MicroStrategy writes to MSCI, removing DAT from the index is stifling innovation

Bitcoin Reserve Strategy Pioneer MicroStrategy Strategy (Originally named MicroStrategy) Sends Letter to MSCI Protest Against “Excluding Companies with Digital Assets Over 50% of Their Balance Sheet” Indicator Qualification, Claiming It Is “Misleading and Harmful,” Which Could Negatively Impact the Market, Innovation, and U.S. Policy.

MSCI Considers Excluding DAT from the Index

One of the world’s largest index providers, MSCI, initiated a consultation in October aimed at excluding digital asset financial companies (DAT) such as MicroStrategy, MARA Holdings, and Riot Platforms from the index because DAT may exhibit characteristics similar to investment funds and does not meet MSCI index eligibility. MSCI suggests excluding companies with cryptocurrency holdings exceeding 50% of their total assets from the MSCI Global Investable Market Index.

(J.P. Morgan: MSCI Index Might Remove MicroStrategy, Triggering Nearly $10 Billion in Capital Outflows)

Strategy Presents Four Main Reasons Opposing MSCI

Strategy outlines four main reasons:

DATs are operating companies, not investment funds

Strategy emphasizes that it does not passively hold Bitcoin but designs various financial instruments (such as digital credit, preferred stock, bonds) through Bitcoin treasury strategies, similar to banking or insurance business models. They are operating companies, not investment funds.

This is similar to REITs, oil companies, and other single-asset enterprises and should not be considered investment funds.

50% Threshold is Discriminatory and Impractical

Other industries, such as oil, gold, real estate, and media, may also be highly concentrated in a single asset but are not excluded. Furthermore, different accounting standards, such as GAAP and IFRS, lead to different treatment of similar companies, making the 50% standard difficult to apply fairly.

Undermines MSCI’s Neutrality

MSCI has always claimed to “not judge the value of markets or companies,” but this proposal shows policy bias and causes MSCI’s indices to lose representativeness and credibility.

Conflicts with U.S. Policies and Stifles Innovation

The Trump administration promoted Bitcoin strategic reserves, 401(k) investments in digital assets, etc., but MSCI’s proposal runs counter to these policies.

Strategy points out that excluding DAT could lead to tens of billions of dollars in capital outflows, weakening U.S. leadership in the digital asset space.

MSCI Should Take a More Cautious Approach, Allow Industry to Mature

Strategy believes MSCI should adopt a more cautious approach, similar to how it took 19 years to establish the “Communication Services” new sector, giving the digital asset industry more time to mature.

Asset management firm Strive Asset Management also wrote to MSCI CEO last week, suggesting that MSCI could adjust through optional index variants rather than redefining broad benchmark eligibility, such as “MSCI USA ex Digital Asset Treasuries,” allowing investors to choose whether to exclude DAT.

In fact, MSCI has already adopted this approach in other areas, providing “exclusion of energy,” “exclusion of tobacco,” and similar screened core indices.

(Strive Writes to MSCI, Excluding DAT from the Index Is Unwarranted)

MSCI will announce its decision by January 15, 2026, just before the February index rebalancing.

This article about MicroStrategy’s letter to MSCI, arguing that removing DAT from the index is stifling innovation, first appeared on Chain News ABMedia.