Strive Urges MSCI To Rethink Bitcoin Index Exclusion
Strive Asset Management Challenges MSCI’s Bitcoin Proposal
Strive Asset Management is taking a stand against MSCI’s recent proposal to remove companies with bitcoin holdings exceeding 50% of total assets from major equity benchmarks. The index provider’s suggestion has sparked controversy within the industry.
In a formal letter addressed to MSCI CEO Henry Fernandez, Strive expressed concerns regarding the potential global implications of the proposed rule. The company highlighted the varying reporting practices of bitcoin holdings under U.S. GAAP and IFRS accounting standards, emphasizing the potential for inconsistent treatment of firms with similar exposure to the cryptocurrency.
Strive urged MSCI to consider utilizing optional “ex-digital-asset treasury” index variants instead of implementing strict eligibility criteria for inclusion in broad benchmarks. The company pointed out that custom indexes already exist for sectors such as energy and tobacco, suggesting a similar approach for companies with significant bitcoin holdings.
As the 14th-largest public corporate bitcoin holder, with over 7,500 BTC on its balance sheet, Strive emphasized the importance of maintaining index neutrality and allowing the market to dictate how bitcoin-heavy firms are evaluated. The company, co-founded by Vivek Ramaswamy and Anson Frericks in 2022, aims to promote a depoliticized corporate environment.
Impact of MSCI’s Proposal on Companies like Strive and Strategy
The potential rule change could have significant implications for companies like Strategy, which holds 650,000 BTC. JPMorgan estimates that MSCI’s exclusion criteria could result in substantial passive outflows, with Strategy alone facing $2.8 billion in potential withdrawals. If other index providers follow suit, the total outflows could reach $8.8 billion.
Strive criticized the 50% threshold set by MSCI as “unjustified, overbroad, and unworkable,” highlighting the diverse business operations of many bitcoin treasury companies. These companies are involved in various sectors such as AI data centers, structured finance, and cloud infrastructure, indicating a broader impact beyond just cryptocurrency holdings.
The firm drew parallels to other industries, noting that indexes do not typically exclude energy companies with significant oil reserves or gold miners whose value is tied to precious metals. Strive argued that implementing a bitcoin-specific rule would introduce an unnecessary investment bias into neutral benchmarks.
Furthermore, Strive raised concerns about market volatility and accounting discrepancies related to bitcoin holdings. The fluctuating price of bitcoin could result in companies moving in and out of eligibility for benchmark inclusion, while complex financial products and derivatives further complicate exposure calculations.
Strive cautioned that stringent rules could hinder innovation within the U.S. market, potentially giving international companies an advantage due to differing accounting standards. The company also warned that the proposed changes might impede the development of new bitcoin-backed financial products.
MSCI is expected to announce its decision on January 15, 2026, ahead of the February index review. Strive is one of several firms actively lobbying against the proposal, emphasizing the principles of fairness, neutrality, and market-driven decision-making over restrictive measures that limit investor access.
Recently, Strategy’s Michael Saylor addressed the MSCI index disputes, clarifying that Strategy is a publicly traded operating company with a substantial software business and a treasury strategy involving bitcoin, rather than being classified as a fund, trust, or holding company.
