温馨提示：本站仅提供公开网络链接索引服务，不存储、不篡改任何第三方内容，所有内容版权归原作者所有
AI智能索引来源：http://www.bee.com/ar/62517.html
点击访问原文链接

Strategy strongly defends MSCI: DAT’s “identity defense battle” | Bee Network

进入原网站 导航首页
Strategy strongly defends MSCI: DAT’s “identity defense battle” | Bee Network Login الأخبار الشائعة منصة إطلاق ميمي وكلاء الذكاء الاصطناعي ديسي مستكشف السلسلة الأعلى لنوبي 100x عملات معدنية لعبة النحل المواقع الأساسية يجب أن يكون لديك التطبيق مشاهير التشفير ديبين الناشئين الأساسية كاشف الفخ الأدوات الأساسية المواقع المتقدمة التبادلات أدوات NFT أهلاً، خروج عالم الويب 3 ألعاب تطبيق خلية نحل منصة النمو إعلان يبحث إنجليزي إعادة شحن العملات تسجيل الدخول تحميل ويب 3 يوني ألعاب تطبيق خلية نحل إعلان بيت•تحليل•Strategy strongly defends MSCI: DAT’s “identity defense battle” Strategy strongly defends MSCI: DAT’s “identity defense battle”تحليلمنذ 3 أشهرجديدوايت 19٬472 13 The struggle over the development of the digital asset treasury (DAT) industry continues.

In October, global index provider MSCI proposed excluding companies with digital asset holdings of 50% or more of their total assets from its global investable market indices. This move directly threatens the market position of digital asset treasury companies like Strategy, and could even reshape the capital flows of the entire digital asset treasury sector.

According to data compiled by Bitcoin for Corporations, 39 companies may be excluded from the MSCI World Investable سوق Index. JPMorgan analysts previously warned that the removal of Strategy alone could result in nearly $2.8 billion in passive capital outflows, and if other index providers follow suit, it could cause outflows of up to $8.8 billion.

Currently, MSCI’s consultation period for this proposal will continue until December 31, 2025, and the final conclusion is expected to be announced before January 15, 2026. If there are any adjustments, they will be formally implemented in the index review process in February 2026.

Faced with this pressing situation, Strategy submitted a strongly worded 12-page open letter to the MSCI Equity Index Committee on December 10th, jointly signed by Executive Chairman and Founder Michael Saylor and President and CEO Phong Le, clearly expressing its firm opposition to the proposal. The letter stated bluntly: “This proposal is seriously misleading and will have profound and destructive consequences for the interests of global investors and the development of the digital asset industry. We strongly urge MSCI to completely withdraw this plan.”

Strategy’s four core defenses Digital assets are a revolutionary foundational technology that is reshaping the financial system. Strategy argues that MSCI’s proposal underestimates the strategic value of Bitcoin and other digital assets. Since Satoshi Nakamoto introduced Bitcoin 16 years ago, this digital asset has grown into a key component of the global economy, with a current market capitalization of approximately $1.85 trillion.

Strategy believes that digital assets are not simply financial instruments, but a fundamental technological innovation that can reshape the global financial system . Companies investing in Bitcoin-related infrastructure are building a completely new financial ecosystem, which is no different from leading companies that have historically focused on a single emerging technology.

Just as Standard Oil in the 19th century focused on deep well drilling and AT&T in the 20th century invested heavily in building its telephone network, these companies laid a solid foundation for subsequent economic transformation and ultimately became industry benchmarks through forward-looking investments in core infrastructure. Strategy believes that companies focusing on digital assets today are repeating this path of “technology pioneers” and should not be simply dismissed by traditional index rules.

DAT is an operating company, not a passive fund. This is the core argument of Strategy’s defense— Digital Asset Treasury (DAT) is an operating company with a complete business model, not just an investment fund that passively holds Bitcoin . Although Strategy currently holds more than 600,000 Bitcoins, its core value does not depend on Bitcoin price fluctuations, but rather on creating sustainable returns for shareholders through the design and launch of unique “digital credit” instruments.

Specifically, Strategy’s “digital lending” instruments encompass various types, including preferred shares with fixed dividend rates, floating dividend rates, different priority levels, and credit protection clauses. Funds raised through the sale of these instruments are then used to increase Bitcoin holdings. As long as the long-term investment return on Bitcoin exceeds Strategy’s dollar-denominated financing costs, it can generate stable returns for shareholders and clients. Strategy emphasizes that this “active operation + asset appreciation” model is fundamentally different from the passive management logic of traditional investment funds or ETFs and should be considered a normal operating business.

In the letter, Strategy also raised questions: Why are oil giants, real estate investment trusts (REITs), and timber companies allowed to hold concentrated assets in a single category, yet not classified as investment funds and excluded from indices? Imposing special restrictions only on digital asset companies clearly does not conform to the principle of industry fairness.

