WisdomTree Bitcoin Fund 10-K

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS Summary of Risk Factors Below is a summary of the principal factors that make an investment in the Shares speculative or risky. This summary does not address all of the risks that we face. Additional discussion of the risks summarized in this risk factor summary, and other risks that we face, can be found below and should be read in conjunction with the other information included in this annual report on Form 10-K, including the Trust’s financial statements and related notes thereto, and our other filings with the SEC, before making an investment decision regarding the Shares. See the section titled “Glossary of Defined Terms” for the definition of certain capitalized terms used in this annual report. All other capitalized terms used, but not defined, herein have the meanings given to them in the Trust Agreement. · There can be no assurance that the Trust will achieve its investment objective. · There is no assurance as to whether the Trust will be profitable or meet its expenses and liabilities. · An investment in the Trust carries with it the inherent risks associated with investments in bitcoin, the trading prices for which have exhibited high levels of volatility and may continue to do so. Because of such volatility, Shareholders could lose all or substantially all of their investment in the Trust. 38 · Investors considering a purchase of Shares of the Trust should carefully consider how much of their total assets should be exposed to the bitcoin market, and should fully understand, be willing to assume, and have the financial resources necessary to withstand, the risks involved in the Trust’s investment strategy, and be in a position to bear the potential loss of their entire investment in the Trust. · The value of Shares depends on the development and acceptance of the Bitcoin network. The Bitcoin network is in the early stages of development and has a limited history, and there is no assurance that usage of Bitcoin network, and bitcoin itself, will continue to grow. The slowing or stopping of the development of the Bitcoin network or acceptance of the Bitcoin network may adversely affect an investment in the Trust. · The trading prices of many digital assets, including bitcoin, have experienced extreme volatility in recent periods and may continue to do so. Extreme volatility in the future, including declines in the trading prices of bitcoin, could have a material adverse effect on the value of the Shares and the Shares could lose all or substantially all of their value. · Regulation of bitcoin and the Bitcoin network continues to evolve in both the U.S. and foreign jurisdictions, which may result in restrictions on the use of bitcoin or otherwise impact the demand for bitcoin. · Disruptions at bitcoin platforms and in the OTC market could adversely affect the availability of bitcoin. · The loss or destruction of certain “private keys,” including by the Bitcoin Custodian, could prevent the Trust from accessing its bitcoin. Loss of these private keys may be irreversible and could result in the loss of all or substantially all of an investment in the Trust. · Bitcoin transactions are irrevocable and stolen or incorrectly transferred bitcoin may be irretrievable. As a result, any incorrectly or unexpected bitcoin transactions could adversely affect an investment in the Trust. · The lack of full insurance and Shareholders’ limited rights of legal recourse against the Trust and its service providers expose the Trust and its Shareholders to the risk of loss of the Trust’s bitcoin for which no person or entity is liable. · The lack of using a bank custodian, or the loss of a critical banking relationship for, or the failure of a bank used by, the Trust, could adversely impact the Trust, its ability to operate or could cause losses to the Trust. · The Reference Rate has a limited history and the price of bitcoin reflected therein is an average composite reference rate calculated using volume-weighted trading price data from certain bitcoin platforms. These bitcoin platforms may change over time and the Benchmark Administrator may remove or add bitcoin platforms to the Reference Rate in the future, as well as the provisions of its publicly available criteria (the “CF Constituent Platform Criteria”) accessible on its website at www.cfbenchmarks.com. The Reference Rate could fail or may not otherwise accurately track the global bitcoin price, which could adversely affect the value of the Shares. · The Trust’s return will likely not match the performance of the price of bitcoin because the Trust incurs operating expenses. Further, the amount of bitcoin represented by the Shares will decline over time. · The NAV of the Trust may not always correspond to the market price of its Shares or the global price of bitcoin for a number of reasons, including price volatility, trading activity, normal trading hours for the Trust, the calculation methodology of the NAV, and/or the closing of bitcoin platforms due to fraud, failure, security breaches or otherwise. As a result, Baskets may be created or redeemed at a dollar value that differs from the market price of the Shares. Consequently, an Authorized Participant may be able to create or redeem a Basket of Shares at a discount or a premium to NAV. Investors also should note that the size of the Trust in terms of total assets held may change substantially over time and from time to time as Baskets are created and redeemed. · Potential conflicts of interest may arise among the Sponsor or its affiliates and the Trust. The Sponsor and its affiliates have no fiduciary duties to the Trust and its Shareholders other than as provided in the Trust Agreement, which may permit them to favor their own interests to the detriment of the Trust and its Shareholders. 39 The following risks, some of which have occurred and any of which may occur in the future, can have a material adverse effect on our business or financial performance, which in turn can affect the price of the Shares. These are not the only risks we face. There may be other risks we are not currently aware of or that we currently deem not to be material but may become material in the future. Risk Factors Associated with bitcoin and the Bitcoin Network Digital assets such as bitcoin are relatively new, and the value of the Shares is subject to a number of factors relating to the capabilities and development of blockchain technologies and to the fundamental investment characteristics of digital assets that are uncertain and difficult to evaluate. Digital assets such as bitcoin are relatively new, and the value of the Shares is influenced by a wide variety of factors that are uncertain and difficult to evaluate, such as the infancy of their development, their dependence on technologies such as cryptographic protocols, their dependence on the role played by miners and developers and the potential for malicious activity. For example, the following are some of the risks that could materially adversely affect the value of the Shares: · Bitcoin’s lack of a physical form, reliance on technology for its creation, existence and transactional validation and its decentralization may subject its integrity to the threat of malicious attacks and technological obsolescence. · As an intangible asset without centralized issuers or governing bodies, bitcoin has been, and may in the future be, subject to security breaches, coordinated manipulation, cyberattacks or other malicious activities, as well as human errors or computer malfunctions that may result in the loss or destruction of private keys needed to access such assets. If such threats are realized or the measures or controls created or implemented to secure the bitcoin holdings fail, it could result in a partial or total misappropriation or loss of the Trust’s bitcoin holdings, and the Trust’s financial condition and operating results would be harmed. · The trading prices of many digital assets, including bitcoin, have experienced extreme volatility in recent periods and may continue to do so. Based on the last ten years, the historical annualized volatility of bitcoin was approximately 74%. Over the course of 2021, there were steep increases in the value of certain digital assets, including bitcoin and multiple market observers asserted that digital assets were experiencing a “bubble.” These increases were followed by steep drawdowns throughout 2022 in digital asset trading prices, including for bitcoin. In the 2021-2022 cycle, the price of bitcoin peaked at $67,734 and bottomed at $15,632, marking a steep 77% drawdown. These episodes of rapid price appreciation followed by steep drawdowns have occurred multiple times throughout bitcoin’s history, including in 2011, 2013-2014, and 2017-2018, before repeating again in 2021-2022. Extreme volatility may persist, and the value of the Shares may significantly decline in the future without recovery. The digital asset markets may still be experiencing a bubble or may experience a bubble again in the future. For example, in the first half of 2022, each of Celsius Network, Voyager Digital Ltd., and Three Arrows Capital declared bankruptcy, resulting in a loss of confidence in participants of the digital asset ecosystem and negative publicity surrounding digital assets more broadly. In November 2022, FTX Trading Ltd. (“FTX”), one of the largest digital asset platforms by volume at the time, halted customer withdrawals amid rumors of the company’s liquidity issues and likely insolvency, which were subsequently corroborated by its CEO. Shortly thereafter, FTX’s CEO resigned and FTX and many of its affiliates filed for bankruptcy in the United States, while other affiliates have entered insolvency, liquidation, or similar proceedings around the globe, following which the U.S. Department of Justice brought criminal fraud and other charges, and the SEC and CFTC brought civil securities and commodities fraud charges, against certain of FTX’s and its affiliates’ senior executives, including its former CEO. In addition, several other entities in the digital asset industry filed for bankruptcy following FTX’s bankruptcy filing, such as BlockFi Inc. and Genesis Global Capital, LLC (“Genesis”). In response to these events, the digital asset markets have experienced extreme price volatility and other entities in the digital asset industry have been, and may continue to be, negatively affected, further undermining confidence in the digital asset markets. These events have also negatively impacted the liquidity of the digital asset markets as certain entities affiliated with FTX engaged in significant trading activity. If the liquidity of the digital asset markets continues to be negatively impacted by these events, digital asset prices, including bitcoin, may continue to experience significant volatility or price declines and confidence in the digital asset markets may be further undermined. In addition, regulatory and enforcement scrutiny has increased, including from, among others, the Department of Justice, the SEC, the CFTC, the White House and Congress, as well as state regulators and authorities. These events are continuing to develop, and the full facts are continuing to emerge. It is not possible to predict at this time all of the risks that they may pose to the Trust, its service providers or to the digital asset industry as a whole. Extreme volatility in the future, including further declines in the trading prices of bitcoin, could have a material adverse effect on the value of the Shares and the Shares could lose all or substantially all of their value. The Trust is not actively managed and will not take any actions to take advantage, or mitigate the impacts, of volatility in the price of bitcoin. 40 · The loss or destruction of a private key required to access a digital asset such as bitcoin may be irreversible. If a private key is lost, destroyed or otherwise compromised, including by the Bitcoin Custodian, the Trust will be unable to access the bitcoin corresponding to that private key, resulting in loss. · Digital asset networks and the software used to operate them are in the early stages of development. Digital assets have experienced, and the Sponsor expects will experience in the future, sharp fluctuations in value. Given the infancy of the development of digital asset networks, parties may be unwilling to transact in digital assets, which would dampen the growth, if any, of digital asset networks, including the Bitcoin network. Further, given the recentness of the development of digital asset networks, digital assets may not function as intended and parties may be unwilling to use digital assets, which would dampen the growth, if any, of digital asset networks. Because bitcoin is a digital asset, the value of the Shares is subject to a number of factors relating to the fundamental investment characteristics of digital assets, including the fact that digital assets are bearer instruments and a theft, compromise, or destruction of the associated private keys could result in permanent loss of the asset. · Digital asset networks are dependent upon the internet. A disruption of the internet or a digital asset network, such as the Bitcoin network, would affect the ability to transfer digital assets, including bitcoin, and, consequently, adversely affect their value. · Because bitcoins have no physical existence beyond the record of transactions on the Bitcoin blockchain, a variety of technical factors related to the Bitcoin blockchain could also impact the price of bitcoin. For example, malicious attacks by “miners” who validate bitcoin transactions, inadequate mining fees to incentivize validating of bitcoin transactions, hard “forks” of the into multiple blockchains, and advances in quantum computing could undercut the integrity of the Bitcoin blockchain and negatively affect the price of bitcoin. · The acceptance of software patches or upgrades by a significant, but not overwhelming, percentage of the users and miners in a digital asset network, such as the Bitcoin network, could result in a “fork” in such network’s blockchain, resulting in the creation of multiple separate networks, which could compete with one another for users, miners, and developers. This could adversely affect the Bitcoin network and bitcoin prices. · Governance of many digital asset networks, including the Bitcoin network, is by voluntary consensus and open competition. As a result, there may be a lack of consensus or clarity on the governance of the Bitcoin network, which may stymie the Bitcoin network’s utility and ability to grow and solve challenges or lead to “forks”. In particular, it may be difficult to find solutions or marshal sufficient effort to overcome current or future problems on the Bitcoin network. · The foregoing notwithstanding, the Bitcoin network’s software protocol is informally managed by a group of core developers that propose amendments to the Bitcoin network’s source code. · The core developers evolve over time, largely based on self-determined participation. To the extent that a significant majority of users and miners adopt amendments to the Bitcoin network, the Bitcoin network will be subject to new protocols that may adversely affect the value of bitcoin. 41 · The open-source structure of many digital asset network protocols, such as the protocol for the Bitcoin network, means that developers and other contributors are generally not directly compensated for their contributions in maintaining and developing such protocols. As a result, the developers and other contributors of a particular digital asset may lack a financial incentive to maintain or develop the network or may lack the resources to adequately address emerging issues. Alternatively, some developers may be funded by companies whose interests are at odds with other participants in a particular digital asset network. A failure to properly monitor and upgrade the software protocol of the Bitcoin network could damage the network, and adversely affect the value of bitcoin. · Bitcoin have only recently become selectively accepted as a means of payment by merchants and retail and commercial businesses, and use of bitcoin by consumers to pay such merchants and businesses remains limited. As a result, the prices of bitcoins may be primarily determined by speculators and miners, thus contributing to price volatility that makes retailers less likely to accept it as a form of payment in the future. · Miners, developers and users may switch to or adopt certain digital asset networks at the expense of their engagement with other digital asset networks, which may negatively impact those networks, including the Bitcoin network. · Over the past several years, digital asset mining operations have become more costly as they have evolved from individual users mining with computer processors, graphics processing units and first-generation application specific integrated circuit machines to “professionalized” mining operations using specialized hardware or sophisticated machines. The reduction in mining rewards of bitcoin, including block reward halving events, which are events that occur after a specific period of time that reduce the block reward earned by miners, could be inadequate to incentivize miners to continue to perform mining activities. If the profit margins of digital asset mining operations are not sufficiently high, digital asset miners are more likely to immediately sell digital assets, earned by mining, resulting in an increase in liquid supply of that digital asset, which would generally tend to reduce that digital asset’s market price. Moreover, concentration of mining operations could lead to a small number of mining operations having significant control or influence over the Bitcoin network. · To the extent that any miners cease to record transactions that do not include the payment of a transaction fee in solved blocks or do not record a transaction because the transaction fee is too low, such transactions will not be recorded on the Bitcoin blockchain until a block is solved by a miner who does not require the payment of transaction fees or is willing to accept a lower fee. Any widespread delays in the recording of transactions could result in a loss of confidence in the Bitcoin network. · In the past, flaws in the source code for digital asset networks have been exposed and exploited, including flaws that disabled some functionality for users, exposed users’ personal information and/or resulted in the theft of users’ digital assets. The cryptography underlying bitcoin could prove to be flawed or ineffective, or developments in mathematics and/or technology, such as advances in quantum computing, could result in such cryptography becoming ineffective, enabling a malicious actor to take the Trust’s bitcoin, which would adversely affect the value of the Shares. Even if another digital asset other than bitcoin were affected by similar circumstances, any reduction in confidence in the robustness of the source code or cryptography underlying digital assets generally could negatively affect the demand for all digital assets, including bitcoin, and therefore adversely affect the value of the Shares. · Banks and other established financial institutions may refuse to process funds for bitcoin transactions; process wire transfers to or from bitcoin platforms, bitcoin-related companies or service providers; or maintain accounts for persons or entities transacting in bitcoin. This could dampen liquidity in the market and damage the public perception of digital assets generally or any one digital asset in particular, such as bitcoin, and their or its utility as a payment system, which could decrease the price of digital assets generally or individually. Further, the lack of availability of banking services could prevent the Trust from being able to complete the timely liquidation of bitcoin and withdrawal of assets from the Bitcoin Custodian even if the Sponsor determined that such liquidation were appropriate or suitable. 42 Additionally, because digital assets, including bitcoin, have been in existence for a short period of time and are continuing to develop, there may be additional risks in the future that are impossible to predict or evaluate as of the date of this registration statement. The value of the Shares relates directly to the value of bitcoin, the value of which may be highly volatile and subject to fluctuations due to a number of factors. The value of the Shares relates directly to the value of the bitcoin held by the Trust. The price of bitcoin has fluctuated widely and may continue to experience significant price fluctuations, which could adversely affect the value of the Shares. The price of bitcoin could drop precipitously (including to zero). Several factors may affect the price of bitcoin, including: · Regulatory changes, whether in or outside the United States, which inhibit (or ban) the holding and/or transacting in bitcoin. For example, the application of securities laws and other regulations to such assets is unclear in many respects, and it is possible that regulators in the United States or foreign countries may create new regulations or interpret laws in a manner that adversely affects the price of bitcoin. The growth of the digital assets industry in general, and the use and acceptance of bitcoin in particular, may also impact the price of bitcoin and is subject to a high degree of uncertainty. · The maximum global supply of bitcoin is limited to 21 million by the Bitcoin network’s software protocol. As of December 31, 2023, there were approximately 19.5 million bitcoin in existence , although not all of such bitcoin were in circulation as of such date, which amount varies day-over-day. The pace of worldwide growth in the adoption and use of bitcoin may depend, for instance, on public familiarity with digital assets, ease of buying and accessing bitcoin, institutional demand for bitcoin as an investment asset, consumer demand for bitcoin as a means of payment, regulatory or legislative developments and the availability and popularity of alternatives to bitcoin. Even if growth in bitcoin adoption occurs in the near or medium-term, there is no assurance that bitcoin usage will continue to grow over the long term; · The adoption of bitcoin as a medium of exchange, store-of-value or other consumptive asset and the maintenance and development of the open-source software protocol of the Bitcoin network, and speculative expectations related thereto; · Forks in the Bitcoin network; · Disruptions, failures, unavailability, or interruptions in service of trading venues for bitcoin, such as, for example, the announcement by the digital asset platform FTX Trading that it would freeze withdrawals and transfers from its accounts and subsequent filing for bankruptcy protection and the recent SEC enforcement action brought against Binance Holdings Ltd., which initially sought to freeze all of its assets during the pendency of the enforcement action; · The filing for bankruptcy protection by, liquidation of, or market concerns about the financial viability of digital asset custodians, trading venues, lending platforms, investment funds, or other digital asset industry participants, such as the filing for bankruptcy protection by digital asset trading venues FTX Trading and BlockFi and digital asset lending platforms Celsius Network and Voyager Digital Holdings in/ 2022, the ordered liquidation of the digital asset investment fund Three Arrows Capital in 2022, the announced liquidation of Silvergate Bank in 2023, the government-mandated closure and sale of Signature Bank in 2023, and the placement of Prime Trust, LLC into receivership following a cease-and-desist order issued by the Nevada Department of Business and Industry in 2023; · Investors’ expectations with respect to interest rates, the rates of inflation of fiat currencies or bitcoin, and digital asset and fiat currency conversion and exchange rates; · Regulatory, legislative, enforcement and judicial actions that adversely affect the price, ownership, transferability, trading volumes, legality or public perception of bitcoin, or that adversely affect the operations of or otherwise prevent digital asset custodians, trading venues, lending platforms or other digital assets industry participants from operating in a manner that allows them to continue to deliver services to the digital assets industry; 43 · Developments in mathematics or technology, including in digital computing, algebraic geometry and quantum computing, that could result in the cryptography used by the Bitcoin blockchain becoming insecure or ineffective; · Monetary policies of governments, trade restrictions, currency devaluations and revaluations and regulatory measures or enforcement actions, if any, that restrict the use of bitcoin as a form of payment or the purchase of bitcoin on the bitcoin markets; · Increased competition from other forms of digital assets or payment services, including digital currencies constituting legal tender that may be issued in the future by central banks, or digital assets meant to serve as a medium of exchange by major private companies or other institutions. · Global or regional political, economic or financial conditions, events and situations, such as the COVID-19 coronavirus outbreak; · Consumer and investor preferences and perceptions of bitcoin specifically and digital assets generally; · Decreased confidence in bitcoin or digital asset platforms generally due to the failure of certain bitcoin or digital asset platforms or their being subject to hacks, service outages, regulatory action, or manipulative trading activity, as well as to the increase or lack of regulation and transparency associated with some of them; · Fiat currency withdrawal and deposit policies on bitcoin platforms; · The liquidity of bitcoin markets; · Levels of speculative interest and trading activity in bitcoin and other digital asset markets; · Large transfers, transactions, or sales of bitcoin by significant holders of bitcoin, including accounts held by centralized exchanges (such as in liquidation), amounts re-entering the market related to dormant accounts or addresses (including those attributed to Satoshi Nakamoto), in addition to investment and trading activities of large holders of bitcoin in general; · A “short squeeze” resulting from speculation on the price of bitcoin, if aggregate short exposure exceeds the number of Shares available for purchase; · An active derivatives market for bitcoin or for digital assets generally; · Negative publicity, media, or social media coverage or sentiment due to events in or relating to, or perception of, bitcoin or the broader digital assets industries or markets, which may include (i) public perception that bitcoin can be used as a vehicle to circumvent sanctions, including sanctions imposed on Russia or certain regions related to the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine; (ii) expected or pending civil, criminal, regulatory enforcement or other high profile actions against major participants in the bitcoin ecosystem, including the SEC’s enforcement actions against Ripple Labs, Coinbase, Inc. and Binance Holdings Ltd.; (iii) additional filings for bankruptcy protection or bankruptcy proceedings of major digital asset industry participants, such as the bankruptcy proceeding of FTX Trading and its affiliates; and (iv) the actual or perceived environmental impact of bitcoin and related activities, including environmental concerns raised by private individuals, governmental and non-governmental organizations, and other actors related to the energy resources consumed in the bitcoin mining process; (v) the restriction of access to cryptocurrency by service providers or financial institutions, such as banks, disallowing the purchase of cryptocurrency; · Fees associated with processing a bitcoin transaction and the speed at which bitcoin transactions are settled; and 44 · The availability and cost of funding and capital. The Trust is not actively managed and does not and will not have any strategy relating to the development of the Bitcoin network. Furthermore, the Sponsor cannot be certain as to the impact of the expansion of its bitcoin holdings on the digital asset industry and the Bitcoin network. A decline in the popularity or acceptance of the Bitcoin network would harm the value of the Trust. Due to the nature of private keys, bitcoin transactions are irrevocable and stolen or incorrectly transferred bitcoin may be irretrievable. As a result, any incorrectly executed bitcoin transactions could adversely affect an investment in the Trust. Bitcoin transactions are not reversible. Once a transaction has been signed with private keys, verified and recorded in a block that is added to the Bitcoin blockchain, an incorrect transfer of cryptocurrency, such