PROSPECTUS

$522,979,000 (Approximate)

Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Trust 2025-5C5
(Central Index Key Number 0002063021)

as Issuing Entity

Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Securities, Inc.
(Central Index Key Number 0000850779)

as Depositor

Wells Fargo Bank, National Association

(Central Index Key Number 0000740906)

Argentic Real Estate Finance 2 LLC
(Central Index Key Number 0001968416)

Citi Real Estate Funding Inc.
(Central Index Key Number 0001701238)

UBS AG
(Central Index Key Number 0001685185)

Bank of Montreal

(Central Index Key Number 0000927971)

Greystone Commercial Mortgage Capital LLC

(Central Index Key number 0001931347)

Zions Bancorporation, N.A.

(Central Index Key number 0000109380)

BSPRT CMBS Finance, LLC
(Central Index Key Number 0001722518)

Natixis Real Estate Capital LLC

(Central Index Key Number 0001542256)

as Sponsors and Mortgage Loan Sellers

Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2025-5C5

Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Securities, Inc. is offering certain classes of the Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2025-5C5 consisting of the certificate classes identified in the table below. The certificates being offered by this prospectus (and the non-offered Class X-D, Class X-E, Class D, Class E, Class F-RR, Class G-RR and Class R certificates) represent the beneficial ownership interests in the issuing entity, which will be a New York common law trust named Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Trust 2025-5C5. The assets of the issuing entity will primarily consist of a pool of fixed rate commercial mortgage loans, which are generally the sole source of payments on the certificates. Credit enhancement will be provided solely by certain classes of subordinate certificates that will be subordinate to certain classes of senior certificates as described under “Description of the Certificates—Subordination; Allocation of Realized Losses”. Each class of certificates will be entitled to receive monthly distributions of interest and/or principal on the 4th business day following the 11th day of each month (or if the 11th day is not a business day, the next business day), commencing in August 2025. The rated final distribution date for the certificates is the distribution date in July 2058.

(Footnotes to this table begin on page 3)

The United States Securities and Exchange Commission and state regulators have not approved or disapproved of the offered certificates or passed upon the adequacy or accuracy of this prospectus. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal offense. Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Securities, Inc. will not list the offered certificates on any securities exchange or on any automated quotation system of any securities association.

The issuing entity will be relying on an exclusion or exemption from the definition of “investment company” under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, contained in Section 3(c)(5) of the Investment Company Act or Rule 3a-7 under the Investment Company Act, although there may be additional exclusions or exemptions available to the issuing entity. The issuing entity will not be relying upon Section 3(c)(1) or Section 3(c)(7) of the Investment Company Act as a basis for not registering under the Investment Company Act. The issuing entity is being structured so as not to constitute a “covered fund” for purposes of the Volcker Rule under the Dodd-Frank Act (both as defined in this prospectus).

The underwriters, Wells Fargo Securities, LLC, BMO Capital Markets Corp., Citigroup Global Markets Inc., UBS Securities LLC, Natixis Securities Americas LLC, Academy Securities, Inc., Drexel Hamilton, LLC and Siebert Williams Shank & Co., LLC, will purchase the offered certificates from Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Securities, Inc. and will offer them to the public at negotiated prices, plus, in certain cases, accrued interest, determined at the time of sale. Wells Fargo Securities, LLC, BMO Capital Markets Corp., Citigroup Global Markets Inc. and UBS Securities LLC are acting as co-lead managers and joint bookrunners in the following manner: Wells Fargo Securities, LLC is acting as sole bookrunning manager with respect to approximately 72.0% of each class of offered certificates, BMO Capital Markets Corp. is acting as sole bookrunning manager with respect to approximately 9.4% of each class of offered certificates and Citigroup Global Markets Inc. is acting as sole bookrunning manager with respect to approximately 18.6% of each class of offered certificates. Academy Securities, Inc., Drexel Hamilton, LLC, Natixis Securities Americas LLC, and Siebert Williams Shank & Co., LLC are acting as co-managers.

The underwriters expect to deliver the offered certificates to purchasers in book-entry form only through the facilities of The Depository Trust Company in the United States and Clearstream Banking, Luxembourg and Euroclear Bank, as operator of the Euroclear System, in Europe, against payment in New York, New York on or about July 30, 2025. Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Securities, Inc. expects to receive from this offering approximately 107.4% of the aggregate certificate balance of the offered certificates, plus accrued interest from July 1, 2025, before deducting expenses payable by the depositor.

Summary of Certificates

of certificates in the table and (b) the weighted average of the net mortgage interest rates on the mortgage loans for the related distribution date. For purposes of the calculation of the weighted average of the net mortgage interest rates on the mortgage loans for each distribution date, the mortgage interest rates will be adjusted as necessary to a 30/360 basis.

The Class X-D, Class X-E, Class D, Class E, Class F-RR, Class G-RR and Class R certificates are not offered by this prospectus. Any information in this prospectus concerning these certificates is presented solely to enhance your understanding of the offered certificates.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ANNEXES

Important Notice Regarding the Offered Certificates

WE HAVE FILED WITH THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION A REGISTRATION STATEMENT UNDER THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933, AS AMENDED, WITH RESPECT TO THE CERTIFICATES OFFERED IN THIS PROSPECTUS; HOWEVER, THIS PROSPECTUS DOES NOT CONTAIN ALL OF THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN OUR REGISTRATION STATEMENT. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION REGARDING THE DOCUMENTS REFERRED TO IN THIS PROSPECTUS, YOU SHOULD REFER TO OUR REGISTRATION STATEMENT AND THE EXHIBITS TO IT. OUR REGISTRATION STATEMENT AND THE EXHIBITS TO IT CAN BE OBTAINED ELECTRONICALLY THROUGH THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION’S INTERNET WEBSITE (HTTP://WWW.SEC.GOV).