The 50% digital asset threshold is arbitrary, discriminatory, and unrealistic. Strategy points out that MSCI’s proposal employs discriminatory standards. Many large companies in traditional industries also have highly concentrated holdings in single asset classes, including oil and gas companies, real estate investment trusts, timber companies, and power infrastructure businesses. However, MSCI has established special exclusion criteria only for digital asset companies, which constitutes clear unfair treatment.

From a feasibility standpoint, the proposal also presents serious problems. Due to the extreme volatility of digital asset prices, the same company could be repeatedly included or excluded from the MSCI index within a few days due to changes in asset value, causing market confusion. Furthermore, differences between accounting standards (US GAAP and international IFRS treat digital assets differently) will lead to companies with the same business model receiving different treatment depending on their place of registration.

Violating the principle of index neutrality, injecting policy bias. Strategy argues that MSCI’s proposal essentially constitutes a value judgment on a particular asset class, violating the fundamental principle that index providers should remain neutral. MSCI claims to the market and regulators that its indices provide “comprehensive” coverage to reflect “the evolution of the underlying stock market,” and should not make “judgments on the good or bad or appropriateness of any market, company, strategy, or investment.”

By selectively excluding digital asset companies, MSCI is effectively making policy judgments on behalf of the market, which is something index providers should avoid.

Contrary to the US digital asset strategy Strategy specifically points out that the proposal conflicts with the Trump administration’s strategic goal of advancing digital asset leadership . In its first week in office, the Trump administration signed executive orders to promote the growth of digital financial technologies and established a strategic Bitcoin reserve, aiming to make the United States a global leader in the digital asset space.

However, if MSCI’s proposal is implemented, it will directly prevent long-term funds such as US pension funds and 401(k) plans from investing in digital asset companies, resulting in billions of dollars of capital flowing out of the industry. This will not only hinder the development of innovative US digital asset companies, but may also weaken the US’s competitiveness in this strategic field, running counter to the government’s established policy direction.

According to analysts’ estimates cited by Strategy, Strategy alone could face up to $2.8 billion in passive stock liquidation due to MSCI’s proposal. This would not only harm Strategy itself but also have a chilling effect on the entire digital asset ecosystem. For example, it could force Bitcoin mining companies to sell assets prematurely to adjust their asset structure, thereby distorting the normal supply and demand relationship in the digital asset market.

Strategy’s ultimate goal Strategy made two main demands in its open letter:

First, we hope that MSCI will completely withdraw the removal proposal , allowing the market to test the value of Digital Asset Treasury (DAT) companies through free competition, so that the index can neutrally and faithfully reflect the development trend of next-generation financial technology.

Secondly, if MSCI insists on “special treatment” of digital asset companies, it needs to expand the scope of industry consultation, extend the consultation period , and provide more sufficient logical support to explain the rationality of the rules.

Strategy is not fighting alone. Strategy is not fighting alone. According to data from BitcoinTreasuries.NET, as of December 11, 208 publicly listed companies worldwide held more than 1.07 million Bitcoins, exceeding 5% of the total Bitcoin supply , with a current value of approximately $100 billion.

Source: BitcoinTreasuries.NET

These digital asset treasury companies have become an important bridge for institutional adoption of تشفيرcurrencies, providing compliant indirect exposure for traditional financial institutions such as pension funds and endowments.

Previously, Strive, a publicly traded company holding Bitcoin, suggested that MSCI should return the “option” for digital asset companies to the market. A simple and direct solution is to create a version of existing indices that excludes digital asset treasury companies , such as the MSCI USA ex Digital Asset Treasuries index and the MSCI ACWI ex Digital Asset Treasuries index. This transparent screening mechanism would allow investors to choose their own benchmarks, preserving the integrity of the indices while meeting the needs of different investors.

Furthermore, the industry organization Bitcoin for Corporations has launched a joint initiative urging MSCI to withdraw its digital asset proposal, arguing that classification should be based on companies’ actual business models, financial performance, and operational characteristics, rather than simply on asset percentages. According to the organization’s website, 309 companies and investors have already signed the joint letter. Signatories include executives from well-known industry players such as Strive, BitGo, Redwood Digital Group, 21MIL, BTC Inc., and DeFi Development Corp., as well as numerous individual developers and investors, in addition to Strategies.

ملخص The standoff between Strategy and MSCI is essentially a fundamental debate about how emerging financial innovations can be integrated into the traditional system. Digital Asset Treasury (DAT), as a “crossover” between the traditional financial and cryptocurrency worlds, is neither a pure technology company nor a simple investment fund, but rather a completely new business model built on digital assets.