as bitcoin, or a theft of bitcoin generally will not be reversible, and the Trust may not be capable of seeking compensation for any such transfer or theft. To the extent that the Trust is unable to successfully seek redress for such error or theft, such loss could adversely affect an investment in the Trust. The custody of the Trust’s bitcoin is handled by the Bitcoin Custodian. The Sponsor has evaluated the procedures and internal controls of the Trust’s Custodian to safeguard the Trust’s bitcoin holdings. However, it is possible that, through computer or human error, or through theft or criminal action, the Trust’s bitcoin could be transferred from the Trust’s account at the Bitcoin Custodian in incorrect amounts or to unauthorized third parties, or to uncontrolled accounts. Alternatively, if the Bitcoin Custodian’s internal procedures and controls are inadequate to safeguard the Trust’s bitcoin holdings, and the Trust’s private key(s) is (are) lost, destroyed or otherwise damaged or compromised and no backup of the private key(s) is (are) accessible, the Trust will be unable to access its bitcoin, which could adversely affect an investment in the Shares of the Trust. When used to sign transactions, the risk of private key theft is heightened as security measures like encryption need to be reversed in order to access and use the private key. In addition, if the Trust’s private key(s) is (are) misappropriated and the Trust’s bitcoin holdings are stolen, including from or by the Bitcoin Custodian, the Trust could lose some or all of its bitcoin holdings, which could adversely impact an investment in the Shares of the Trust. Such events have occurred in connection with digital assets in the past and should not be unexpected in the future. For example, in September 2014, the Chinese digital asset platform Huobi announced that it sent bitcoin to the wrong customers. Security threats to the Trust’s account with the Bitcoin Custodian or Prime Execution Agent could result in the halting of Trust operations and a loss of Trust assets or damage to the reputation of the Trust, each of which could result in a reduction in the price of the Shares. Security breaches, computer malware and computer hacking attacks have been a prevalent concern in relation to digital assets. The Sponsor believes that the Trust’s bitcoin held in the Trust’s account with the Bitcoin Custodian or Trading Balance held with the Prime Execution Agent will be an appealing target to hackers or malware distributors seeking to destroy, damage or steal the Trust’s bitcoin and will only become more appealing as the Trust’s assets grow. To the extent that the Trust, the Sponsor, the Bitcoin Custodian or Prime Execution Agent is unable to identify and mitigate or stop new security threats or otherwise adapt to technological changes in the digital asset industry, the Trust’s bitcoin may be subject to theft, loss, destruction or other attack. The Sponsor has evaluated the security procedures in place for safeguarding the Trust’s bitcoin. Nevertheless, the security procedures cannot guarantee the prevention of any loss due to a security breach, hack, software defect or act of God that may be borne by the Trust and the security procedures may not protect against all errors, software flaws or other vulnerabilities in the Trust’s technical infrastructure, which could result in theft, loss or damage of its assets. The Sponsor does not control the Bitcoin Custodian’s or Prime Execution Agent’s operations or their implementation of such security procedures and there can be no assurance that such security procedures will actually work as designed or prove to be successful in safeguarding the Trust’s assets against all possible sources of theft, loss or damage. Assets not held in cold storage, such as assets held in the Trading Balance, may be more vulnerable to security breach, hacking or loss than assets held in cold storage. Furthermore, assets held in a trading account, including the Trading Balance, generally is held in hot storage on an omnibus, rather than segregated basis, which creates greater risk of loss. Even though bitcoin is only moved into the Trading Balance in connection with and to the extent of purchases and sales of bitcoin by the Trust, there are no policies that would limit the amount of bitcoin that can be held temporarily in the Trading Balance maintained by the Prime Execution Agent. This could create greater risk of loss of the Trust’s bitcoin, which could cause Shareholders to suffer losses. 45 The security procedures and operational infrastructure may be breached due to the actions of outside parties, error or malfeasance of Sponsor personnel, the Bitcoin Custodian, Prime Execution Agent, or otherwise, and, as a result, an unauthorized party may obtain access to the Trust’s account with the Bitcoin Custodian, the private keys (and therefore bitcoin) or other data of the Trust. Additionally, outside parties may attempt to fraudulently induce Sponsor personnel, the Bitcoin Custodian, Prime Execution Agent, or the Trust’s other service providers to disclose sensitive information in order to gain access to the Trust’s infrastructure. As the techniques used to obtain unauthorized access, disable or degrade service, or sabotage systems change frequently, or may be designed to remain dormant until a predetermined event and often are not recognized until launched against a target, the Sponsor, the Bitcoin Custodian and/or other Trust service providers may be unable to anticipate these techniques or implement adequate preventative measures. An actual or perceived breach of the Trust’s account with the Bitcoin Custodian, Prime Execution Agent and/or other Trust service providers could harm the Trust’s operations, result in partial or total loss of the Trust’s assets, damage the Trust’s reputation and negatively affect the market perception of the effectiveness of the Trust, all of which could in turn reduce demand for the Shares, resulting in a reduction in the price of the Shares. The Trust may also cease operations, suspend redemptions or suffer a reduction in assets, the occurrence of which could similarly result in a reduction in the price of the Shares. The value of the Shares depends on the development and acceptance of the Bitcoin network. The slowing or stopping of the development or acceptance of the Bitcoin network may adversely affect an investment in the Trust. The Bitcoin network, including the cryptographic and algorithmic protocols associated with the operation of the Bitcoin blockchain, has only been in existence since 2009, and bitcoin markets have a limited performance record, making them part of a new and rapidly evolving industry that is subject to a variety of factors that are difficult to evaluate. The growth of the digital asset industry in general, and the Bitcoin network in particular, is subject to a high degree of uncertainty. For example, the following are some of the risks that could materially adversely affect the value of the Shares: · As the Bitcoin network continues to develop and grow, certain technical issues might be uncovered, and the troubleshooting and resolution of such issues requires the attention and efforts of Bitcoin’s global development community. · In August 2017, the Bitcoin network underwent a hard fork that resulted in the creation of a new digital asset network called Bitcoin Cash. This hard fork was contentious, and as a result some users of the Bitcoin Cash network may harbor ill will toward the Bitcoin network. These users may attempt to negatively impact the use or adoption of the Bitcoin network. · Also in August 2017, the Bitcoin Network was upgraded with a technical feature known as “Segregated Witness” with the promise of increasing the number of transactions per second that can be handled on-chain and enabling so-called second layer solutions, such as the Lightning Network or payment channels which continue to be developed, that increase transaction throughput by processing certain transactions outside the main Bitcoin blockchain. These upgrades may fail to achieve the expected benefits or widespread adoption, leading to a decline in public support for, and the price of, bitcoin. · It is possible that some of the largest bitcoin wallets are controlled by the same person or entity, or that other persons or entities control multiple wallets that collectively hold a significant number of bitcoin, even if each wallet individually only holds a small amount. As a result of this potential concentration of ownership, large sales by such holders may have an adverse effect on the market price of bitcoin. There is no assurance that the Bitcoin network, or the service providers necessary to accommodate it, will continue in existence or grow. Furthermore, there is no assurance that the availability of and access to digital asset service providers will not be negatively affected by government regulation or supply and demand of bitcoin. 46 A disruption of the internet may affect the operation of the Bitcoin network, which may adversely affect the bitcoin industry and an investment in the Trust. The Bitcoin network relies on the internet. A significant disruption of internet connectivity ( i.e. , one that affects large numbers of users or geographic regions) could disrupt the Bitcoin network’s functionality and operations until the disruption is resolved. A disruption of the internet could adversely affect an investment in the Trust or the ability of the Trust to operate. Potential amendments to the Bitcoin network’s protocols and software could, if accepted and authorized by the Bitcoin network community, adversely affect an investment in the Trust. The Bitcoin network uses a cryptographic protocol to govern the interactions within the Bitcoin network. A loose community known as the core developers has evolved to informally manage the source code for the protocol. Membership in the community of core developers evolve over time, largely based on self-determined participation in the resource section dedicated to bitcoin on Github.com. The core developers can propose amendments to the Bitcoin network’s source code that, if accepted by miners and users, could alter the protocols and software of the Bitcoin network and the properties of bitcoin. These alterations would occur through software upgrades and could potentially include changes to the irreversibility of transactions and limitations on the mining of new bitcoin, which could undermine the appeal and market value of bitcoin. Alternatively, software upgrades and other changes to the protocols of the Bitcoin network could fail to work as intended or could introduce bugs, security risks, or otherwise adversely affect, the speed, security, usability, or value of the Bitcoin network or bitcoins. As a result, the Bitcoin network could be subject to new protocols and software in the future that may adversely affect an investment in the Trust. The open-source structure of the Bitcoin network protocol means that the core developers and other contributors are generally not directly compensated for their contributions in maintaining and developing the Bitcoin network protocol. A failure to properly monitor and upgrade the Bitcoin network protocol could damage the Bitcoin network and an investment in the Trust. The Bitcoin network operates based on an open-source protocol maintained by the core developers and other contributors, largely on the GitHub resource section dedicated to bitcoin development. As the Bitcoin network protocol is not sold or made available subject to licensing or subscription fees and its use does not generate revenues for its development team, the core developers are generally not compensated for maintaining and updating the source code for the Bitcoin network protocol. Consequently, there is a lack of financial incentive for developers to maintain or develop the Bitcoin network and the core developers may lack the resources to adequately address emerging issues with the Bitcoin network protocol. Although the Bitcoin network is currently supported by the core developers, there can be no guarantee that such support will continue or be sufficient in the future. For example, there have been recent reports that the number of core developers who have the authority to make amendments to the Bitcoin network’s source code in the GitHub repository is relatively small, although there are believed to be a larger number of developers who contribute to the overall development of the source code of the Bitcoin network. Further, a bad actor could also attempt to interfere with the operation of the Bitcoin network by attempting to, or actually, influencing a core developer in a negative way or with malintent. Alternatively, some developers may be funded by entities whose interests are at odds with other participants in the Bitcoin network. To the extent that material issues arise with the Bitcoin network protocol and the core developers and open-source contributors are unable to address the issues adequately or in a timely manner, the Bitcoin network and an investment in the Trust may be adversely affected. A temporary or permanent “fork” of the Bitcoin blockchain could adversely affect an investment in the Trust. Bitcoin software is open source. Any user can download the software, modify it and then propose that the core developers, users and miners adopt the modification. When a modification is introduced and a substantial majority of users and miners consent to the modification, the change is implemented and the Bitcoin network remains uninterrupted. However, if less than a substantial majority of users and miners consent to the proposed modification, and the modification is nonetheless implemented by some users and miners and the modification is not compatible with the software prior to its modification, the consequence would be what is known as a “fork” ( i.e. , “split”) of the Bitcoin network (and the blockchain), with one version running the pre-modified software and the other running the modified software. The effect of such a fork would be the existence of two (or more) versions of the Bitcoin network running in parallel, but with each version’s bitcoin lacking interchangeability. Such a fork in the Bitcoin blockchain typically would be addressed by community-led efforts to merge the forked Bitcoin blockchains, and several prior forks have been so merged. Since the Bitcoin network’s inception, modifications to the Bitcoin network have generally been accepted by the majority of users and miners, ensuring that the Bitcoin network remains a coherent economic system and the focal point of the majority of developer activity. There is no assurance, however, that this will continue to be the case, and if it is not, then the price of bitcoin could be negatively affected. The original blockchain and the forked blockchain could potentially compete with each other for users, developers, and miners, leading to a loss of these for the original blockchain. A fork of any kind could adversely affect an investment in the Trust or the ability of the Trust to operate and the Trust’s procedures may be inadequate to address the effects of a fork. 47 Additionally, a fork could be introduced by an unintentional, unanticipated software flaw in the multiple versions of otherwise compatible software users run. It is also possible that, in a future accidental or unintentional fork, a substantial number of users and miners could adopt an incompatible version of the digital asset while resisting community-led efforts to merge the two blockchains, which could cause bitcoin to decline in value. Further, a hard fork could lead to new security concerns. Forks have occurred already to the Bitcoin network. For example, in August 2017, Bitcoin “forked” into Bitcoin and a new digital asset, Bitcoin Cash, as a result of a several-year dispute over how to increase the rate of transactions that the Bitcoin network can process. At the time of the fork, bitcoin was valued at roughly $2,700. Within approximately two weeks following the fork, bitcoin reached a value of roughly $4,000, while nearly four months later in mid-December 2017, bitcoin reached an all-time high at the time of roughly $19,500, before dropping to roughly $14,000 prior to year-end 2017. Forks may also occur as a network community’s response to a significant security breach. For example, in July 2016, Ethereum “forked” into Ethereum and a new digital asset, Ethereum Classic, as a result of the Ethereum network community’s response to a significant security breach in which an anonymous hacker exploited a smart contract running on the Ethereum network to syphon approximately $60 million of ETH held by the DAO, a distributed autonomous organization, into a segregated account. In response to the hack, most participants in the Ethereum community elected to adopt a “fork” that effectively reversed the hack. However, a minority of users continued to develop the original blockchain, now referred to as “Ethereum Classic” with the digital asset on that blockchain now referred to as Ethereum Classic, or ETC. ETC now trades on several digital asset platforms. A fork may also occur as a result of an unintentional or unanticipated software flaw in the various versions of otherwise compatible software that users run. Such a fork could lead to users and miners abandoning the digital asset with the flawed software. It is possible, however, that a substantial number of users and miners could adopt an incompatible version of the digital asset while resisting community-led efforts to merge the two chains. This could result in a permanent fork, as in the case of Ethereum and Ethereum Classic. In addition, many developers have previously initiated hard forks in the blockchain to launch new digital assets, such as Bitcoin Gold and Bitcoin Diamond. To the extent such digital assets compete with bitcoin, such competition could impact demand for bitcoin and could adversely impact the value of the Shares. Furthermore, a hard fork can lead to new security concerns. For example, when the Ethereum and Ethereum Classic networks, two other digital asset networks, split in July 2016, replay attacks, in which transactions from one network were rebroadcast to nefarious effect on the other network, plagued Ethereum exchanges through at least October 2016. An Ethereum exchange announced in July 2016 that it had lost 40,000 Ethereum Classic, worth about $100,000 at that time, as a result of replay attacks. Similar replay attack concerns occurred in connection with the Bitcoin Cash and Bitcoin Satoshi’s Vision networks split in November 2018. Another possible result of a hard fork is an inherent decrease in the level of security due to significant amounts of mining power remaining on one network or migrating instead to the new forked network. After a hard fork, it may become easier for an individual miner or mining pool’s hashing power to exceed 50% of the processing power of a digital asset network that retained or attracted less mining power, thereby making digital asset networks that rely on proof-of-work more susceptible to attack. A hard fork may adversely affect the price of bitcoin at the time of announcement or adoption. For example, the announcement of a hard fork could lead to increased demand for the pre-fork digital asset, in anticipation that ownership of the pre-fork digital asset would entitle holders to a new digital asset following the fork. The increased demand for the pre-fork digital asset may cause the price of the digital asset to rise. After the hard fork, it is possible the aggregate price of the two versions of the digital asset running in parallel would be less than the price of the digital asset immediately prior to the fork. Furthermore, while the Sponsor will, as permitted by the terms of the Trust Agreement, determine which network is generally accepted as the Bitcoin network and should therefore be considered the appropriate network for the Trust’s purposes, there is no guarantee that the Sponsor will choose the network and the associated digital asset that is ultimately the most valuable fork. Either of these events could therefore adversely impact the value of the Shares. 48 As another example of the effects of hard forks on digital assets, on September 15, 2022, the Ethereum Network completed a move from a proof-of-work model to a proof-of-stake model. Ethereum proof-of-work miners who disagreed with the new consensus mechanism forked the network which resulted in the Ethereum proof-of-work network. Ethereum proof-of-work network was driven by a small but vocal group of miners who wished to hold onto revenue as Ethereum switched to proof-of-stake. The vast majority of token holder votes preferred the new proof-of stake consensus method. There was no material impact on the Ethereum network as a result of the fork. All ether holders were airdropped Ethereum proof-of-work network tokens as a result of the hard fork. However, not all liquidity providers were able to trade the new token and the Ethereum proof-of-work network token almost immediately lost most of its value. A future fork in the Bitcoin network could adversely affect the value of the Shares or the ability of the Trust to operate. In addition to forks, a digital asset may become subject to a similar occurrence known as an “airdrop.” In an airdrop, the promotors of a new digital asset announce to holders of another digital asset that such holders will be entitled to claim a certain amount of the new digital asset for free, based on the fact that they hold such other digital asset. For example, in March 2017 the promoters of Stellar Lumens announced that anyone that owned bitcoin as of June 26, 2017 could claim, until August 27, 2017, a certain amount of Stellar Lumens. Airdrops could create operational security, legal or regulatory, or other risks for the Trust, the Sponsor, the Bitcoin Custodian, Authorized Participants, or other entities. Typically, the holder of bitcoin has no discretion in a hard fork; it merely has the right to claim the new forked asset on a pro rata basis while it continues to hold the same number of bitcoin. If such a transaction does occur, the Trust will, at the direction of the Sponsor, direct the Bitcoin Custodian to irrevocably and permanently abandon, for no consideration, the new cryptocurrency or digital asset as soon as possible. In the event of a hard fork of the Bitcoin network, the Sponsor will use its discretion to determine which network should be considered the appropriate network for the Trust’s purposes, and in doing so may adversely affect the value of the Shares. In the event of a hard fork of the Bitcoin network, the Sponsor will use its discretion to determine, in good faith, which peer-to-peer network, among a group of incompatible forks of the Bitcoin network, is generally accepted as the Bitcoin network and should therefore be considered the appropriate network for the Trust’s purposes. The Sponsor will base its determination on a variety of then relevant factors, including, but not limited to, the Sponsor’s beliefs regarding expectations of the core developers of Bitcoin, users, service providers, businesses, miners and other constituencies, as well as the actual continued acceptance of, mining power on, and community engagement with, the Bitcoin network. However, even after taking these factors into consideration, there is no guarantee that the Sponsor’s determination as to the most appropriate network for the Trust’s purposes will ultimately become the most valuable fork, which may adversely affect the value of the Shares. The Sponsor may also disagree with Shareholders, the Bitcoin Custodian, other service providers and security vendors on what is generally accepted as Bitcoin and should therefore be considered “bitcoin” for the Trust’s purposes, which may also adversely affect the value of the Shares. The Bitcoin blockchain could be vulnerable to a “51% attack,” which could adversely affect an investment in the Trust or the ability of the Trust to operate. If the majority of the processing power dedicated to mining on the Bitcoin network is controlled by a bad actor or actors (often referred to as a “51% attack”), such persons may be able to alter the Bitcoin blockchain on which the Bitcoin network and bitcoin transactions rely. This could occur if the bad actor(s) were to construct fraudulent blocks or prevent certain transactions from completing in a timely manner, or at all. It could be possible for the malicious actor to control, exclude or modify the ordering of transactions, though it could not generate new bitcoin or transactions. Further, a bad actor could “double-spend” its own bitcoin ( i.e. , spend the same bitcoin in more than one transaction) and prevent the confirmation of other users’ transactions for so long as it maintained control. If the Bitcoin community did not reject the fraudulent blocks as malicious or to the extent that such bad actor did not yield its control of processing power, reversing any changes made to the Bitcoin blockchain may be impossible. The possible crossing of this threshold indicates a greater risk that a single mining pool or coordinate group of pools could exert authority over the validation of bitcoin transactions. If the feasibility of a bad actor gaining control of the processing power on the Bitcoin network increases, there may be a negative effect on an investment in the Trust. 49 Although there are no known reports of malicious parties taking control of the Bitcoin network, it is believed that certain mining pools may have exceeded the 50% threshold on the Bitcoin network on a temporary basis. The possible crossing of the 50% threshold indicates a greater risk that a single mining pool could exert authority over the validation of Bitcoin transactions, and this risk is heightened if over 50% of the processing power on the network falls within the jurisdiction of a single governmental authority. If network participants, including the core developers and the administrators of mining pools, do not act to ensure greater decentralization of Bitcoin mining processing power, the feasibility of a malicious actor obtaining control of the processing power on the Bitcoin network will increase, which may adversely affect the value of the Shares. The 51% threshold is the level which would almost guarantee a malicious actor’s success. However, such attacks could in theory occur at thresholds lower than 51% of the available hash power. In addition, a malicious actor may also obtain control over the Bitcoin network through its influence over core developers by gaining direct control over a core developer or an otherwise influential programmer. To the extent that the Bitcoin ecosystem does not grow, the possibility that a malicious actor may be able to obtain control of the processing power or development control on the Bitcoin network in this manner will remain heightened. If such an attack occurred, even outside of the Bitcoin blockchain, investor sentiment in the infrastructure of digital assets generally could be adversely affected, effecting demand and therefore ultimately the price of a digital asset such as bitcoin, thus adversely impacting the value of the Shares. Transacting in bitcoin is subject to illicit financing risk. Although transaction details of peer-to-peer transactions are recorded on the Bitcoin network, a buyer or seller of bitcoin on a peer-to-peer basis directly on the Bitcoin network may never know to whom the public key belongs or the true identity of the party with whom it is transacting. Public key addresses are randomized sequences of alphanumeric characters that, standing alone, do not provide sufficient information to identify users. In addition, certain technologies - such as bitcoin trading platforms commonly referred to as “mixers” - may obscure the origin or chain of custody of bitcoin. The opaque nature of the market poses asset verification challenges for market participants, regulators and auditors and gives rise to an increased risk of manipulation and fraud, including the potential for Ponzi schemes, bucket shops and pump and dump schemes. Bitcoin in the past has been used to facilitate illicit activities. If bitcoin (or other digital assets) were used to facilitate illicit activities, businesses that facilitate transactions in bitcoin or other digital assets could be at increased risk of potential criminal or civil lawsuits, or of having banking or other services cut off, and such digital asset could be removed from digital asset platforms. Any of the aforementioned occurrences could adversely affect the price of the relevant digital asset, including bitcoin, the attractiveness of the respective blockchain network such as the Bitcoin network and an investment in the Shares. If the Trust, the Sponsor or the Trustee were to transact with a sanctioned entity, the Trust, the Sponsor or the Trustee would be at risk of investigation, potential criminal or civil lawsuits or liability, have their assets frozen, lose access to banking services or services provided by other service providers, or suffer disruptions to their operations, any of which could negatively affect the Trust’s ability to operate or cause losses in value of the Shares. If miners expend less processing power on the Bitcoin network, it could increase the likelihood of a malicious actor obtaining control. Miners ceasing operations would reduce the collective processing power on the Bitcoin network, which would adversely affect the confirmation process for transactions ( i.e. , temporarily decreasing the speed at which blocks are added to the Bitcoin blockchain until the next scheduled adjustment in difficulty for block solutions). If a reduction in processing power occurs, the Bitcoin network may be more vulnerable to a malicious actor obtaining control in excess of fifty percent (50%) of the processing power on the Bitcoin network. As a result, it may be possible for a bad actor to manipulate the Bitcoin blockchain and hinder transactions. Any reduction in confidence in the confirmation process or processing power of the Bitcoin network may adversely affect an investment in the Trust. 