Saylor Pushes Back As Strategy Risks Being Dropped From Major Indices After 30% Bitcoin Crash
Strategy, the company formerly known as MicroStrategy and led by Michael Saylor, has landed in the spotlight again – this time not for buying more Bitcoin, but for the risk of being removed from some of the most important stock market indices in the world.
Following a sharp 30% pullback in Bitcoin from its recent all‑time highs, concerns have intensified that Strategy could be excluded from benchmark indices such as MSCI USA and the Nasdaq 100 due to its massive exposure to the leading cryptocurrency.
Bitcoin Slumps, Pressure Mounts On Strategy
For most of the year, Strategy’s aggressive Bitcoin accumulation strategy looked like a masterstroke. As Bitcoin pushed to new highs, the company’s share price surged, riding the wave of institutional interest in digital assets.
That backdrop has changed abruptly. Bitcoin has entered what may be its most turbulent phase since late 2022, falling more than 30% from peak levels and slipping below the 85,000 USD mark.
Because Strategy is the largest public corporate holder of Bitcoin, with more than 650,000 BTC on its balance sheet, the company’s fortunes have become tightly correlated with the crypto market. This extreme exposure is now at the heart of a debate over whether it should continue to be included in major indices that many traditional investors use to build diversified portfolios.
Why Index Inclusion Matters So Much
Inclusion in large indices like MSCI USA and the Nasdaq 100 is not just a matter of prestige. It has direct consequences for liquidity, valuation, and capital access:
– Many mutual funds and ETFs are mandated to track or closely follow these indices.
– Being part of these benchmarks forces passive capital to hold the stock.
– Index membership can lower funding costs and expand the investor base.
If Strategy is removed, a large segment of passive investors may be compelled to sell, which could amplify volatility in the stock and potentially in the broader Bitcoin ecosystem.
Saylor: “We Are Not A Fund Or A Trust”
Responding to mounting speculation, Michael Saylor took to X (formerly Twitter) to push back on the narrative that Strategy should be classified like a fund or a crypto holding vehicle.
He insisted that the market is mischaracterizing the company’s nature. According to Saylor, Strategy is neither:
– a fund,
– a trust, nor
– a pure holding company.
Instead, he described it as a publicly traded operating business anchored by a roughly 500 million USD software operation. What distinguishes Strategy, in his view, is not passive ownership of Bitcoin, but an active, deliberate treasury strategy that treats BTC as “productive capital” – the foundation for building financial products and structures.
A Bitcoin-Backed Structured Finance Model
Saylor laid out a vision in which Strategy becomes a new type of enterprise: a Bitcoin‑backed structured finance company that operates at the intersection of capital markets and software.
This is not just rhetoric. In the current year alone, Strategy has:
– completed five public digital credit offerings – STRK, STRF, STRD, STRC, and STRE –
– with a combined notional value of more than 7.7 billion USD.
These issues are framed as financial instruments tied to the firm’s digital asset strategy, rather than simple equity raises.
In addition, Strategy introduced Stretch (ticker STRC), a Bitcoin‑backed treasury credit product aimed at generating variable USD yields. This offering is targeted at both institutional and retail markets, signaling that the company intends to operate like a structured finance platform powered by its Bitcoin reserves.
Active Creator, Not Passive Holder
Saylor contrasted Strategy with traditional funds and holding companies, arguing that those entities:
– merely hold or park capital, and
– do not directly operate or structure financial products.
By comparison, Strategy:
– designs Bitcoin‑linked instruments,
– issues them into the market,
– manages and operates them as part of an integrated business model.
From his perspective, this level of operational and product‑development activity sets Strategy apart from vehicles that MSCI and other gatekeepers often exclude from equity indices.
“Index Labels Don’t Define Us”
Despite the anxiety in markets, Saylor downplayed the idea that index classification should determine the company’s identity or long‑term trajectory.
He reiterated that Strategy remains committed to Bitcoin and to its broader mission, encapsulating it in a simple message:
– The firm’s conviction in Bitcoin is unwavering.
– Its mission is unchanged – to build what Saylor calls the world’s first “digital monetary institution,” grounded in sound money principles and ongoing financial innovation.
In other words, whether or not Strategy is included in certain indices, its strategy will continue to center around Bitcoin as both a reserve and a cornerstone for new products.
JPMorgan Flags Billions In Potential Outflows
Not everyone is as dismissive about the importance of index inclusion. Analysts at JPMorgan have sounded the alarm on what might happen if MSCI follows through with its proposed changes.