THIS PROSPECTUS IS NOT AN OFFER TO SELL OR A SOLICITATION OF AN OFFER TO BUY THESE SECURITIES IN ANY STATE OR OTHER JURISDICTION WHERE SUCH OFFER, SOLICITATION OR SALE IS NOT PERMITTED.

THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES REFERRED TO IN THIS PROSPECTUS ARE OFFERED ON A “WHEN, AS AND IF ISSUED” BASIS.

THE UNDERWRITERS DESCRIBED IN THESE MATERIALS MAY FROM TIME TO TIME PERFORM INVESTMENT BANKING SERVICES FOR, OR SOLICIT INVESTMENT BANKING BUSINESS FROM, ANY COMPANY NAMED IN THESE MATERIALS. THE UNDERWRITERS AND/OR THEIR RESPECTIVE EMPLOYEES MAY FROM TIME TO TIME HAVE A LONG OR SHORT POSITION IN ANY CONTRACT OR CERTIFICATE DISCUSSED IN THESE MATERIALS.

THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS PROSPECTUS SUPERSEDES ANY PREVIOUS SUCH INFORMATION DELIVERED TO ANY PROSPECTIVE INVESTOR.

THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES DO NOT REPRESENT AN INTEREST IN OR OBLIGATION OF THE DEPOSITOR, THE SPONSORS, THE MORTGAGE LOAN SELLERS, THE MASTER SERVICER, THE SPECIAL SERVICER, THE TRUSTEE, THE OPERATING ADVISOR, THE ASSET REPRESENTATIONS REVIEWER, THE CERTIFICATE ADMINISTRATOR, THE DIRECTING CERTIFICATEHOLDER, THE RISK RETENTION CONSULTATION PARTY, THE UNDERWRITERS OR ANY OF THEIR RESPECTIVE AFFILIATES. NEITHER THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES NOR THE MORTGAGE LOANS ARE INSURED OR GUARANTEED BY ANY GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY OR INSTRUMENTALITY OR PRIVATE INSURER.

THERE IS CURRENTLY NO SECONDARY MARKET FOR THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES. THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES ARE A NEW ISSUE OF SECURITIES WITH NO ESTABLISHED TRADING MARKET AND WE CANNOT ASSURE YOU THAT A SECONDARY MARKET FOR THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES WILL DEVELOP. THE UNDERWRITERS ARE UNDER NO OBLIGATION TO MAKE A MARKET IN THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES AND MAY DISCONTINUE ANY MARKET MAKING ACTIVITIES AT ANY TIME WITHOUT NOTICE. IN ADDITION, THE ABILITY OF THE UNDERWRITERS TO MAKE A MARKET IN THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES MAY BE IMPACTED BY CHANGES IN REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO MARKETING, HOLDING AND SELLING OF, OR ISSUING QUOTATIONS WITH RESPECT TO, ASSET-BACKED SECURITIES GENERALLY. IF A SECONDARY MARKET DOES DEVELOP, WE CANNOT ASSURE YOU THAT IT WILL PROVIDE HOLDERS OF THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES WITH LIQUIDITY OF INVESTMENT OR THAT IT WILL CONTINUE FOR THE LIFE OF THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES. ACCORDINGLY, PURCHASERS MUST BE PREPARED TO BEAR THE RISKS OF THEIR INVESTMENTS FOR AN INDEFINITE PERIOD. SEE “RISK FACTORS—Other Risks Relating to the Certificates—The Certificates May Have Limited Liquidity and the Market Value of the Certificates May Decline” IN THIS PROSPECTUS.

Important Notice About Information Presented in this Prospectus

You should rely only on the information contained in this prospectus. We have not authorized anyone to provide you with information that is different from that contained in this prospectus. The information contained in this prospectus is accurate only as of the date of this prospectus.

This prospectus begins with several introductory sections describing the certificates and the issuing entity in abbreviated form:

This prospectus includes cross references to sections in this prospectus where you can find further related discussions. The table of contents in this prospectus identifies the pages where these sections are located.

Certain capitalized terms are defined and used in this prospectus to assist you in understanding the terms of the offered certificates and this offering. The capitalized terms used in this prospectus are defined on the pages indicated under the caption “Index of Defined Terms”.

All annexes and schedules attached to this prospectus are a part of this prospectus.

In this prospectus:

Until ninety days after the date of this prospectus, all dealers that buy, sell or trade the offered certificates, whether or not participating in this offering, may be required to deliver a prospectus. This is in addition to the dealers’ obligation to deliver a prospectus when acting as underwriters and with respect to their unsold allotments or subscriptions.

NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES

This prospectus presents a number of non-GAAP financial measures, including Underwritten Net Cash Flow as well as other terms used to measure and present information relating to operation and performance of the Mortgaged Properties that are commonly used in the commercial real estate and real estate finance industries. In addition, the presentation of Net Operating Income includes adjustments that reflect various non-GAAP measures.

As presented in this prospectus, these terms are measures that are not presented in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”). They are not measurements of financial performance under GAAP and should not be considered as alternatives to performance measures derived in accordance with GAAP or as alternatives to net income or cash flows from operating activities or as illustrative measures of liquidity. While some of these terms are widely-used within the commercial real estate and real estate finance industries, these terms have limitations as analytical tools, and investors should not consider them in isolation or as substitutes for analysis of results as if reported under GAAP.