50 Blockchain technologies are based on the theoretical conjectures as to the impossibility of solving certain cryptographical puzzles quickly. These premises may be incorrect or may become incorrect due to technological advances. Blockchain technologies are premised on theoretical conjectures as to the impossibility, in practice, of solving certain mathematical problems quickly. Those conjectures remain unproven, however, and mathematical or technological advances could conceivably prove them to be incorrect. Blockchain technology companies may also be negatively affected by cryptography or other technological advances, such as the development of quantum computers with significantly more power than computers presently available, that undermine or vitiate the cryptographic consensus mechanism underpinning the Bitcoin blockchain and other distributed ledger protocols. If either of these events were to happen, markets that rely on blockchain technologies, such as the Bitcoin network, could quickly collapse, and an investment in the Trust may be adversely affected. The price of bitcoin on the bitcoin market has exhibited periods of extreme volatility, which could have a negative impact on the performance of the Trust. The price of bitcoin as determined by the bitcoin market has experienced periods of extreme volatility and may be influenced by a wide variety of factors. Speculators and investors who seek to profit from trading and holding bitcoin generate a significant portion of bitcoin demand. Such speculation regarding the potential future appreciation in the value of bitcoin may cause the price of bitcoin to increase. Conversely, a decrease in demand for or speculative interest regarding bitcoin may cause the price to decline. The volatility of the price of bitcoin, particularly arising from speculative activity, may have a negative impact on the performance of the Trust. The price of bitcoin may become closely correlated with other asset classes. Returns from investing in bitcoin have at times diverged from and/or have not been correlated with those associated with other asset classes, but there can be no assurance that there will be any such divergence, either generally or with respect to any particular asset class, or that price movements will not be correlated. In addition, there is no assurance that bitcoin will maintain its value in the long, intermediate, short, or any other term. In the event that the price of bitcoin declines, the value of the Shares is likely to decline proportionately. Prices of bitcoin may be affected due to stablecoins, the activities of stablecoin issuers and their regulatory treatment. While the Trust does not invest in “stablecoins,” such as those digital assets that are pegged to the U.S. dollar and holders expect to receive one U.S. dollar in exchange for the stablecoin, it may nonetheless be exposed to risks that stablecoins pose for the bitcoin market and other digital asset markets. Stablecoins are digital assets designed to have a stable value over time as compared to typically volatile digital assets. Although the prices of stablecoins are intended to be stable, their market value may fluctuate. This volatility has in the past indirectly or apparently impacted the price of bitcoin. Stablecoins are a relatively new phenomenon whereby assets held in stablecoins has increased significantly over the past few years, such that it is impossible to know all of the risks that they could pose to participants in the bitcoin market. In addition, some have argued that certain stablecoins are improperly issued without sufficient backing in a way that, when the stablecoin is used to pay for bitcoin, could cause artificial rather than genuine demand for bitcoin, which may artificially inflate the price of bitcoin. Some issuers of stablecoins may not be vetted or regulated, and it is not always possible to discern whether there is sufficient backing for a given stablecoin or other mechanisms to maintain a stable price for the asset. In addition, it is not possible to eliminate the possibility that some stablecoins are involved in illicit activities. Given the foundational role that stablecoins play in global digital asset markets, their fundamental liquidity can have a dramatic impact on the broader digital asset market, including the market for bitcoin. Because a large portion of the digital asset market trading volume occurs in stablecoins, there is a risk that actual or perceived loss of value or backing could disrupt the digital asset market, including via a disorderly de-pegging or a run on stablecoins could lead to dramatic market volatility in digital assets more broadly. Perceived or actual volatility in stablecoins, operational issues with stablecoins (for example, technical issues that prevent settlement), concerns about the sufficiency of any reserves that support stablecoins or potential manipulative activity when unbacked stablecoins are used to pay for other digital assets (including bitcoin), or regulatory concerns or actions about stablecoin issuers or intermediaries, such as platforms, that support stablecoins, could impact both the digital assets market and individuals’ willingness to trade on trading venues that rely on stablecoins, reduce liquidity in the bitcoin market, and affect the value of bitcoin, and in turn impact an investment in the Shares. 51 Currently, there is relatively small use of bitcoin in the retail and commercial marketplace in comparison to relatively large use by speculators and those perceiving bitcoin as a store of value, thus contributing to price volatility that could adversely affect an investment in the Trust. Certain merchants and major retail and commercial businesses have only recently begun accepting bitcoin and the Bitcoin network as a means of payment for goods and services. Consumer use of bitcoin to pay such retail and commercial outlets, however, remains limited. Yet, market speculators and investors seeking to profit from the short- or long-term holding of bitcoin generate a significant portion of demand for bitcoin, which can contribute to price volatility, which in turn can make bitcoin less attractive to merchants and commercial parties as a means of payment. A lack of expansion by bitcoin into retail and commercial markets or a contraction of such use may result in a reduction in the price of bitcoin, which could adversely affect an investment in the Trust. Bitcoin platforms on which bitcoin trades are relatively new and, in some cases, unregulated, and, therefore, may be more exposed to fraud, manipulation and security breaches than established, regulated platforms for other financial assets or instruments, which could have a negative impact on the performance of the Trust. Risk of Fraud and Market Manipulation. Over the past several years, a number of bitcoin platforms have been closed or faced issues due to fraud, manipulation, failure, security breaches or governmental regulations. Bitcoin platforms may be more exposed to the risk of market manipulation than exchanges for more traditional assets. Some bitcoin platforms are not subject to direct regulatory oversight, and some bitcoin platforms that are subject to such oversight typically must comply with minimum net worth, cybersecurity, and anti-money laundering requirements, but are not typically required to protect customers or their markets to the same extent that regulated securities exchanges or futures exchanges are required to do so. Tools to detect and deter fraudulent or manipulative trading activities such as market manipulation, front-running of trades, and wash-trading may not be available to or employed by digital asset platforms or may not exist at all. The SEC has identified possible sources of fraud and manipulation in the bitcoin market generally, including, among others (1) “wash trading”; (2) persons with a dominant position in bitcoin manipulating bitcoin pricing; (3) hacking of the Bitcoin network and trading platforms; (4) malicious control of the Bitcoin network; (5) trading based on material, non-public information (for example, plans of market participants to significantly increase or decrease their holdings in bitcoin, new sources of demand for bitcoin) or based on the dissemination of false and misleading information; (6) manipulative activity involving stablecoins; and (7) fraud and manipulation at bitcoin trading platforms. The effect of potential market manipulation, front-running, wash-trading, and other fraudulent or manipulative trading practices may inflate the volumes actually present in crypto markets and/or cause distortions in price, which could adversely affect the Trust or Shares. Further, the closure or temporary shutdown of bitcoin platforms due to fraud, manipulation business failure, hackers or malware, or government-mandated regulation may reduce confidence in the Bitcoin network and can slow down the mass adoption of bitcoin. Further, such bitcoin platform failures or that of any other major component of the overall bitcoin ecosystem can have an adverse effect on bitcoin markets and the price of bitcoin and could therefore have a negative impact on the performance of the Trust. Spot markets may be exposed to wash trading. Spot markets on which bitcoin trades may be susceptible to wash trading. Wash trading occurs when offsetting trades are entered into for other than bona fide reasons, such as the desire to inflate reported trading volumes. Wash trading may be motivated by non-economic reasons, such as a desire for increased visibility on popular websites that monitor markets for digital assets so as to improve their attractiveness to investors who look for maximum liquidity, or it may be motivated by the ability to attract listing fees from token issuers who seek the most liquid and high-volume exchanges on which to list their coins. Results of wash trading may include unexpected obstacles to trade and erroneous investment decisions based on false information. Any actual or perceived false trading in the digital asset markets, and any other fraudulent or manipulative acts and practices, could adversely affect the value of bitcoin and/or negatively affect the market perception of bitcoin. To the extent that wash trading either occurs or appears to occur in spot markets on which bitcoin trades, investors may develop negative perceptions about bitcoin and the digital assets industry more broadly, which could adversely impact the price bitcoin and, therefore, the price of Shares. Wash trading also may place more legitimate digital asset platforms at a relative competitive disadvantage. 52 Price Volatility. Many bitcoin platforms lack certain safeguards established by more traditional exchanges to enhance the stability of trading on the platform, such as measures designed to prevent sudden drops in value of items traded on the exchange ( i.e. , “flash crashes”). As a result, the prices of cryptocurrencies, including bitcoin, on exchanges may be subject to larger and more frequent sudden declines than assets traded on more traditional platforms. Sales of new bitcoin may cause the price of bitcoin to decline, which could negatively affect an investment in the Trust. Newly created bitcoin (“newly mined bitcoin”) are generated through a process referred to as “mining.” If entities engaged in bitcoin mining choose not to hold the newly mined bitcoin, and, instead, make them available for sale, there can be downward pressure on the price of bitcoin. A bitcoin mining operation may be more likely to sell a higher percentage of its newly created bitcoin, and more rapidly so, if it is operating at a low profit margin, thus reducing the price of bitcoin. Lower bitcoin prices may result in further tightening of profit margins for miners and decreasing profitability, thereby potentially causing even further selling pressure. Diminishing profit margins and increasing sales of newly mined bitcoin could result in a reduction in the price of bitcoin, which could adversely impact an investment in the Shares. Digital asset networks face significant scaling challenges and efforts to increase the volume of transactions may not be successful. Many digital asset networks face significant scaling challenges due to the fact that public blockchains generally face a tradeoff between security and scalability. One means through which public blockchains achieve security is decentralization, meaning that no intermediary is responsible for securing and maintaining these systems. For example, a greater degree of decentralization generally means a given digital asset network is less susceptible to manipulation or capture. Achieving decentralization may mean that every single node on a given digital asset network is responsible for securing the system by processing every transaction and maintaining a copy of the entire state of the network. However, this may involve tradeoffs from an efficiency perspective, impose constraints on throughput or have other consequences (see the next risk factor regarding the Bitcoin network’s decentralized governance structure). In an effort to increase the volume of transactions that can be processed on a given digital asset network, many digital assets are being upgraded with various features to increase the speed and throughput of digital asset transactions. In August 2017, the Bitcoin network was upgraded with a technical feature known as “Segregated Witness” with the promise of increasing the number of transactions per second that can be handled on-chain and enabling so-called second layer solutions, such as the Lightning Network or payment channels, that increase transaction throughput by processing certain transactions outside the main Bitcoin blockchain. However, this upgrade may fail to achieve the expected benefits or widespread adoption. If increases in throughput on the Bitcoin network lag behind growth in usage of bitcoin, average fees and settlement times may increase considerably. For example, the Bitcoin network has been, at times, subject to congestion, which has led to increased transaction fees. Increased fees and decreased settlement speeds could preclude certain uses for bitcoin ( e.g. , micropayments), and could reduce demand for, and the price of, bitcoin, which could adversely impact the value of the Shares. Many developers are actively researching and testing scalability solutions for public blockchains that do not necessarily result in lower levels of security or decentralization. However, there is no guarantee that any of the mechanisms in place or being explored for increasing the scale of settlement of the Bitcoin network transactions will be effective, or how long these mechanisms will take to become effective, which could adversely impact the value of the Shares. 53 The Bitcoin network’s decentralized governance structure may negatively affect its ability to grow and respond to challenges. The governance of decentralized networks, such as the Bitcoin network, is by voluntary consensus and open competition. In other words, the Bitcoin network has no central decision-making body or clear manner in which participants can come to an agreement other than through voluntary, widespread consensus. As a result, a lack of widespread consensus in the governance of the Bitcoin network may adversely affect the network’s utility and ability to adapt and face challenges, including technical and scaling challenges. Historically the development of the source code of the Bitcoin network has been overseen by the core developers. However, the Bitcoin network would cease to operate successfully without both miners and users, and the core developers cannot formally compel them to adopt the changes to the source code desired by core developers, or to continue to render services or participate in the Bitcoin network. As a general matter, the governance of the Bitcoin network generally depends on most of members of the Bitcoin community ultimately reaching some form of voluntary agreement on significant changes. The decentralized governance of the Bitcoin network may make it difficult to find or implement solutions or marshal sufficient effort to overcome existing or future problems, especially protracted ones requiring substantial directed effort and resource commitment over a long period of time, such as scaling challenges. Deeply held differences of the opinion have led to forks in the past, such as between Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash, and could lead to additional forks in the future, with potentially divisive effects. The Bitcoin network’s failure to overcome governance challenges could exacerbate problems experienced by the network or cause the network to fail to meet the needs of its users, and could cause users, miners, and developer talent to abandon the Bitcoin network or to choose competing blockchain protocols, or lead to a drop in speculative interest, which could cause the value of bitcoin to decline. If the Bitcoin community is unable to reach consensus in the future, it could have adverse consequences for the Bitcoin network or lead to a fork, which could affect the value of bitcoin. New competing digital assets may pose a challenge to bitcoin’s current market position, resulting in a reduction in demand for bitcoin, which could have a negative impact on the price of bitcoin and may have a negative impact on the performance of the Trust. The Bitcoin network and bitcoin, as an asset, hold a “first-to-market” advantage over other digital assets. This first-to-market advantage has contributed to the Bitcoin network evolving into the most well-developed network of any digital asset. The Bitcoin network enjoys the largest user base and has more mining power in use to secure the Bitcoin blockchain than any other digital asset. Having a large mining network could provide users confidence regarding the security and long-term stability of the Bitcoin network. This in turn could create a domino effect that inures to the benefit of the Bitcoin network - namely, the advantage of more users and miners makes a digital asset more secure, which potentially makes it more attractive to new users and miners, resulting in a network effect that potentially strengthens the first-to-market advantage. However, despite the first-mover advantage of the Bitcoin network over other digital assets, it is possible that real or perceived shortcomings in the Bitcoin network, or technological, regulatory or other developments, could result in a decline in popularity and acceptance of bitcoin and the Bitcoin network, and other digital currencies and trading systems could become more widely accepted and used than the Bitcoin network. In addition, leading technologies and/or payments companies, from Meta Platforms, Inc. (formerly known as Facebook) to Paypal, have explored plans, enacted plans and/or introduced various digital asset and electronic payments initiatives. Such initiatives could adversely affect the value of bitcoin and digital assets, in particular where technical limitations or perceived disadvantages of bitcoin or the Bitcoin network are compared to such other initiatives. These could include operational cost exceeding the award for solving blocks or transaction fees, and increased transaction fees which may adversely affect the usage of the Bitcoin network. Competition from the emergence or growth of alternative digital assets and smart contracts platforms, such as Ethereum, Solana, Avalanche, Polkadot, or Cardano, could have a negative impact on the demand for, and price of, bitcoin and thereby adversely affect the value of the Shares. 54 The Trust and the Sponsor face competition from competing products. The Trust and the Sponsor face competition with respect to the creation of competing exchange-traded bitcoin products. If the SEC were to approve many or all of the currently pending applications for such exchange-traded bitcoin products, many or all of such products, including the Trust, could fail to acquire substantial assets, initially or at all. The Trust’s competitors may also charge a substantially lower fee than the Sponsor’s Fee in order to achieve initial market acceptance and scale. Accordingly, the Sponsor’s competitors may commercialize a competing product more rapidly or effectively than the Sponsor is able to, which could adversely affect the Sponsor’s competitive position and the likelihood that the Trust will achieve initial market acceptance and could have a detrimental effect on the scale and sustainability of the Trust. If the Trust fails to achieve sufficient scale, approximately $450 million in assets or more, due to competition, limited interest or otherwise, the Sponsor may have difficulty in covering the costs associated with launching and maintaining the Trust and such shortfalls could impact the Sponsor’s ability to properly invest in robust ongoing operations and controls of the Trust to minimize the risk of operating events, errors, or other forms of losses to the Shareholders. In addition, the Trust may also fail to attract adequate liquidity in the secondary market due to such competition, resulting in a sub-standard number of Authorized Participants willing to make a market in the Shares, which in turn could result in a significant premium or discount in the Shares for extended periods and the Trust’s failure to reflect the performance of the price of bitcoin. Competition from central bank digital currencies (“CBDCs”) and other initiatives could adversely affect the value of bitcoin and other digital assets. Central banks in certain countries have introduced digital forms of legal tender (CBDCs). Research suggests over 100 countries are exploring CBDCs. Whether or not they incorporate blockchain or similar technology, CBDCs, as legal tender in the issuing jurisdiction, could have an advantage in competing with, or replace, bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies as a medium of exchange or store of value. Central banks and other governmental entities have also announced cooperative initiatives and consortia with private sector entities, with the goal of leveraging blockchain and other technology to reduce friction in cross-border and interbank payments and settlement, and commercial banks and other financial institutions have also recently announced a number of initiatives of their own to incorporate new technologies, including blockchain and similar technologies, into their payments and settlement activities, which could compete with, or reduce the demand for, bitcoin. As a result, the value of bitcoin could decrease, which could adversely affect an investment in the Trust. The scheduled mining of additional bitcoin and their subsequent sale may cause the price of bitcoin to decline, which could negatively affect an investment in the Trust. The Bitcoin network is designed to periodically reduce the fixed award given to miners for solving new blocks (the “block reward”), most recently in May 2020, when the block reward reduced from 12.5 to 6.25 bitcoin. The next such event, as referred to as a “halving” event, is anticipated to occur at some point between March 2024 to May 2024. As the block reward continues to decrease over time, the mining incentive structure may transition to a higher reliance on transaction confirmation fees in order to incentivize miners to continue to dedicate processing power to the blockchain. If transaction confirmation fees become too high, the marketplace may be reluctant to use bitcoin. Increased transaction fees may motivate market participants, such as merchants or commercial institutions, to switch from bitcoin to another digital asset or back to fiat currency as their preferred medium of exchange. Decreased demand for bitcoin may adversely affect its price, which may adversely affect an investment in the Trust. To the extent that any miners cease to record transactions that do not include the payment of a transaction fee in mined blocks or do not record a transaction because the transaction fee is too low, such transactions will not be recorded on the Bitcoin blockchain until a block is mined by a miner who does not require the payment of transaction fees or is willing to accept a lower fee. Also, some miners have financed the acquisition of mining equipment or the development or construction of infrastructure to perform mining activities by borrowing. If such miners experience financial difficulties and are unable to pay back their borrowings, their mining capacity could become unavailable to the Bitcoin network, which could conceivably result in disruptions in recording transactions on the Bitcoin network. Any widespread delays or disruptions in the recording of transactions could result in a loss of confidence in the Bitcoin network and disrupt transactions with Authorized Participants, bitcoin more broadly or otherwise adversely impact the value of Shares. 55 Ultimately, if the awards of new bitcoin for solving blocks declines and transaction fees for recording transactions are not sufficiently high to exceed the costs of mining, miners may operate at a loss or cease operations. If the award does not exceed the costs of mining in the long-term, miners may have to cease operations entirely. If miners cease their operations, this could have a negative impact on the Bitcoin network and could adversely affect the value of the bitcoin held by the Trust. Miners could act in collusion to raise transaction fees, which may adversely affect the usage of the Bitcoin network. Bitcoin miners collect fees for each transaction they confirm. Miners validate unconfirmed transactions by adding the previously unconfirmed transactions to new blocks in the blockchain. Miners are not forced to confirm any specific transaction, but they are economically incentivized to confirm valid transactions as a means of collecting fees. To the extent that any miners cease to record transactions in solved blocks, such transactions will not be recorded on the Bitcoin blockchain until a block is solved by a miner who does not require the payment of transaction fees. Miners have historically accepted relatively low transaction confirmation fees. If miners collude in an anticompetitive manner to reject low transaction fees, then bitcoin users could be forced to pay higher fees, thus reducing the attractiveness of the bitcoin network, or to wait longer times for their transactions to be validated by a miner who does not require the payment of a transaction fee. Bitcoin mining occurs globally, and it may be difficult for authorities to apply antitrust regulations or similar doctrines across multiple jurisdictions. Any collusion among miners may adversely impact an investment in the Trust or the ability of the Trust to operate. As technology advances, miners may be unable to acquire the digital asset mining hardware necessary to develop and launch their operations. A decline in the bitcoin mining population could adversely affect the Bitcoin network and an investment in the Trust. Due to the increasing demand for digital asset mining hardware, miners may be unable to acquire the proper mining equipment or suitable amount of equipment necessary to continue their operations or develop and launch their operations. In addition, because successful mining of a digital asset that uses “proof of work” validation requires maintaining or exceeding a certain level of computing power relative to other validators, miners will need to upgrade their mining hardware periodically to keep up with their competition. The development of supercomputers with disproportionate computing power may threaten the integrity of the bitcoin market by concentrating mining power, which would make it unprofitable for other miners to mine. The expense of purchasing or upgrading new equipment may be substantial and diminish returns to miners dramatically. A decline in miners may result in a decrease in the value of bitcoin and the value of the Trust. If profit margins of bitcoin mining operations are not high, miners may elect to immediately sell bitcoin earned by mining, resulting in a reduction in the price of bitcoin that could adversely affect an investment in the Trust. Bitcoin network mining operations have rapidly evolved over the past several years from individual users mining with computer processors, graphics processing units and first-generation ASIC (application-specific integrated circuit) machines. New processing power is predominantly added to the Bitcoin network currently by “professionalized” mining operations. Such operations may use proprietary hardware or sophisticated ASIC machines acquired from ASIC manufacturers. Significant capital is necessary for mining operations to acquire this hardware, lease operating space (often in data centers or warehousing facilities), afford electricity costs and employ technicians to operate the mining farms. As a result, professionalized mining operations are of a greater scale than prior Bitcoin network validators and have more defined, regular expenses and liabilities. In addition, mining operations may choose to immediately sell bitcoin earned from their operations into the global bitcoin market. In past years, individual miners are believed to have been more likely to hold newly mined bitcoin for more extended periods. The immediate selling of newly mined bitcoin could increase the supply of bitcoin on the bitcoin market, creating downward pressure on the price of bitcoin. A professional mining operation operating at a low profit margin may be more likely to sell a higher percentage of its newly mined bitcoin rapidly, and it may partially or completely cease operations if its profit margin is negative. The reduction in mining rewards of bitcoin, including block reward halving events, which are events that occur after a specific period of time that reduce the block reward earned by miners, could be inadequate to incentivize miners to continue to perform mining activities. In a low profit margin environment, a higher percentage of the new bitcoin mined each day will be sold into the bitcoin market more rapidly, thereby reducing bitcoin prices. The network effect of reduced profit margins resulting in greater sales of newly mined bitcoin could result in a reduction in the price of bitcoin that could adversely affect an investment in the Trust. 