They highlighted the date January 15, 2026, as a key decision point for MSCI’s reclassification. If Strategy is ejected from these benchmarks, JPMorgan estimates that:
– capital outflows tied to the company could fall in a range of
2.8 billion to 8.8 billion USD.
While actively managed funds are not forced to follow index adjustments, JPMorgan warned that many market participants treat index expulsions as a negative signal. The likely result would be:
– lower trading liquidity for Strategy’s stock,
– heightened volatility,
– and higher funding costs for the company going forward.
MSCI’s Stance On Digital Asset Treasury Firms
Behind the scenes, MSCI has been consulting investors and other stakeholders about a special class of companies it refers to as digital asset treasury firms (DATs). These are businesses that hold substantial digital assets on their balance sheets as part of their corporate strategy.
According to MSCI, some investors view such firms as behaving similarly to investment funds rather than operating companies. That perception alone can be enough to disqualify them from inclusion in traditional equity indices, which are typically designed around operating businesses, not vehicles for asset exposure.
To align its rules with this viewpoint, MSCI has proposed:
– excluding any company whose digital asset holdings make up 50% or more of total assets
– from its global investable market indices.
Under this framework, Strategy – with its enormous Bitcoin reserves – finds itself squarely in the crosshairs.
What Exclusion Could Mean For Strategy’s Stock
If MSCI and potentially other index providers eventually follow through, Strategy could face a multi‑layered impact:
1. Forced Selling
Passive index funds and some rule‑based strategies would likely be required to liquidate their positions, adding selling pressure.
2. Valuation Discount
Companies perceived as “outside the index universe” often trade at lower multiples, as they are seen as more volatile and less predictable.
3. Wider Bid‑Ask Spreads
With reduced passive capital participation, daily liquidity can deteriorate, making it more expensive for large investors to enter or exit positions.
4. Funding Challenges
Higher perceived risk can push up yields on any new debt or structured products the company issues, raising the cost of capital.
However, there is also a counter‑argument: exclusion might further cement Strategy’s identity as a high‑beta Bitcoin proxy rather than a conventional tech stock, potentially attracting a different, more risk‑tolerant investor base that prefers that purity of exposure.
Implications For Corporate Bitcoin Treasuries
The MSCI debate surrounding Strategy has implications that go beyond a single company. It sends a powerful signal to any corporation contemplating a Bitcoin‑heavy treasury strategy:
– If digital assets cross certain thresholds on the balance sheet,
index eligibility could be at risk.
– That, in turn, affects how attractive such strategies are for large public firms that rely on index‑linked capital.
Companies now must weigh:
– the potential upside of Bitcoin exposure,
– against the possibility of structural exclusion from mainstream equity benchmarks.
This tension could slow down further adoption of Bitcoin as a treasury asset among index‑conscious corporations, or at least push them to keep exposure below the thresholds highlighted by MSCI.
Could Strategy Become A Blueprint Or A Warning?
Whether Strategy ultimately thrives or struggles under this model will likely shape how other firms approach digital asset strategies:
– If Saylor’s vision plays out and the company successfully positions itself as a profitable Bitcoin‑backed structured finance and software hybrid, it may become a template for new corporate models in the digital asset era.
– If, instead, index exclusion leads to persistent valuation discounts, growth constraints, and funding headwinds, Strategy may be cited as a cautionary tale about over‑concentration in volatile assets.
Either way, it is clear that Strategy is testing the boundary between traditional equity markets and a new, crypto‑integrated corporate landscape.
Broader Market Impact: Bitcoin And Beyond
Strategy’s fate could also influence sentiment in the Bitcoin market itself. As one of the most visible corporate Bitcoin holders:
– A sharp re‑rating of Strategy’s stock could feed back into how investors assess the risks of corporate Bitcoin adoption.
– Regulatory and index‑provider reactions to Strategy will be watched closely as de facto guidance on how far public firms can go in turning their balance sheets into digital asset vaults.
At the same time, Bitcoin’s 30% drawdown underscores that even as institutional adoption grows, the asset remains highly volatile. For companies like Strategy, this volatility is both the opportunity and the existential risk at the heart of their strategy.
The Road Ahead
Over the next year, several threads will determine the outcome:
– MSCI’s final decision and any similar moves from other index providers.
– Market reception to Strategy’s structured financial products and new offerings.
– The trajectory of Bitcoin itself, including regulation, macroeconomic factors, and institutional demand.
For now, Saylor appears committed to doubling down on his vision: a company that uses Bitcoin not only as a reserve asset but as the engine of a scalable, innovative financial business. Whether equity index gatekeepers ultimately embrace or reject that model may define a crucial chapter in the convergence of traditional markets and digital assets.