Key Highlights
- Strive submitted comments on MSCI’s proposed methodology for identifying companies with substantial non-operating assets.
- The company is seeking clearer criteria for determining what qualifies as an operating asset.
- Strive argues that financial assets such as Bitcoin can form part of an operating business depending on how they are used.
Strive has asked MSCI to clarify how it would determine whether assets form part of a company’s operating business under a proposed methodology that could affect firms with large holdings of financial assets.
In comments submitted on September 25, Strive Chairman and CEO Matt Cole questioned how the framework would apply to companies that use financial assets in activities such as lending, structured finance and asset management.
The issue is particularly relevant to Bitcoin treasury companies and financial firms whose balance sheets contain large digital-asset positions alongside businesses such as asset management, lending and structured products.
MSCI moves away from Bitcoin specific screen
MSCI launched its latest consultation after withdrawing an earlier proposal that would have specifically screened companies whose digital assets represented at least 50% of total assets.
The revised approach does not specifically mention Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies.
Instead, MSCI proposes first assessing whether a company has a substantial proportion of operating assets. Companies that fail that initial screen would then be evaluated using five additional measures:
- Operating-asset intensity
- Operating-expense intensity
- Operating cash flow
- Non-operating fair-value changes
- Capital dependence
Under the proposed framework, a company that fails the initial screen would become ineligible if it also triggers at least four of the five additional measures.
Existing index constituents would receive additional buffers, including a requirement to fail the screen over two consecutive periods before removal.
Strive wants operating assets defined more clearly
Strive’s submission focuses on the definition of an operating asset.
Cole argued that MSCI’s consultation does not provide enough detail about how the term would be interpreted or which financial information would determine a company’s classification.
“The proposal’s most important term is also its least defined,” Cole wrote.
Strive is asking MSCI to provide clearer criteria for distinguishing operating assets from non-operating holdings. It also wants companies to be able to identify which parts of the methodology caused them to fail the proposed screen.
The issue could be relevant to companies whose financial assets are used in lending, structured finance or asset-management activities rather than held solely as passive investments.
Strive argues Bitcoin can support operations
Strive also challenged the assumption that Bitcoin holdings should automatically be treated as non-operating assets.
The company argues that the classification should depend partly on how an asset is used within the business.
Strive pointed to its activities in structured finance and institutional asset management alongside its Bitcoin treasury operations.
The company also compared the issue with financial institutions such as banks and insurers, where financial assets can represent a core part of normal business operations.
MSCI has not indicated that it accepts Strive’s interpretation. The treatment of such assets remains part of the ongoing consultation.
Strategy raised similar concerns
Strive’s comments follow a separate submission from Strategy on August 31.
Strategy argued that the terms “operating” and “non-operating” in MSCI’s proposal do not directly correspond with definitions used under U.S. GAAP or IFRS.
The company also said its Bitcoin activities are reported as an operating segment and that Bitcoin fair-value changes are reflected within operating expenses under its accounting presentation.
Strategy cited approximately $52.56 billion in total assets, including about $49.67 billion in digital assets, in its June 2026 filing.
The company has asked MSCI to withdraw the proposal and establish clearer criteria for distinguishing operating and non-operating businesses.
Both submissions raise a broader issue for MSCI: whether the classification should depend primarily on the type of assets a company holds or on how those assets are used within its business.
MSCI simulation flags three companies
MSCI’s consultation includes a simulation using May 2026 data.
The exercise identified Strategy, Metaplanet and Yellow Cake for potential deletion from the MSCI ACWI IMI. SharpLink, Center Laboratories and Lydia Holding were placed on a public watchlist.
Strategy had a free-float-adjusted market capitalization of approximately $23.9 billion in the simulation.
These results are part of MSCI’s consultation process and do not represent current changes to the index.
Accounting treatment could affect the screen
Another issue raised by Strive concerns differences between accounting frameworks.
The company argues that similar businesses could receive different results under the methodology because the treatment of digital assets can vary between jurisdictions and accounting frameworks.
Strive has therefore asked MSCI to explain how differences between U.S. GAAP and IFRS would be handled when applying the proposed tests.
The company is also seeking more detail on the thresholds used in the five secondary measures and why four of the five tests would be required after a company fails the initial screen.
MSCI consultation runs through September 30
MSCI is accepting feedback on the proposed methodology until September 30, 2026, with the consultation results expected by October 16.
Any resulting changes are proposed to take effect as part of the November 2026 Index Review.
Until MSCI completes the consultation, the potential impact on companies with large Bitcoin or other financial-asset holdings remains unresolved.
The discussion has therefore shifted from a Bitcoin-specific ownership threshold to a broader question of how index providers should classify companies whose financial assets are closely connected to their operating activities.
Also Read: Peter Schiff Questions Catalysts Behind Bitcoin Rally, Citing Saylor