56 Congestion or delay in the Bitcoin network may delay purchases or sales of bitcoin by the Trust. The size of each block on the Bitcoin blockchain is currently limited and is significantly below the level that centralized systems can provide with regard to volume of transaction processing. Increased transaction volume on the Bitcoin network could result in delays in the recording of transactions due to congestion in the Bitcoin network. Moreover, unforeseen system failures, disruptions in operations, or poor connectivity may also result in delays in the recording of transactions on the Bitcoin network. Any delay in the Bitcoin network could affect the Trust’s ability to buy or sell bitcoin at an advantageous price, or may create the opportunity for a bad actor to double spend bitcoin, resulting in decreased confidence in the Bitcoin network. Over the longer term, delays in confirming transactions could reduce the attractiveness to merchants and other commercial parties as a means of payment. As a result, the Bitcoin network and the value of the Trust would be adversely affected. Bitcoin mining is energy intensive and concerns about climate change may raise the economic and societal costs of bitcoin mining. Bitcoin mining involves advanced computers that consume significant energy, which may have a negative environmental impact and give rise to public opinion against allowing, or government regulations restricting, the use of electricity for mining operations. Researchers at the University of Cambridge estimate that bitcoin mining consumes 121.36 terawatt-hours per year, which equates to approximately the annual energy consumption of Argentina. The energy intensive nature of bitcoin mining is in some circumstances potentially mitigated by the fact that many miners could elect to operate geographically near renewable energy sources where energy might be otherwise wasted. However, miners may be forced to cease operations during an electricity shortage or power outage, or if electricity prices increase where the mining activities are performed. This could adversely the price of bitcoin, or the operation of the Bitcoin network, and accordingly adversely affect the value of the Shares. In addition, due to concerns around energy consumption and the impact on public utility companies, various states and cities have implemented, or are considering implementing, moratoriums on mining activity in their jurisdictions. A significant reduction in mining activity as a result of such actions could adversely affect the security of the Bitcoin network by making it easier for a malicious actor or botnet to manipulate the relevant blockchain. If regulators or public utilities take action that restricts or otherwise impacts mining activities, such actions could result in decreased security or activity of the Bitcoin network, consequently adversely impacting the value of the Shares. Risk Factors Associated with the Bitcoin Platform Market The value of the Shares relates directly to the value of the bitcoin held by the Trust and fluctuations in the price of bitcoin could materially and adversely affect an investment in the Shares. The Shares are designed to mirror as closely as possible the performance of the price of bitcoin, as determined by the Reference Rate, and the value of the Shares relates directly to the value of the bitcoin held by the Trust, less the Trust’s liabilities (including estimated accrued but unpaid fees and expenses). The Reference Rate is derived from the transaction prices on electronic marketplaces where platform participants may first use fiat currency to trade, buy and sell bitcoin based on bid-ask trading. The Reference Rate uses U.S. dollar-denominated trading data from bitcoin platforms to determine its value. Whether a bitcoin platform is considered eligible to be included in the Reference Rate’s calculation depends on considerations such as depth of liquidity, compliance with applicable legal and regulatory requirements, data availability, domicile and acceptance of U.S. dollar deposits. The price of bitcoin has fluctuated widely over the past several years and may continue to experience significant price fluctuations. Several factors may affect the Reference Rate, including, but not limited to: · The maximum global supply of bitcoin is limited to 21 million and as of December 31, 2023, there were approximately 19.5 million bitcoin in existence; · Global bitcoin demand, which is influenced by the growth of retail merchants’ and commercial businesses’ acceptance of bitcoin as payment for goods and services, the security of online bitcoin platforms and digital wallets that hold bitcoin, the perception that the use and holding of bitcoin is safe and secure, the lack of regulatory restrictions on their use and the reputation of bitcoin for illicit use; 57 · Global bitcoin supply, which is influenced by similar factors as global bitcoin demand, in addition to fiat currency needs by miners (for example, to invest in equipment or pay electricity bills) and taxpayers who may liquidate bitcoin holdings around tax deadlines to meet tax obligations; · Investors’ expectations with respect to the rate of inflation of fiat currencies; · Investors’ expectations with respect to the rate of deflation of bitcoin; · Interest rates; · Currency exchange rates, including the rates at which bitcoin may be exchanged for fiat currencies; · Fiat currency withdrawal and deposit policies of bitcoin platforms and liquidity of such bitcoin platforms; · Interruptions in service from or failures of major bitcoin platforms; · Cyber theft of bitcoin from online bitcoin wallet providers, or news of such theft from such providers, or from individuals’ bitcoin wallets; · Investment and trading activities of large investors, including private and registered funds, that may directly or indirectly invest in bitcoin; · Monetary policies of governments, trade restrictions, currency devaluations and revaluations; · Regulatory measures, if any, that restrict the use of bitcoin as a form of payment or the purchase of bitcoin on the bitcoin market; · The availability and popularity of businesses that provide bitcoin-related services; · The maintenance and development of the open-source software protocol of the Bitcoin network; · Increased competition from other forms of cryptocurrency or payments services; · Global or regional political, economic or financial events and situations; · Expectations among Bitcoin economy participants that the value of bitcoin will soon change; and · Fees associated with processing a bitcoin transaction. If bitcoin markets continue to be subject to sharp fluctuations, you may experience losses if you need to sell your Shares at a time when the price of bitcoin is lower than it was when you made your prior investment. Even if you are able to hold Shares for the long-term, your Shares may never generate a profit, since bitcoin markets have historically experienced extended periods of flat or declining prices, in addition to sharp fluctuations. In addition, investors should be aware that there is no assurance that bitcoin will maintain their long-term value in terms of future purchasing power or that the acceptance of bitcoin payments by mainstream retail merchants and commercial businesses will continue to grow. In the event that the price of bitcoin declines, the Sponsor expects the value of an investment in the Shares to decline proportionately. Due to the unregulated nature and lack of transparency surrounding the operations of bitcoin platforms, the marketplace may lose confidence in bitcoin platforms, upon which the Trust is dependent. Bitcoin platforms are relatively new and, in some cases, not subject to direct regulatory oversight. Furthermore, while many prominent bitcoin platforms provide the public with significant information regarding their ownership structure, management teams, corporate practices and regulatory compliance, many bitcoin platforms do not provide this information. Bitcoin platforms do not appear to be subject to, or may not comply with, regulation in a similar manner as other regulated trading platforms, such U.S. securities exchanges. As a result, the marketplace may lose confidence in bitcoin platforms, including prominent bitcoin platforms that handle a significant volume of bitcoin trading. 58 Many digital asset platforms are unlicensed, unregulated, operate without extensive supervision by governmental authorities, and do not provide the public with significant information regarding their ownership structure, management team, corporate practices, cybersecurity, and regulatory compliance. In particular, those located outside the United States may be subject to significantly less stringent regulatory and compliance requirements in their local jurisdictions. As a result, trading activity on or reported by these digital asset platforms is generally significantly less regulated than trading in regulated U.S. securities and commodities markets, and may reflect behavior that would be prohibited in regulated U.S. trading venues. For example, in 2019 there were reports claiming that 80.95% of bitcoin trading volume on bitcoin platforms was false or non-economic in nature, with specific focus on unregulated bitcoin platforms located outside of the U.S. Such reports may indicate that the bitcoin platform market is significantly smaller than expected and that the U.S. makes up a significantly larger percentage of the bitcoin platform market than is commonly understood. Nonetheless, any actual or perceived false trading in the bitcoin platform market, and any other fraudulent or manipulative acts and practices, could adversely affect the value of bitcoin and/or negatively affect the market perception of Bitcoin. In addition, over the past several years, some bitcoin platforms have been closed due to fraud and manipulative activity, business failure or security breaches. In many of these instances, the customers of such bitcoin platforms were not compensated or made whole for the partial or complete losses of their account balances in such bitcoin platforms. While smaller bitcoin platforms are less likely to have the infrastructure and capitalization that make larger bitcoin platforms more stable, larger bitcoin platforms are more likely to be appealing targets for hackers and malware and may be more likely to be targets of regulatory enforcement action. For example, the collapse of Mt. Gox, which filed for bankruptcy protection in Japan in late February 2014, demonstrated that even the largest bitcoin platforms could be subject to abrupt failure with consequences for both users of bitcoin platforms and the Bitcoin industry and market as a whole. In particular, in the two weeks that followed the February 7, 2014, halt of bitcoin withdrawals from Mt. Gox, the value of one bitcoin fell on other bitcoin platforms from around $795 on February 6, 2014 to $578 on February 20, 2014. Additionally, in January 2015, Bitstamp announced that approximately 19,000 bitcoin had been stolen from its operational or “hot” wallets. Further, in August 2016, it was reported that almost 120,000 bitcoins worth around $78 million were stolen from Bitfinex, a large bitcoin platform. The value of bitcoin immediately decreased over 10% following reports of the theft at Bitfinex and the shares suffered a corresponding decrease in value. In July 2017, FinCEN assessed a $110 million fine against BTC-E, a now defunct bitcoin platform, for facilitating crimes such as drug sales and ransomware attacks. In addition, in December 2017, Yapian, the operator of Seoul-based cryptocurrency platform Youbit, suspended digital asset trading and filed for bankruptcy following a hack that resulted in a loss of 17% of Yapian’s assets. Following the hack, Youbit users were allowed to withdraw approximately 75% of the digital assets in their platform accounts, with any potential further distributions to be made following Yapian’s pending bankruptcy proceedings. In addition, in January 2018, the Japanese digital asset platform, Coincheck, was hacked, resulting in losses of approximately $535 million, and in June 2020 the platform suffered another data breach that resulted in the unauthorized access to its domain registration service, forcing the Japanese platform to halt its crypto remittance service. In February 2018, the Italian digital asset platform, Bitgrail, was hacked, resulting in approximately $170 million in losses. In May 2019, one of the world’s largest bitcoin platforms, Binance, was hacked, resulting in losses of approximately $40 million. The Spanish cryptocurrency platform, 2gether, disclosed in August 2020 that a cyberattack against its platform resulted in $1.45 million in crypto assets-about one-third of the firm’s holdings at that time-being stolen. More recently, in November 2022, FTX Trading Ltd. (“FTX”), one of the largest digital asset platforms by volume at the time, halted customer withdrawals amid rumors of the company’s liquidity issues and likely insolvency, which were subsequently corroborated by its CEO. Shortly thereafter, FTX’s CEO resigned and FTX and many of its affiliates filed for bankruptcy in the United States, while other affiliates have entered insolvency, liquidation, or similar proceedings around the globe, following which the U.S. Department of Justice brought criminal fraud and other charges, and the SEC and CFTC brought civil securities and commodities fraud charges against certain of FTX’s and its affiliates’ senior executives, including its former CEO (and the CEO was subsequently convicted by a jury of fraud). Around the same time, there were reports that approximately $300-600 million of digital assets were removed from FTX and the full facts remain unknown, including whether such removal was the result of a hack, theft, insider activity, or other improper behavior. 59 Negative perception, a lack of stability in the bitcoin markets and the closure or temporary shutdown of bitcoin platforms due to fraud, business failure, hackers or malware, or government-mandated regulation may reduce confidence in the Bitcoin network and result in greater volatility in the prices of bitcoin. Furthermore, the closure or temporary shutdown of a bitcoin platform used in calculating the Reference Rate may result in a loss of confidence in the Trust’s ability to determine its bitcoin holdings on a daily basis, although the Benchmark Administrator has documented procedures in place in its published methodology to mitigate against these situations and continue to calculate and publish the Reference Rate. These potential consequences of such a bitcoin platform’s failure could adversely affect the value of the Shares. Since there is no limit on the number of bitcoin that the Trust may acquire, the Trust itself, as it grows, may have an impact on the supply and demand of bitcoin that ultimately may affect the price of the Shares in a manner unrelated to other factors affecting the global market for bitcoin. The Trust Agreement places no limit on the number of bitcoin the Trust may hold. Moreover, the Trust may issue an unlimited number of Shares, subject to registration requirements, and therefore acquire an unlimited number of bitcoin in existence at any point in time. The Bitcoin network’s mathematical protocols under which bitcoin is created or “mined” permit the creation of a limited, predetermined number of bitcoin not to exceed 21 million. Furthermore, the rate of creation or issuance of bitcoin cannot be increased ahead of the protocol’s schedule. If the number of bitcoin acquired by the Trust is large enough relative to global bitcoin supply and demand, further creations and redemptions of Shares could have an impact on the supply of and demand for bitcoin in a manner unrelated to other factors affecting the global market for bitcoin. Such an impact could affect the Reference Rate, which would directly affect the price at which Shares are traded on the Exchange or the price of future Baskets created or redeemed by the Trust. The Shares may trade at a discount or premium in the trading price relative to the Trust’s bitcoin holdings per Share as a result of non-concurrent trading hours between the Exchange and the bitcoin platform market. The value of a Share may be influenced by non-concurrent trading hours between the Exchange and various bitcoin platforms, including those that represent components of the Reference Rate. While the Exchange is open for trading in the Shares for a limited period each day, the bitcoin platform market is a 24-hour marketplace; however, trading volume and liquidity on the bitcoin platform market is not consistent throughout the day and bitcoin platforms, including the larger-volume markets, have been known to shut down temporarily or permanently due to security concerns, directed denial of service attacks and distributed denial-of-service attacks and other reasons. As a result, during periods when the Exchange is open but large bitcoin platforms (or a substantial number of smaller bitcoin platforms) are either lightly traded or are closed, trading spreads and the resulting premium or discount on the Shares may widen and, therefore, increase the difference between the price of the Shares and the Trust’s bitcoin holdings per Share. Premiums or discounts may have an adverse effect on an investment in the Shares if a Shareholder sells or acquires its Shares during a period of discount or premium, respectively. Investors in Shares in the secondary market may be subject to brokerage commissions, over which the Trust has no control. Investors buying or selling Shares in the secondary market will pay brokerage commissions or other charges imposed by brokers, as determined by the applicable broker. Brokerage commissions are often a fixed amount and may be a significant proportional cost for investors seeking to buy or sell relatively small amounts of Shares. In addition, secondary market investors will also incur the cost of the difference between the price that an investor is willing to buy shares (the “bid” price) and the price at which an investor is willing to sell Shares (the “ask” price). This difference in bid and ask prices is often referred to as the “spread” or “bid/ask spread.” The bid/ask spread varies over time for Shares based on trading volume and market liquidity of the Shares and the bitcoin comprising the Trust’s portfolio, and is generally lower if Shares have more trading volume and market liquidity and higher if Shares have little trading volume and market liquidity. Further, a relatively small investor base in the Trust, asset swings in the Trust and/or increased market volatility may cause bid/ask spreads to increase. Shares, similar to shares of other issuers listed on a stock exchange, may be sold short and are therefore subject to the risk of increased volatility associated with short selling. Due to the costs of buying or selling Shares, including bid/ask spreads, frequent trading of Shares may significantly reduce investment results and an investment in the Shares may not be advisable for investors who anticipate regularly making small investments. 60 If bitcoin prices on the bitcoin platform market move negatively during hours when the Exchange is closed, trading prices on the Exchange may “gap” down at market open. The value of a Share may be influenced by non-concurrent trading hours between the Exchange and various bitcoin platforms, including those that represent components of the Reference Rate. While the Exchange is open for trading in the Shares for a limited period each day, the bitcoin platform market is a 24-hour marketplace. During periods when the Exchange is closed but bitcoin platforms are open, significant changes in the price of bitcoin on the platform market could result in a difference in performance between the value of bitcoin as measured by the Reference Rate and the most recent bitcoin holdings per Share or closing trading price. To the extent that the price of bitcoin on the platform market, and the value of bitcoin as measured by the Reference Rate, moves significantly in a negative direction after the close of the Exchange, the trading price of the Shares may “gap” down to the full extent of such negative price shift when the Exchange reopens. To the extent that the price of bitcoin on the platform market drops significantly during hours the Exchange is closed, investors may not be able to sell their Shares until after the “gap” down has been fully realized, resulting in an inability to mitigate losses in a rapidly negative market. A possible “short squeeze” due to a sudden increase in demand for the Shares that largely exceeds supply may lead to price volatility in the Shares. Investors may purchase Shares to hedge existing bitcoin or other digital currencies, commodity or currency exposure or to speculate on the price of bitcoin. Speculation on the price of bitcoin may involve long and short exposures. To the extent that aggregate short exposure exceeds the number of Shares available for purchase (for example, in the event that large redemption requests by Authorized Participants dramatically affect Share liquidity), investors with short exposure may have to pay a premium to repurchase Shares for delivery to Share lenders. Those repurchases may, in turn, dramatically increase the price of the Shares until additional Shares are created through the creation process. This is often referred to as a “short squeeze.” A short squeeze could lead to volatile price movements in the Shares that are not directly correlated to the price of bitcoin. Purchasing activity in the bitcoin platform market associated with Basket creations or selling activity following Basket redemptions may affect the Reference Rate and Share trading prices, adversely affecting an investment in the Shares. Purchasing activity associated with acquiring bitcoin required for deposit with the Trust in connection with the creation of Baskets may increase the market price of bitcoin on the bitcoin platform market, which will result in higher prices for the Shares. Increases in the market price of bitcoin may also occur as a result of the purchasing activity of other market participants. Other market participants may attempt to benefit from an increase in the market price of bitcoin that may result from increased purchasing activity of bitcoin connected with the issuance of Baskets. Consequently, the market price of bitcoin may decline immediately after Baskets are created. Selling activity associated with sales of bitcoin withdrawn from the Trust in connection with the redemption of Baskets may decrease the market price of bitcoin on the bitcoin platform market, which will result in lower prices for the Shares. Decreases in the market price of bitcoin may also occur as a result of the selling activity of other market participants. If the Reference Rate declines, the trading price of the Shares will generally also decline. An investment in the Shares may be adversely affected by competition from other methods of investing in bitcoin. The Trust competes with direct investments in bitcoin and other potential financial vehicles, possibly including securities backed by or linked to bitcoin and digital currency financial vehicles similar to the Trust. Market and financial conditions, and other conditions beyond the Sponsor’s control, may make it more attractive to invest in other financial vehicles or to invest in bitcoin directly, which could limit the market for the Shares and reduce the liquidity of the Shares. The Reference Rate may be affected by the sale of other digital currency financial vehicles that invest in and track the price of bitcoin. To the extent digital currency financial vehicles other than the Trust tracking the price of bitcoin are formed and represent a significant proportion of the demand for bitcoin, large redemptions of the securities of these digital currency financial vehicles, or private funds holding bitcoin, could negatively affect the Reference Rate, the Trust’s bitcoin holdings and the price of the Shares. 