An exhortation has been issued by Strive Chief Executive Matt Cole to MSCI to “permit the marketplace to determine” the inclusion of Bitcoin-possessing corporations within their passive capital allocations.
MSCI has been implored by Strive, the fourteenth-largest Bitcoin treasury enterprise publicly traded on Nasdaq, to re-evaluate its forthcoming omission of prominent Bitcoin-possessing firms from its proprietary indexes.
In a communication delivered to MSCI’s chairman and Chief Executive, Henry Fernandez, the position was asserted by Strive that the exclusion of corporations whose digital asset reserves encompass over 50% of overall assets would diminish passive investors’ involvement in expanding sectors and would be deficient in encompassing the firms it purports to capture.
The forfeit of a position within MSCI’s proprietary indexes could constitute a substantial detriment to digital asset treasury corporations. Earlier, a caution was issued by JPMorgan analysts that Strategy, a Bitcoin treasury enterprise enumerated in the MSCI World Index, might incur a loss of $2.8 billion should the proposal be implemented by MSCI.
It has since been declared by Strategy Chairman Michael Saylor that the corporation is presently in dialogue with the index vendor regarding this specific concern.
Big Bitcoin Investors Are Leading the AI Charge, Says Strive CEO
The assertion was advanced by Strive CEO Matt Cole that significant Bitcoin mining corporations—specifically MARA Holdings, Riot Platforms, and Hut 8, all prospective firms on the exclusion register—are rapidly diversifying their data facilities to supply energy and infrastructure for artificial intelligence computation.
“Many analysts argue that the AI race is increasingly limited by access to power, not semiconductors. Bitcoin miners are ideally positioned to meet this rising demand,”
he said.
“But even as AI revenue comes in, their Bitcoin will remain, and your exclusion would too, curtailing client participation in the fastest-growing part of the global economy.”
Bitcoin Structured Finance Is On the Rise
The omission would also sever access for corporations such as Strategy and Metaplanet, which afford shareholders a comparable asset to sundry structured obligations tied to Bitcoin’s remunerations from entities such as JP Morgan, Morgan Stanley, and Goldman Sachs, Cole contended.
“Bitcoin structured financial services represent as legitimate an undertaking for us as it does for JPMorgan. Indeed, our aspiration to establish this as our central operational sector has been made public, similarly to other Bitcoin enterprises. It would be deemed disproportionate for us to engage in rivalry with conventional financiers, considering they are encumbered by a heightened capital expense resulting from passive index providers’ sanctions on the very Bitcoin that facilitates our provisions.”
A 50% Bitcoin Cap Is Not Feasible
The proposition was declared unfeasible in practical application by Cole, as the linkage of index admittance to a fluctuating asset would signify that corporations would “oscillate” in and out of the index, thereby escalating administrative expenditures and exacerbating tracking discrepancies.
There is also the predicament of ascertaining precisely when digital asset reserves attain the 50% threshold, as corporate entities garner exposure to digital holdings through assorted financial instruments.
“The question is not theoretical. Trump Media & Technology Group Corp., holder of the tenth-largest public Bitcoin treasury, did not appear on your preliminary exclusion list because its spot holdings comprised just under 50% of total assets,”
said Cole.
“However, Trump Media is absent merely because it represents the initial substantial treasury seeking considerable digital asset involvement through financial derivatives and exchange-traded funds.”
Rather than enacting an expansive exclusion, the MSCI has been pressed by Strive to contemplate the formation of an “ex-digital asset treasury” iteration for its currently utilized indexes.
“Proprietors of capital desiring to eschew these corporations could select those specific benchmarks, whilst others might persist in utilizing the conventional indices that most accurately depict the complete universe of investable equity.”
