Crypto Treasury Firms Face $15B Selling Pressure From MSCI Decision

bitcoinistPubblicato 2025-12-19Pubblicato ultima volta 2025-12-19

Introduzione

Analysts estimate that passive funds could pull between $10 billion and $15 billion from companies holding significant crypto assets if MSCI proceeds with a proposed rule change. The index provider is reviewing a policy to exclude firms holding over 50% of their assets in digital currencies from its benchmarks, a decision expected by January 2026. If enacted, index-tracking funds would be forced to sell shares of affected companies. JPMorgan analysis singles out MicroStrategy as the most impacted, potentially facing $2.8 billion in outflows. Beyond stock sales, there is a risk the companies themselves might liquidate crypto holdings, adding direct selling pressure to both equity and crypto markets. Industry groups are pushing back against the proposal, arguing for an operations-based classification instead.

Analysts have calculated that passive funds could pull as much as $11.6 billion from companies that treat large crypto holdings as corporate treasuries if MSCI removes them from its indexes, a move that would force index-tracking vehicles to sell shares.

Reports say that number comes from adding direct MSCI-tracked outflows to possible follow-on selling by other index providers.

Estimated Outflows Range

The figure sits inside a wider band of estimates. Some analysts and press pieces put the possible damage anywhere between $10 billion and $15 billion, depending on whether other major index providers copy MSCI’s decision and how much passive money is forced to move.

The analysis that produced these numbers looked at roughly 39 listed companies that meet MSCI’s proposed definition of a digital-asset treasury firm.

BTCUSD now trading at $87,105. Chart: TradingView

MSCI’s Proposal And The Mechanics

According to MSCI’s own consultation documents, the index provider is reviewing a rule that would treat companies holding more than 50% of their assets in digital assets as non-constituents of its broad equity indexes.

MSCI extended the consultation through December and said it expects to announce conclusions by January 15, 2026, with any changes applied in the February 2026 index review. If a firm is removed, funds that track MSCI benchmarks typically must reduce or sell their stakes automatically.

Strategy Stands Out

JPMorgan’s work has been singled out in multiple reports. According to that note, Strategy alone could face about $2.8 billion in passive outflows if removed from MSCI indexes, and larger losses if other index families follow.

Analysts say Strategy’s unique position — with a very high share of its balance sheet in Bitcoin — makes it the single biggest driver of the total outflow math.

Risk To Crypto Holdings

Some sectors warn that, beyond stock selling, the companies themselves might liquidate crypto positions to meet margin or liquidity needs, which could push crypto asset sales toward a figure as high as $15 billion in the worst scenarios. That would add direct selling pressure to both the equities and crypto markets.

Source: Bitcoin for Corporations

Industry Pushback

Based on reports, a group named Bitcoin For Corporations, along with several affected firms, pushed back, saying the MSCI test relies on a single balance-sheet threshold that doesn’t reflect how these companies actually operate.

The campaign has drawn public comments and petitions; several reports put the signature count at about 1,200 to 1,300. Companies have filed feedback with MSCI and have argued for an operations-based classification instead of a holdings-based cut-off.

Featured image from Unsplash, chart from TradingView

Domande pertinenti

QWhat is the estimated amount of selling pressure that crypto treasury firms could face due to MSCI's proposed rule change?

AAnalysts estimate that crypto treasury firms could face selling pressure ranging from $10 billion to $15 billion.

QWhat is the specific threshold in MSCI's proposal that would cause a company to be excluded from its indexes?

AMSCI's proposal would treat companies holding more than 50% of their assets in digital assets as non-constituents of its broad equity indexes.

QWhich company is singled out as the single biggest driver of the total outflow math and why?

AMicroStrategy is singled out as the biggest driver due to its unique position with a very high share of its balance sheet in Bitcoin, potentially facing about $2.8 billion in passive outflows.

QBeyond stock selling, what additional risk to the crypto market is highlighted in the article?

AThe article warns that the companies themselves might be forced to liquidate their crypto positions to meet margin or liquidity needs, which could add direct selling pressure to the crypto market.

QWhat is the main argument made by the industry group 'Bitcoin For Corporations' against MSCI's proposal?

AThe group argues that the MSCI test relies on a single balance-sheet threshold that doesn't reflect how these companies actually operate, and they have advocated for an operations-based classification instead.