61 The impact of geopolitical or economic events on the supply and demand for bitcoin is uncertain, but could motivate large-scale sales of bitcoin, which could result in a reduction in the Reference Rate and adversely affect an investment in the Shares. As an alternative to fiat currencies that are backed by central governments, digital assets such as bitcoin, which are relatively new, are subject to supply and demand forces based upon the desirability of an alternative, decentralized means of buying and selling goods and services, and it is unclear how such supply and demand will be impacted by geopolitical events. Nevertheless, political or economic crises may motivate large-scale acquisitions or sales of bitcoin either globally or locally. Large-scale sales of bitcoin would result in a reduction in the Reference Rate and could adversely affect an investment in the Shares. Demand for bitcoin is driven, in part, by its perceived status as a prominent and secure digital asset. It is possible that a digital asset other than bitcoin could have features that make it more desirable to a material portion of the digital asset user base, resulting in a reduction in demand for bitcoin, which could have a negative impact on the price of bitcoin and adversely affect an investment in the Shares. Bitcoin was the first digital asset to gain global adoption and critical mass, and as a result, it has a “first to market” advantage over other digital assets. As of December 31, 2023, bitcoin was the largest digital asset by market capitalization and had the largest user base and largest combined mining power. Despite this first to market advantage, as of December 31, 2023, there were over 9,000 alternative digital assets tracked by CoinMarketCap, having a total market-capitalization of approximately $1.66 trillion (including the approximately $830 billion market cap of bitcoin), as calculated using market prices and total available supply of each digital asset. In addition, many consortiums and financial institutions are also researching and investing resources into private or permissioned blockchain platforms rather than open platforms like the Bitcoin network. Competition from the emergence or growth of alternative digital assets could have a negative impact on the demand for, and price of, bitcoin and thereby adversely affect an investment in the Shares. Investors may invest in bitcoin through means other than the Shares, including through direct investments in bitcoin and other potential financial vehicles, possibly including securities backed by or linked to bitcoin and digital asset financial vehicles similar to the Trust. Market and financial conditions, and other conditions beyond the Sponsor’s control, may make it more attractive to invest in other financial vehicles or to invest in bitcoin directly, which could limit the market for, and reduce the liquidity of, the Shares. In addition, to the extent digital asset financial vehicles other than the Trust tracking the price of bitcoin are formed and represent a significant proportion of the demand for bitcoin, large purchases or redemptions of the securities of these digital asset financial vehicles, or private investment vehicles holding bitcoin, could negatively affect the Reference Rate, the bitcoin holdings, the price of the Shares, the NAV and the NAV per Share. Risk Factors Associated with the Reference Rate The Reference Rate has a limited history and there are limitations with the price of bitcoin reflected there. The Reference Rate has a limited history, having first been introduced on February 28, 2022. The Reference Rate is also based on the BRR’s methodology, which was introduced November 14, 2016. The value of both the Reference Rate and the BRR is an average composite reference rate calculated using volume-weighted trading price data from certain bitcoin platforms (“Constituent Platforms”). These platforms are chosen by the Benchmark Administrator in accordance with the provisions of its publicly available CF Constituent Platform Criteria that is available on its website, conformance to which is supervised by an oversight body (the “Oversight Committee”). This CF Constituent Platform Criteria and the composition of the Constituent Platforms may change over time, and the current selection of Constituent Platforms has only been in place since May 2022. Neither the Benchmark Administrator nor the Oversight Committee are obligated to take the needs of the Trust, the Shareholders, or anyone else into consideration in connection with such changes. There is no guarantee that the methodology currently used in calculating the Reference Rate will appropriately track the price of bitcoin in the future. 62 For more information on the Oversight Committee, the Constituent Platforms, and the CF Constituent Platform Criteria in the Reference Rate, see the section titled “The Trust and Bitcoin Prices - The Reference Rate”. The value of bitcoin as reflected by the Reference Rate may be subject to momentum pricing due to speculation regarding future appreciation in value, leading to greater volatility which could adversely affect an investment in the Shares. Momentum pricing typically is associated with growth stocks and other assets whose valuation, as determined by the investing public, accounts for anticipated future appreciation in value. The Reference Rate is determined using data from various bitcoin platforms. The Sponsor believes that momentum pricing of bitcoin has resulted, and may continue to result, in speculation regarding future appreciation in the value of bitcoin, inflating and making the Reference Rate more volatile. As a result, bitcoin may be more likely to fluctuate in value due to changing investor confidence in future appreciation or depreciation in the Reference Rate, which could adversely affect an investment in the Shares. The Benchmark Administrator could experience system failures or errors. If the computers or other facilities of the Benchmark Administrator, data providers and/or relevant bitcoin trading platforms malfunction for any reason, calculation and dissemination of the Reference Rate may be delayed and trading in the Shares may be suspended for a period of time. Errors in Reference Rate data, the Reference Rate computations and/or construction may occur from time to time and may not be identified and/or corrected for a period of time or at all, which may have an adverse impact on the Trust and the Shareholders. Any of the foregoing may lead to the errors in the Reference Rate, which may lead to a different investment outcome for the Trust and its Shareholders than would have been the case had such events not occurred. The Reference Rate is the reference price for calculating the Trust’s NAV. Consequently, losses or costs associated with the Reference Rate’s errors or other risks described above will generally be borne by the Trust and the Shareholders and neither the Sponsor nor its affiliates or agents make any representations or warranties regarding the foregoing. If the Reference Rate is not available, the Trust’s holdings may be fair valued in accordance with the policy approved by the Sponsor. To the extent the valuation determined in accordance with the policy approved by the Sponsor differs materially from the actual market price of bitcoin, the price of the Shares may no longer track, whether temporarily or over time, the price of bitcoin, which could adversely affect an investment in the Trust by reducing investors’ confidence in the Shares’ ability to track the price of bitcoin, which could adversely affect the value of the Shares. The Reference Rate could fail to track the global bitcoin price Although the Reference Rate is intended to provide a reasonable measure for the market price of bitcoin, third parties may be able to purchase and sell bitcoin on public or private markets not included among the bitcoin platforms used in calculating the Reference Rate, and such transactions may take place at prices materially higher or lower than the Reference Rate. Moreover, there may be variances in the prices of bitcoin on the various bitcoin platforms used in calculating the Reference Rate and the price of bitcoins on the bitcoin platforms could be materially higher or lower than the Reference Rate price. To the extent the Reference Rate price differs materially from the actual prices available on a bitcoin platform used to calculate it, or the global market price of bitcoin, the price of the Shares may no longer track, whether temporarily or over time, the global market price of bitcoin, which could adversely affect an investment in the Trust by reducing investors’ confidence in the Shares’ ability to track the market price of bitcoin. To the extent such prices differ from the Reference Rate, investors may lose confidence in the Shares’ ability to track the market price of bitcoin, which could adversely affect the value of the Shares. The Sponsor can discontinue using the Reference Rate and use a different pricing or valuation methodology instead. The Sponsor, in its sole discretion, may select, remove, change, or replace the pricing or valuation methodology or policies used to value the Trust’s assets and determine NAV and NAV per Share, including the Reference Rate. To the extent such new or revised pricing or valuation methodologies or their pricing output differ from the Reference Rate, investors may lose confidence in the Shares’ ability to track the market price of bitcoin, which could adversely affect the value of the Shares. The Sponsor may make this decision for any reason, including, but not limited to, a determination that the Reference Rate differs materially from the actual prices available on a bitcoin platform used to calculate it, that errors in the Reference Rate have negatively impacted the investment outcome for the Trust and its Shareholders, or that third parties are able to purchase and sell bitcoin on exchanges at prices that are materially higher or lower than those reflected by the Reference Rate. The Sponsor is under no obligation to select a different pricing or valuation method under any circumstance. If the Sponsor makes the decision to materially change the valuation methodology or replace of either the Reference Rate or the Benchmark Administrator, the Sponsor will notify Shareholders via a posting on the Trust’s website, prospectus supplement, post-effective amendment, through a current report on Form 8-K or in the Trust’s annual or quarterly reports. 63 Risk Factors Associated with Investing in the Trust As the Sponsor and its management have no meaningful history of operating an investment vehicle like the Trust within the United States, their experience may be inadequate or unsuitable to manage the Trust. The Sponsor has no meaningful history of past performance in managing investment vehicles like the Trust within the United States. The past performances of the Sponsor’s affiliate in other investment vehicles in other jurisdictions, including their experiences with bitcoin and other commodities, are no indication of the Sponsor’s ability to manage an investment vehicle such as the Trust within the United States. If the experience of the Sponsor and its management is inadequate or unsuitable to manage an investment vehicle such as the Trust, the operations of the Trust may be adversely affected. The Trust is a passive investment vehicle that does not seek to generate returns beyond tracking the price of bitcoin. The Trust is not actively managed and will be affected by a general decline in the price of bitcoin. The Trust is a passive investment vehicle that does not seek to generate returns beyond tracking the price of bitcoin. The Sponsor does not actively manage the bitcoin held by the Trust. This means the Sponsor does not speculatively sell bitcoin at times when its price is high or speculatively acquire bitcoin at low prices in the expectation of future price increases. It also means the Trust does not utilize leverage, derivatives or any similar arrangements in seeking to meet its investment objective. Any losses sustained by the Trust will adversely affect the value of your Shares. The value of the Shares may be influenced by a variety of factors unrelated to the value of bitcoin. The value of the Shares may be influenced by a variety of factors unrelated to the price of bitcoin that may have an adverse effect on the price of the Shares. These factors include the following factors: · Unanticipated problems or issues with respect to the mechanics of the Trust’s operations and the trading of the Shares may arise, in particular due to the fact that the mechanisms and procedures governing the creation and redemption of Baskets in exchange for cash, offering of the Shares and storage of bitcoin have been developed specifically for this product; · The Trust could experience difficulties in operating and maintaining its technical infrastructure, including in connection with expansions or updates to such infrastructure, which are likely to be complex and could lead to unanticipated delays, unforeseen expenses and security vulnerabilities; · The Trust could experience unforeseen issues relating to the performance and effectiveness of the security procedures used to protect the Trust’s account with the Bitcoin Custodian, or the security procedures may not protect against all errors, software flaws or other vulnerabilities in the Trust’s technical infrastructure, which could result in theft, loss or damage of its assets; · Service providers may fail to perform their obligations or decide to terminate their relationships with the Trust due to concerns that the introduction of privacy enhancing features to the Bitcoin network may increase the potential for bitcoin to be used to facilitate crime, exposing such service providers to potential reputational harm. Any of these factors could affect the value of the Shares, either directly or indirectly through their effect on the Trust’s assets; or · Prime Execution Agent could experience difficulties from business failures, bankruptcies, hacking, fraud, crime, government investigations, or other negative developments affecting digital asset businesses, including digital asset platforms, or banks or other financial institutions and service providers which provide services to the digital assets industry. 64 The Shares are a relatively new securities product. The mechanisms and procedures governing the creation, redemption and offering of the Shares are recently developed securities products. Consequently, there may be unanticipated problems or issues with respect to the mechanics of the operations and the trading of the Shares that could have a material adverse effect on an investment in the Shares. The Trust is subject to market risk. Market risk refers to the risk that the market price of bitcoin held by the Trust will rise or fall, sometimes rapidly or unpredictably. An investment in the Shares is subject to market risk, including the possible loss of the entire principal of the investment. Investors should not rely on past performance in deciding whether to buy Shares. Investors should not rely on the past performance of the Trust, the Reference Rate or bitcoin in deciding whether to buy Shares in the Trust. The NAV may not always correspond to the market price of bitcoin and, as a result, Baskets may be created or redeemed at a value that is different from the market price of the Shares. The NAV of the Trust will change as fluctuations occur in the market price of the Trust’s bitcoin holdings. Shareholders should be aware that the public trading price per Share may be different from the NAV for a number of reasons, including price volatility, trading activity, the closing of bitcoin platforms due to fraud, failure, security breaches or otherwise, and the fact that supply and demand forces at work in the secondary trading market for Shares are related, but not identical, to the supply and demand forces influencing the market price of bitcoin. An Authorized Participant may be able to create or redeem a Basket at a discount or a premium to the public trading price per Share and the Trust will therefore maintain its intended fractional exposure to a specific amount of bitcoin per Share. Shareholders also should note that the size of the Trust in terms of total bitcoin held may change substantially over time and as Baskets are created and redeemed. Authorized Participants’ buying and selling activity associated with the creation and redemption of Baskets may adversely affect an investment in the Shares of the Trust. Authorized Participants’ purchase of bitcoin in connection with Basket creation orders may cause the price of bitcoin to increase, which will result in higher prices for the Shares. Increases in the bitcoin prices may also occur as a result of bitcoin purchases by other market participants who attempt to benefit from an increase in the market price of bitcoin when Baskets are created. The market price of bitcoin may therefore decline immediately after Baskets are created. Selling activity associated with sales of bitcoin by Authorized Participants in connection with redemption orders may decrease the bitcoin prices, which will result in lower prices for the Shares. Decreases in bitcoin prices may also occur as a result of selling activity by other market participants. In addition to the effect that purchases and sales of bitcoin by Authorized Participants may have on the price of bitcoin, sales and purchases of bitcoin by similar investment vehicles (if developed) could impact the price of bitcoin. If the price of bitcoin declines, the trading price of the Shares will generally also decline. 65 The inability of Authorized Participants and market makers to hedge their bitcoin exposure may adversely affect the liquidity of Shares and the value of an investment in the Shares. Authorized Participants and market makers will generally want to hedge their exposure in connection with Basket creation and redemption orders. To the extent Authorized Participants and market makers are unable to hedge their exposure due to market conditions ( e.g. , insufficient bitcoin liquidity in the market, inability to locate an appropriate hedge counterparty, etc.), such conditions may make it difficult to create or redeem Baskets or cause them to not create or redeem Baskets. In addition, the hedging mechanisms employed by Authorized Participants and market makers to hedge their exposure to bitcoin may not function as intended, which may make it more difficult for them to enter into such transactions. Such events could negatively impact the market price of the Trust and the spread at which the Trust trades on the open market. The market for exchange-traded bitcoin futures has limited trading history and operational experience and may be less liquid, more volatile and more vulnerable to economic, market and industry changes than more established futures markets. The liquidity of the market will depend on, among other things, the adoption of bitcoin and the commercial and speculative interest in the market for the ability to hedge against the price of bitcoin with exchange-traded bitcoin futures. The arbitrage mechanism on which the Trust relies to keep the price of the Shares closely linked to the price of bitcoin, as reflected via the Reference Rate, may not function properly if Authorized Participants are able to purchase or sell large aggregations of bitcoins in the open market at prices that are materially higher or lower than the Reference Rate. Authorized Participants may purchase or sell bitcoins on public or private markets not included among the Bitcoin platforms included in the Reference Rate, and such transactions may take place at prices materially higher or lower than the Reference Rate. Furthermore, while the Reference Rate provides a U.S. dollar-denominated composite reference rate for the price of bitcoin based on the volume-weighted price of a bitcoin on certain constituent Bitcoin platforms at any given time, the prices on each individual Bitcoin platform are not necessarily equal to the value of a bitcoin as represented by the Reference Rate. The price of bitcoins on an individual bitcoin platform could be materially higher or lower than the Reference Rate. Under either such circumstance, the arbitrage mechanism will function to link the price of the Shares to the prices at which Authorized Participants are able to purchase or sell large aggregations of bitcoins. To the extent such prices differ materially from the Reference Rate, the price of the Shares may no longer track, whether temporarily or over time, the Reference Rate, which could adversely affect an investment in the Trust by reducing investors’ confidence in the Shares’ ability to track the market price of bitcoin. Arbitrage transactions intended to keep the price of Shares closely linked to the price of bitcoin may be problematic if the process for the creation and redemption of Baskets becomes more difficult, or if Authorized Participants or market makers encounter difficulties, which may adversely affect an investment in the Shares. If the processes of creation and redemption of Baskets (which depend on timely transfers of bitcoin to and by the Bitcoin Custodian and/or Prime Execution Agent) encounter any unanticipated difficulties, including, but not limited to, the price volatility of bitcoin, the insolvency, business failure or interruption, default, failure to perform, security breach, or other problems affecting the Prime Execution Agent or Bitcoin Custodian, limiting creations and redemptions to cash, the closing of bitcoin trading platforms due to fraud, failures, regulatory or legislative action, security breaches or otherwise, or network outages or congestion, spikes in fees demanded by miners, or other problems or disruptions affecting the Bitcoin network, the Trust’s inability in the future to obtain regulatory approvals for the offer and sale of additional Shares after the present offering is completed, potential market participants who would otherwise be willing to purchase or redeem Baskets to take advantage of any arbitrage opportunity arising from discrepancies between the price of the Shares and the price of the underlying bitcoin may not take the risk that, as a result of those difficulties, they may not be able to realize the profit they expect. In addition, in the case of a network outage or other problems affecting the Bitcoin network, the processing of transactions on the Bitcoin network may be disrupted, which in turn may prevent Authorized Participants (or market makers via Authorized Participants) from transacting in bitcoin and/or purchasing or redeeming Baskets. In such situations, the liquidity of Shares may decline and the price of the Shares may fluctuate independently of the price of bitcoin and may fall. 66 The use of cash creations and redemptions, as opposed to in-kind creations and redemptions, may adversely affect the arbitrage transactions by Authorized Participants intended to keep the price of the Shares closely linked to the price of bitcoin and, as a result, the price of the Shares may fall or otherwise diverge from NAV. The use of cash creations and redemptions, as opposed to in-kind creations and redemptions, could cause delays in trade execution due to potential operational issues arising from implementing a cash creation and redemption model, which involves greater operational steps (and therefore execution risk) than the originally contemplated in-kind creation and redemption model, or the potential unavailability or exhaustion of the Trust’s ability to borrow bitcoin or cash as trade credits (“Trade Credits”), which the Trust would not be able to use in connection with in-kind creations and redemptions. Such delays could cause the execution price associated with such trades to materially deviate from the Reference Rate used to determine the NAV, particularly when considering that the trading prices for bitcoin have exhibited high levels of volatility and may continue to do so. Even though the Authorized Participant is responsible for the dollar cost of such difference in prices, Authorized Participants could default on their obligations to the Trust, or such potential risks and costs could lead to Authorized Participants, who would otherwise be willing to purchase or redeem Baskets to take advantage of any arbitrage opportunity arising from discrepancies between the price of the Shares and the price of the underlying bitcoin, to elect to not participate in the Trust’s Share creation and redemption processes. This may adversely affect the arbitrage mechanism intended to keep the price of the Shares closely linked to the price of bitcoin, and as a result, the price of the Shares may fall or otherwise diverge from NAV. If the arbitrage mechanism is not effective, purchases or sales of Shares on the secondary market could occur at a premium or discount to NAV, which could harm Shareholders by causing them buy Shares at a price higher than the value of the underlying bitcoin held by the Trust or sell Shares at a price lower than the value of the underlying bitcoin held by the Trust, causing Shareholders to suffer losses. The Trust is subject to risks due to its concentration of investments in a single asset class. Unlike other funds that may invest in diversified assets, the Trust’s investment strategy is concentrated in a single asset class: bitcoin. This concentration maximizes the degree of the Trust’s exposure to a variety of market risks associated with bitcoin. By concentrating its investment strategy solely in bitcoin, any losses suffered as a result of a decrease in the value of bitcoin can be expected to reduce the value of an interest in the Trust and will not be offset by other gains if the Trust were to invest in underlying assets that were diversified. The lack of full insurance and Shareholders’ limited rights of legal recourse against the Trust, Trustee, Sponsor, Trust Administrator, Cash Custodian, Bitcoin Custodian and Prime Execution Agent expose the Trust and its Shareholders to the risk of loss of the Trust’s bitcoins for which no person or entity is liable. The Trust is not a banking institution or otherwise a member of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) or Securities Investor Protection Corporation (“SIPC”) and, therefore, deposits held with or assets held by the Trust are not subject to the protections enjoyed by depositors with FDIC or SIPC member institutions. In addition, neither the Trust nor the Sponsor insure the Trust’s bitcoins. While the Bitcoin Custodian has advised the Sponsor that it has insurance coverage up to a certain amount that could be used to repay losses of the digital assets it custodies on behalf of its clients, including the Trust’s bitcoin, resulting from theft, Shareholders cannot be assured that the Bitcoin Custodian will maintain adequate insurance, that such coverage will cover losses with respect to the Trust’s bitcoins, or that sufficient insurance proceeds will be available to cover the Trust’s losses in full. The Bitcoin Custodian’s insurance may not cover the type of losses experienced by the Trust. Alternatively, the Trust may be forced to share such insurance proceeds with other clients or customers of the Bitcoin Custodian, which could reduce the amount of such proceeds that are available to the Trust. In addition, the bitcoin insurance market is limited, and the level of insurance maintained by the Bitcoin Custodian may be substantially lower than the assets of the Trust. While the Bitcoin Custodian maintains certain capital reserve requirements depending on the assets under custody, and such capital reserves may provide additional means to cover client asset losses, the Trust cannot be assured that the Bitcoin Custodian will maintain capital reserves sufficient to cover actual or potential losses with respect to the Trust’s digital assets. 67 Furthermore, under the Custodian Agreement and the Prime Execution Agent Agreement, the Bitcoin Custodian’s liability and the Prime Execution Agent’s liability is limited in various ways. By way of example, the Bitcoin Custodian is not liable for delays, suspension of operations, failure in performance, or interruption of service to the extent it is directly due to a cause or condition beyond the reasonable control of the Bitcoin Custodian. In the event of potential losses incurred by the Trust as a result of the Bitcoin Custodian losing control of the Trust’s bitcoins or failing to properly execute instructions on behalf of the Trust, the Bitcoin Custodian’s liability with respect to the Trust will be subject to certain limitations which may allow it to avoid liability for potential losses or may be insufficient to cover the value of such potential losses. Furthermore, the insurance maintained by the Bitcoin Custodian may be insufficient to cover its liabilities to the Trust. Both the Trust and the Bitcoin Custodian are required to indemnify each other under certain circumstances. Although the Bitcoin Custodian carries insurance for the benefit of its account holders, the Bitcoin Custodian’s insurance does not cover any loss in value to bitcoin and only covers losses caused by certain events such as fraud or theft and, in such covered events, it is unlikely the insurance would cover the full amount of any losses incurred by the Trust. The Bitcoin Custodian maintains a commercial crime insurance policy, which is intended to cover the loss of client assets held in cold storage, including from employee collusion or fraud, physical loss including theft, damage of key material, security breach or hack, and fraudulent transfer. The insurance maintained by the Bitcoin Custodian is shared among all of the Bitcoin Custodian’s customers, is not specific to the Trust or to customers holding bitcoin with the Bitcoin Custodian, and may not be available or sufficient to protect the Trust from all possible losses or sources of losses. Moreover, in the event of an insolvency or bankruptcy of the Prime Execution Agent or Bitcoin Custodian in the future, given that the contractual protections and legal rights of customers with respect to digital assets held on their behalf by third parties are relatively untested in a bankruptcy of an entity such as the Prime Execution Agent or Bitcoin Custodian in the virtual currency industry, there is a risk that customers’ assets - including the Trust’s assets - may be considered the property of the bankruptcy estate of the Bitcoin Custodian, and customers - including the Trust - may be at risk of being treated as general unsecured creditors of such entities and subject to the risk of total loss or markdowns on value of such assets. The Custody Agreement contains an agreement by the parties to treat the bitcoin credited to the Trust’s Vault Balance as financial assets under Article 8 of the New York Uniform Commercial Code (“Article 8”), in addition to stating that the Bitcoin Custodian will serve as fiduciary and custodian on the Trust’s behalf. It is possible that a court would not treat custodied digital assets as part of the Bitcoin Custodian’s general estate in the event the Bitcoin Custodian were to experience insolvency. However, due to the novelty of digital asset custodial arrangements courts have not yet considered this type of treatment for custodied digital assets and it is not possible to predict with certainty how they would rule in such a scenario. If the Bitcoin Custodian became subject to insolvency proceedings and a court were to rule that the custodied bitcoin were part of the Bitcoin Custodian’s general estate and not the property of the Trust, then the Trust would be treated as a general unsecured creditor in the Bitcoin Custodian’s insolvency proceedings and the Trust could be subject to the loss of all or a significant portion of its assets. Moreover, in the event of the bankruptcy of the Bitcoin Custodian, an automatic stay could go into effect and protracted litigation could be required in order to recover the assets held with the Bitcoin Custodian, all of which could significantly and negatively impact the Trust’s operations and the value of the Shares. With respect to the Prime Execution Agent Agreement, there is a risk that the Trading Balance, in which the Trust’s bitcoin and cash is held in omnibus accounts by the Prime Execution Agent could be considered part of the Prime Execution Agent’s bankruptcy estate in the event of the Prime Execution Agent’s bankruptcy. The Prime Execution Agent Agreement contains an Article 8 opt-in clause with respect to the Trust’s assets held in the Trading Balance. The Prime Execution Agent is not required to hold any of the bitcoin or cash in the Trust’s Trading Balance in segregation. Within the Trading Balance, the Prime Execution Agent Agreement provides that the Trust does not have an identifiable claim to any particular bitcoin (and cash). Instead, the Trust’s Trading Balance represents an entitlement to a pro rata share of the bitcoin (and cash) the Prime Execution Agent has allocated to the omnibus wallets the Prime Execution Agent holds, as well as the accounts in the Prime Execution Agent’s name that the Prime Execution Agent maintains at a connected trading venue (each, a “Connected Trading Venue”) (which are typically held on an omnibus, rather than segregated, basis). If the Prime Execution Agent suffers an insolvency event, there is a risk that the Trust’s assets held in the Trading Balance could be considered part of the Prime Execution Agent’s bankruptcy estate and the Trust could be treated as a general unsecured creditor of the Prime Execution Agent, which could result in losses for the Trust and Shareholders. Moreover, in the event of the bankruptcy of the Prime Execution Agent, an automatic stay could go into effect and protracted litigation could be required in order to recover the assets held with the Prime Execution Agent, all of which could significantly and negatively impact the Trust’s operations and the value of the Shares. There are no policies that would limit the amount of bitcoin that can be held temporarily in the Trading Balance maintained by the Prime Execution Agent. 