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
Launchpad
Be early to the next big token project
Alpha Points
Trade on-chain assets and earn airdrops
Futures Points
Earn futures points and claim airdrop rewards
More
Global leading index provider MSCI released a thought-provoking announcement in early January this year. They decided not to remove publicly traded companies holding cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin and Ethereum from their stock indices, including those that adopt a core strategy of holding digital assets. However, they also drew a line: companies already included can remain, new similar companies cannot join for now, and the weights of existing companies will not be increased.
MSCI's reasoning is straightforward—they received feedback from numerous institutional investors indicating that it is difficult to distinguish in practice between "companies solely investing in crypto assets" and "investment firms that also hold crypto assets." Rather than acting rashly, it’s better to maintain the status quo and observe how things develop. This logic reflects the current attitude of traditional financial institutions: they are neither eager to completely exclude crypto nor ready to fully embrace it.
Interestingly, while traditional finance remains cautious about crypto assets, the crypto ecosystem itself is accelerating its iteration. For example, some new protocols recently discussed within the community are attempting to address the pain points of decentralized finance through technological and mechanism innovations. Take certain DeFi projects, for instance—they utilize token governance, smart contract design, and liquidity incentive mechanisms to create a more transparent asset management experience for users. The core idea of these projects is to encourage long-term participation in the ecosystem, rather than just profit from trading.
From a certain perspective, MSCI’s "freeze" and the rapid evolution of on-chain ecosystems illustrate the duality of the industry. Traditional finance is observing and evaluating, while the crypto ecosystem is experimenting and optimizing. One side is contemplating whether to embrace, the other is already building the next-generation financial infrastructure. As both iterate, their eventual convergence may shape the future market landscape.
---
Basically, traditional finance is still struggling, but we've already built ahead.
---
Haha, isn't that just being cowardly? Clearly just an excuse for not knowing the difference.
---
No increase in weight, new companies can't enter... this is essentially admitting that crypto assets carry risks.
---
Interesting, freezing one side while observing, waiting to see who wins.
---
DeFi is indeed making moves, much faster than some traditional financial iterations.
---
Both sides do their own thing; only when they converge will we know the outcome. There's no point in rushing now.
---
Honestly, institutions are just waiting now, waiting for clear policies and a change in sentiment, but on-chain has already started running.
---
We believe in projects that are truly innovating in DeFi. Compared to Wall Street's hesitation, we are already building the future.
---
This is ridiculous. Just cut it all off cleanly, insist on doing this "freezing" thing.
---
Traditional finance is scared, can't keep up with technological iterations, so they just lie flat and watch, waiting for us to pave the way before they come in.
---
In the end, it's all about technology. DeFi's token governance and incentive mechanisms are much more transparent than traditional finance.
---
I can't understand MSCI's logic anyway; it just seems like they're afraid of taking risks. We'll keep doing our thing.
Traditional finance is still struggling with classification, while on-chain has already been working on the next generation stuff. The gap is quite big
Let's wait and see, sooner or later, it will have to be accepted...
Wait, are they afraid their classification standards will backfire? Not daring to make a move without knowing the difference, pretty clever.
On-chain projects have already started competing, brothers, they won't wait for your decision.
Traditional finance is still struggling with classification, while we on the chain have already been building the next-generation infrastructure. The gap is obvious.
Real·Hesitation vs. Real·Construction, the future landscape has long been written on the chain.
---
But speaking of which, this move is actually an invisible benefit for existing listed companies holding tokens... The higher the threshold, the more rare it becomes.
---
I always feel that MSCI's rhetoric sounds very hollow; the so-called "uncertainty" is actually just fear of regulatory aftereffects.
---
Wait, does this indirectly suggest that institutional investors aren't actually that opposed to crypto, but are just pretending to be cautious and waiting to enter?
---
On-chain is building, traditional finance is dodging and hiding—it's interesting. Sooner or later, everyone will have to choose a side.
---
DeFi's approach is indeed more transparent; it all depends on whether it can truly replace the outdated TradFi system.
---
Basically, they are just being cowardly. When unsure, they freeze. This move is stable, but it also shows they haven't really thought it through.
---
The real thing is on-chain iteration. DeFi is doing the work, while traditional finance is still in meetings and discussions.
---
Wait, so companies already in the index can keep holding tokens? Doesn't that mean latecomers are forever locked out? Isn't this a disguised "vested interest alliance"?
---
I just want to know whether those institutional investors giving feedback to MSCI truly can't tell the difference, or are they pretending not to so as to reduce competitive pressure?
---
Both sides are iterating... sounds elegant, but actually it's a gamble on who concedes first. If Web3 can really develop the infrastructure, MSCI's approach will be useless.
---
Knowing full well that crypto assets can't escape, yet pretending to be cautious—this mindset I understand clearly.