Futures
Access hundreds of perpetual contracts
TradFi
Gold
One platform for global traditional assets
Options
Hot
Trade European-style vanilla options
Unified Account
Maximize your capital efficiency
Demo Trading
Introduction to Futures Trading
Learn the basics of futures trading
Futures Events
Join events to earn rewards
Demo Trading
Use virtual funds to practice risk-free trading
Launch
CandyDrop
Collect candies to earn airdrops
Launchpool
Quick staking, earn potential new tokens
HODLer Airdrop
Hold GT and get massive airdrops for free
Pre-IPOs
Unlock full access to global stock IPOs
Alpha Points
Trade on-chain assets and earn airdrops
Futures Points
Earn futures points and claim airdrop rewards
#MSCI未来或纳入数字资产财库企业 One interesting event that happened on January 7th—MSCI, the global index leader, announced an important decision: they will temporarily refrain from removing digital asset treasury companies (DATCOs) from the index.
How are these companies defined? Simply put, companies where digital assets account for more than 50% of total assets. Strategy firms are typical representatives. Last October, MSCI proposed to exclude them, which caused a market uproar—JPMorgan even calculated that if implemented, Strategy could face a tidal outflow of $2.8 billion in passive funds.
Why was no action taken in the end? The core issue lies here: how should these companies be classified? As operating companies or as investment funds? Regulatory opinions are inconsistent, and the companies named have all strongly opposed the proposal.
The result is—postponement. Strategy stocks surged over 6% after hours. MSCI said they will continue to consult and are preparing to revisit the inclusion standards for non-operational companies. This adjustment is expected to be finalized in the February index review. In plain terms, this decision leaves more room for imagination regarding the integration of digital assets with traditional capital markets.
---
Honestly, the classification standards haven't been clearly explained; MSCI is still exploring.
---
Strategy made a huge profit this round, jumping 6% directly, this is the policy expectation gap.
---
Let's wait until February to see; I feel there will be follow-up, it's impossible for the market to oppose so strongly without reason.
---
Including digital assets in the index is already an inevitable trend, but regulation still needs to be clarified.
---
It's hilarious, a hedging move caused Strategy to rise 6%, showing how worried the market is.
---
It seems MSCI isn't quite sure how to classify these companies, so they just leave it as is.
---
Strategy made a huge profit this round. MSCI’s way of playing both sides is brilliant.
---
Basically, they haven't figured out how to regulate it, so they might as well leave it alone for now.
---
Regulatory agencies' opinions don't match up, so this is destined to be delayed.
---
Waiting for another round in February? I bet 5 BTC that it will keep swinging.
---
Can't even tell if companies with 50% digital assets are enterprises or funds. This regulation is also incredible.
---
Strategy jumped 6% directly. So realistic, the market just eats this up.
---
It's all about betting; whoever has the louder voice gets listened to.
---
The inclusion of digital assets in the index is far from over; we'll have to watch the show.
---
It's that same routine again—delay first, then continue consulting, dragging out the time.
---
But speaking of which, the final verdict on DATCOs still depends on February. It's too early to celebrate now, right?
---
Wait, is 50% of digital assets classified as this type? Then I need to review my own account... No, for small retail investors like us, there's no need to overthink. Just watch how these big players operate.
---
Traditional finance and the crypto world are about to argue over classification again. Truly impressive—that's why rules can never keep up with innovation.
---
Strategy has escaped this time, but what about next time? Suspension ≠ permanent exemption. Let's wait and see in February.
---
Interesting, JPMorgan is helping with the calculations, as if they're afraid Strategy will blow up. What's going on here?
---
The classification issue has stalled MSCI, indicating that the digital asset space is indeed a vacuum zone right now. No one can fully clarify it, which actually presents an opportunity.
With a $2.8 billion outflow pressure, no wonder Strategy and these companies are making such a fuss. But on the other hand, since the classification standards haven't been finalized, it's hard to say who's right or wrong.
Still, as I always say, the fate of players like Grayscale ultimately depends on policy trends. We'll see the answer in February.
It’s quite ironic—on one side, ETFs are entering the market, while on the other, indices are still struggling with classification. Traditional finance still needs more time.
This move is brilliant; postponing it instead gives the market greater imagination. Rather than a compromise, it’s more like a disguised positive signal.
Wait, in that case, should the index components of listed companies holding Bitcoin also be re-evaluated?
It feels like the rules are becoming more and more blurred, but that’s precisely the opportunity. The game of profiting amid chaos has just begun.
---
They can't even figure out the classification standards and still want to influence the index. MSCI's approach is truly disappointing.
---
Putting it aside = keep exploiting the system, try again in February? I doubt it.
---
The key is that regulatory agencies are not unified in their opinions, which shows that the path to DeFi compliance is still long.
---
The stock price of Strategy rose 6%, which shows how ridiculous this decision is. The capital market is really attractive.
---
Including digital assets in the index is a good thing, but such unpredictable attitudes really give people heart attacks.
---
If 50% of assets are digital, should they be deleted? Then companies buying corporate bonds with Bitcoin are all at risk.
---
In summary, it's just a game of利益博弈, whoever has the bigger fist gets to decide.
---
Wait until February, probably another big show. Should we cut or not this time?
---
The funniest part is that MSCI itself can't even define it, but it gave DATCOs a chance to breathe, which is a bit ironic.
Putting it on hold just gives everyone a breather, but regulators are still dragging their feet...
Really? Another wave in February? I bet this issue with sat will keep recurring.
The traditional financial classification standards are already a joke to BTC holders.
If the $2.8 billion outflow really happens, it would be a disaster. Luckily, they didn't act.
Regulatory authorities haven't figured out how to classify it yet, but the index companies are eager to exclude it. That logic is indeed...
We'll see the results in February. Let's just wait and see.
There's definitely plenty of room left; the story between traditional capital markets and digital assets is not over yet.