2026-01-08 07:25:42

MSCI has changed its stance. Originally, it was scheduled to decide in mid-January 2026 whether to remove MicroStrategy and similar digital asset treasury companies from the index. However, they announced earlier that they will not remove them and will instead develop new rules.

This effectively dispels concerns about capital outflows and is a long-term positive. But why did they have to announce it early? Frankly, MSCI wants to ease the public pressure. Bank of America has officially announced that clients can allocate up to 4% in Bitcoin ETFs, a move that directly influences MSCI's pace. Although capital won't flood in immediately, this effectively introduces Bitcoin to a new audience—institutions worried about missing out.

Recently, some have been speculating about the risks of the November 2026 midterm elections. To be honest, this is just short sellers running out of ammunition, using the same narrative of quantum computing threats every day. Looking at it from another angle: if you are a trader and know that the midterm elections could be bearish, would you foolishly announce a decline in advance? Smart traders do the opposite.

The real logic is this: first, wipe out the bulls, make everyone doubt that the bull market is dead, and then have a strong rally. That maximizes profits. From this perspective, this dip is just paving the way for a better rise. According to this rhythm, January and February should both be upward.

BTC0.61%

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

18 Likes

Reward
18
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

AlgoAlchemist

· 22h ago

MSCI's move this time was still forced. As soon as the actions from the banks started, institutions couldn't sit still anymore. This is the real domino effect. Currently, the bears are as fragile as paper, with mid-term elections and quantum computing all just smokescreens. Smart money has already started to position itself. A decline is just accumulation, this tactic has been effective for so many years. Those who regret now are the ones who got shaken out during the February surge. What does MSCI changing its stance early indicate? The main players are rushing to meet deadlines. When Bank of America’s 4% limit was lifted, the sentiment shifted—this is what you call a forced choice. This round is truly a cleansing; those who can hold on will profit immensely.

View OriginalReply0

MentalWealthHarvester

· 22h ago

MSCI's recent move was truly forced; whenever US banks act, it has to follow. The institutions are stepping in to buy the dip, in other words, preparing for this wave of growth. People who are bearish really should change their mindset. They keep shouting about negatives every day, but the coins in their hands are still climbing. See you in February.

View OriginalReply0

ser_we_are_ngmi

· 22h ago

There really aren't any new moves for the bears, still talking about stories in 2026, hilarious

View OriginalReply0

NFT_Therapy_Group

· 22h ago

Ha, MSCI's recent moves are truly forced; the bank's tactics are too ruthless. --- Bears are shouting bearish every day, but they have no bullets left—just the old tricks. --- Hitting the longs and then pushing the price up again—that's the right way to make big money. --- So, if January and February are really going to rise? Then I need to be prepared. --- When public opinion pressure is high, they make early statements—basically, big funds are pushing from behind. --- The US bank's move definitely changed the rhythm; MSCI has no choice. --- Quantum computing threats, mid-term election risks—these reasons are becoming more and more flimsy. --- Smart traders play it like this: first make you despair, then give you a boost. --- Is MicroStrategy and companies like it really going to stabilize? That would be a major event. --- Capital inflows to new audiences and institutional FOMO are the real driving forces.

View OriginalReply0

metaverse_hermit

· 22h ago

MSCI's recent actions are really driven by pressure from US banks. As soon as news about institutional allocation to Bitcoin ETFs came out, they had to respond quickly. Basically, the public opinion pressure is just too strong. The bears are really out of ideas now; even topics like the 2026 midterm elections are being used to stir the market, showing they are at their wit's end. They previously crushed the bulls, and now it's time to turn around and hit the bears. The real move will come in January and February if prices start to rise. MSCI's decision not to delist this time is definitely a positive in the long run, but how the short-term capital inflow will proceed still depends on subsequent developments. This trading logic is very clear: first create despair, then deliver surprises. Those still pessimistic haven't thought it through. Bank of America’s 4% Bitcoin allocation quota may seem small, but it gives all institutions a reason to get on board, and that’s enough. Bears are shouting about quantum computing threats and midterm election risks, but they really think everyone is a rookie. Smart institutions have already seen through it. The probability of a rise in January and February is quite high, mainly depending on actions from the US side. MSCI not delisting is considered a bottom-line guarantee.

View OriginalReply0

OnchainUndercover