SKN | Bitcoin Policy Institute Questions MSCI Proposal Targeting Strategy and Metaplanet

Key Points

• The Bitcoin Policy Institute questioned how MSCI developed its proposed rules for identifying “non-operating companies,” which could affect Strategy and Metaplanet.
• BPI said metadata from MSCI’s consultation materials appeared to trace back to an internal folder associated with digital asset treasury companies.
• MSCI’s simulation indicated that Strategy, Metaplanet and uranium investment company Yellow Cake could be excluded under the proposed methodology.

The Bitcoin Policy Institute (BPI) has raised questions about MSCI’s process for developing a proposed methodology that could remove companies such as Strategy and Metaplanet from its global equity indexes.

The controversy centers on MSCI’s broader proposal concerning “non-operating companies,” which would establish criteria for determining whether a company’s value is primarily derived from accumulated assets rather than revenue-generating business operations.

The proposal follows an earlier MSCI initiative specifically targeting digital asset treasury companies. BPI’s latest research examines whether elements of that earlier effort remain embedded in the broader methodology.

From Crypto Treasury Review to Broader Rule

MSCI initially proposed excluding digital asset treasury companies from its global indexes in 2025. Following industry pushback, the index provider shelved that proposal in January and said it would instead conduct a broader review of non-operating companies.

MSCI returned with the expanded proposal on Aug. 3. Rather than focusing specifically on companies holding digital assets, the framework would apply broader tests to companies across different sectors.

Under the proposed methodology, MSCI would first determine whether a company has substantial operating assets before applying five additional financial tests. MSCI’s own simulation indicated that Strategy, Metaplanet and uranium investment company Yellow Cake would be removed under the proposed rules.

BPI Examines MSCI’s Internal Materials

In a research paper titled Wall Street’s Invisible Committee, BPI pointed to metadata associated with the presentation supporting MSCI’s consultation.

According to BPI, the metadata indicated that the presentation was stored in an internal folder associated with digital asset treasury companies. The institute said the finding raises the question of whether MSCI’s broader proposal retained elements of its previous effort focused specifically on crypto treasury companies.

The finding does not by itself establish that MSCI designed the broader methodology specifically to exclude digital asset treasury companies. Rather, BPI said the information warrants greater transparency around how the proposal was developed.

MSCI had not responded to requests for comment before publication of the source report.

Debate Over What Counts as an Operating Company

BPI also challenged MSCI’s use of the term “operating assets,” arguing that the concept is not a standardized balance-sheet category under US Generally Accepted Accounting Principles or International Financial Reporting Standards.

The institute said this could leave MSCI with considerable discretion when determining how to classify assets including cash, investments, construction projects and strategic holdings.

The issue could extend beyond companies that hold Bitcoin or other digital assets. BPI argued that capital-intensive businesses such as mining companies or satellite-network operators can accumulate significant assets and depend on external financing for extended periods before producing substantial revenue.

From that perspective, the methodology could have implications for companies outside the cryptocurrency sector depending on how MSCI ultimately defines and applies its operating-asset criteria.

Potential Impact on Bitcoin Treasury Companies

Exclusion from major indexes can have consequences for companies held by funds that track those benchmarks. If Strategy or Metaplanet were removed from relevant MSCI indexes, index-tracking funds could be required to sell their shares.

JPMorgan analysts estimated in 2025 that Strategy could face approximately $2.8 billion in potential outflows if it were excluded from MSCI indexes.

For Bitcoin treasury companies, the issue is particularly relevant because their inclusion in major equity benchmarks can influence institutional exposure and the availability of passive investment capital.

MSCI Sets October Decision Timeline

MSCI accepted feedback on the proposal through Sept. 30 and said it expected to announce the results on or before Oct. 16.

Any resulting methodology changes are proposed to take effect as part of MSCI’s November 2026 Index Review.

The final rules will determine whether companies identified in MSCI’s simulation remain subject to exclusion and how the index provider ultimately defines non-operating businesses across its global benchmarks.

Outlook

The MSCI consultation has broadened a debate that initially centered on digital asset treasury companies into a wider question about how major index providers distinguish operating businesses from companies whose value is heavily tied to accumulated assets.

For Strategy and Metaplanet, the final methodology could affect their status in global indexes and, consequently, the funds that track those benchmarks. BPI’s research is also calling attention to the need for clearer and reproducible classification criteria as MSCI prepares to announce the outcome of its review.