68 Under the Trust Agreement, the Trustee and the Sponsor are not be liable for any liability or expense incurred, including, without limitation, as a result of any loss of bitcoin by the Bitcoin Custodian, absent fraud, bad faith, or willful misconduct on the part of the Sponsor or the Trustee, as the case may be. As a result, the recourse of the Trust or the Shareholders to the Trustee or the Sponsor, including in the event of a loss of bitcoin by the Bitcoin Custodian, is limited. The Shareholders’ recourse against the Sponsor, the Trustee, and the Trust’s other service providers for the services they provide to the Trust, including, without limitation, those relating to the holding of bitcoin or the provision of instructions relating to the movement of bitcoin, is limited. For the avoidance of doubt, neither the Sponsor, the Trustee, nor any of their affiliates, nor any other party has guaranteed the assets or liabilities, or otherwise assumed the liabilities, of the Trust, or the obligations or liabilities of any service provider to the Trust, including, without limitation, the Bitcoin Custodian and Prime Execution Agent. The Prime Execution Agent Agreement and Custodian Agreement provide that neither the Sponsor, the Trustee, nor their affiliates shall have any obligation of any kind or nature whatsoever, by guaranty, enforcement or otherwise, with respect to the performance of any the Trust’s obligations, agreements, representations or warranties under the Prime Execution Agent Agreement or Custodian Agreement or any transaction thereunder. Consequently, a loss may be suffered with respect to the Trust’s bitcoin that is not covered by the Bitcoin Custodian’s insurance and for which no person is liability in damages. As a result, the recourse of the Trust or the Shareholders, under applicable law, is limited. If the Trade Credits are not available or become exhausted, the Trust may face delays in buying or selling bitcoin that may adversely impact Shareholders; if the Trust does not repay the Trade Credits on time, its assets may be liquidated by the Trade Credit Lender and its affiliates. To avoid having to pre-fund purchases or sales of bitcoin in connection with cash creations and redemptions and sales of bitcoin to pay the Sponsor’s Fee and any other Trust expenses not assumed by the Sponsor, to the extent applicable, the Trust may acquire Trade Credits from Coinbase Credit, Inc. (the “Trade Credit Lender”) on a short-term basis pursuant to the Coinbase Trade Financing Agreement (the “Trade Financing Agreement”). The Trade Credit Lender is only required to extend Trade Credits to the Trust to the extent such bitcoin or cash is actually available to the Trade Credit Lender and only up to the amount available to the Trust. To the extent that Trade Credits are not available or become exhausted, (1) there may be delays in the buying and selling of bitcoin related to cash creations and redemptions or the selling of bitcoin related to paying the Sponsor’s Fee and any other Trust expenses, to the extent applicable, (2) Trust assets may be in held the Trading Balance for a longer duration than if Trade Credits were available, and (3) the execution price associated with such trades may deviate significantly from the Reference Rate used to determine the net asset value of the Trust. To the extent that the execution price for purchases and sales of bitcoin related to creations and redemptions and sales of bitcoin in connection with paying the Sponsor’s Fee and any other Trust expenses deviate significantly from the Reference Rate used to determine the net asset value of the Trust, the Shareholders may be negatively impacted because the added costs of such price deviations would be incurred by the Authorized Participants and may be passed onto the Shareholders in the secondary market. Moreover, this risk factor relating to the unavailability or exhaustion of the Trade Credits should be interpreted as a heightened risk as a result of the change from the originally contemplated in-kind creations and redemptions to cash creations and redemptions. The Trust generally must repay Trade Credits by 6:00 p.m. ET (the “Settlement Deadline”) on the calendar day immediately following the day the Trade Credit was extended by the Trade Credit Lender to the Trust (or, if such day is not a business day, on the next business day). Pursuant to the Trade Financing Agreement, the Trust has granted a security interest, lien on, and right of set off against all of the Trust’s right, title and interest, in the Trust’s Trading Balance and Vault Balance established pursuant to the Prime Execution Agent Agreement and Custodian Agreement, in order to secure the repayment by the Trust of the Trade Credits and financing fees to the Trade Credit Lender. Under a variety of circumstances, including events of default, the Bitcoin Custodian and the Prime Execution Agent have agreed to comply with instructions from the Trade Credit Lender with respect to the disposition of the assets in the Trust’s Vault Balance and Trading Balance respectively without further consent by the Trust. If the Trust fails to repay the Trade Credits to the Trade Credit Lender on time and in full, the Trade Credit Lender can take control of the Trust’s assets and liquidate them to repay the Trade Credit debt owed by the Trust to the Trade Credit Lender. 69 Loss of a critical banking relationship for, or the failure of a bank used by, the Trust could adversely impact the Trust’s ability to create or redeem Creation Baskets, or could cause losses to the Trust. The Cash Custodian is necessary to facilitate the creation and redemption of Baskets (in exchange for cash subscriptions by Authorized Participants, or in exchange for redemptions of Shares by Authorized Participants), and other cash movements, including in connection with the purchase of bitcoin by the Sponsor to effectuate subscriptions for cash and the selling of bitcoin to effect redemptions for cash or pay the Sponsor Fee and, to the extent applicable, other Trust expenses, and in extraordinary circumstances, to effect the liquidation of the Trust’s bitcoin. The Trust relies on the Cash Custodian or Prime Execution Agent, as applicable, to hold any cash related to the purchase or sale of bitcoin. To the extent that the Trust or Sponsor face difficulty establishing or maintaining banking relationships, the loss of the Trust’s banking partners, including the Cash Custodian, the Prime Execution Agent faces difficulty establishing or maintaining banking relationships, or there is an imposition of operational restrictions by these banking partners with the inability for the Trust to utilize other financial institutions, this may result in a disruption of creation and redemption activity of the Trust, or cause other operational disruptions or adverse effects for the Trust. In the future, it is possible that the Trust or Prime Execution Agent could be unable to establish accounts at new banking partners or establish new banking relationships, or that the banks with which the Trust or Prime Execution Agent is able to establish relationships may not be as large or well-capitalized or subject to the same degree of prudential supervision as the existing providers. The Trust could also suffer losses in the event that a bank in which the Trust holds customer cash, including the cash associated with the Trust’s account at the Cash Custodian, or a bank used by the Prime Execution Agent, fails, becomes insolvent, enters receivership, is taken over by regulators, enters financial distress, or otherwise suffers adverse effects to its financial condition or operational status. Recently, some banks have experienced financial distress. If the Cash Custodian or Prime Execution Agent (or banks it relies on) were to experience financial distress or its financial condition is otherwise affected, the Cash Custodian’s or Prime Execution Agent’s ability to provide services to the Trust could be affected. Moreover, the future failure of a bank at which the Trust maintains cash, could result in losses to the Trust, to the extent the balances are not subject to deposit insurance, notwithstanding the regulatory requirements to which the Cash Custodian or Prime Execution Agent is subject or other potential protections. As a result, the Trust could suffer losses. The Prime Execution Agent routes orders through Connected Trading Venues in connection with trading services under the Prime Execution Agent Agreement. The loss or failure of any such Connected Trading Venues may adversely affect the Prime Execution Agent’s business and cause losses for the Trust. In connection with trading services under the Prime Execution Agent Agreement, the Prime Execution Agent routinely routes customer orders to Connected Trading Venues, which are third-party platforms or other trading venues (including the trading venue operated by the Prime Execution Agent). In connection with these activities, the Prime Execution Agent may hold bitcoin with such Connected Trading Venues in order to effect customer orders, including the Trust’s orders. If the Prime Execution Agent were to experience a disruption in the Prime Execution Agent’s access to these Connected Trading Venues, the Prime Execution Agent’s trading services under the Prime Execution Agent Agreement could be adversely affected to the extent that the Prime Execution Agent is limited in its ability to execute order flow for its customers, including the Trust. In addition, while the Prime Execution Agent has policies and procedures to help mitigate the Prime Execution Agent’s risks related to routing orders through third-party trading venues, if any of these third-party trading venues experience any technical, legal, regulatory or other adverse events, such as shutdowns, delays, system failures, suspension of withdrawals, illiquidity, insolvency, or loss of customer assets, the Prime Execution Agent might not be able to fully recover the customer’s bitcoin that the Prime Execution Agent has deposited with these third parties. As a result, the Prime Execution Agent’s business, operating results and financial condition could be adversely affected, potentially resulting in its failure to provide services to the Trust or perform its obligations under the Prime Execution Agent Agreement, and the Trust could suffer resulting losses or disruptions to its operations. The failure of a Connected Trading Venue at which the Prime Execution Agent maintains customer bitcoin, including bitcoin associated with the Trust, could result in losses to the Trust, notwithstanding the regulatory requirements to which the Prime Execution Agent is subject or other potential protections. 70 The lack of active trading markets for the Shares of the Trust may result in losses on Shareholders’ investments at the time of disposition of Shares. Although Shares of the Trust are publicly listed and traded on the Exchange, there can be no guarantee that an active trading market for the Trust will develop or be maintained. If Shareholders need to sell their Shares at a time when no active market for them exists, the price Shareholders receive for their Shares, assuming that Shareholders are able to sell them, likely will be lower than the price that Shareholders would receive if an active market did exist and, accordingly, a Shareholder may suffer losses. Possible illiquid markets may exacerbate losses or increase the variability between the Trust’s NAV and its market price. Bitcoin is a relatively new asset with limited trading history. Therefore, the markets for bitcoin may be less liquid and more volatile than other markets for more established products. It may be difficult to execute a bitcoin trade at a specific price when there is a relatively small volume of buy and sell orders in the bitcoin market. A market disruption can also make it more difficult to liquidate a position or find a suitable counterparty at a reasonable cost. Market illiquidity may cause losses for the Trust. The large size of the positions that the Trust may acquire will increase the risk of illiquidity by both making the positions more difficult to liquidate and increasing the losses incurred while trying to do so should the Trust need to liquidate its bitcoin, or making it more difficult for Authorized Participants to acquire or liquidate bitcoin as part of the creation and/or redemption of Shares of the Trust. Any type of disruption or illiquidity will potentially be exacerbated due to the fact that the Trust will typically invest in bitcoin, which is highly concentrated. Several factors may affect the Trust’s ability to achieve its investment objective on a consistent basis. There is no guarantee that the Trust will meet its investment objective. Factors that may affect the Trust’s ability to meet its investment objective include, without limitation: (1) Authorized Participants’ willingness and ability to purchase and sell bitcoin (or provide cash in relation thereto) in an efficient manner to effectuate creation and redemption orders; (2) transaction fees associated with the Bitcoin network; (3) the bitcoin market becoming illiquid or disrupted; (4) the Trust’s Share prices being rounded to the nearest cent and/or valuation methodologies; (5) the need to conform the Trust’s portfolio holdings to comply with investment restrictions or policies or regulatory or tax law requirements; (6) early or unanticipated closings of the markets on which bitcoin trades, resulting in the inability of Authorized Participants to execute intended portfolio transactions; (7) accounting standards; and (8) the Reference Rate becoming disrupted, unavailable or unreliable. The amount of bitcoin represented by the Shares will decline over time. The amount of bitcoin represented by the Shares will continue to be reduced during the life of the Trust due to the transfer of the Trust’s bitcoin to pay for the Sponsor Fee, and to pay for extraordinary fees and expenses. This dynamic will occur irrespective of whether the trading price of the Shares rises or falls in response to changes in the price of bitcoin. Each outstanding Share represents a fractional, undivided interest in the bitcoin held by the Trust. The Trust does not generate any income and transfers bitcoin to pay for the Sponsor Fee, and to pay for extraordinary fees and expenses. Therefore, the amount of bitcoin represented by each Share will gradually decline over time. This is also true with respect to Shares that are issued in exchange for additional deposits of bitcoin over time, as the amount of bitcoin required to create Shares proportionally reflects the amount of bitcoin represented by the Shares outstanding at the time of such creation unit being created. Assuming a constant bitcoin price, the trading price of the Shares is expected to gradually decline relative to the price of bitcoin as the amount of bitcoin represented by the Shares gradually declines. Shareholders should be aware that the gradual decline in the amount of bitcoin represented by the Shares will occur regardless of whether the trading price of the Shares rises or falls in response to changes in the price of bitcoin. 71 The development and commercialization of the Trust is subject to competitive pressures. The Trust and the Sponsor face competition with respect to the creation of competing products. The Sponsor’s competitors may have greater financial, technical and human resources than the Sponsor. These competitors may also compete with the Sponsor in recruiting and retaining qualified personnel. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be effective competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. Accordingly, the Sponsor’s competitors may commercialize a product involving bitcoin more rapidly or effectively than the Sponsor is able to, which could adversely affect the Sponsor’s competitive position, the likelihood that the Trust will achieve initial market acceptance and the Sponsor’s ability to generate meaningful revenues from the Trust. The Trust is an emerging growth company, and the Trust cannot be certain if the reduced disclosure requirements applicable to emerging growth companies will make the Shares less attractive to investors. The Trust is an emerging growth company, as defined in the JOBS Act, and may take advantage of certain exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies. The Trust cannot predict if investors will find the Shares less attractive because of the Trust’s reliance on these exemptions. If some investors find the Trust’s Shares less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for the Shares. In addition, under the JOBS Act, the Trust’s independent registered public accounting firm will not be required to attest to the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 for so long as it is an emerging growth company. For as long as the Trust takes advantage of the reduced reporting obligations, the information that the Trust provides its Shareholders may be different from information provided by other public companies. If the Trust issues all Shares registered or such registration expires, it could have to cease creating new Baskets until additional shares are registered for sale. Investors should be aware that if the Trust issues all Shares registered or such registration expires, it could have to cease creating new Baskets until additional shares are registered for sale. This could impact the trading price of the Trust’s Shares. Moreover, soon after new Baskets are created and sold under this Annual report, there is a possibility that the availability of newly created Shares may (or may not) affect the trading price of the Shares already issued, and both current Shareholders and purchasers of newly created Shares could be adversely affected by falling trading prices. Risk Factors Associated with Regulation As bitcoin and digital assets have grown in both popularity and market size, the U.S. Congress and a number of U.S. federal and state agencies have been examining the operations of digital asset networks, digital asset users and the digital asset spot market. Many of these state and federal agencies have brought enforcement actions and issued advisories and rules relating to digital asset markets. The U.S. Securities Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) has recently charged certain large US digital asset trading platforms of supporting trading and settlement of securities in violation of the US federal securities laws. Specifically, the SEC has alleged that these exchanges are operating as unregistered securities exchanges, brokers and clearing agencies. For example, on June 5, 2023, the SEC filed lawsuits against cryptocurrency exchanges Coinbase and Binance alleging, among other things, their operation of an unlicensed securities exchange. Although the SEC has not alleged that bitcoin is a security, the outcome of these enforcement actions and others may result in the substantial restructuring of the digital asset market in the United States. Moreover, until these actions are resolved, the structure of the digital asset market in the United States will remain subject to substantial regulatory risk, which may impact the demand for digital assets and the continued availability of existing exchanges and offerings. The U.S. Congress is also actively preparing new legislation to address certain market structure issues relating to digital assets and stablecoins. The outcome of this legislation is unknown. Both the outcome of the pending SEC enforcement actions and federal legislation are highly uncertain and may alter, perhaps to a materially adverse extent, the nature of an investment in the Shares and/or the ability of the Trust to continue to operate. 72 Although neither the SEC nor the CFTC has exerted direct authority over bitcoin or bitcoin spot trading activity, the SEC and CFTC have broad authority over the regulation of issuances of securities (including digital asset securities) and commodity interests (including derivative instruments utilizing or referencing digital assets). The SEC and CFTC’s engagement with the digital asset industry has had a material impact on the development of digital asset markets, including initial coin offerings, margin trading, regulated and unregulated derivatives markets, and decentralized finance markets. For example, the SEC has issued guidance as to the application of the securities laws to digital assets and initiated enforcement actions against certain digital asset issuers and offerings on the basis that such digital assets and offerings are securities under U.S. securities laws. In these actions, the SEC reasoned that the unregistered offer and sale of digital assets can, in certain circumstances, including ICOs, be considered an illegal public offering of securities. Similarly, the CFTC, together with the Department of Justice, has initiated enforcement actions against digital asset trading platforms relating to violations of the CEA, on the basis that such platforms engaged in illegal, off-exchange retail commodity transactions in digital assets and digital asset derivative transactions. Further enforcement actions against participants in the digital asset industry could have negative impacts the price of digital assets, including bitcoin. In August 2021, Gary Gensler, the Chairman of the SEC, stated that he believed investors using digital asset trading platforms are not adequately protected, and that activities on the platforms can implicate the securities laws, commodities laws and banking laws, raising a number of issues related to protecting investors and consumers, guarding against illicit activity, and ensuring financial stability. Chair Gensler expressed a need for the SEC to have additional authorities to prevent transactions, products, and platforms from “falling between regulatory cracks,” as well as for more resources to protect investors in “this growing and volatile sector.” Chair Gensler called for federal legislation centering on digital asset trading, lending, and decentralized finance platforms, seeking “additional plenary authority” to write rules for digital asset trading and lending. It is not possible to predict whether the U.S. Congress will grant additional authorities to the SEC or other regulators, what the nature of such additional authorities might be, how they might impact the ability of digital assets markets to function or how any new regulations that may flow from such authorities might impact the value of digital assets generally and bitcoin held by the Trust specifically. Subsequent to Chair Gensler’s assertions in August 2021, in April 2022, he announced that he instructed the SEC staff to work (i) to register and regulate digital asset platforms like securities exchanges; (ii) with the CFTC on how to jointly address digital asset platforms that trade both securities and non-securities; (iii) on segregating out digital asset platforms’ custody of customer assets, if appropriate; and (iv) on segregating out the market making functions of digital asset platforms, if appropriate. At the same time and continuing through the date of this Annual report, the U.S. Congress continues to consider and debate a variety of proposals regarding how digital assets should be characterized and regulated. In addition to the SEC’s actions targeting digital assets and trading platforms directly, the SEC has also targeted regulated investments that provide exposure to digital assets indirectly. For example, in a recent letter regarding the SEC’s review of proposed rule changes to list and trade shares of certain bitcoin-related investment vehicles on public markets, the SEC staff stated that it has significant investor protection concerns regarding the markets for digital assets, including the potential for market manipulation and fraud. In March 2018, it was reported that the SEC was examining as many as 100 investment funds with strategies focused on digital assets. The reported focus of the examinations is on the accuracy of risk disclosures to investors in these funds, digital asset pricing practices, and compliance with rules meant to prevent the theft of investor funds, as well as on information gathering so that the SEC can better understand new technologies and investment products. It has further been reported that some of these funds have received subpoenas from the SEC’s Enforcement Division. Additionally, the SEC’s Division of Examinations stated in its 2023 Examination Priorities Report that digital assets remain an examination priority. In particular, the SEC’s Division of Examinations intended to focus its examination on portfolio management of digital assets, safety of client funds and assets, pricing and valuation of client portfolios, compliance and internal controls, and supervision of employee outside business activities. OFAC has added digital currency addresses to the list of Specially Designated Nationals whose assets are blocked, and with whom U.S. persons are generally prohibited from dealing. Such actions by OFAC, or by similar organizations in other jurisdictions, may introduce uncertainty in the market as to whether bitcoin that has been associated with such addresses in the past can be easily sold. This “tainted” bitcoin may trade at a substantial discount to untainted bitcoin. Reduced fungibility in the bitcoin markets may reduce the liquidity of bitcoin and therefore adversely affect its price. 