Strive Urges MSCI to Rethink “Unworkable” Bitcoin Blacklist Proposal

• Strive asks MSCI to review its plan to exclude companies holding large amounts of Bitcoin.
• The proposal targets firms whose digital asset holdings exceed 50% of total assets.
• Strive warns the rule would harm passive investors and remove access to high-growth sectors.
• Big Bitcoin miners are expanding into AI infrastructure and could be unfairly excluded.
• Strive says the 50% threshold is impractical and would cause companies to drop in and out of indexes.
• The company suggests MSCI create an “ex-digital asset treasury” version of indexes instead.

Strive, one of the largest publicly listed Bitcoin treasury firms on Nasdaq, is calling on MSCI to reconsider its proposal that would exclude major Bitcoin-holding companies from its global indexes.

The proposal aims to remove firms whose digital asset holdings make up more than 50% of their total assets. According to Strive CEO Matt Cole, this approach is “unworkable” and could negatively impact passive investors who rely on MSCI indexes for exposure to the broader market.

Analysts have already highlighted the potential impact of the policy. JPMorgan warned that Strategy, another major Bitcoin treasury firm currently part of the MSCI World Index, could lose around $2.8 billion if the exclusion is finalized. Strategy’s chairman, Michael Saylor, has confirmed the company is in active discussions with MSCI to address the issue.

Bitcoin Miners Are Becoming AI Infrastructure Providers

Strive argues that large Bitcoin miners — including MARA Holdings, Riot Platforms, and Hut 8 — should not be penalized because they are now expanding into AI infrastructure. These firms operate large data centers and energy-intensive facilities, making them well-positioned to support the fast-growing demand for AI computing power.
Cole says that even as revenue from AI services grows, these companies will still hold Bitcoin, meaning MSCI’s exclusion would block investors from participating in both Bitcoin and AI growth.

Strive also notes that the exclusion could unfairly affect companies like Strategy and Metaplanet, which currently offer structured financial products linked to Bitcoin’s performance. Similar Bitcoin-linked offerings from major banks such as JPMorgan, Morgan Stanley, and Goldman Sachs would not be affected, creating what Cole calls an “asymmetric disadvantage” for Bitcoin-native firms.

The 50% Rule Is Difficult to Apply

Another issue raised by Strive is the practicality of measuring when a company crosses the 50% threshold. Digital asset exposure can come from spot Bitcoin, ETFs, derivatives, or other instruments. As a result, companies may repeatedly move above and below the threshold, causing them to enter and exit indexes frequently.
Cole also pointed to Trump Media — one of the largest public Bitcoin treasury holders — which was not listed in MSCI’s preliminary exclusions simply because its holdings were just below 50% at the time.

Instead of the exclusion rule, Strive proposes that MSCI introduce a separate “ex-digital asset treasury” version of its existing indexes. This would give investors a choice:

• those who want to avoid Bitcoin-heavy companies can choose the filtered index
  
• those who want full market representation can continue using the standard index
  

Strive believes this solution offers a fair and practical way to satisfy both types of investors without distorting the overall market.

Final Thought

Strive’s response highlights a key debate in modern investing: how traditional index providers should adapt to the growing presence of Bitcoin-focused companies. As Bitcoin treasuries expand into AI and structured finance, exclusion rules may risk cutting investors off from high-growth opportunities. Strive argues that offering flexible index options is a smarter approach than enforcing blanket restrictions.