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

bitcoinistPublicado em 2025-12-19Última atualização em 2025-12-19

Resumo

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

Perguntas relacionadas

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.

Leituras Relacionadas

Annual Salary of Millions Competing for Electricians, Meta Rushes to Open Its Own Technical School

The AI boom is facing an unexpected bottleneck: a severe shortage of skilled construction workers and electricians. As tech giants like Meta, OpenAI, and Alphabet race to build massive data centers—such as OpenAI's $16 billion "Stargate" project—they are hitting a critical labor wall. The U.S. needs an estimated 130,000 more electricians, 240,000 construction workers, and 150,000 supervisors by 2030 for AI infrastructure alone, but tens of thousands of electrician jobs go unfilled each year. While AI companies offer high premiums, with electricians earning up to $280,000 annually, worker scarcity still causes massive losses—delays on a single project can cost $14.2 million per month. The complexity of building AI data centers, which require immense power (equivalent to powering hundreds of thousands of homes), sophisticated electrical systems, and advanced liquid cooling solutions, demands highly skilled technicians who are in short supply. To combat this, companies are investing heavily in training. Meta has committed $115 million to a free training school offering tuition, housing, and stipends, targeting 5,000 new workers. OpenAI is partnering with unions to secure skilled labor. These efforts are paying off, with a significant rise in Gen Z interest in trade schools over college. However, the power demands are staggering. AI data centers are driving a rapid surge in electricity consumption, projected to account for up to 12% of U.S. power use by 2028 and raising costs for consumers. Furthermore, the construction boom is project-based, leading to a potential future glut of trained workers once building peaks, which could depress wages industry-wide. The race for AI supremacy now depends as much on skilled hands as on advanced chips.

marsbitHá 59m

Annual Salary of Millions Competing for Electricians, Meta Rushes to Open Its Own Technical School

marsbitHá 59m

OpenAI No Longer Sells Its Most Expensive Model for Profit

OpenAI is shifting its business strategy away from promoting its most expensive, flagship models for every task. Recent price cuts—80% for GPT-5.6 Luna and 20% for Terra—signal a deeper change: the company now actively advises users that many tasks don't require the most powerful model. Instead, OpenAI recommends a tiered approach: use the high-end GPT-5.6 Sol for complex planning and analysis, then delegate execution to cheaper models like Luna. This mirrors moves by Anthropic, which recently launched Claude Opus 5 at half the price of its top model, Fable 5. Both companies are de-emphasizing flagship models as primary revenue drivers, using them instead for brand prestige and technological showcases. The industry is entering a "mass-market" phase, similar to automotive, where high-volume, cost-effective models handle daily operations and drive scale. OpenAI's price reductions are partly enabled by AI models themselves optimizing underlying code and infrastructure, creating a self-reinforcing cycle of efficiency gains and cost reduction. Competition is shifting from "who is smartest" to "who offers the best value." The goal is no longer selling individual models but fostering widespread API adoption and ecosystem lock-in. By making AI calls cheap and ubiquitous, companies like OpenAI aim to become the indispensable, utility-like infrastructure powering automated workflows—the "water and electricity" of software, quietly embedded everywhere.

marsbitHá 59m

OpenAI No Longer Sells Its Most Expensive Model for Profit

marsbitHá 59m

Trading

Spot
活动图片