Saylor Urges MSCI to Drop ‘Discriminatory’ Rule Threatening Strategy’s Index Spot

Strategy’s fight to keep its seat in MSCI’s global stock indices has flared up for a second time this year, and this time Michael Saylor isn’t waiting quietly for a ruling. Here’s how the standoff has unfolded.

January 2026: The first exclusion scare

MSCI first floated the idea of screening out companies that primarily hold digital assets from its widely tracked indices back in January, targeting firms holding 50% or more of their assets in crypto. The threat carried real financial weight: JPMorgan estimated that funds tracking MSCI benchmarks could be forced to sell roughly $2.8 billion worth of Strategy shares if the exclusion went through, given how many passive and index-tracking funds hold MSTR simply because it sits inside those benchmarks. Saylor pushed back publicly at the time, arguing Strategy “is not a fund, not a trust, and not a holding company” but a operating business with a software segment and a treasury strategy that uses Bitcoin as productive capital. MSCI ultimately decided against the exclusion, with a decision landing around January 15 and Saylor confirming shortly after that Strategy would remain in MSCI’s indexes.

Late August 2026: MSCI reopens the question

The reprieve didn’t last. MSCI launched a fresh consultation proposing an eligibility screen built around whether a company’s operating assets fall below 50% of its total assets. Rather than a single bright line, the new proposal uses five financial-ratio flags — covering operating asset intensity, expense intensity, operating cash flow, fair-value changes, and dependence on outside capital — and a company that trips at least four of the five becomes ineligible for MSCI’s indices. Critics of the proposal, Strategy included, describe it as the same underlying idea from January dressed up in more technical clothing.

MSCI’s own consultation materials, using data as of May 2026, estimate the screen would result in three deletions from the ACWI IMI index: Strategy, with a float-adjusted market capitalization of $23.93 billion; UK-listed uranium holder Yellow Cake, at $1.81 billion; and Japan’s Metaplanet, at $654 million.

August 31: Strategy’s letter

Strategy responded directly. In a letter signed by Executive Chairman Michael Saylor and CEO Phong Le, the company called the consultation “discriminatory, arbitrary, and misguided” and urged MSCI to withdraw it entirely. The letter argues the proposal specifically targets companies that maintain substantial digital asset reserves as part of a deliberate corporate strategy, and characterizes it as a repackaged version of the crypto-holdings threshold MSCI already declined to adopt in January.

What happens next

MSCI is accepting public feedback on the proposal through September 30 and has said it plans to announce its decision by October 16. Any resulting index changes wouldn’t take effect until December, giving affected companies and the funds that track them a window to prepare regardless of the outcome. For now, Strategy remains in MSCI’s indices, and the outcome of this second round will determine whether the January reprieve holds or whether a more technical version of the same proposal succeeds where the original one failed.

Index-inclusion decisions can move share prices independent of a company’s underlying business or Bitcoin holdings, and passive fund flows tied to index membership carry their own risks. This is not financial advice. For background on how corporate Bitcoin treasury companies work, see coin680’s Bitcoin Academy.