TL;DR
- Bitcoin Policy Institute challenged MSCI’s proposed non-operating-company screen, arguing its definition of operating assets leaves excessive room for subjective classification.
- MSCI’s simulation would remove Strategy, Metaplanet and uranium holder Yellow Cake from the MSCI ACWI IMI if the methodology were applied.
- Public comments closed September 30, with MSCI expected to announce a decision by October 16, meaning the companies currently remain potentially affected rather than formally excluded from the indexes.
The Bitcoin Policy Institute is challenging MSCI’s index-eligibility proposal, arguing that the methodology could exclude companies whose business models rely heavily on strategic asset holdings and external capital. In its September 30 analysis, the think tank focused on companies tied to Bitcoin, including Strategy and Metaplanet, which appear on MSCI’s simulated deletion list alongside uranium holder Yellow Cake. The dispute centers on whether MSCI’s proposed definition of a non-operating company is sufficiently objective and transparent, not on any final exclusion decision.
BPI Questions MSCI’s Non-Operating Company Test
MSCI’s August consultation introduces a two-step test. Companies first face a core screen measuring whether operating assets exceed 50% of total assets. Those that fail move to five additional ratios covering operating-asset intensity, operating expenses, cash flow, fair-value changes and dependence on financing. A company could become ineligible if it fails four of the five secondary tests, placing the methodology at the center of renewed scrutiny over Strategy and Metaplanet’s potential MSCI exclusion.
The Bitcoin Policy Institute argues that one of the proposal’s main weaknesses is the term “operating assets,” which it says is not a standardized category under U.S. GAAP or IFRS. The group contends that different classifications of cash, strategic holdings, construction assets or development-stage property could materially change the outcome. Its criticism is that unpublished classification judgments could influence index eligibility even when the underlying financial ratios appear formulaic, echoing Strategy’s own objection to MSCI’s proposed test.
MSCI’s simulation indicates that Strategy, Metaplanet and Yellow Cake would be removed from the MSCI ACWI IMI under the proposed methodology. The consultation followed an earlier 2025 proposal targeting companies with digital assets representing at least 50% of total assets, which MSCI later declined to implement at that time. The current proposal is broader and does not explicitly single out crypto companies, although its simulated results again capture major Bitcoin treasury firms.
The think tank is calling for transparent, reproducible rules and a presumption of inclusion for lawful, liquid and investable equities in broad-market indexes. Public comments closed September 30, with MSCI expected to announce a decision by October 16. The consultation affects benchmarks followed by pools of passive investment capital globally. Until that decision arrives, Strategy and Metaplanet remain potentially affected rather than formally excluded, while the debate continues over how MSCI should classify Bitcoin treasury companies.