The non-GAAP financial measures presented are not intended as alternatives to any measures of performance in conformity with GAAP. Investors should therefore not place undue reliance on non-GAAP financial measures or ratios calculated using those measures.

The SEC has adopted rules to regulate the use in filings with the SEC and public disclosures and press releases of non-GAAP financial measures that are derived on the basis of methodologies other than in accordance with GAAP. The non-GAAP financial measures presented in this prospectus may not comply with these rules.

NOTICE TO INVESTORS: EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AREA

PROHIBITION ON SALES TO EU RETAIL INVESTORS

THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES ARE NOT INTENDED TO BE OFFERED, SOLD OR OTHERWISE MADE AVAILABLE TO, AND SHOULD NOT BE OFFERED, SOLD OR OTHERWISE MADE AVAILABLE TO, ANY EU RETAIL INVESTOR IN THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AREA (THE “EEA”). FOR THESE PURPOSES (AND FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE FOLLOWING SECTION OF THIS PROSPECTUS), AN “EU RETAIL INVESTOR” MEANS A PERSON WHO IS ONE (OR MORE) OF THE FOLLOWING: (I) A RETAIL CLIENT, AS DEFINED IN POINT (11) OF ARTICLE 4(1) OF DIRECTIVE 2014/65/EU (AS AMENDED, “MIFID II”); OR (II) A CUSTOMER WITHIN THE MEANING OF DIRECTIVE (EU) 2016/97 (AS AMENDED), WHERE THAT CUSTOMER WOULD NOT QUALIFY AS A PROFESSIONAL CLIENT, AS DEFINED IN POINT (10) OF ARTICLE 4(1) OF MIFID II; OR (III) NOT A QUALIFIED INVESTOR (AN “EU QUALIFIED INVESTOR”), AS DEFINED IN ARTICLE 2 OF REGULATION (EU) 2017/1129 (AS AMENDED, THE “EU PROSPECTUS REGULATION”). CONSEQUENTLY NO KEY INFORMATION DOCUMENT REQUIRED BY REGULATION (EU) NO 1286/2014 (AS AMENDED, THE “EU PRIIPS REGULATION”) FOR OFFERING OR SELLING THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES OR OTHERWISE MAKING THEM AVAILABLE TO EU RETAIL INVESTORS IN THE EEA HAS BEEN PREPARED AND THEREFORE OFFERING OR SELLING THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES OR OTHERWISE MAKING THEM AVAILABLE TO ANY EU RETAIL INVESTOR IN THE EEA MAY BE UNLAWFUL UNDER THE EU PRIIPS REGULATION.

OTHER EEA OFFERING RESTRICTIONS

THIS PROSPECTUS IS NOT A PROSPECTUS FOR PURPOSES OF THE EU PROSPECTUS REGULATION. THIS PROSPECTUS HAS BEEN PREPARED ON THE BASIS THAT ANY OFFER OF OFFERED CERTIFICATES IN THE EEA WILL BE MADE ONLY TO A LEGAL ENTITY WHICH IS AN EU QUALIFIED INVESTOR. ACCORDINGLY, ANY PERSON MAKING OR INTENDING TO MAKE AN OFFER IN THE EEA OF OFFERED CERTIFICATES WHICH ARE THE SUBJECT OF THE OFFERING CONTEMPLATED IN THIS PROSPECTUS MAY ONLY DO SO WITH RESPECT TO EU QUALIFIED INVESTORS. NONE OF THE ISSUING ENTITY, THE DEPOSITOR OR ANY UNDERWRITER HAVE AUTHORIZED, NOR DO THEY AUTHORIZE, THE MAKING OF ANY OFFER OF OFFERED CERTIFICATES IN THE EEA OTHER THAN TO EU QUALIFIED INVESTORS.

MIFID II PRODUCT GOVERNANCE

ANY DISTRIBUTOR SUBJECT TO MIFID II THAT IS OFFERING, SELLING OR RECOMMENDING THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES IS RESPONSIBLE FOR UNDERTAKING ITS OWN TARGET MARKET ASSESSMENT IN RESPECT OF THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES AND DETERMINING APPROPRIATE DISTRIBUTION CHANNELS FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE MIFID II PRODUCT GOVERNANCE RULES UNDER COMMISSION DELEGATED DIRECTIVE (EU) 2017/593 (AS AMENDED, THE “DELEGATED DIRECTIVE”). NONE OF THE ISSUING ENTITY, THE DEPOSITOR OR (EXCEPT AS REGARDS ITSELF OR AGENTS ACTING ON ITS BEHALF, TO THE EXTENT RELEVANT) ANY UNDERWRITER MAKES ANY REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES AS TO A DISTRIBUTOR’S COMPLIANCE WITH THE DELEGATED DIRECTIVE.

EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AREA SELLING RESTRICTIONS

EACH UNDERWRITER, SEVERALLY BUT NOT JOINTLY, HAS REPRESENTED AND AGREED THAT IT HAS NOT OFFERED, SOLD OR OTHERWISE MADE AVAILABLE, AND WILL NOT OFFER, SELL OR OTHERWISE MAKE AVAILABLE, ANY OFFERED CERTIFICATES TO ANY

EU RETAIL INVESTOR (AS DEFINED ABOVE) IN THE EEA. FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS PROVISION, THE EXPRESSION “OFFER” INCLUDES THE COMMUNICATION IN ANY FORM AND BY ANY MEANS OF SUFFICIENT INFORMATION ON THE TERMS OF THE OFFER AND THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES SO AS TO ENABLE AN INVESTOR TO DECIDE TO PURCHASE OR SUBSCRIBE FOR THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES.

