MSCI has opened a consultation on a new eligibility test for "non-operating" companies. A simulation with May 2026 data shows index exclusion for Strategy and Metaplanet from the MSCI ACWI IMI.
MSCI is a US index provider whose equity indices serve as benchmarks for passively managed funds and ETFs. If a company drops out of such an index, these funds sell the stock as their mandate requires. The fund manager's own view does not matter. Previously, the provider dropped a more narrowly framed push against crypto treasury companies (DATs) in January 2026. At the same time, it announced a broader review of non-operating companies. Its outcome is now on the table. This time the proposal reaches beyond pure crypto firms. In the simulation, Strategy shows a free-float-adjusted market capitalization of USD 23.9 billion. That puts the company at the top of the deletion candidates. The metric captures only the freely tradable portion of shares and thus sets the weight in the index.
Subscribe to our newsletter
The best articles of the week, directly delivered into your mailbox.
MSCI would measure index exclusion candidates against five metrics
The proposed methodology works in two stages. First, a core screen checks whether a company's operating assets make up more than 50 percent of total assets. Companies that hold this threshold stay eligible, while those that fail move to the second stage. However, the test contains no crypto-specific thresholds. It targets the balance sheet structure, not the type of asset held. A commodity holder can fail it just as easily as a Bitcoin buyer.
The second stage rests on five metrics: operating asset intensity, expense intensity, cash flow, fair-value intensity and capital dependency. Operating assets below 20 percent of total assets count as critical, as does operating expense below 5 percent. Furthermore, a negative operating cash flow belongs to the list. So do non-operating fair-value changes above 5 percent of total assets. Finally, the fifth threshold covers capital dependency above 20 percent. This metric measures how strongly a company relies on fresh outside capital for its growth. Consequently, a company only becomes ineligible in one case. It must miss the core screen and trigger at least four of the five criteria. A single outlier on the balance sheet is not enough.
Existing index members, however, face milder thresholds than candidates for a new inclusion. In addition, members must fail the screen in two consecutive sets of annual financial statements before a deletion follows. A one-time miss of the thresholds triggers no reclassification, MSCI states in the consultation document. Instead, the provider requires a lasting change in business structure. So the test only bites when a company is permanently more asset manager than operating business.
Strategy, Metaplanet and Yellow Cake fail the core screen
In the simulation with May 2026 data, three companies lose their place in the MSCI ACWI IMI Index. Besides Strategy and Metaplanet, it hits the uranium investment firm Yellow Cake. The selection is no accident. All three hold mostly assets that feed no ongoing business but sit on the balance sheet. A commodity holder such as Yellow Cake appears on the list as well. Therefore, the sector-neutral design of the methodology becomes visible. Crypto would not be the only sector hit.
Moreover, three groups would land on a public watch list: SharpLink, Center Laboratories and Lydia Holding. This list names companies whose balance sheet profile MSCI will examine critically, without an immediate deletion. For investors, it still carries a signal.
The proposal broadly targets companies that accumulate non-operating assets and generate little operating cash flow. Likewise, dependence on external capital for growth counts. Exactly this profile describes the business model of Bitcoin treasury firms. They fund purchases through share and bond issues and hold what they acquire. As a result, the grid captures them technically, without naming them. Nevertheless, the methodology contains no explicit ban on digital assets.
Passive funds would have to pull billions automatically
The financial weight of an exclusion does not depend on the views of individual investors. Index funds replicate their benchmark mechanically and therefore have to sell a deleted stock. Whether the price is favorable does not matter for these mandates. For globally investing equity funds, the MSCI ACWI IMI serves as the reference. JPMorgan analysts already put the volume for Strategy at around USD 2.8 billion in passive outflows in 2025.
An estimate from the industry body Bitcoin For Corporations arrived at USD 10 billion to 15 billion in December 2025. That range covered the entire universe of crypto treasury companies, though, not Strategy alone. The different scope explains the distance between the two figures.
At the same time, the test requires two consecutive annual financial statements below the thresholds for existing members. The index provider justifies the procedure with the goal of limiting turnover in its indices. How much time this leaves the affected companies remains open. Strategy and Metaplanet, however, already miss the thresholds in the simulation on the basis of their May 2026 figures. A timely balance sheet rebuild keeps them in.
Second attempt against crypto treasuries within a year
The pattern repeats. Earlier, a first consultation ran between October and December 2025 and limited itself explicitly to digital asset treasury companies. It identified 39 potentially affected firms, including 18 existing index members. Strategy, Riot Platforms and Marathon Digital were among them. For 21 further candidates, MSCI would have denied future inclusion as well. Eventually, the provider stepped back from the plan and pointed to a need for more research and consultation.
The decision against excluding these firms came in early January 2026. Strategy shares then rose about 6 percent after hours. The jump showed how closely the valuation of such companies hangs on their index status. Later, the announcement fed into the proposal now on the table. Its scope is broader than in the first attempt, yet it hits the crypto treasuries again.
The timeline is tight. First, MSCI takes feedback from market participants until September 30, 2026. The consultation results should be available by October 16, 2026. If the methodology is adopted, implementation could follow in the November index review. Comparatively few weeks would lie between the announcement of the results and a possible implementation. Strategy has publicly opposed the proposal.
Digital assets are assets. Index providers should measure markets, not decide which assets companies are allowed to own. MSCI’s proposal puts it out of step with regulators, markets, and its own customers. Bitcoin doesn’t need MSCI. Neither does Strategy. $BTC $MSTR
- Strategy (@Strategy) August 14, 2026
