Key Takeaways
- • Bill Miller IV, CIO of Miller Value Partners, opposes MSCI's proposal to exclude companies with less than 50% operating assets from its indexes, warning the rule could inadvertently exclude blue-chip firms like Berkshire Hathaway and established biotech companies alongside intended Bitcoin treasury firms.
- • MSCI's decision on the digital asset treasury company (DATCO) exclusion proposal is expected by mid-October 2026, with potential implementation in November 2026, creating a near-term catalyst for index-constituent companies holding significant crypto assets.
- • Index exclusion could materially impact share prices of affected firms by reducing passive investment flows, creating downside risk for companies that have adopted Bitcoin treasury strategies but don't meet MSCI's proposed operating asset thresholds.
- • The 50% operating asset threshold represents an overbroad classification mechanism that risks capturing legitimate operating companies alongside pure crypto-focused entities, according to Miller's critique.
Summary
Bill Miller IV, Chief Investment Officer of Miller Value Partners, has issued a public warning regarding MSCI's proposed rule to exclude companies holding digital assets as a significant portion of their balance sheets from major equity indexes. The proposal specifically targets digital asset treasury companies (DATCOs) by establishing a threshold that would exclude firms with less than 50% of operating assets held in traditional business operations. Miller contends this metric is both imprecise and economically counterproductive.
The core concern is that MSCI's threshold-based approach lacks sufficient nuance to distinguish between companies that have strategically accumulated Bitcoin for treasury management purposes and operational businesses that happen to hold meaningful crypto positions. Miller specifically cited Berkshire Hathaway as an example of an established, operationally focused firm that could face unintended exclusion. Beyond Berkshire, he warned that biotech startups and other growth-stage companies with substantial liquid asset positions could similarly fall afoul of the rule despite maintaining active, traditional business operations as their primary revenue source.
The timing of MSCI's decision—expected by mid-October 2026 with potential November 2026 implementation—represents a critical near-term window for affected companies and their investors. Index exclusion carries material consequences, as passive investment flows tied to MSCI constituents would be redirected away from excluded companies, potentially creating downward pressure on share prices. Companies that have adopted Bitcoin treasury strategies without substantial alternative revenue streams face particular exposure to this outcome.
The proposal also reflects broader institutional debate over how traditional index methodologies should accommodate corporate cryptocurrency holdings. Miller's intervention signals that major asset managers and investment professionals view MSCI's approach as overly blunt and potentially damaging to legitimate business strategies. The final decision will establish precedent for how index providers classify and treat companies with significant digital asset positions going forward.
The core concern is that MSCI's threshold-based approach lacks sufficient nuance to distinguish between companies that have strategically accumulated Bitcoin for treasury management purposes and operational businesses that happen to hold meaningful crypto positions. Miller specifically cited Berkshire Hathaway as an example of an established, operationally focused firm that could face unintended exclusion. Beyond Berkshire, he warned that biotech startups and other growth-stage companies with substantial liquid asset positions could similarly fall afoul of the rule despite maintaining active, traditional business operations as their primary revenue source.
The timing of MSCI's decision—expected by mid-October 2026 with potential November 2026 implementation—represents a critical near-term window for affected companies and their investors. Index exclusion carries material consequences, as passive investment flows tied to MSCI constituents would be redirected away from excluded companies, potentially creating downward pressure on share prices. Companies that have adopted Bitcoin treasury strategies without substantial alternative revenue streams face particular exposure to this outcome.
The proposal also reflects broader institutional debate over how traditional index methodologies should accommodate corporate cryptocurrency holdings. Miller's intervention signals that major asset managers and investment professionals view MSCI's approach as overly blunt and potentially damaging to legitimate business strategies. The final decision will establish precedent for how index providers classify and treat companies with significant digital asset positions going forward.
Go deeper than the headline
Research every firm in this story, track the ones that matter and get the daily briefing — free for 7 days.