73 In December 2020, FinCEN, a bureau within the U.S. Treasury Department, proposed a rule that would require financial institutions to submit reports, keep records, and verify the identity of customers for certain transactions to or from so-called “unhosted” wallets, also commonly referred to as self-hosted wallets. In May 2021, the U.S. Department of Treasury proposed new rules potentially requiring businesses to record transactions in digital assets that exceed $10,000 in value. It remains unclear if these proposed rules will ultimately be adopted. On March 9, 2022, President Biden signed an Executive Order on Ensuring Responsible Development of Digital Assets (the “Executive Order”), which outlined a unified federal regulatory approach to addressing the risks and benefits of digital assets. The Executive Order articulated various policy objectives related to digital assets, including investor protections, financial and national security risks, and responsible development and use of digital assets. The Executive Order directed federal government departments and agencies to produce various reports, frameworks, analyses, and regulatory and legislative recommendations to the Biden Administration. The policies and objectives of the Executive Order are broad, and, at this time, it is unclear what impact it may have on the regulation of bitcoin and other digital assets. The consequences of increased federal regulation of digital assets and digital asset activities could have a material adverse effect on the Trust and the Shares. If the Sponsor determines not to comply with such additional regulatory and registration requirements, it may seek to cease certain or all of the Trust’s operations. Any such action could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. The entire cryptocurrency industry experienced a significant drawdown in 2022, particularly throughout the latter half of the year. The decline was due to numerous factors, including a slowing macroeconomic environment, rising interest rates, expiring pandemic financial assistance, and the public collapse of several major industry participants, including Three Arrows Capital, Voyager, Celsius, and most recently, FTX and Genesis. The cryptocurrency industry’s turbulent drawdown in 2022 is expected to draw increased regulatory scrutiny from the U.S. Congress, SEC, and CFTC in the remainder of 2023 and beyond. Under regulations from the NYDFS, businesses involved in certain digital asset business activity involving New York or a New York resident must apply for a license, commonly known as a BitLicense, from the NYDFS and must comply with anti-money laundering, cyber security, consumer protection, and financial and reporting requirements, among others. As an alternative to a BitLicense, a firm can apply for a charter to become a limited purpose trust company under New York law qualified to engage in digital asset business activity. Other states have considered or approved digital asset business activity statutes or rules, passing, for example, regulations or guidance indicating that certain digital asset business activities constitute money transmission requiring licensure. The regulation of digital asset activity under state money transmission laws varies substantially. Differences between state regimes increase the complexity and compliance burden of operating digital asset businesses across the U.S., which may affect consumer adoption of bitcoin and its price. In an attempt to address these issues, the Uniform Law Commission passed a model law in July 2017, the Uniform Regulation of Virtual Currency Businesses Act, which has many similarities to the BitLicense and features a multistate reciprocity licensure feature, wherein a business licensed in one state could apply for accelerated licensure procedures in other states. As of 2023, only Rhode Island has adopted the model law, while three other states have introduced it. It is still unclear; however, how many states will ultimately adopt some or all of the model legislation. In June 2021, the government of El Salvador announced and passed legislation that identified bitcoin as legal tender in El Salvador. Other South and Central American political leaders have indicated a desire to explore the issues relating to legal tender status for bitcoin. In April 2022, the government of the Central African Republic announced its adoption of bitcoin as legal tender in the Central African Republic. It is unclear whether the designation of bitcoin as legal tender in El Salvador, the Central African Republic, or any other country will impact the regulatory treatment of bitcoin in the United States, or whether other countries will adopt similar legislation. On February 15, 2022, Representative Warren Davidson introduced the “Keep Your Coins Act,” which is intended “[t]o prohibit Federal agencies from restricting the use of convertible virtual currency by a person to purchase goods or services for the person’s own use, and for other purposes.” That same day, Congressman Josh Gottheimer also announced a discussion draft of the “Stablecoin Innovation and Protection Act,” which is intended to define “qualified stablecoins” to differentiate them from “more volatile cryptocurrencies.” 74 On March 17, 2022, Senators Elizabeth Warren, Jack Reed, Mark Warner, and Jon Tester introduced the Digital Asset Sanctions Compliance Enhancement Act in an attempt to ensure blacklisted Russian individuals and businesses do not use cryptocurrency to evade economic sanctions. The bill does not come without controversy, however, as it “would place sweeping restrictions on persons who build, operate and use cryptocurrency networks even if they have no knowledge or intent to help anyone evade sanctions,” according to policy group Coin Center. On March 28, 2022, Representative Stephen Lynch, along with co-sponsors Jesús G. García, Rashida Tlaib, Ayanna Pressley, and Alma Adams, introduced H.R. 7231, the Electronic Currency and Secure Hardware Act (ECASH Act), which would direct the secretary of the U.S. Department of the Treasury (not the Federal Reserve) to develop and issue a digital analogue to the U.S. dollar, or “e-cash,” which is intended to “replicate and preserve the privacy, anonymity-respecting, and minimal transactional data-generating properties of physical currency instruments such as coins and notes to the greatest extent technically and practically possible,” all without requiring a bank account. E-cash would be legal tender, payable to the bearer and functionally identical to physical U.S. coins and notes, “capable of instantaneous, final, direct, peer-to-peer, offline transactions using secured hardware devices that do not involve or require subsequent or final settlement on or via a common or distributed ledger, or any other additional approval or validation by the United States Government or any other third-party payments processing intermediary,” including fully anonymous transactions, and “interoperable with all existing financial institutions and payment systems and generally accepted payments standards and network protocols, as well as other public payments programs.” On April 6, 2022, Senator Pat Toomey released a draft of his Stablecoin Transparency of Reserves and Uniform Safe Transactions Act, or Stablecoin TRUST Act. The draft bill contemplates a “payment stablecoin,” which is convertible directly to fiat currency by the issuer. Only an insured depositary institution, a money transmitting business (authorized by its respective state authority) or a new “national limited payment stablecoin issuer” would be eligible to issue payment stablecoins. Additionally, payment stablecoins would be exempt from the federal securities requirements, including the 1933 Act, the 1934 Act, and the 1940 Act. On June 7, 2022, Senators Kirsten Gillibrand and Cynthia Lummis introduced the “Responsible Financial Innovation Act,” which was drafted to “create a complete regulatory framework for digital assets that encourages responsible financial innovation, flexibility, transparency and robust consumer protections while integrating digital assets into existing law.” Importantly, the legislation would assign regulatory authority over digital asset spot markets to the CFTC and codify that digital assets that meet the definition of a commodity, such as bitcoin and ether, would be regulated by the CFTC. In 2023, Congress continued to consider several stand-alone digital asset bills, including a formal process to determine when digital assets will be treated as either securities to be regulated by the SEC or commodities under the purview of the CFTC, what type of federal/state regulatory regime will exist for payment stablecoins and the how the Bank Secrecy Act (“BSA”) will apply to cryptocurrency providers. The Financial Innovation and Technology for the 21st Century Act (“FIT for the 21st Century Act”) advanced through the House in a vote along bipartisan lines. The FIT for the 21st Century Act would require the SEC and the CFTC to jointly issue rules or guidance that would outline their process in delisting a digital asset that they deem inconsistent with the CEA, federal securities laws and the FIT for the 21st Century Act. The bill, in part, would also provide a certification process for blockchains to be recognized as decentralized, which would allow the SEC to challenge claims made by token issuers about meeting the outlined standards. Legislative efforts have also focused on setting criteria for stablecoin issuers and what rules will govern redeemability and collateral. The Clarity for Payment Stablecoins Act of 2023, as introduced by House Finance Committee Chair Patrick McHenry (the “McHenry bill”), would make it unlawful for any entity other than a permitted payment stablecoin issuer to issue a payment stablecoin. The McHenry bill would establish bank-like regulation and supervision for federal qualified nonbank payment stablecoin issuers. These requirements include capital, liquidity and risk management requirements, application of the Bank Secrecy Act and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act’s customer privacy requirements, certain activities limits, and broad supervision and enforcement authority. The McHenry bill would grant state regulators primary supervision, examination and enforcement authority over state stablecoin issuers, leaving the Federal Reserve Board with secondary, backup enforcement authority for “exigent” circumstances. The McHenry bill would also amend the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, the 1940 Act, the 1933 Act, the 1934 Act and the Securities Investor Protection Act of 1970 to specify that payment stablecoins are not securities for purposes of those federal securities laws. 75 Several other bills have advanced through Congress to curb crypto as a payment gateway for illicit activity and money laundering. The “Blockchain Regulatory Clarity Act” would provide clarity to the regulatory classification of digital assets, providing market certainty for innovators and clear jurisdictional boundaries for regulators by affirming that blockchain developers and other related service providers that do not custody customer funds are not money transmitters. The “Financial Technology Protection Act”, another bipartisan measure, would set up an independent Financial Technology Working Group to combat terrorism and illicit financing in cryptocurrency. The “Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act” aims to protect certain blockchain platforms from being designated as money-services businesses. Both acts advanced through the House with bipartisan support. In a similar effort to prevent money laundering and stop crypto-facilitated crime and sanctions violations, bipartisan legislation was introduced to require decentralized finance (“DeFi”) services to meet the same anti-money laundering and economic sanctions compliance obligations as other financial companies. DeFi generally refers to applications that facilitate peer-to-peer financial transactions that are recorded on blockchains. By design, DeFi provides anonymity, which can allow malicious and criminal actors to evade traditional financial regulatory tools. Noting that transparency and sensible rules are vital for protecting the financial system from crime, the “Crypto-Asset National Security Enhancement and Enforcement (CANSEE) Act” was introduced. The CANSEE Act would end special treatment for DeFi by applying the same national security laws that apply to banks and securities brokers, casinos and pawn shops, and other cryptocurrency companies like centralized trading platforms. DeFi services would be forced to meet basic obligations, most notably to maintain anti-money laundering programs, conduct due diligence on their customers, and report suspicious transactions to FinCEN. The continued evolution of federal, state and foreign government regulators and policymakers will continue to impact the viability and success of digital asset markets, broadly, and bitcoin, specifically. Future and current regulations by a United States or foreign government or quasi-governmental agency could have an adverse effect on an investment in the Trust. The regulation of bitcoin and related products and services continues to evolve, may take many different forms and will, therefore, impact bitcoin and its usage in a variety of manners. The inconsistent and sometimes conflicting regulatory landscape may make it more difficult for bitcoin businesses to provide services, including trading markets or platforms, which may impede the growth of the bitcoin economy and have an adverse effect on consumer adoption of bitcoin or the ability to trade bitcoin. Many state and federal agencies have brought enforcement actions or issued consumer advisories regarding the risks posed by digital assets to investors. There is a possibility of future regulatory change or actions altering, perhaps to a material extent, the nature of an investment in the Trust or the ability of the Trust to continue to operate. Additionally, changes to current regulatory determinations of bitcoin’s status as not being a security under U.S. federal law, changes to regulations surrounding bitcoin futures or related products, or actions by a United States or foreign government or quasi-governmental agency exerting regulatory authority over bitcoin, the Bitcoin network, bitcoin trading, bitcoin mining or related activities impacting other parts of the digital asset market, may adversely impact bitcoin and therefore may have an adverse effect on the value of your investment in the Trust. The Trust is not an investment company registered under the 1940 Act or the Commodity Exchange Act. While the Sponsor has indicated that the Trust will voluntarily comply with certain provisions of the 1940 Act, the Trust is not registered as an investment company under the 1940 Act and is not subject to the statutory requirements of the 1940 Act. Further, the Trust does not hold or trade in commodity interests regulated by the CEA, as administered by the CFTC and that neither the Sponsor nor the Trustee is subject to regulation by the CFTC as a commodity pool operator or a commodity trading advisor in connection with the operation of the Trust. Consequently, Shareholders will not have the statutory protections provided to investors in registered investment companies, CEA-regulated instruments or commodity pools. Future regulations may require the Trust or the Sponsor to become registered, which may cause the Trust to liquidate. Current and future legislation, SEC and CFTC rulemaking, and other regulatory developments may impact the manner in which bitcoin are treated for classification and clearing purposes. In particular, bitcoin in the future may be classified by the CFTC as a “commodity interest” under the CEA and certain transactions in bitcoin may be deemed to be commodity futures or bitcoin may be classified by the SEC as a “security” under U.S. federal securities laws. In the face of such developments, the required registrations and compliance steps may result in extraordinary, nonrecurring expenses to the Trust. If the Sponsor decides to terminate the Trust in response to the changed regulatory circumstances, the Trust may be dissolved or liquidated at a time that is disadvantageous to Shareholders. 76 The SEC has stated that certain digital assets may be considered “securities” under the federal securities laws. The test for determining whether a particular digital asset is a “security” is complex and the outcome is difficult to predict. If bitcoin is determined to be a “security” under federal or state securities laws by the SEC or any other agency, or in a proceeding in a court of law or otherwise, such a determination may have material adverse consequences for bitcoin as a digital asset. For example, it may become more difficult for bitcoin to be traded, cleared and custodied as compared to other digital assets that are not considered to be securities, which could in turn negatively affect the liquidity and general acceptance of bitcoin and cause users to migrate to other digital assets. To the extent that bitcoin is determined to be a security, the Trust and the Sponsor may also be subject to additional regulatory requirements, including under the 1940 Act, and the Sponsor may be required to register as an investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. If the Sponsor determines not to comply with such additional regulatory and registration requirements, the Sponsor will terminate the Trust. Any such termination could result in the liquidation of the Trust’s bitcoin at a time that is disadvantageous to Shareholders. To the extent that bitcoin is deemed to fall within the definition of a “commodity interest” under the CEA, the Trust and the Sponsor may be subject to additional regulation under the CEA and CFTC regulations. These additional requirements may result in extraordinary, recurring and/or nonrecurring expenses of the Trust, thereby materially and adversely impacting the Shares. If the Sponsor and/or the Trust determines not to comply with such additional regulatory and registration requirements, the Sponsor may terminate the Trust. Any such termination could result in the liquidation of the Trust’s bitcoin at a time that is disadvantageous to Shareholders. Regulatory changes or interpretations of an Authorized Participant’s, the Trust’s or the Sponsor’s activities could result in extraordinary, recurring and/or nonrecurring expenses to the Authorized Participant, Trust or Sponsor or increased commissions for the Authorized Participant’s clients, thereby reducing the liquidity of the Shares. To the extent that the activities of any Authorized Participant, the Trust or the Sponsor cause it to be deemed a MSB under the regulations promulgated by FinCEN under the authority of the U.S. Bank Secrecy Act, such Authorized Participant, the Trust or the Sponsor may be required to comply with FinCEN regulations, including those that would mandate the Authorized Participant to implement anti-money laundering programs, make certain reports to FinCEN and maintain certain records. Similarly, the activities of an Authorized Participant, the Trust or the Sponsor may require it to be licensed as a money transmitter or as a digital asset business, such as under NYDFS’s BitLicense regulation. Such additional regulatory obligations may cause the Authorized Participant, the Trust or the Sponsor to incur extraordinary expenses. If the Authorized Participant, the Trust or the Sponsor decide to seek the required licenses, there is no guarantee that they will timely receive them. The Authorized Participant may also instead decide to terminate its role as Authorized Participant of the Trust, or the Sponsor may decide to terminate the Trust. Termination by the Authorized Participant may decrease the liquidity of the Shares, which may adversely affect the value of the Shares, and any termination of the Trust in response to the changed regulatory circumstances may be at a time that is disadvantageous to the Shareholders. Trading on bitcoin platforms outside the United States is not subject to U.S. regulation, and may be less reliable than U.S. exchanges, and regulatory changes or actions in foreign jurisdictions may impact the value of Shares. To the extent any of the Trust’s trading is conducted on bitcoin platforms outside the U.S., trading on such exchanges is not regulated by any U.S. governmental agency and may involve certain risks not applicable to trading on U.S. exchanges. Certain foreign markets may be more susceptible to disruption than U.S. exchanges. These factors could adversely affect the performance of the Trust. 77 Various foreign jurisdictions have, and may continue to adopt laws, regulations or directives that affect digital asset networks (including the Bitcoin network), the digital asset markets (including the bitcoin market), and their users, particularly digital asset platforms and service providers that fall within such jurisdictions’ regulatory scope. A number of foreign jurisdictions have recently taken regulatory action aimed at digital asset activities. Foreign laws, regulations or directives may conflict with those of the United States and may negatively impact the acceptance of one or more digital assets (including bitcoin) by users, merchants and service providers outside the United States and may therefore impede the growth or sustainability of the digital asset economy in the European Union, China, Japan, Russia and the United States and globally, or otherwise negatively affect the value of bitcoin. The effect of any future regulatory change on the Trust or bitcoin is impossible to predict, but such change could be adverse to the Trust and the value of the Shares. The Sponsor may need to find and appoint a replacement custodian or execution agent quickly, which could pose a challenge to the safekeeping of the Trust’s bitcoin and the Trust’s ability to continue to operate may be adversely affected. The Trust is dependent on the Bitcoin Custodian and Prime Execution Agent to operate. The Bitcoin Custodian performs essential functions in terms of safekeeping the Trust’s bitcoin in the Vault Balance and the Prime Execution Agent facilitates the buying and selling or settlement of bitcoin by the Trust in connection with cash creations and redemptions between the Trust and Authorized Participants, the selling of bitcoin to pay the Sponsor’s Fee, any other Trust expenses, to the extent applicable, other Trust expenses, and in extraordinary circumstances, to liquidate the Trust’s bitcoin. The Sponsor could decide to replace the Bitcoin Custodian as the custodian of the Trust’s bitcoin or the Prime Execution Agent to facilitate buying and selling or settlement of bitcoin or the Bitcoin Custodian or Prime Execution Agent could experience issues, exit the business or terminate its relationship with the Trust. If either entity fails to perform the functions they perform for the Trust, the Trust may be unable to operate or create or redeem Baskets, which could force the Trust to liquidate or adversely affect the price of the Shares. Transferring maintenance of any such responsibilities to another party will likely be complex and could subject the Trust’s bitcoin to the risk of loss during the transfer, which could have a negative impact on the performance of the Shares or result in loss of the Trust’s assets. The Sponsor may not be able to find another party willing to serve as the custodian or prime execution agent under the same terms as the current applicable agreement. To the extent that Sponsor is not able to find a suitable party willing to serve as the custodian or prime execution agent, the Sponsor may be required to terminate the Trust and liquidate the Trust’s bitcoin. In addition, to the extent that the Sponsor finds a suitable party but must enter into a modified servicing agreement that is less favorable for the Trust or Sponsor, the value of the Shares could be adversely affected. On March 22, 2023, the Prime Execution Agent and ultimate parent of the Bitcoin Custodian (such parent, “Coinbase Global” and together with the other named subsidiary of Coinbase Global, the “Relevant Coinbase Entities”) received a “Wells Notice” from the SEC staff stating that the SEC staff made a “preliminary determination” to recommend that the SEC file an enforcement action against the Relevant Coinbase Entities alleging violations of the federal securities laws, including the 1934 Act and the 1933 Act. According to Coinbase Global’s public reporting company disclosure, based on discussions with the SEC staff, the Relevant Coinbase Entities believe these potential enforcement actions would relate to aspects of the Relevant Coinbase Entities’ Coinbase Prime service via the Prime Execution Agent, spot market, staking service Coinbase Earn, and Coinbase Wallet, and the potential civil action may seek injunctive relief, disgorgement, and civil penalties. On June 6, 2023, the SEC filed a complaint against the Relevant Coinbase Entities in federal district court in the Southern District of New York, alleging, inter alia: (i) that Coinbase Inc. has violated the 1934 Act by failing to register with the SEC as a national securities exchange, broker-dealer, and clearing agency, in connection with activities involving certain identified digital assets that the SEC’s complaint alleges are securities, (ii) that Coinbase Inc. has violated the 1934 Act by failing to register with the SEC the offer and sale of its staking program, and (iii) that Coinbase Global is jointly and severally liable as a control person under the 1934 Act for Coinbase Inc.’s violations of the 1934 Act to the same extent as Coinbase Inc. The SEC’s complaint against the Relevant Coinbase Entities does not allege that bitcoin is a security nor does it allege that Coinbase Inc’s activities involving bitcoin caused the alleged registration violations, and the Bitcoin Custodian was not named as a defendant. The SEC’s complaint seeks a permanent injunction against the Relevant Coinbase Entities to prevent them from violations of the 1934 Act or 1933 Act, disgorgement, civil monetary penalties, and such other relief as the court deems appropriate or necessary. While the Bitcoin Custodian is not named in the complaint, if Coinbase Global, as the ultimate parent of the Bitcoin Custodian, is required, as a result of a judicial determination, or could choose, to restrict or curtail the services its subsidiaries provide to the Trust, or its financial condition is negatively affected, it could negatively affect the Trust’s ability to operate. 78 The Sponsor may not be able to find a party willing to serve as the custodian of the Trust’s bitcoin or as the Trust’s prime execution agent under the same terms as the current Custodian Agreement or agreement with prime execution agent or at all. To the extent that Trustee is not able to find a suitable party willing to serve as the custodian or prime execution agent, it may be necessary to terminate the Trust and liquidate the Trust’s bitcoin. In addition, to the extent that the Sponsor finds a suitable party but must enter into a modified Custodian Agreement or modified agreement with prime execution agent that is less favorable for the Trust, the value of the Shares could be adversely affected. If the Trust is unable to find a replacement prime execution agent, its operations could be adversely affected. The Trust Administrator calculates the NAV using the value of the bitcoin holdings and bitcoin holdings per Share, and any errors, discontinuance or changes in such valuation calculations may have an adverse effect on the value of the Shares. The Trust Administrator calculates the Trust’s NAV using the value of the Trust’s bitcoin holdings and bitcoin holdings per Share on a daily basis as soon as practicable after 4:00 p.m. ET on each business day. The NAV is generally calculated utilizing the Reference Rate, calculated at 4:00 p.m. ET on such day. To the extent that the bitcoin holdings or bitcoin holdings per Share are incorrectly calculated, the Trust Administrator may not be liable for any error and such misreporting of valuation data could adversely affect the value of the Shares. The value of the Shares will be adversely affected if the Trust is required to indemnify the Sponsor, the Trustee, the Trust Administrator Transfer Agent, the Bitcoin Custodian or the Cash Custodian under the Trust documents. Under the Trust documents, each of the Sponsor, the Trustee, the Trust Administrator, the Transfer Agent, the Bitcoin Custodian and the Cash Custodian has a right to be indemnified by the Trust for certain liabilities or expenses that it incurs without bad faith and/or willful misconduct on its part. Therefore, such obligation(s) may require that the assets of the Trust be sold in order to cover losses or liability suffered by it. Any sale of that kind would reduce the bitcoin holdings of the Trust and the value of the Shares. Intellectual property rights claims may adversely affect the Trust and the value of the Shares. The Sponsor is not aware of any intellectual property rights claims that may prevent the Trust from operating and holding bitcoin. However, third parties may assert intellectual property rights claims relating to the operation of the Trust and the mechanics instituted for the investment in, holding of and transfer of bitcoin. Regardless of the merit of an intellectual property or other legal action, any legal expenses to defend or payments to settle such claims would be extraordinary expenses that would be borne by the Trust through the sale or transfer of its bitcoin. Additionally, a meritorious intellectual property rights claim could prevent the Trust from operating and force the Sponsor to terminate the Trust and liquidate its bitcoin. As a result, an intellectual property rights claim against the Trust could adversely affect the value of the Shares. Risk Factors Associated with Taxation Shareholders could incur a tax liability without an associated distribution of the Trust. In the normal course of business, it is possible that the Trust could incur a taxable gain in connection with the sale of bitcoin (including deemed sales of bitcoin as a result of the Trust using bitcoin to pay its expenses) that is otherwise not associated with a distribution to Shareholders., In the event that purchases and sales of bitcoin occur, Shareholders may be subject to tax due to the grantor trust status of the Trust even though there is not a corresponding distribution from the Trust. 