NOTICE TO INVESTORS: UNITED KINGDOM

PROHIBITION ON SALES TO UK RETAIL INVESTORS

THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES ARE NOT INTENDED TO BE OFFERED, SOLD OR OTHERWISE MADE AVAILABLE TO, AND SHOULD NOT BE OFFERED, SOLD OR OTHERWISE MADE AVAILABLE TO, ANY UK RETAIL INVESTOR IN THE UNITED KINGDOM (THE “UK”). FOR THESE PURPOSES (AND FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE FOLLOWING SECTION OF THIS PROSPECTUS), A “UK RETAIL INVESTOR” MEANS A PERSON WHO IS ONE (OR MORE) OF THE FOLLOWING: (I) A RETAIL CLIENT, AS DEFINED IN POINT (8) OF ARTICLE 2 OF COMMISSION DELEGATED REGULATION (EU) 2017/565, AS IT FORMS PART OF UK DOMESTIC LAW BY VIRTUE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION (WITHDRAWAL) ACT 2018 (AS AMENDED, THE “EUWA”) AND AS AMENDED; OR (II) A CUSTOMER WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE FINANCIAL SERVICES AND MARKETS ACT 2000 (AS AMENDED, THE “FSMA”) AND ANY RULES OR REGULATIONS MADE UNDER THE FSMA (SUCH RULES AND REGULATIONS AS AMENDED) TO IMPLEMENT DIRECTIVE (EU) 2016/97, WHERE THAT CUSTOMER WOULD NOT QUALIFY AS A PROFESSIONAL CLIENT, AS DEFINED IN POINT (8) OF ARTICLE 2(1) OF REGULATION (EU) NO 600/2014, AS IT FORMS PART OF UK DOMESTIC LAW BY VIRTUE OF THE EUWA AND AS AMENDED; OR (III) NOT A QUALIFIED INVESTOR (A “UK QUALIFIED INVESTOR”), AS DEFINED IN ARTICLE 2 OF REGULATION (EU) 2017/1129, AS IT FORMS PART OF UK DOMESTIC LAW BY VIRTUE OF THE EUWA AND AS AMENDED (THE “UK PROSPECTUS REGULATION”). CONSEQUENTLY NO KEY INFORMATION DOCUMENT REQUIRED BY REGULATION (EU) NO 1286/2014, AS IT FORMS PART OF UK DOMESTIC LAW BY VIRTUE OF THE EUWA AND AS AMENDED (THE “UK PRIIPS REGULATION”) FOR OFFERING OR SELLING THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES OR OTHERWISE MAKING THEM AVAILABLE TO UK RETAIL INVESTORS IN THE UK HAS BEEN PREPARED; AND THEREFORE OFFERING OR SELLING THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES OR OTHERWISE MAKING THEM AVAILABLE TO ANY UK RETAIL INVESTOR IN THE UK MAY BE UNLAWFUL UNDER THE UK PRIIPS REGULATION.

OTHER UK OFFERING RESTRICTIONS

THIS PROSPECTUS IS NOT A PROSPECTUS FOR PURPOSES OF THE UK PROSPECTUS REGULATION. THIS PROSPECTUS HAS BEEN PREPARED ON THE BASIS THAT ANY OFFER OF OFFERED CERTIFICATES IN THE UK WILL BE MADE ONLY TO A LEGAL ENTITY WHICH IS A UK QUALIFIED INVESTOR. ACCORDINGLY, ANY PERSON MAKING OR INTENDING TO MAKE AN OFFER IN THE UK OF OFFERED CERTIFICATES WHICH ARE THE SUBJECT OF THE OFFERING CONTEMPLATED IN THIS PROSPECTUS MAY ONLY DO SO WITH RESPECT TO UK QUALIFIED INVESTORS. NONE OF THE ISSUING ENTITY, THE DEPOSITOR OR ANY UNDERWRITER HAVE AUTHORIZED, NOR DO THEY AUTHORIZE, THE MAKING OF ANY OFFER OF OFFERED CERTIFICATES IN THE UK OTHER THAN TO UK QUALIFIED INVESTORS.

UK MIFIR PRODUCT GOVERNANCE

ANY DISTRIBUTOR SUBJECT TO THE FCA HANDBOOK PRODUCT INTERVENTION AND PRODUCT GOVERNANCE SOURCEBOOK (THE “UK MIFIR PRODUCT GOVERNANCE RULES”) THAT IS OFFERING, SELLING OR RECOMMENDING THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES IS

RESPONSIBLE FOR UNDERTAKING ITS OWN TARGET MARKET ASSESSMENT IN RESPECT OF THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES AND DETERMINING APPROPRIATE DISTRIBUTION CHANNELS. NONE OF THE ISSUING ENTITY, THE DEPOSITOR OR (EXCEPT AS REGARDS ITSELF OR AGENTS ACTING ON ITS BEHALF, TO THE EXTENT RELEVANT) ANY UNDERWRITER MAKES ANY REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES AS TO A DISTRIBUTOR’S COMPLIANCE WITH THE UK MIFIR PRODUCT GOVERNANCE RULES.

