MicroStrategy opposed the proposal by Morgan Stanley Capital International (MSCI) to remove companies heavily associated with Bitcoin from major stock indices. The company argues that this is discrimination and the law wrongly treats them as investment funds.
The response came after a warning from JPMorgan. The bank claimed that such a move could force the sale of assets worth several billion USD. This decision places Strategy at the center of the debate on how to manage exposure to Bitcoin in the public market.
MicroStrategy defends its operational model
Strategy (formerly MicroStrategy) issued a statement on Wednesday. The company emphasized that the MSCI proposal completely misrepresents how Bitcoin-related companies operate.
In a 12-page letter signed by Michael Saylor and CEO Phong Le, the company emphasizes that it conducts operational activities. It utilizes Bitcoin reserves for the issuance of credit instruments and capital raising.
The company argues that this approach fundamentally differs from a passive vehicle tracking a single asset.
“We call on MSCI to reject this proposal. It is based on a general and incorrect characterization of DAT and would impose arbitrary, unworkable conditions. This would stifle innovation, harm the reputation of MSCI indices, and be contrary to national priorities.”
Strategy also stated that the proposed 50% threshold for digital asset holdings is discriminatory. The company emphasized that the rule only targets it while ignoring other heavily concentrated sectors like oil or real estate.
Bitcoin vaults in danger: Is this discrimination?
Controversies began in October when MSCI launched consultations on how to classify digital asset vaults (DAT) in its index methodology. The proposed 50% threshold immediately subjected Strategy and other Bitcoin-focused companies to scrutiny.
In November, JPMorgan estimated that Strategy may be forced to sell assets worth about 2.8 billion USD if MSCI removes it. The bank added that pressure could rise to 8–9 billion USD if other index providers adopt the same approach.
These forecasts have raised concerns and once again highlighted how companies with Bitcoin digital vaults should be classified within the index ecosystem.
For Strategy, the consequences extend beyond qualification for indices.
Exclusion may reduce liquidity and raise the cost of capital. It may also limit the role of corporate vaults as a conduit for Bitcoin exposure for investors.
For a broader audience of investors, the matter comes down to a key question. Should exposure to Bitcoin be primarily through regulated ETF funds, or can it exist through publicly traded companies holding digital assets on their balance sheets?
MSCI consultations are ongoing until December 31. Market participants are closely monitoring the index provider's decision.
To read the latest cryptocurrency market analysis from BeInCrypto, click here.
