Catenaa, Saturday, August 22, 2026- Strategy and Metaplanet could be removed from major MSCI equity indexes under proposed rules that question whether companies built around accumulating assets still qualify as operating businesses.
MSCI has opened a consultation on a new methodology for identifying what it calls non-operating companies.
A simulation using May 2026 data found that the proposed rules would remove Strategy, Metaplanet and UK-listed uranium investor Yellow Cake from the MSCI ACWI Investable Market Index.
Strategy is by far the largest company caught by the simulated screen, with a free-float-adjusted market capitalization of about $23.9 billion.
Metaplanet had a comparable MSCI-adjusted market capitalization of about $654 million in the simulation.
No deletions have yet been approved.
MSCI will accept market feedback through Sept. 30 and expects to announce its decision by Oct. 16. Any adopted changes are proposed for implementation during the November 2026 index review.
The proposal is not written specifically for Bitcoin treasury companies.
Instead, MSCI is trying to identify corporate issuers whose financial structure more closely resembles an investment vehicle than a conventional operating business.
The distinction could have major consequences for the growing corporate treasury sector.
Strategy has transformed its balance sheet around Bitcoin accumulation. Metaplanet has followed a similar model in Japan.
Both remain listed operating companies, but large parts of their value and financing strategies are now tied to assets held on their balance sheets.
MSCI’s proposal asks whether companies with those characteristics belong in indexes designed primarily to represent operating businesses.
The proposed methodology begins by examining a company’s operating assets.
A company would pass MSCI’s core screen if operating assets exceed 50% of total assets.
Companies failing that test would then face five additional financial screens.
Those examine operating asset intensity, operating expenses, cash flow, fair-value changes and dependence on outside capital.
For companies not already in MSCI indexes, warning thresholds include operating assets below 20% of total assets, operating expenses below 5%, negative operating cash flow and high dependence on external financing.
A company failing the core test and triggering at least four of the five secondary flags would be considered ineligible.
The methodology is designed to detect companies that accumulate non-operating assets, generate limited cash from underlying business operations and rely heavily on capital markets to expand those holdings.
That description brings the economics of some Bitcoin treasury companies directly into focus.
MSCI is proposing more lenient treatment for companies already inside its indexes.
Current constituents would face buffered thresholds and generally would need to fail the screen across two consecutive annual filing reviews before removal.
MSCI said this approach is intended to avoid excessive index turnover caused by temporary changes in a company’s financial position.
The May simulation nevertheless identified Strategy, Metaplanet and Yellow Cake as deletions under the proposed methodology.
Three other companies, SharpLink, Center Laboratories and Lydia Holding, would be placed on a public watchlist.
SharpLink has also become closely associated with a digital asset treasury strategy, centered on Ether.
Index exclusion matters because MSCI indexes are followed by investment funds around the world.
Funds designed to replicate an index generally adjust their portfolios when constituents are added or removed.
Removal can therefore create mechanical selling pressure even when an investor has made no independent judgment about a company’s prospects.
That makes index eligibility another risk for digital asset treasury companies alongside cryptocurrency prices, access to capital and changes in their market premium.
Strategy is especially exposed because of its size.
Its business model has relied heavily on raising capital through common shares, preferred securities and debt while accumulating Bitcoin.
MSCI’s proposed capital-dependence test directly examines whether a company relies on financing cash flows to accumulate assets.
The issue reaches beyond Strategy and Metaplanet.
Public companies have increasingly adopted Bitcoin, Ether and other digital assets as treasury holdings.
Some retain large operating businesses alongside those assets.
Others have increasingly structured their corporate identity around raising capital and accumulating cryptocurrency.
MSCI’s framework could force a clearer distinction between those models.
A company holding Bitcoin as one treasury asset may look very different under the proposed test from a company whose primary economic activity becomes raising external capital to buy more Bitcoin.
That distinction could influence which treasury companies remain eligible for mainstream equity indexes.
Catenaa View
MSCI’s proposal introduces a new question for the digital asset treasury trade.
Until now, investors have largely asked whether a company can acquire cryptocurrency cheaply enough, raise capital efficiently and increase crypto exposure per share.
Index providers may begin asking something more basic:
Is it still an operating company?
That could become a defining test for the sector.
Strategy and Metaplanet have demonstrated that a listed corporation can become a vehicle for obtaining amplified Bitcoin exposure through conventional equity markets.
The model also allows investors who cannot or do not want to hold Bitcoin directly to gain exposure through ordinary shares.
But that same structure can blur the line between an operating corporation and an asset accumulation vehicle.
MSCI is now proposing a quantitative framework for drawing that line.
The effects would not stop at index membership.
If major index providers begin classifying some treasury companies as non-operating entities, asset managers may have to reconsider how those stocks fit into conventional equity portfolios.
Other index providers could also examine similar questions independently.
For Bitcoin treasury companies, that creates an unusual tension.
Accumulating more Bitcoin can strengthen the strategy that attracts shareholders.
Yet allowing non-operating assets to dominate the balance sheet could make the company look less like the type of operating business that broad equity indexes were built to track.
What Comes Next
Market participants have until Sept. 30 to respond to MSCI.
The index provider expects to announce consultation results by Oct. 16.
If adopted, the methodology could be implemented during the November index review.
Until then, Strategy and Metaplanet remain index constituents where currently included, and the simulated deletions should not be treated as final decisions.
The consultation nevertheless puts the corporate crypto treasury model under a new form of scrutiny.
Bitcoin price performance is no longer its only test.
The structure of the company itself may now determine whether some of the world’s largest index-linked investors can continue owning it.
MSCI’s Global Investable Market Indexes cover companies across developed and emerging equity markets and are widely used as benchmarks by institutional investors. Existing methodology already excludes investment funds and certain other vehicles based on their legal form. The August proposal would add financial tests capable of identifying corporate issuers displaying similar non-operating characteristics. MSCI’s May simulation identified three potential deletions and three watchlist companies. The proposal comes as Strategy, Metaplanet and other listed companies have expanded digital asset treasury models funded through equity and debt markets.