OTHER UK REGULATORY RESTRICTIONS

THE ISSUING ENTITY MAY CONSTITUTE A “COLLECTIVE INVESTMENT SCHEME” AS DEFINED BY SECTION 235 OF THE FSMA THAT IS NOT A “RECOGNIZED COLLECTIVE INVESTMENT SCHEME” FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE FSMA AND THAT HAS NOT BEEN AUTHORIZED, REGULATED OR OTHERWISE RECOGNIZED OR APPROVED. AS AN UNREGULATED SCHEME, THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES CANNOT BE MARKETED IN THE UK TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC, EXCEPT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FSMA.

THE DISTRIBUTION OF THIS PROSPECTUS (A) IF MADE BY A PERSON WHO IS NOT AN AUTHORIZED PERSON UNDER THE FSMA, IS BEING MADE ONLY TO, OR DIRECTED ONLY AT, PERSONS WHO (I) ARE OUTSIDE THE UK, OR (II) HAVE PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE IN MATTERS RELATING TO INVESTMENTS AND QUALIFY AS INVESTMENT PROFESSIONALS IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 19(5) OF THE FINANCIAL SERVICES AND MARKETS ACT 2000 (FINANCIAL PROMOTION) ORDER 2005 (AS AMENDED, THE “FINANCIAL PROMOTION ORDER”), OR (III) ARE PERSONS FALLING WITHIN ARTICLE 49(2)(A) THROUGH (D) (“HIGH NET WORTH COMPANIES, UNINCORPORATED ASSOCIATIONS, ETC.”) OF THE FINANCIAL PROMOTION ORDER, OR (IV) ARE PERSONS TO WHOM THIS PROSPECTUS MAY OTHERWISE LAWFULLY BE COMMUNICATED OR DIRECTED (ALL SUCH PERSONS TOGETHER BEING REFERRED TO AS “FPO PERSONS”); AND (B) IF MADE BY A PERSON WHO IS AN AUTHORIZED PERSON UNDER THE FSMA, IS BEING MADE ONLY TO, OR DIRECTED ONLY AT, PERSONS WHO (I) ARE OUTSIDE THE UK, OR (II) HAVE PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE OF PARTICIPATING IN UNREGULATED SCHEMES (AS DEFINED FOR PURPOSES OF THE FINANCIAL SERVICES AND MARKETS ACT 2000 (PROMOTION OF COLLECTIVE INVESTMENT SCHEMES) (EXEMPTIONS) ORDER 2001 (AS AMENDED, THE “PROMOTION OF COLLECTIVE INVESTMENT SCHEMES EXEMPTIONS ORDER”)) AND QUALIFY AS INVESTMENT PROFESSIONALS IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 14(5) OF THE PROMOTION OF COLLECTIVE INVESTMENT SCHEMES EXEMPTIONS ORDER, OR (III) ARE PERSONS FALLING WITHIN ARTICLE 22(2)(A) THROUGH (D) (HIGH NET WORTH COMPANIES, UNINCORPORATED ASSOCIATIONS, ETC.) OF THE PROMOTION OF COLLECTIVE INVESTMENT SCHEMES EXEMPTIONS ORDER, OR (IV) ARE PERSONS TO WHOM THE ISSUING ENTITY MAY LAWFULLY BE PROMOTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 4.12B OF THE FCA HANDBOOK CONDUCT OF BUSINESS SOURCEBOOK (ALL SUCH PERSONS, TOGETHER WITH FPO PERSONS, “RELEVANT PERSONS”).

THIS PROSPECTUS MUST NOT BE ACTED ON OR RELIED ON BY PERSONS WHO ARE NOT RELEVANT PERSONS. ANY INVESTMENT OR INVESTMENT ACTIVITY TO WHICH THIS PROSPECTUS RELATES, INCLUDING THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES, IS AVAILABLE ONLY TO RELEVANT PERSONS AND WILL BE ENGAGED IN ONLY WITH RELEVANT PERSONS.

POTENTIAL INVESTORS IN THE UK ARE ADVISED THAT ALL, OR MOST, OF THE PROTECTIONS AFFORDED BY THE UK REGULATORY SYSTEM WILL NOT APPLY TO AN INVESTMENT IN THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES AND THAT COMPENSATION WILL NOT BE AVAILABLE UNDER THE UK FINANCIAL SERVICES COMPENSATION SCHEME. 

UNITED KINGDOM SELLING RESTRICTIONS

EACH UNDERWRITER, SEVERALLY BUT NOT JOINTLY, HAS REPRESENTED AND AGREED THAT:

PROHIBITION ON SALES TO UK RETAIL INVESTORS

(A) IT HAS NOT OFFERED, SOLD OR OTHERWISE MADE AVAILABLE, AND WILL NOT OFFER, SELL OR OTHERWISE MAKE AVAILABLE, ANY OFFERED CERTIFICATES TO ANY UK RETAIL INVESTOR (AS DEFINED ABOVE) IN THE UK (AND FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS PROVISION, THE EXPRESSION “OFFER” INCLUDES THE COMMUNICATION IN ANY FORM AND BY ANY MEANS OF SUFFICIENT INFORMATION ON THE TERMS OF THE OFFER AND THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES SO AS TO ENABLE AN INVESTOR TO DECIDE TO PURCHASE OR SUBSCRIBE FOR THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES);

OTHER UK REGULATORY RESTRICTIONS

(B) IT HAS ONLY COMMUNICATED OR CAUSED TO BE COMMUNICATED AND WILL ONLY COMMUNICATE OR CAUSE TO BE COMMUNICATED AN INVITATION OR INDUCEMENT TO ENGAGE IN INVESTMENT ACTIVITY (WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 21 OF THE FSMA) RECEIVED BY IT IN CONNECTION WITH THE ISSUE OR SALE OF THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES IN CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH SECTION 21(1) OF THE FSMA DOES NOT APPLY TO THE ISSUING ENTITY OR THE DEPOSITOR; AND

(C) IT HAS COMPLIED AND WILL COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE FSMA WITH RESPECT TO ANYTHING DONE BY IT IN RELATION TO THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES IN, FROM OR OTHERWISE INVOLVING THE UK.

