As debate over digital assets intensifies, a growing bitcoin treasury coalition is mounting a coordinated challenge to MSCI’s controversial index exclusion proposal.
Bitcoin for Corporations announces 1000+ signatory coalition
Bitcoin for Corporations (BFC) announced on 16 December 2025 that its coalition opposing MSCI‘s proposed 50% digital-asset exclusion has surpassed 1000 signatories. The initiative, based in Nashville, TN, brings together public companies and other affected organizations that depend on neutral global equity benchmarks.
The coalition features Strategy (MSTR), described as the world’s first and largest Bitcoin treasury company, led by Executive Chairman Michael Saylor. It also includes Strive Asset Management (ASST), co-founded by Vivek Ramaswamy and identified as the 14th-largest corporate Bitcoin holder, alongside Metaplanet (TYO: 3350), Japan’s leading Bitcoin treasury company. Moreover, hundreds of individual and institutional investors have joined to oppose the rule.
Details of MSCI’s proposed digital-asset exclusion rule
Under the proposal, listed operating companies would be removed from the MSCI Global Investable Market Indexes if digital assets represent 50% or more of total assets and their primary business is classified as digital asset treasury activity. However, the exclusion would apply only to digital assets, not to companies whose balance sheets are heavily concentrated in real estate, commodities, or cash.
George Mekhail, Managing Director of Bitcoin for Corporations, noted that MSCI has historically defined companies by operations, including products, customers, and revenue, rather than by a single balance-sheet item. He argued that the wide range of coalition members, from Strategy to Strive to Metaplanet and numerous individual investors, underscores how misguided the proposal appears to market participants.
Mekhail added that a shareholder-approved treasury strategy should not remove an operating company from global equity benchmarks. That said, the consultation period gives MSCI time to reconsider whether balance-sheet composition should override long-standing operations-based classifications.
Strategy pushes back on MSCI’s classification approach
In its formal submission to MSCI, Strategy called the proposal “misguided” and labeled the 50% threshold “discriminatory, arbitrary, and unworkable.” The letter, signed by Michael Saylor and CEO Phong Le, stressed that Digital Asset Treasury Companies are operating businesses that actively use Bitcoin to generate shareholder returns, not passive investment funds.
The company argued that high asset concentration has never been sufficient grounds for exclusion from MSCI indices. REITs, oil producers, and timber companies all maintain highly concentrated balance sheets yet remain eligible. Moreover, Strategy warned that attaching a “fund-like” label exclusively to digital asset treasuries would break with decades of index construction precedent.
According to the company, the bitcoin treasury model relies on corporate decision-making, capital allocation, and operational execution rather than fund-style portfolio management. This distinction, it said, aligns more closely with operating companies than with investment vehicles in regulatory frameworks.
Strive warns of threats to index neutrality
Strive Asset Management submitted a seven-page letter to MSCI CEO Henry Fernandez, arguing that the proposal violates “the long-established principle of index neutrality.” The firm, which holds over 7,500 BTC, maintained that benchmarks should reflect market structure rather than impose subjective judgments on how companies manage their treasuries.
Ben Werkman, Strive’s Chief Investment Officer, warned that the rule “would penalize U.S. markets in favor of international markets” because of differences between U.S. GAAP and IFRS accounting treatment of digital assets. That said, Strive did not oppose specialized benchmarks; instead, it urged MSCI to create optional “ex-digital-asset treasury” index variants, similar to existing screens for energy and tobacco, without redefining eligibility criteria for broad market indexes.
Market impact and risks for global capital formation
JPMorgan analysts estimate that exclusion from MSCI indices could trigger up to $2.8 billion in passive outflows from Strategy alone. If other index providers replicate MSCI’s approach, total passive outflows could reach $8.8 billion. Moreover, the coalition warns that such exclusions risk distorting capital allocation at a time when major economies are competing in digital asset innovation.
Beyond near-term market moves, coalition members argue that the msci bitcoin exclusion rule could discourage public companies from exploring innovative treasury models. They stress that limiting index eligibility on the basis of digital-asset holdings may hinder capital formation and slow the development of digital asset technologies across key regions.
Coalition’s formal requests to MSCI
Bitcoin for Corporations and its member companies have outlined a clear set of demands for MSCI. First, they ask the index provider to withdraw the proposed 50% digital-asset exclusion. Second, they urge MSCI to preserve the operations-based definition of “primary business” that focuses on products, customers, and revenue.
Third, the coalition requests that MSCI adhere to regulatory standards separating operating companies from investment funds. Fourth, it calls for continued asset-class neutrality in index construction so that digital assets are treated consistently with other balance-sheet exposures. Finally, the group wants MSCI to engage with market participants to develop a business-aligned classification framework before making structural changes.
Consultation timeline and broader industry context
MSCI’s consultation is scheduled to close on December 31, 2025, with a final decision expected on January 15, 2026. Until then, coalition members are continuing to mobilize support from public companies, corporate treasurers, and institutional investors that rely on MSCI benchmarks for asset allocation and performance measurement.
In this context, organizations focused on corporate bitcoin adoption see the debate as a key test of whether digital asset treasuries will receive equal treatment within global financial infrastructure. However, they also frame the discussion as an opportunity for index providers to refine classification standards in cooperation with the companies they track.
About Bitcoin for Corporations
Bitcoin for Corporations (BFC) is an industry initiative that convenes public companies, corporate treasurers, and institutional investors to advance responsible corporate adoption of Bitcoin and digital assets. The group advocates for neutral market infrastructure and equal treatment of digital asset treasury strategies across the global financial system.
By coordinating responses to regulatory and index policy proposals, BFC aims to ensure that operating companies using digital assets in their treasuries remain accurately represented in major benchmarks, while maintaining investor access to transparent and neutral market indices.