Letture associate

Gensyn AI: Don't Let AI Repeat the Mistakes of the Internet

In recent months, the rapid growth of the AI industry has attracted significant talent from the crypto sector. A persistent question among researchers intersecting both fields is whether blockchain can become a foundational part of AI infrastructure. While many previous AI and Crypto projects focused on application layers (like AI Agents, on-chain reasoning, data markets, and compute rentals), few achieved viable commercial models. Gensyn differentiates itself by targeting the most critical and expensive layer of AI: model training. Gensyn aims to organize globally distributed GPU resources into an open AI training network. Developers can submit training tasks, nodes provide computational power, and the network verifies results while distributing incentives. The core issue addressed is not decentralization for its own sake, but the increasing centralization of compute power among tech giants. In the era of large models, access to GPUs (like the H100) has become a decisive bottleneck, dictating the pace of AI development. Major AI companies are heavily dependent on large cloud providers for compute resources. Gensyn's approach is significant for several reasons: 1) It operates at the core infrastructure layer (model training), the most resource-intensive and technically demanding part of the AI value chain. 2) It proposes a more open, collaborative model for compute, potentially increasing resource utilization by dynamically pooling idle GPUs, similar to early cloud computing logic. 3) Its technical moat lies in solving complex challenges like verifying training results, ensuring node honesty, and maintaining reliability in a distributed environment—making it more of a deep-tech infrastructure company. 4) It targets a validated, high-growth market with genuine demand, rather than pursuing blockchain integration without purpose. Ultimately, the boundaries between Crypto and AI are blurring. AI requires global resource coordination, incentive mechanisms, and collaborative systems—areas where crypto-native solutions excel. Gensyn represents a step toward making advanced training capabilities more accessible and collaborative, moving beyond a niche controlled by a few giants. If successful, it could evolve into a fundamental piece of AI infrastructure, where the most enduring value in the AI era is often created.

marsbit9 h fa

Gensyn AI: Don't Let AI Repeat the Mistakes of the Internet

marsbit9 h fa

Why is China's AI Developing So Fast? The Answer Lies Inside the Labs

A US researcher's visit to China's top AI labs reveals distinct cultural and organizational factors driving China's rapid AI development. While talent, data, and compute are similar to the West, Chinese labs excel through a pragmatic, execution-focused culture: less emphasis on individual stardom and conceptual debate, and more on teamwork, engineering optimization, and mastering the full tech stack. A key advantage is the integration of young students and researchers who approach model-building with fresh perspectives and low ego, prioritizing collective progress over personal credit. This contrasts with the US culture of self-promotion and "star scientist" narratives. Chinese labs also exhibit a strong "build, don't buy" mentality, preferring to develop core capabilities—like data pipelines and environments—in-house rather than relying on external services. The ecosystem feels more collaborative than tribal, with mutual respect among labs. While government support exists, its scale is unclear, and technical decisions appear driven by labs, not state mandates. Chinese companies across sectors, from platforms to consumer tech, are building their own foundational models to control their tech destiny, reflecting a broader cultural drive for technological sovereignty. Demand for AI is emerging, with spending patterns potentially mirroring cloud infrastructure more than traditional SaaS. Despite challenges like a less mature data industry and GPU shortages, Chinese labs are propelled by vast talent, rapid iteration, and deep integration with the open-source community. The competition is evolving beyond a pure model race into a contest of organizational execution, developer ecosystems, and industrial pragmatism.

marsbit10 h fa

Why is China's AI Developing So Fast? The Answer Lies Inside the Labs

marsbit10 h fa

3 Years, 5 Times: The Rebirth of a Century-Old Glass Factory

Corning, a 175-year-old glass company, is experiencing a dramatic revival as a key player in AI infrastructure, driven by surging demand for high-performance optical fiber in data centers. AI data centers require vastly more fiber than traditional ones—5 to 10 times as much per rack—to handle high-speed data transmission between GPUs. This structural demand shift, coupled with supply constraints from the lengthy expansion cycle for fiber preforms, has created a significant supply-demand gap. Nvidia has invested in Corning, along with Lumentum and Coherent, in a $4.5 billion total commitment to secure the optical supply chain for AI. Corning's competitive edge lies in its expertise in producing ultra-low-loss, high-density, and bend-resistant specialty fiber, which is critical for 800G+ and future 1.6T data rates. Its deep involvement in co-packaged optics (CPO) with partners like Nvidia further solidifies its position. While not the largest fiber manufacturer globally, Corning's revenue from enterprise/data center clients now exceeds 40% of its optical communications sales, and it has secured multi-year supply agreements with major hyperscalers including Meta and Nvidia. Financially, Corning's optical communications revenue has surged, doubling from $1.3 billion in 2023 to over $3 billion in 2025. Its stock price has risen nearly 6-fold since late 2023. Key future catalysts include the rollout of Nvidia's CPO products and the scale of undisclosed customer agreements. However, risks include high current valuations and potential disruption from next-generation technologies like hollow-core fiber. The company's long-term bet on light over electricity, maintained even through the telecom bubble crash, is now being validated by the AI boom.

marsbit11 h fa

3 Years, 5 Times: The Rebirth of a Century-Old Glass Factory

marsbit11 h fa

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片