EU SECURITIZATION RULES AND UK SECURITIZATION RULES

NONE OF THE SPONSORS, THE DEPOSITOR OR THE UNDERWRITERS, OR THEIR RESPECTIVE AFFILIATES, OR ANY OTHER PERSON, INTENDS TO RETAIN A MATERIAL NET ECONOMIC INTEREST IN THE SECURITIZATION CONSTITUTED BY THE ISSUANCE OF THE CERTIFICATES, OR TO TAKE ANY OTHER ACTION IN RESPECT OF SUCH SECURITIZATION, IN A MANNER PRESCRIBED OR CONTEMPLATED BY THE EU SECURITIZATION RULES OR THE UK SECURITIZATION RULES (EACH AS DEFINED BELOW). IN PARTICULAR, NO SUCH PERSON UNDERTAKES TO TAKE ANY ACTION, OR REFRAIN FROM TAKING ANY ACTION, FOR PURPOSES OF, OR IN CONNECTION WITH, COMPLIANCE BY ANY PROSPECTIVE INVESTOR OR CERTIFICATEHOLDER WITH ANY APPLICABLE REQUIREMENT OF THE EU SECURITIZATION RULES OR THE UK SECURITIZATION RULES. IN ADDITION, THE ARRANGEMENTS DESCRIBED UNDER “CREDIT RISK RETENTION” IN THIS PROSPECTUS HAVE NOT BEEN STRUCTURED WITH THE OBJECTIVE OF ENSURING OR FACILITATING COMPLIANCE BY ANY PERSON WITH ANY APPLICABLE REQUIREMENT OF THE EU SECURITIZATION RULES OR THE UK SECURITIZATION RULES. CONSEQUENTLY, THE CERTIFICATES MAY NOT BE A SUITABLE INVESTMENT FOR ANY PERSON THAT IS SUBJECT TO THE EU SECURITIZATION RULES OR THE UK SECURITIZATION RULES; AND THIS MAY, AMONGST OTHER THINGS, HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE VALUE AND LIQUIDITY OF THE CERTIFICATES, AND OTHERWISE AFFECT THE SECONDARY MARKET FOR THE CERTIFICATES.

SEE “RISK FACTORS—OTHER RISKS RELATING TO THE CERTIFICATES—EU SECURITIZATION RULES AND UK SECURITIZATION RULES” IN THIS PROSPECTUS.

PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA

THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES WILL NOT BE OFFERED OR SOLD IN THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA (EXCLUDING HONG KONG, MACAU AND TAIWAN, THE “PRC”) AS PART OF THE INITIAL DISTRIBUTION OF THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES BUT MAY BE AVAILABLE FOR PURCHASE BY INVESTORS RESIDENT IN THE PRC FROM OUTSIDE THE PRC.

THIS PROSPECTUS DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN OFFER TO SELL OR THE SOLICITATION OF AN OFFER TO BUY ANY SECURITIES IN THE PRC TO ANY PERSON TO WHOM IT IS UNLAWFUL TO MAKE THE OFFER OR SOLICITATION IN THE PRC.

THE DEPOSITOR DOES NOT REPRESENT THAT THIS PROSPECTUS MAY BE LAWFULLY DISTRIBUTED, OR THAT ANY OFFERED CERTIFICATES MAY BE LAWFULLY OFFERED, IN COMPLIANCE WITH ANY APPLICABLE REGISTRATION OR OTHER REQUIREMENTS IN THE PRC, OR PURSUANT TO AN EXEMPTION AVAILABLE THEREUNDER, OR ASSUME ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR FACILITATING ANY SUCH DISTRIBUTION OR OFFERING. IN PARTICULAR, NO ACTION HAS BEEN TAKEN BY THE DEPOSITOR WHICH WOULD PERMIT AN OFFERING OF ANY OFFERED CERTIFICATES OR THE DISTRIBUTION OF THIS PROSPECTUS IN THE PRC. ACCORDINGLY, THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES ARE NOT BEING OFFERED OR SOLD WITHIN THE PRC BY MEANS OF THIS PROSPECTUS OR ANY OTHER DOCUMENT. NEITHER THIS PROSPECTUS NOR ANY ADVERTISEMENT OR OTHER OFFERING MATERIAL MAY BE DISTRIBUTED OR PUBLISHED IN THE PRC, EXCEPT UNDER CIRCUMSTANCES THAT WILL RESULT IN COMPLIANCE WITH ANY APPLICABLE LAWS AND REGULATIONS.

HONG KONG

THIS PROSPECTUS HAS NOT BEEN DELIVERED FOR REGISTRATION TO THE REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES IN HONG KONG AND THE CONTENTS OF THIS PROSPECTUS HAVE NOT BEEN REVIEWED OR APPROVED BY ANY REGULATORY AUTHORITY IN HONG KONG. THIS PROSPECTUS DOES NOT CONSTITUTE NOR INTEND TO BE AN OFFER OR INVITATION TO THE PUBLIC IN HONG KONG TO ACQUIRE THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES.