MSCI’s proposal attempts to classify these complex entities as “investment funds” and exclude them from the index using a “50% asset allocation” standard; Strategy, however, insists that such simplification is a serious misunderstanding of their commercial nature and a departure from the principle of index neutrality. With the decision date approaching January 15, 2026, the outcome of this game will not only determine the index “eligibility” of several publicly listed companies holding Bitcoin, but will also تحديne a crucial “survival boundary” for the future position of the digital asset industry within the global traditional financial system.

Source reference:

https://assets.contentstack.io/v3/assets/bltf8d808d9b8cebd37/blt26a263f232aa531c/693976b64c2a191113a60111/strategy-msci-letter.pdf

https://app2.msci.com/webapp/index_ann/DocGet?pub_key=0bZz7Im3vZU%3D&lang=en&format=html

https://x.com/ColeMacro/status/1996930014441623902

هذا المقال مصدره من الانترنت: Strategy strongly defends MSCI: DAT’s “identity defense battle”

Related: Murad, the reigning top trading signal provider: 116 reasons why a bull market is coming in 2026. Guest: Murad Podcast source: MustStopMurad Original title: 116 Reasons Why Crypto BULL MARKET is NOT OVER Broadcast date: November 27, 2025 Key points summary Remember Murad, the king of trading signals from the last cycle? He’s the one who proposed the Meme supercycle theory. Now he’s back. In this podcast, Murad shares 116 bullish reasons, data analysis, and on-chain signals that suggest the cryptocurrency bull market could continue into 2026. Murad believes this market cycle may break the previous pattern of occurring every four years and last longer. Summary of key viewpoints Bitcoin may experience a parabolic rise in the future, reaching a high of $150,000 to $200,000. ETF holders have very strong long-term confidence in Bitcoin. The Bitcoin bull market is not over yet and will continue until 2026.…

تحليل ## بيتكوينعملة # المشفرة# ديفي# السوق© 版权声明المصفوفة 上一篇 Starting with the hijacking of Blue War: What exactly makes the security costs of crypto bigwigs so high? 下一篇 In-depth report on account abstraction: The generational leap of the Ethereum account system and the reshaping of the landscape in the next five years 相关文章 Circle, the first stablecoin stock, applies for a federal trust bank license with $60 billion in assets under self-custo 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 26٬666 1 In-depth analysis of Fluid: The king of lending + DEX fusion, a severely underestimated crypto infrastructure. 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 18٬201 1 New upgrade of TRON ecosystem: NFT, PePe, and SUNDOG land on Binance Alpha, seamlessly connected to Binance wallet to ac 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 27٬582 2 CME Gaps: A Misunderstood Market “Clock,” Not a Prophecy 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 7٬206 1 مليار مستخدم للبيتكوين بحلول عام 2025: ما هي توقعات الأسعار؟ 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 51٬103 2 Crypto Stock Weekly Report: Metaplanet Halts Bitcoin Purchases for Two Consecutive Weeks; BitMine’s Total ETH Holdings Increase to Over 3.236 Million (October 21st) 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 17٬117 أحدث المقالات Did Jane Street “Manipulate” BTC? Decoding the AP System, Understanding the Power Struggle Behind ETF Creation and Redemption Pricing منذ 24 ساعة 692 Stop Comparing Bitcoin to Gold—It’s Now a High-Volatility Software Stock منذ 24 ساعة 760 Matrixport Research: $25 Billion Gamma Unwinding Imminent, Liquidity Yet to Return Behind the Rebound منذ 24 ساعة 709 ERC-5564: Ethereum’s Stealth Era Has Arrived, Receiving Addresses No Longer ‘Exposed’ منذ 24 ساعة 563 Hong Kong Regulatory Green Light: Asseto Enables DL Holdings to Achieve Compliance for Two RWA Business Implementations منذ 24 ساعة 661 المواقع الشعبيةTempoLighterGAIBطائرة شراعيةبلانكرايلزبوكر BCPokerفوي Bee.com أكبر بوابة Web3 في العالم الشركاء كوين كارب بينانس CoinMarketCap كوين جيكو كوين لايف الدروع قم بتنزيل تطبيق Bee Network وابدأ رحلة web3 ورق ابيض الأدوار التعليمات © 2021-2026. جميع الحقوق محفوظة. سياسة الخصوصية | شروط الخدمة تحميل تطبيق Bee Network وابدأ رحلة web3 أكبر بوابة Web3 في العالم الشركاء CoinCarp Binance CoinMarketCap CoinGecko Coinlive Armors ورق ابيض الأدوار التعليمات © 2021-2026. جميع الحقوق محفوظة. سياسة الخصوصية | شروط الخدمة يبحث يبحثفي الموقععلى تشيناجتماعيأخبار العنوان: صيادو الإنزال الجوي تحليل البيانات مشاهير التشفير كاشف الفخ العربية English 繁體中文 简体中文 日本語 Tiếng Việt 한국어 Bahasa Indonesia हिन्दी اردو Русский العربية

智能索引记录