Strategy Reported $19.5 Billion in Profit—Why Is MSCI Removing It From Stock Indexes?

Table of Contents

• You might want to know
• Why MSCI is removing Strategy
• Key insights table
• Afterwards...

You might want to know

• How can Strategy report $19.53 billion in quarterly profit when its software revenue is much smaller?
• Could removal from stock indexes affect Strategy’s ability to buy Bitcoin?

Why MSCI is removing Strategy

Strategy reported $19.53 billion in profit last quarter, but that headline figure has not kept the company in some of the stock benchmarks maintained by MSCI, one of the world’s largest index providers. In its November review, MSCI listed “STRATEGY A”—the company’s MSTR shares—for removal from the MSCI USA Index after trading closes November 30. The change also affects broader indexes that include U.S. companies, including the MSCI World and MSCI All Country World indexes.

The decision is about index membership, not whether Strategy can continue operating. MSCI is not removing MSTR from the Nasdaq stock exchange, requiring Strategy to close its business, or ordering it to sell Bitcoin. Instead, it is changing which companies appear in indexes that investment products use as guides for what to own. The distinction matters because index-tracking funds may need to sell shares when a stock is deleted, even if their managers would otherwise choose to keep holding it.

For example, an exchange-traded fund (ETF) designed to replicate the MSCI USA Index generally adjusts its holdings to match the index. If MSTR is removed, the fund may have to sell its shares to reflect the revised benchmark. This can create demand or selling pressure that is separate from a company’s operating performance or an individual investor’s view of its prospects. The effect will depend on how closely funds follow the index and how they implement the change.

MSCI’s policy shift concerns what it calls non-operating companies. In October, the provider adopted new rules aimed at companies that resemble investment funds more than operating businesses. The rationale is that benchmarks intended to represent operating companies should not necessarily include vehicles whose principal activity is holding financial assets. MSCI’s screening considers operating assets and other financial measures.

The deletion notice does not specify which particular tests Strategy failed. Strategy disputes the underlying characterization. In an August letter to MSCI, it said that raising capital, managing its Bitcoin treasury, and issuing financial products constitute genuine business activities. The company called the proposal “discriminatory, arbitrary, and misguided,” and argued that MSCI should be a “mirror of the market, not an arbiter of it.”

At the center of the disagreement is how to classify Strategy’s Bitcoin-related activity. The company still has a software business, but Bitcoin now dominates its finances. MSCI’s rules distinguish companies that operate a business from entities that chiefly hold or manage financial assets. Strategy maintains that its capital-raising and treasury activities are part of an operating company; the index provider’s new approach raises questions about whether those activities are sufficient for inclusion in its benchmarks.

The company’s earnings help explain why the distinction is difficult. Strategy’s latest quarterly results showed $19.53 billion in net income, but that amount does not represent revenue from software customers. Nearly all of its $20.91 billion in reported operating income came from an increase in Bitcoin’s accounting value.

Under accounting rules adopted in 2025, changes in Bitcoin’s market price are reflected in Strategy’s earnings even when the company has not sold its coins. This can produce substantial reported gains when Bitcoin rises, while a decline in Bitcoin’s price can create the opposite result. Consequently, the company’s reported profit can change significantly with the market value of its holdings, independently of software sales or cash received from customers.

Strategy’s software division, by contrast, recorded $125.4 million in quarterly revenue, down 3% from a year earlier. For all of 2025, the division generated $477.2 million in revenue, slightly below the $486.3 million reported in 2019, before Strategy began buying Bitcoin. These figures do not, by themselves, settle the question of how MSCI should classify the company, but they illustrate the difference between Strategy’s software operations and the much larger movements in its Bitcoin-related accounts.

The likely immediate consequence of the index change is potential selling of MSTR, rather than direct selling of Bitcoin. Strategy estimated that funds linked to MSCI indexes held roughly 13 million of its shares, equal to 3.1% of its outstanding common stock. That estimate does not mean every one of those shares will be sold at once. Some funds may use different implementation methods, and Strategy says the amount is manageable.

Even so, the possibility of selling matters because Strategy has repeatedly raised money by issuing shares and other securities, then used the proceeds to buy Bitcoin. If a change in index demand contributes to a lower MSTR share price, Strategy could receive less money from selling the same number of new shares. To raise an equivalent amount, it might have to issue more shares; alternatively, it might raise less money and buy fewer Bitcoin. Neither outcome is automatic, but both illustrate a possible connection between a stock-index decision and the company’s financing capacity.

The chain of effects is indirect. MSCI’s action changes a benchmark; funds that track the benchmark may adjust their MSTR positions; any resulting market impact could influence the price at which Strategy raises capital; and the amount of capital available could affect future Bitcoin purchases. The exclusion does not force Strategy to sell Bitcoin, and it does not guarantee that the company will buy less. Its potential significance is that it may weaken one source of financing used by a major corporate Bitcoin buyer.

There are also limits to what can be concluded from the available figures. The estimate of 13 million shares and 3.1% of common stock indicates exposure among funds linked to MSCI indexes, but it does not specify the exact timing or amount of any eventual sales. Nor does it determine how investors outside those funds will respond. The ultimate effect on MSTR will depend on actual trading, the company’s financing choices, and broader market conditions.

For Bitcoin, the distinction between direct and indirect effects is important. Index deletion is a decision about a publicly traded company’s place in equity benchmarks, not a change to Bitcoin’s ownership rules or market structure. Any effect on Bitcoin purchases would arise only if Strategy’s access to capital or its willingness to acquire more coins changed. The index decision therefore represents a potential financing risk for Strategy rather than a direct instruction to the company or a guaranteed event for the crypto market.

Key Insights Table

Afterwards...

The next questions are how funds respond to the index change and whether the resulting trading has a lasting effect on MSTR. Strategy’s ability to raise capital, the performance of its software business, and the market value of its Bitcoin holdings will also shape how investors assess its future.

For now, MSCI’s decision should be understood as a change in benchmark eligibility, not a directive to sell Bitcoin or a verdict on the company’s continued existence. Its broader significance will depend on whether index-related share adjustments materially affect Strategy’s financing choices—and, in turn, whether those choices alter its future Bitcoin purchases.