79 The tax treatment of bitcoin and transactions involving bitcoin for United States federal income tax purposes may change. Current IRS guidance indicates that bitcoin should be treated as property for U.S. federal income tax purposes and that transactions involving the exchange of bitcoin in return for goods and services should be treated as barter exchanges. Such guidance allows transactions in bitcoin held for investment to qualify for beneficial capital gains treatment. However, because bitcoin is a new technological innovation, the U.S. federal income tax treatment of an investment in bitcoin or in transactions relating to investments in bitcoin, including without limitation the tax treatment of a fork, may evolve and change from those described in this Annual report, possibly with retroactive effect. Any such change in the U.S. federal income tax treatment of bitcoin may have a negative effect on prices of bitcoin and may adversely affect the value of the Shares. In this regard, the IRS has indicated that it has made it a priority to issue additional guidance related to the taxation of virtual currency transactions, such as transactions involving bitcoin. While it has started to issue such additional guidance, whether any future guidance will adversely affect the U.S. federal income tax treatment of an investment in bitcoin or in transactions relating to investments in bitcoin is unknown. Moreover, future developments that may arise with respect to digital currencies may increase the uncertainty with respect to the treatment of digital currencies for U.S. federal income tax purposes. The tax treatment of bitcoin and transactions involving bitcoin for state and local tax purposes is not settled. Because bitcoin is a new technological innovation, the tax treatment of bitcoin for state and local tax purposes, including without limitation state and local income and sales and use taxes, is not settled. It is uncertain what guidance, if any, on the treatment of bitcoin for state and local tax purposes may be issued in the future. A state or local government authority’s treatment of bitcoin may have negative consequences, including the imposition of a greater tax burden on investors in bitcoin or the imposition of a greater cost on the acquisition and disposition of bitcoin generally. Any such treatment may have a negative effect on prices of bitcoin and may adversely affect the value of the Shares. Other Risk Factors The Exchange on which the Shares are listed may halt trading in the Trust’s Shares, which would adversely impact a Shareholder’s ability to sell Shares. The Trust’s Shares are listed for trading on the Exchange under the market symbol “BTCW.” Trading in Shares may be halted due to market conditions or, in light of the Exchange rules and procedures, for reasons that, in the view of the Exchange, make trading in Shares inadvisable. In addition, trading is subject to trading halts caused by extraordinary market volatility pursuant to “circuit breaker” rules that require trading to be halted for a specified period based on a specified market decline. Additionally, there can be no assurance that the requirements necessary to maintain the listing of the Trust’s Shares will continue to be met or will remain unchanged. The liquidity of the Shares may also be affected by the withdrawal from participation of Authorized Participants or other market participants, which could adversely affect the market price of the Shares. The Trust has a limited number of financial institutions that may act as Authorized Participants. In addition, there may be a limited number of market makers and/or liquidity providers in the marketplace. In the event that one or more Authorized Participants or market makers that have substantial interests in the Trust’s Shares withdraw, “step away” from participation, or have a business disruption or otherwise become unable or unwilling to participate, in the purchase (creation) or sale (redemption) of the Trust’s Shares, the liquidity of the Shares will likely decrease, which could adversely affect the market price of the Shares and result in Shareholders incurring a loss on their investment. The market infrastructure of the bitcoin spot market could result in the absence of active Authorized Participants able to support the trading activity of the Trust. Bitcoin is extremely volatile, and concerns exist about the stability, reliability and robustness of many bitcoin platforms. In a highly volatile market, or if one or more bitcoin platforms faces an issue, it could be extremely challenging for any Authorized Participant to provide continuous liquidity in the Shares. There can be no guarantee that the Sponsor will be able to find an Authorized Participant to actively and continuously support the Trust. 80 Bitcoin platforms are not subject to same regulatory oversight as traditional equity exchanges, which could negatively impact the ability of Authorized Participants to implement arbitrage mechanisms. The trading for bitcoin occurs on multiple trading venues that have various levels and types of regulation, but are not regulated in the same manner as traditional stock and bond exchanges. If these bitcoin platforms do not operate smoothly or face technical, security or regulatory issues, that could impact the ability of Authorized Participants to make markets in the Shares. In such an event, trading in the Shares could occur at a material premium or discount to the NAV. Shareholders that are not Authorized Participants may only purchase or sell their Shares in secondary trading markets, and the conditions and operational risks associated with trading in secondary markets may adversely affect Shareholders’ investment in the Shares. Only Authorized Participants may create or redeem Baskets. All other Shareholders that desire to purchase or sell Shares must do so through the Exchange or in other markets, if any, in which the Shares may be traded. Shares may trade at a premium or discount to the NAV per Share. Investors in Shares should note that while transferring Shares, specific risks should be noted. To generally initiate a transfer, a transaction must be signed using the private key of the asset holder. The private key should remain secret at all times. If the private key is not secured when in use, an asset holder risks their private key being obtained by third parties, including criminals, and risk losing all or some of their investment. Platforms are a popular venue for bitcoin investors to store assets and facilitate transactions with other participants. As with any financial transaction, investors in Shares need to ensure adequate controls are in place to authenticate themselves on these platforms. Failure to follow security best practices, including multifactor authentication (MFA), well-formed strong passwords and checks on the validity of platform URLs may risk unauthorized transfer and loss of assets. As the Sponsor and its management have limited history of operating investment vehicles like the Trust, their experience may be inadequate or unsuitable to manage the Trust. The past performances of the Sponsor’s management or affiliates of the Sponsor in other investment vehicles are no indication of their ability to manage an investment vehicle such as the Trust. If the experience of the Sponsor and its management is inadequate or unsuitable to manage an investment vehicle such as the Trust, the operations of the Trust may be adversely affected. Furthermore, management of the Sponsor is currently engaged in the management of, or are otherwise involved with the operations of, other investment vehicles which could divert their attention and resources. The Sponsor is leanly staffed and relies heavily on key personnel. The Sponsor is leanly staffed and relies heavily on key personnel to manage its activities. These key personnel allocate their time managing the Trust in a manner that they deem appropriate. If such key personnel were to leave or be unable to carry out their present responsibilities, it may have an adverse effect on the management of the Sponsor. The Trust is new, and if it is not profitable, the Trust may terminate and liquidate at a time that is disadvantageous to Shareholders. The Trust is new. If the Trust does not attract sufficient assets to remain viable, then the Trust could be terminated and liquidated at the direction of the Sponsor. Termination and liquidation of the Trust could occur at a time that is disadvantageous to Shareholders. When the Trust’s assets are sold as part of the Trust’s liquidation, the resulting proceeds distributed to Shareholders may be less than those that may be realized in a sale outside of a liquidation context. Shareholders may be adversely affected by redemption or creation orders that are subject to postponement, suspension or rejection under certain circumstances. 81 Shareholders do not have the rights enjoyed by investors in certain other vehicles and may be adversely affected by a lack of statutory rights and by limited voting and distribution rights. The Shares have limited voting and distribution rights. For example, Shareholders do not have the right to elect directors, the Trust may enact splits or reverse splits without Shareholder approval and the Trust is not required to pay regular distributions, although the Trust may pay distributions at the discretion of the Sponsor. An investment in the Trust may be adversely affected by competition from other ETFs focused on bitcoin. If the SEC were to approve other bitcoin ETFs in addition to the Trust, the Trust could fail to acquire substantial assets, initially or at all. The Trust’s bitcoin ETF competitors may also charge a substantially lower fee than the Sponsor’s Fee in order to achieve initial market acceptance and scale. Accordingly, the Trust’s bitcoin ETF competitors may commercialize a competing bitcoin ETF more rapidly or effectively than the Trust, which could adversely affect the Trust’s competitive position and the likelihood that the Trust will achieve initial market acceptance, and could have a detrimental effect on the scale and sustainability of the Trust. If the Trust fails to achieve sufficient scale due to competition, the Sponsor may have difficulty raising approximately $450 million in assets which would be sufficient to cover the costs associated with launching and maintaining the Trust and such shortfalls could impact the Sponsor’s ability to properly invest in robust ongoing operations and controls of the Trust to minimize the risk of operating events, errors, or other forms of losses to the Shareholders. In addition, the Trust may also fail to attract adequate liquidity in the secondary market due to such competition, resulting in a sub-standard number of Authorized Participants willing to make a market in the Shares, which in turn could result in a significant premium or discount in the Shares for extended periods and the Trust’s failure to reflect the performance of the price of bitcoin. An investment in the Trust may be adversely affected by competition from other investment vehicles focused on bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies. The Trust competes with direct investments in bitcoin, other digital assets and other potential financial vehicles, possibly including securities backed by or linked to cryptocurrency and other investment vehicles that focus on other digital assets. Market and financial conditions, and other conditions beyond the Trust’s control, may make it more attractive to invest in other vehicles, which could adversely affect the performance of the Trust. In addition, a failure of any competitive bitcoin ETF or similar trust or other instrument could have negative consequences with respect to the price of bitcoin generally or interest in bitcoin ETFs. Coinbase serves as the bitcoin custodian and prime execution agent for several competing exchange-traded bitcoin products, which could adversely affect the Trust’s operations and ultimately the value of the Shares. The Prime Execution Agent and Bitcoin Custodian are both affiliates of Coinbase Global. As of the date hereof, Coinbase Global is the largest publicly traded digital asset company in the world by market capitalization and is also the largest digital asset custodian in the world by assets under custody. By virtue of its leading market position and capabilities, and the relatively limited number of institutionally capable providers of digital asset brokerage and custody services, Coinbase serves as the bitcoin custodian and prime execution agent for several competing exchange-traded bitcoin products and, as such, plays a critical role in supporting the U.S. spot bitcoin exchange-traded product ecosystem. If Coinbase were to favor the interests of certain exchange-traded products over others, it could result in inadequate attention or comparatively unfavorable commercial terms to less favored products, which could adversely affect the Trust’s operations and ultimately the value of the Shares, particularly given the limited number of qualified alternative providers. Authorized Participants serve in a similar capacity on behalf of several, competing exchange-traded bitcoin products, which could adversely affect the value or availability of the Shares. Baskets may be created or redeemed only by Authorized Participants, but the Authorized Participants are not required or obligated to engage in the creation or redemption of Baskets. The Trust has a limited number of entities that may act as Authorized Participants, and the Authorized Participants act in a similar capacity for competing exchange-traded bitcoin products. To the extent one or more Authorized Participants chooses to transact with or favor the interests of certain exchange-traded bitcoin products over others, or such Authorized Participants exit the business or are unable to proceed with creation or redemption orders with respect to the Trust and no other Authorized Participant creates or redeems Baskets, the Shares may be more likely to trade at a premium or discount to NAV and potentially face trading halts or delisting. 82 Shareholders cannot be assured of the Sponsor’s continued services, the discontinuance of which may be detrimental to the Trust. Shareholders cannot be assured that the Sponsor will be able to continue to service the Trust for any length of time. If the Sponsor discontinues its activities on behalf of the Trust, the Trust may be adversely affected, as there may be no entity servicing the Trust for a period of time. Such an event could result in termination of the Trust and a liquidation of its bitcoin. Shareholders may be adversely affected by creation or redemption orders that are subject to postponement, suspension or rejection under certain circumstances. The Trust may, in its discretion, suspend the right of creation or redemption or may postpone the redemption or purchase settlement date, for (1) any period during which an emergency exists as a result of which the fulfillment of a purchase order or the redemption distribution is not reasonably practicable, or (2) such other period as the Sponsor determines to be necessary for the protection of the Shareholders of the Trust or if it is not feasible for Shares to be delivered or the redemption distribution to be made. In addition, the Trust may reject a redemption order if the order is not in proper form as described in the Authorized Participant Agreement or if the fulfillment of the order might be unlawful as determined by the Sponsor or its counsel. Any such postponement, suspension or rejection could adversely affect a redeeming Authorized Participant. Suspension of creation privileges may adversely impact how the Shares are traded and arbitraged on the secondary market, which could cause them to trade at levels materially different (premiums and discounts) from the fair value of their underlying holdings. Shareholders may be adversely affected by an overstatement or understatement of the NAV calculation of the Trust due to the valuation method employed on the date of the NAV calculation. In certain circumstances, the Trust’s bitcoin investments may be valued using techniques other than reliance on the price established by the Reference Rate. The value established by using the Reference Rate may be different from what would be produced through the use of another methodology. Bitcoin or other digital asset investments that are valued using techniques other than those employed by the Reference Rate, including bitcoin investments that are “fair valued,” may be subject to greater fluctuation in their value from one day to the next than would be the case if market-price valuation techniques were used. The liability of the Sponsor and the Trustee is limited, and the value of the Shares will be adversely affected if the Trust is required to indemnify the Trustee or the Sponsor. Under the Trust Agreement, the Trustee and the Sponsor are not liable, and have the right to be indemnified, for any liability or expense incurred absent willful misconduct on the part of the Trustee or the Sponsor or breach by the Sponsor of the Trust Agreement, as the case may be. As a result, the Sponsor may require the assets of the Trust to be sold in order to cover losses or liability suffered by it or by the Trustee. Any sale of that kind would reduce the NAV of the Trust and the value of its Shares. Extraordinary expenses resulting from unanticipated events may become payable by the Trust, adversely affecting an investment in the Shares. Extraordinary expenses of the Trust (for example, expenses relating to litigation) are not assumed by the Sponsor and are instead borne by the Trust and paid through the sale of the Trust’s bitcoins. Because the Trust does not generate any income, every time that it delivers bitcoins to the Sponsor for the Sponsor Fee or sells bitcoins for expenses such as extraordinary expenses, the number of bitcoins represented by each Share will gradually decrease over time. In addition, the Sponsor may, in its sole discretion, increase the Sponsor Fee or decrease the Sponsor-paid expenses which could result in a greater decline in the number of bitcoins that the Trust holds. Such changes could occur if the expenses of the Trust materially increase. For example, while the current Sponsor Fee is a unitary fee in which the Sponsor agrees to pay all the fee of the Trust’s service providers (except for extraordinary expenses), the Sponsor may unwind part of this unitary fee and have a service providers’ ( e.g. , custodian’s fee) charged directly to the Trust. In that case, the Sponsor would provide 60 days’ advance notice to Shareholders via a posting on the Trust’s website, prospectus supplement, post-effective amendment, through a current report on Form 8-K or in the Trust’s annual or quarterly reports. 83 Third parties may infringe upon or otherwise violate intellectual property rights or assert that the Sponsor has infringed or otherwise violated their intellectual property rights, which may result in significant costs and diverted attention. It is possible that third parties might utilize the Trust’s intellectual property or technology, including the use of its business methods and trademarks, without permission. However, the Trust may not have adequate resources to implement procedures for monitoring unauthorized uses of their trademarks, proprietary software and other technology. Also, third parties may independently develop business methods, trademarks or proprietary software and other technology similar to that of the Trust or claim that the Trust has violated their intellectual property rights, including their copyrights, trademark rights, trade names, trade secrets and patent rights. As a result, the Trust may have to litigate in the future to protect its trade secrets, determine the validity and scope of other parties’ proprietary rights, defend itself against claims that it has infringed or otherwise violated other parties’ rights, or defend itself against claims that its rights are invalid. Any litigation of this type, even if the Trust is successful and regardless of the merits, may result in significant costs, divert its resources from the Trust, or require it to change its proprietary software and other technology or enter into royalty or licensing agreements. Due to the increased use of technologies, intentional and unintentional cyber-attacks pose operational and information security risks. With the increased use of technologies such as the internet and the dependence on computer systems to perform necessary business functions, the Trust is susceptible to operational and information security risks. In general, cyber incidents can result from deliberate attacks or unintentional events. Cyber-attacks include, but are not limited to, gaining unauthorized access to digital systems for purposes of misappropriating assets or sensitive information, corrupting data, or causing operational disruption. Cyber-attacks may also be carried out in a manner that does not require gaining unauthorized access, such as causing denial-of-service attacks on websites. Cyber security failures or breaches of one or more of the Trust’s service providers (including, but not limited to, the Sponsor, Trust Administrator, Transfer Agent, the Bitcoin Custodian and the Cash Custodian), as well as Authorized Participants and market makers, have the ability to cause disruptions and impact business operations, potentially resulting in financial losses, the inability of the Shareholders to transact business, violations of applicable privacy and other laws, regulatory fines, penalties, reputational damage, reimbursement or other compensation costs, and/or additional compliance costs. In addition, substantial costs may be incurred in order to prevent any cyber incidents in the future. The Trust and its Shareholders could be negatively impacted as a result. While the Trust has established business continuity plans, there are inherent limitations in such plans. The Trust and its service providers are subject to certain operational risks. The Trust and its service providers, including the Sponsor, Trust Administrator, Transfer Agent, Bitcoin Custodian and Cash Custodian (as well as Authorized Participants and market makers) may experience disruptions that arise from human error, processing and communications errors, counterparty or third-party errors, or technology or systems failures, any of which may have an adverse impact on the Trust. Although the Trust and its service providers seek to mitigate these operational risks through their internal controls and operational risk management processes, these measures may not identify or may be inadequate to address all such risks. The Trust Agreement includes a provision that restricts the right of a beneficial owner of a statutory trust from bringing a derivative action. Under Delaware law, the right of a beneficial owner of a statutory trust (such as a Shareholder of the Trust) to bring a derivative action ( i.e. , to initiate a lawsuit in the name of a the statutory trust in order to assert a claim belonging to the statutory trust against a fiduciary of the statutory trust or against a third-party when the statutory trust’s management has refused to do so) may be restricted by the terms of the governing instrument of the statutory trust. The Trust Agreement provides that in addition to any other requirements of applicable law, no Shareholder shall have the right, power or authority to bring or maintain a derivative action, suit or other proceeding on behalf of the Trust unless two or more Shareholders who (i) are not affiliates of one another and (ii) collectively hold at least 10% of the outstanding Shares join in the bringing or maintaining of such action, suit or other proceeding. 84 Due to this additional requirement, a Shareholder attempting to bring or maintain a derivative action in the name of the Trust will be required to locate at least one other Shareholder with which it is not affiliated and together have sufficient Shares to meet the 10% threshold based on the number of Shares outstanding on the date the claim is brought and thereafter throughout the duration of the action, suit or proceeding. This may be difficult and may result in increased costs to a Shareholder attempting to seek redress in the name of the Trust in court. Moreover, if Shareholders bringing a derivative action, suit or proceeding pursuant to this provision of the Trust Agreement do not hold 10% of the outstanding Shares on the date such an action, suit or proceeding is brought, or such Shareholders are unable to maintain Share ownership meeting the 10% threshold throughout the duration of the action, suit or proceeding, such Shareholders’ derivative action may be subject to dismissal. As a result, the Trust Agreement limits the likelihood that a Shareholder will be able to successfully assert a derivative action in the name of the Trust, even if such Shareholder believes that he or she has a valid derivative action, suit or other proceeding to bring on behalf of the Trust. COVID-19 and measures intended to prevent its spread could have a material adverse effect on the Trust’s business and financial condition. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has adversely affected the economies of many nations and the entire global economy as well as individual issuers, assets and capital markets and could continue to, and other future public health emergencies could, have serious negative effects on social, economic and financial systems, including significant uncertainty and volatility in the digital asset markets. For example, digital asset prices, including bitcoin, decreased significantly in the first quarter of 2020 amidst broader market declines as a result of the COVID-19 outbreak. Future public health emergencies could result in an increase of the costs of the Trust and affect liquidity in the digital asset market, as well as the correlation between the price of the Shares and the net asset value of the Trust, any of which could adversely affect the value of the Shares. In addition, future public health emergencies could impair the information technology and other operational systems upon which the Trust’s service providers, including the Sponsor, the Trustee, the Delaware Trustee and the Custodians, rely, and could otherwise disrupt the ability of employees of the Trust’s service providers to perform essential tasks on behalf of the Trust. Governmental and quasi-governmental authorities and regulators throughout the world have at times responded to major economic disruptions with a variety of fiscal and monetary policy changes, including, but not limited to, direct capital infusions into companies and other issuers, new monetary tools and lower interest rates. An unexpected or sudden reversal of these policies, or the ineffectiveness of these policies, is likely to increase volatility in the digital asset markets, which could adversely affect the value of bitcoin and the price of the Shares. Further, future public health emergencies could also interfere with the operations of the Reference Rate or the Benchmark Administrator, which the Sponsor uses to value the bitcoin held by the trust calculate the net asset value of the Trust. The COVID-19 pandemic or other future public health emergencies could also cause the closure of futures exchanges, which could eliminate the ability of Authorized Participants to hedge purchases of Baskets, increasing trading costs of Shares and resulting in a sustained premium or discount in the Shares. Each of these outcomes would negatively impact the Trust.