Background: MSCI's Proposal to Exclude Bitcoin Heavyweights
Index provider MSCI has proposed removing companies with bitcoin holdings exceeding 50% of total assets from major equity benchmarks. Strive Asset Management responded by sending a letter to MSCI CEO Henry Fernandez, warning that the plan could create uneven results worldwide due to differences in how companies report bitcoin under U.S. GAAP and IFRS accounting standards. Co-founded by Vivek Ramaswamy and Anson Frericks in 2022, Strive aims to "depoliticize corporate America" and is the 14th-largest public corporate bitcoin holder with over 7,500 BTC on its balance sheet.
Strive's Objections: Accounting Disparities and Index Neutrality
Strive argued that the proposal would "depart from index neutrality" and asked MSCI to "let the market decide" how bitcoin-heavy firms are treated. The firm urged MSCI to rely on optional "ex-digital-asset treasury" index variants instead of redefining eligibility for broad benchmarks. Such custom indexes already exist for sectors like energy and tobacco. Strive criticized the 50% threshold as "unjustified, overbroad and unworkable," noting that many bitcoin treasury companies operate real businesses including AI data centers, structured finance, and cloud infrastructure. Miners like MARA, Riot, Hut 8, and CleanSpark are pivoting into renting excess power and compute capacity.
Impact on Major Bitcoin Holders: Strategy and Strive
The rule change could significantly affect major players. Strategy holds 650,000 BTC, and JPMorgan estimates MSCI's exclusion could trigger $2.8 billion in passive outflows from Strategy alone. If other index providers follow suit, the total could rise to $8.8 billion. Strive itself holds over 7,500 BTC. Last week, Strategy's Michael Saylor clarified that Strategy is a publicly traded operating company with a $500 million software business and a treasury strategy using Bitcoin, not a fund, trust, or holding company. He disputed MSCI index disputes directly.
Industry Comparisons and Alternative Solutions
Strive drew comparisons to other industries: indexes do not exclude energy companies with large oil reserves or gold miners whose value depends on metals. Applying a bitcoin-specific rule imposes an investment judgment on benchmarks meant to remain neutral. Strive recommended MSCI use the existing "ex-digital-asset treasury" index variants, which are analogous to custom indexes for energy and tobacco sectors. The firm also highlighted market volatility and accounting differences: bitcoin's price swings could push companies in and out of eligibility from quarter to quarter, while derivatives and structured products further complicate exposure calculations.
Market Volatility and Innovation Risks
Strive warned that strict rules could push innovation abroad. U.S. markets may face penalties while international companies benefit from IFRS treatment. The firm believes the proposal may stifle new bitcoin-backed financial products. MSCI plans to announce its decision on January 15, 2026, before the February index review. Strive is among several firms lobbying against the proposal, centering its argument on fairness, neutrality, and market choice rather than restricting investor access. The broader crypto community is watching closely as this decision could set a precedent for how index providers treat digital asset holdings.