EACH UNDERWRITER HAS REPRESENTED, WARRANTED AND AGREED THAT: (1) IT HAS NOT OFFERED OR SOLD AND WILL NOT OFFER OR SELL IN HONG KONG, BY MEANS OF ANY DOCUMENT, ANY OFFERED CERTIFICATES (EXCEPT FOR CERTIFICATES WHICH ARE A “STRUCTURED PRODUCT” AS DEFINED IN THE SECURITIES AND FUTURES ORDINANCE (CAP. 571) (THE “SFO”) OF HONG KONG) OTHER THAN (A) TO “PROFESSIONAL INVESTORS” AS DEFINED IN THE SFO AND ANY RULES OR REGULATIONS MADE UNDER THE SFO; OR (B) IN OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH DO NOT RESULT IN THE DOCUMENT BEING A “PROSPECTUS” AS DEFINED IN THE COMPANIES (WINDING UP AND MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) ORDINANCE (CAP. 32) (THE “C(WUMP)O”) OF HONG KONG OR WHICH DO NOT CONSTITUTE AN OFFER TO THE PUBLIC WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE C(WUMP)O; AND (2) IT HAS NOT ISSUED OR HAD IN ITS POSSESSION FOR THE PURPOSES OF ISSUE, AND WILL NOT ISSUE OR HAVE IN ITS POSSESSION FOR THE PURPOSES OF ISSUE, WHETHER IN HONG KONG OR ELSEWHERE, ANY ADVERTISEMENT, INVITATION OR DOCUMENT RELATING TO THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES, WHICH IS DIRECTED AT, OR THE CONTENTS OF WHICH ARE LIKELY TO BE ACCESSED OR READ BY, THE PUBLIC OF HONG KONG (EXCEPT IF PERMITTED TO DO SO UNDER THE SECURITIES LAWS OF HONG KONG) OTHER THAN WITH RESPECT TO OFFERED CERTIFICATES WHICH ARE OR ARE INTENDED TO BE DISPOSED OF ONLY TO PERSONS OUTSIDE HONG KONG OR ONLY TO “PROFESSIONAL INVESTORS” AS DEFINED IN THE SFO AND ANY RULES MADE UNDER THE SFO.

W A R N I N G

THE CONTENTS OF THIS PROSPECTUS HAVE NOT BEEN REVIEWED OR APPROVED BY ANY REGULATORY AUTHORITY IN HONG KONG. YOU ARE ADVISED TO EXERCISE CAUTION IN RELATION TO THE OFFER. IF YOU ARE IN ANY DOUBT ABOUT ANY OF THE CONTENTS OF THIS PROSPECTUS, YOU SHOULD OBTAIN INDEPENDENT PROFESSIONAL ADVICE.

SINGAPORE

NEITHER THIS PROSPECTUS NOR ANY OTHER DOCUMENT OR MATERIAL IN CONNECTION WITH ANY OFFER OF THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES HAS BEEN REGISTERED AS A PROSPECTUS WITH THE MONETARY AUTHORITY OF SINGAPORE (“MAS”) UNDER THE SECURITIES AND FUTURES ACT (CAP. 289) OF SINGAPORE (THE “SFA”). ACCORDINGLY, MAS ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE CONTENTS OF THIS PROSPECTUS. THIS PROSPECTUS IS NOT A PROSPECTUS AS DEFINED IN THE SFA AND STATUTORY LIABILITY UNDER THE SFA IN RELATION TO THE CONTENTS OF PROSPECTUSES WOULD NOT APPLY. ANY PROSPECTIVE INVESTOR SHOULD CONSIDER CAREFULLY WHETHER THE INVESTMENT IS SUITABLE FOR IT. THIS PROSPECTUS AND ANY OTHER DOCUMENT OR MATERIAL IN CONNECTION WITH THE OFFER OR SALE, OR INVITATION FOR SUBSCRIPTION OR PURCHASE, OF THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES MAY NOT BE CIRCULATED OR DISTRIBUTED, NOR MAY THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES BE OFFERED OR SOLD, OR BE MADE THE SUBJECT OF AN INVITATION FOR SUBSCRIPTION OR PURCHASE, WHETHER DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, TO PERSONS IN SINGAPORE OTHER THAN (I) TO AN INSTITUTIONAL INVESTOR (AS DEFINED IN SECTION 4A(1)(c) OF THE SFA) PURSUANT TO SECTION 274 OF THE SFA (EACH AN “INSTITUTIONAL INVESTOR”), (II) TO A RELEVANT PERSON (AS DEFINED IN SECTION 275(2) OF THE SFA) PURSUANT TO SECTION 275(1), OR ANY PERSON PURSUANT TO SECTION 275(1A) OF THE SFA, AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS SPECIFIED IN SECTION 275 OF THE SFA, PROVIDED ALWAYS THAT NONE OF SUCH PERSON SHALL BE AN INDIVIDUAL OTHER THAN AN INDIVIDUAL WHO IS AN ACCREDITED INVESTOR (AS DEFINED IN SECTION 4A(1)(a) OF THE SFA) (EACH, A “RELEVANT INVESTOR”).

NO CERTIFICATES ACQUIRED BY (I) AN INSTITUTIONAL INVESTOR; OR (II) A RELEVANT INVESTOR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS SPECIFIED IN SECTION 275 OF THE SFA MAY BE OFFERED OR SOLD, MADE THE SUBJECT OF AN INVITATION FOR SUBSCRIPTION OR PURCHASE, OR OTHERWISE TRANSFERRED, WHETHER DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, TO PERSONS IN SINGAPORE, OTHER THAN TO (I) AN INSTITUTIONAL INVESTOR; OR (II) A RELEVANT INVESTOR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS SPECIFIED IN SECTION 275 OF THE SFA.

