{{articledata.title}}

- Strategy challenges MSCI's plan, saying Bitcoin-treasury firms are misclassified

- The company calls the 50% digital-asset threshold arbitrary and structurally flawed

- Strategy warns the proposal could increase index volatility and conflict with U.S. policy

Cryptoprowl / Strategy (NASDAQ: $MSTR ) has issued a formal challenge to MSCI's plan to exclude digital-asset treasury companies from its Global Investable Market Indexes, warning that the proposed cap could disrupt index behavior and create structural inconsistencies for investors. In its submission, the company argued that MSCI's approach overlooks how Bitcoin treasury models operate and risks introducing rapid swings in index composition at a time when digital-asset classifications remain unsettled across global reporting standards.

In its response, Strategy said MSCI's methodology is built on a flawed understanding of firms that maintain large Bitcoin (CRYPTO: $BTC ) reserves as part of their corporate operations. The company stated that digital-asset treasuries function as operating companies, not investment assets, and emphasized that Bitcoin holdings support product development and internal initiatives rather than passive accumulation.

Strategy noted that its model aligns with traditional financial practices used by banks and insurance institutions, where treasury assets support ongoing business functions. The company also reiterated that it maintains an active operating profile in the software and analytics sector, a point it said contradicts assumptions embedded in MSCI's proposal. The firm additionally referenced recent public comments from Michael Saylor, saying they reinforce its long-term strategic posture toward Bitcoin.

Company Labels the 50% Asset Threshold "Arbitrary"

The firm described the suggested 50% digital-asset ratio as arbitrary and without demonstrated benefit. According to the filing, applying the metric as a hard cutoff fails to reflect how corporate treasuries actually work and could misclassify businesses that incorporate digital assets into broader operational frameworks.

Strategy argued that digital-asset accounting varies across jurisdictions, which could lead to conflicting interpretations of identical balance sheets. The company said this inconsistency would produce unequal outcomes for firms in different regulatory environments, undermining the principle of neutral index construction that MSCI promotes.

Concerns Over Index Volatility and Policy Alignment

A central element of the firm's objection is the risk of heightened index volatility. Strategy warned that digital-asset price movements occur quickly enough to push companies above or below the proposed threshold in short intervals, creating frequent index reshuffling. Such dynamics, the company said, would reduce predictability for index users.

Strategy also contended that the proposal runs counter to current U.S. federal efforts aimed at digital-asset development. The firm's letter asserted that national policy encourages responsible use of Bitcoin and broader crypto-asset integration, and therefore the exclusion criteria would conflict with these initiatives.