Strategy thought it had won the battle in January. Seven months later, MSCI returns with a different method that could lead to the same result: the exit of the largest listed holder of bitcoin of several global indices. This time, the word “crypto” almost disappears from the device. In its place are five financial ratios intended to identify companies whose value depends more on accumulated assets than on traditional operational activity. And in MSCI’s simulation, Strategy falls straight into the net.
In brief
- MSCI is proposing new rules to exclude certain companies deemed “non-operational” from its major indices.
- A simulation performed with May 2026 data places Strategy among three companies that would be removed from the MSCI ACWI IMI.
- Strategy counterattacks and accuses the index of indirectly penalizing its model based on bitcoin.
Bitcoin: Strategy falls back into MSCI’s sights
The respite was short. In January, MSCI finally kept Strategy and other crypto cash companies in its global indexes. The index provider had abandoned a particularly simple first approach: excluding companies whose digital assets represented at least 50% of the balance sheet. The new project goes further. And above all, it avoids directly targeting the bitcoin.
MSCI now wants to identify so-called “non-operating companies”. The first test looks at the composition of the balance sheet. If operational assets exceed 50% of the total, the company passes the hurdle. Otherwise, it passes before a second battery of five criteria: weight of operational assets, level of expenses linked to the activity, operational cash flows, variations in fair value and dependence on external financing. Four out of five negative signals can be enough to make a company ineligible.
This mechanic completely changes the debate. MSCI no longer asks how many bitcoins a company owns. He asks, in essence, what really brings life and value to the company.
For Strategy, the answer poses a problem. Its software business still exists, but its balance sheet and valuation now largely revolve around its gigantic BTC reserve and its ability to raise capital to fuel it.
The MSCI simulation leaves little room for doubt. Applied to the MSCI ACWI IMI with data available in May 2026, the new method would have resulted in three deletions: Strategy, Yellow Cake and Metaplanet. Strategy largely dominates the trio with a float-adjusted capitalization estimated at $23.93 billion.
Strategy refuses to transform its bitcoin into a handicap
The reaction was quick. On August 14, Strategy publicly challenged MSCI’s logic. His argument is in a nutshell: digital assets are still assets, and an index provider should reflect the market, not decide which assets a company can keep on its balance sheet. The tone rises because the subject goes well beyond a line in an index.
Strategy holds over 840,000 BTC. Its model has for years consisted of using stocks, debt and financial products to accumulate bitcoin. This mechanism has given it a unique place on Wall Street, but it also makes its profile very different from a traditional company.
The financial situation has also started to change. Strategy recently sold part of its bitcoins in order to strengthen its financial structure. The symbol matters. For a long time, Michael Saylor’s group had built part of its image around an almost irreversible accumulation of BTC.
The debate launched by MSCI touches precisely this border: When does a listed company cease to be primarily a business and become more like an investment vehicle?
The detail that complicates the accusation of a war on bitcoin comes from Yellow Cake. This British company holds physical uranium, not crypto, and yet is also among the three simulated deletions. MSCI therefore has a solid argument: its new filter officially covers neither Bitcoin nor digital assets.
Strategy can nevertheless reply that the new formula produces almost the same effect as the one abandoned a few months earlier. The crypto threshold has disappeared; the company remains threatened.
An exclusion capable of causing forced sales
Exiting an MSCI index doesn’t just mean losing a line on a list. Passive funds built to track these indexes must adjust their portfolios when a stock disappears. Excluding MSTR can therefore transform a methodological decision into very real sell orders.
JPMorgan had estimated approximately $2.8 billion exits likely to affect Strategy under the former MSCI project. This figure does not correspond exactly to the methodology currently submitted for consultation, so it must be handled with caution. It nevertheless gives an idea of the financial stakes surrounding the presence of MSTR in major benchmarks.
The pressure comes at a delicate time. The premium once placed by investors on Strategy over the value of its bitcoins has compressed sharply. With spot Bitcoin ETFs, Wall Street also has another avenue to gain exposure to BTC without bearing the debt, equity issuances, preferred shares and risks specific to Strategy.
This does not condemn Michael Saylor’s model. This forces him to prove that he is worth more than a huge portfolio of publicly traded bitcoins. And the decision has not yet been made. MSCI is collecting market feedback until September 30, 2026 and plans to publish the results of its consultation no later than October 16. If the reform passes, changes could occur during the November index review.
Strategy has also started to strengthen its defenses by building up several billion dollars of liquidity to consolidate its balance sheet. The duel with MSCI thus reveals a deeper question than the fate of MSTR: Wall Street now accepts the bitcoin. It remains to be seen to what extent it will accept companies for which bitcoin ends up becoming the dominant economic activity.
Maximize your Tremplin.io experience with our ‘Read to Earn’ program! For every article you read, earn points and access exclusive rewards. Sign up now and start earning benefits.
