Ming Sheng (MSCI.US) plans to select crypto companies: MicroStrategy (MSTR.US) is angry at discrimination

According to Woofun AI, MicroStrategy (MSTR.US) officially issued a strong protest against MSCI.US (MSCI.US), accusing it of discriminating against crypto companies when revising the index to include standards, in an attempt to remove companies that use Bitcoin as a core asset from mainstream global financial benchmarks. This conflict marks a further escalation of tension between traditional financial infrastructure and the emerging digital asset economy.

MSCI.US (MSCI.US) previously announced consultations on revising the inclusion criteria for the Global Investable Markets Index, which is an important benchmark for many exchange-traded funds and institutional portfolios. Under the proposed new rules, companies classified as' non-operating 'may be excluded. This will directly affect companies such as MicroStrategy (MSTR.US) and Japanese Metaplanet, which all use large amounts of Bitcoin as part of their asset allocation strategy.

According to Woofun AI, MSCI.US has yet to make a final decision, and the consultation period is still ongoing, and market participants can submit feedback during this period. However, this possible exclusion has raised concerns among investors, as they see such companies as an important bridge between traditional finance and the growing digital asset economy.

In the letter, MicroStrategy (MSTR.US) questioned the fairness and credibility of the proposal, saying that its definition of an 'operating company' was too narrow and out of date. The company believes that companies that actively manage Bitcoin assets, participate in capital market activities, and create value for shareholders through digital asset strategies are actually in a state of operation—simply not operating companies in the traditional sense of the term as conceived by MSCI.US standards. MicroStrategy (MSTR.US) also pointed out that this recommendation may distort the performance of the index because it will exclude a portion of the market that has been widely accepted by many institutions. The company stressed that this move will affect not only the companies themselves, but also investors who rely on index funds to access the cryptocurrency economy.

If this rule is implemented, index funds based on the MSCI.US (MSCI.US) Index will have to sell the shares of the companies involved, which in turn may cause price fluctuations. For investors, this means fewer diversified investment opportunities and missed development opportunities in this sector, which is showing strong momentum.

Furthermore, the proposal raised a broader question: in an age where digital assets are increasingly integrated into corporate balance sheets, how should index compilers define an 'operating company'? As more businesses use Bitcoin as an asset reserve, the line between traditional operators and entities with cryptocurrencies at the core of their business is blurring. The dispute between MicroStrategy (MSTR.US) and MSCI.US (MSCI.US) reflects the increasingly strained relationship between traditional financial infrastructure and the growing cryptocurrency economy.

Although MSCI.US has yet to make a decision, its final results may set a precedent for how other indexers treat crypto-related businesses. Currently, market participants are closely watching the matter, as this decision may affect the extent to which institutional investors are adopting these fields, as well as the popularity of digital assets in the mainstream financial sector. Following the regulatory framework game, this is yet another critical definition battle faced by crypto assets entering the mainstream financial system.