MSTR's Future Amid Nasdaq 100 Inclusion and MSCI Scrutiny: Assessing the Long-Term Viability of a Bitcoin Treasury Business Model

The inclusion of companies like MicroStrategy (MSTR) in traditional equity indices has sparked a fundamental debate about the classification of firms with Bitcoin treasury business models. As the Nasdaq 100 retains MSTR under its technology sub-category, while MSCI proposes reclassifying such entities as "funds" if their digital assets exceed 50% of total assets according to analysis, the long-term viability of this business model hinges on evolving index criteria and market sentiment. This analysis examines the implications of these developments for MSTR and the broader adoption of Bitcoin as a corporate treasury asset.

Nasdaq 100's Reluctant Acceptance of Bitcoin Treasuries

MicroStrategy's retention in the Nasdaq 100, despite its transformation from a software company to a Bitcoin-holding entity, reflects a pragmatic approach by index providers. According to a Reuters report, the company was included in the index's technology sub-category during the December 2025 reshuffle. This decision underscores the Nasdaq's prioritization of market capitalization and liquidity over strict adherence to traditional business model definitions. However, analysts have flagged risks, noting that MSTR's inclusion may not be sustainable if its operational revenue declines further relative to its Bitcoin holdings.

The Nasdaq 100's current criteria emphasize market size and sector representation but lack explicit rules for classifying companies with unconventional asset allocations. This ambiguity creates a short-term lifeline for MSTR but leaves its long-term index status vulnerable to shifting interpretations of what constitutes a "technology company."

MSCI's Proposed Reclassification: A Threat to Index Viability

MSCI's proposed rule, which would exclude firms with 50% or more of their assets in digital assets from its Global Investable Market Indexes, represents a more direct challenge to the Bitcoin treasury model. The rationale-framing such companies as investment funds rather than operating businesses-has drawn sharp criticism. As stated in a Bitcoin Magazine analysis, the rule arbitrarily targets digital assets while ignoring similar thresholds for real estate or equities.

The potential consequences are significant. If implemented, the rule could trigger over $8.8 billion in passive outflows from index-linked funds, disproportionately impacting MSTR, which holds over 660,000 Bitcoin according to a Big Spring Herald article. This volatility stems from the rule's dependency on Bitcoin's price, which could cause companies to flip in and out of index eligibility without operational changes as noted in analysis. For MSTR, whose stock has already fallen 65% from its 2024 peak according to financial reporting, such instability could exacerbate capital costs and investor uncertainty.

The Broader Implications for Bitcoin Treasuries

The debate over MSTR's classification is not merely about one company but about the legitimacy of Bitcoin as a corporate treasury asset. Proponents argue that Bitcoin's role as a hedge against inflation and a store of value aligns with traditional treasury strategies. Critics, however, view the model as speculative, with earnings derived primarily from price appreciation rather than operational performance according to LinkedIn analysis.

MSCI's proposal highlights a deeper tension between innovation and tradition in financial markets. By reclassifying Bitcoin treasuries as funds, the index provider risks stifling experimentation with digital assets while failing to address the growing demand for Bitcoin exposure among institutional investors. As noted in a Big Spring Herald article, this approach could undermine U.S. leadership in digital finance and create inconsistencies in global index standards.

Conclusion: A Pivotal Moment for Digital Asset Integration

The future of MSTR-and by extension, the Bitcoin treasury business model-depends on how index providers balance innovation with traditional metrics. While the Nasdaq 100's current stance offers a temporary reprieve, MSCI's proposed rule signals a potential paradigm shift. If implemented, it could force companies like MSTR to restructure their balance sheets or seek alternative capital sources, reducing their appeal to passive investors.

For investors, the key takeaway is clear: the viability of Bitcoin treasuries in traditional indices remains contingent on regulatory and market dynamics. As the MSCI consultation period closes in December 2025, the outcome will shape not only MSTR's trajectory but also the broader acceptance of digital assets in corporate finance.