Index provider MSCI is proposing changes that could remove two major Bitcoin treasury companies from its Global Investable Market Indexes (GIMI) at the November 2026 review, a move that could force passive funds tracking those indexes to sell their holdings. Strategy (MSTR) and Metaplanet, both companies that hold significant Bitcoin reserves as core business strategies, were flagged for deletion in a May 2026 simulation using MSCI's proposed new eligibility rules.

What Is MSCI Proposing and Why Does It Matter?

MSCI is consulting with market participants on updated rules for non-operating companies in its indexes. The new framework applies a two-stage screening process designed to identify companies that function more as investment vehicles than operating businesses. Companies holding operating assets greater than 50% of their total assets would automatically pass the screen. Those below that threshold would face a second assessment examining five criteria: the intensity of operating assets, operating expenses, operating cash flow, non-operating fair value changes, and reliance on financing to grow assets.

Any company triggering four or more of those five criteria would be classified as non-operating and subject to removal. This represents a significant shift from MSCI's previous approach, which proposed a simpler 50% digital asset threshold specifically for crypto treasury businesses. That earlier proposal was scrapped in February after investor concerns that such a simple test could not distinguish between genuine operating companies and investment vehicles.

Which Companies Are at Risk of Removal?

The May 2026 simulation identified three companies for deletion under the new rules:

• Strategy (MSTR): Free-float adjusted market capitalization of $23.93 billion, the largest of the three flagged companies and a major Bitcoin holder with significant exposure to BTC price movements.
• Metaplanet: Free-float adjusted market capitalization of $654 million, a company that has continued to operate a Bitcoin treasury strategy as its core business model.
• Yellow Cake: Free-float adjusted market capitalization of $1.81 billion, a uranium investor also flagged in the simulation.

Three additional companies, SharpLink, Center Laboratories, and Lydia Holding, were placed on a public watchlist because they failed the screen in only one period. Under MSCI's framework, new candidates that fail the latest review become ineligible, while member companies face less stringent criteria and would only be excluded after failing in two consecutive annual reviews.

What Could Happen to Passive Investors?

If MSCI implements these changes, passive funds that track its Global Investable Market Indexes would be forced to sell their holdings of Strategy and Metaplanet. MSCI has not provided an estimate of the total selling pressure that would result from the current consultation. However, during the previous crypto treasury consultation, JPMorgan estimated that removing Strategy alone would create $2.8 billion in passive selling pressure, though that estimate was based on the prior methodology and may not apply directly to the current proposal.

This forced selling could create downward price pressure on both companies' stock prices, affecting not only passive investors but also active traders and individual shareholders. The impact would be particularly significant for Strategy, given its $23.93 billion market capitalization and heavy exposure to Bitcoin holdings.

How to Understand the Timeline and Next Steps

• Feedback Period: MSCI is accepting public consultation feedback until September 30, 2026, allowing market participants, investors, and affected companies to voice concerns about the proposed changes.
• Announcement Expected: MSCI plans to announce the outcome of its consultation on or around October 16, 2026, giving the market roughly two weeks' notice before the November review.
• Implementation Timeline: If adopted, the changes would be implemented at the November 2026 Index Review, though MSCI has cautioned that the consultation does not guarantee that any or all proposed changes will be enacted.

The timing is critical because it gives affected companies and investors a narrow window to respond. Strategy and Metaplanet have both had opportunities to comment on previous proposals, and both remain heavily exposed to Bitcoin. Strategy continues to hold significant Bitcoin reserves, while Metaplanet has maintained its Bitcoin treasury strategy as a core operational focus.

Why Did MSCI Change Its Approach?

The original February proposal for a simple 50% digital asset threshold was abandoned because investors and companies like Strategy argued that such a straightforward test was arbitrary and could not properly distinguish between operating companies and pure investment vehicles. Strategy had specifically called out the 50% threshold as inadequate for capturing the nuances of different business models.

The new two-stage approach attempts to address these concerns by examining multiple operational metrics rather than relying on a single asset-composition test. However, the broader criteria may still catch Bitcoin treasury companies that operate primarily as investment vehicles, which is exactly what Strategy and Metaplanet do. Both companies have built their business models around accumulating and holding Bitcoin as their primary strategy, rather than generating revenue from traditional operating activities.

The consultation period remains open until September 30, and the final outcome is not guaranteed. However, the May simulation provides a clear signal of which companies MSCI views as problematic under its new framework. Investors and companies affected by the proposal have roughly six weeks to make their case to MSCI before the consultation closes.