#密码资产动态追踪 MSCI presses pause, the behind-the-scenes weighing game as MSTR surges 6.58% after hours

On January 7th, the index giant MSCI announced a thought-provoking decision: in the February 2026 index review, they will temporarily refrain from removing Digital Asset Trust Companies (DATCOs) from the MSCI Global Investable Market Index.

This seemingly administrative announcement actually reflects a deeper dilemma regarding identity recognition. MSCI’s underlying logic is clear — they plan to initiate a broader consultation process to redefine how to treat companies that are not primarily engaged in core operations. The core issue is: how to distinguish whether a company is engaging in normal investment activities or treating non-operational assets (such as digital assets) as its core business? This is not a minor issue.

Digital asset reserve companies like MSTR break the traditional boundaries of business models. They are neither purely tech companies nor traditional asset management firms. This ambiguity has caused global exchanges and index providers to face the same dilemma — from MSCI and Nasdaq to Asian exchanges, all are re-evaluating the compliance status of these new entities.

After the announcement, Strategy (MSTR) surged 6.58% in after-hours trading, a direct market reaction to MSCI’s decision. But what’s more worth pondering is the underlying logic: why can this decision move the stock price?

Part of the reason is that traditional financial institutions’ attitudes toward this model are subtly shifting. S&P’s "B-" credit rating for MSTR is evidence of this — it recognizes the inclusion of Bitcoin treasury models into mainstream evaluation frameworks for the first time, while the lower rating reflects cautiousness about its risks. This duality precisely illustrates the true thoughts of traditional institutions: acknowledging the existence of this model but still observing and evaluating.

MSCI’s decision is essentially a compromise. On one hand, it responds to market voices concerned about the purity of the index; on the other hand, it avoids rushing to suppress a rapidly growing new sector. This balancing act appears moderate, but the real challenges lie ahead.

The focus for the future is whether this new consultation process can produce a convincing evaluation framework. This framework needs to be sufficiently clear, fair, and most importantly, broadly accepted by the market. Only then can DAT companies truly gain legitimate status in the traditional financial world.

From a macro perspective, the entire process is a true reflection of the ongoing collision, trial, and integration between traditional finance and the crypto asset space. Every regulatory decision, every index adjustment, and every rating change is a sign of these two worlds gradually finding their rhythm.