WHERE THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES ARE SUBSCRIBED OR PURCHASED UNDER SECTION 275 OF THE SFA BY A RELEVANT PERSON WHICH IS: (A) A CORPORATION (WHICH IS NOT AN ACCREDITED INVESTOR (AS DEFINED IN SECTION 4A OF THE SFA)) THE SOLE BUSINESS OF WHICH IS TO HOLD INVESTMENTS AND THE ENTIRE SHARE CAPITAL OF WHICH IS OWNED BY ONE OR MORE INDIVIDUALS, EACH OF WHOM IS AN ACCREDITED INVESTOR; OR (B) A TRUST (WHERE THE TRUSTEE IS NOT AN ACCREDITED INVESTOR) WHOSE SOLE PURPOSE IS TO HOLD INVESTMENTS AND EACH BENEFICIARY IS AN ACCREDITED INVESTOR, SECURITIES (AS DEFINED IN SECTION 239(1) OF THE SFA) OF THAT CORPORATION OR THE BENEFICIARIES’ RIGHTS AND INTEREST (HOWSOEVER DESCRIBED) IN THAT TRUST SHALL NOT BE TRANSFERABLE FOR 6 MONTHS AFTER THAT CORPORATION OR THAT TRUST HAS ACQUIRED THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES UNDER SECTION 275 OF THE SFA EXCEPT: (1) TO AN INSTITUTIONAL INVESTOR UNDER SECTION

274 OF THE SFA OR TO A RELEVANT PERSON (AS DEFINED IN SECTION 275(2) OF THE SFA), OR TO ANY PERSON PURSUANT TO AN OFFER THAT IS MADE ON TERMS THAT SUCH SHARES, DEBENTURES AND UNITS OF SHARES AND DEBENTURES OF THAT CORPORATION OR SUCH RIGHTS OR INTEREST IN THAT TRUST ARE ACQUIRED AT A CONSIDERATION OF NOT LESS THAN 200,000 SINGAPORE DOLLARS (OR ITS EQUIVALENT IN A FOREIGN CURRENCY) FOR EACH TRANSACTION, WHETHER SUCH AMOUNT IS TO BE PAID FOR IN CASH OR BY EXCHANGE OF SECURITIES OR OTHER ASSETS, AND FURTHER FOR CORPORATIONS, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS SPECIFIED IN SECTION 275(1A) OF THE SFA; (2) WHERE NO CONSIDERATION IS GIVEN FOR THE TRANSFER; (3) WHERE THE TRANSFER IS BY OPERATION OF LAW; OR (4) AS SPECIFIED IN SECTION 276(7) OF THE SFA.

REPUBLIC OF KOREA

THESE CERTIFICATES HAVE NOT BEEN REGISTERED WITH THE FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMISSION OF THE REPUBLIC OF KOREA FOR A PUBLIC OFFERING IN THE REPUBLIC OF KOREA. THE UNDERWRITERS HAVE THEREFORE REPRESENTED AND AGREED THAT THE CERTIFICATES HAVE NOT BEEN AND WILL NOT BE OFFERED, SOLD OR DELIVERED DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, OR OFFERED, SOLD OR DELIVERED TO ANY PERSON FOR RE-OFFERING OR RESALE, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, IN THE REPUBLIC OF KOREA OR TO ANY RESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF KOREA, EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PERMITTED UNDER APPLICABLE LAWS AND REGULATIONS OF THE REPUBLIC OF KOREA, INCLUDING THE FINANCIAL INVESTMENT SERVICES AND CAPITAL MARKETS ACT AND THE FOREIGN EXCHANGE TRANSACTIONS LAW AND THE DECREES AND REGULATIONS THEREUNDER.

JAPAN

THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES HAVE NOT BEEN AND WILL NOT BE REGISTERED UNDER THE FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS AND EXCHANGE LAW OF JAPAN, AS AMENDED (THE “FIEL”), AND DISCLOSURE UNDER THE FIEL HAS NOT BEEN AND WILL NOT BE MADE WITH RESPECT TO THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES. ACCORDINGLY, EACH UNDERWRITER HAS REPRESENTED AND AGREED THAT IT HAS NOT, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, OFFERED OR SOLD AND WILL NOT, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, OFFER OR SELL ANY OFFERED CERTIFICATES IN JAPAN OR TO, OR FOR THE BENEFIT OF, ANY RESIDENT OF JAPAN (WHICH TERM AS USED IN THIS PROSPECTUS MEANS ANY PERSON RESIDENT IN JAPAN, INCLUDING ANY CORPORATION OR OTHER ENTITY ORGANIZED UNDER THE LAWS OF JAPAN) OR TO OTHERS FOR REOFFERING OR RE-SALE, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, IN JAPAN OR TO, OR FOR THE BENEFIT OF, ANY RESIDENT OF JAPAN EXCEPT PURSUANT TO AN EXEMPTION FROM THE REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS OF, AND OTHERWISE IN COMPLIANCE WITH, THE FIEL AND OTHER RELEVANT LAWS, REGULATIONS AND MINISTERIAL GUIDELINES OF JAPAN. AS PART OF THIS OFFERING OF THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES, THE UNDERWRITERS MAY OFFER THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES IN JAPAN TO UP TO 49 OFFEREES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ABOVE PROVISIONS.

JAPANESE RETENTION REQUIREMENT

THE JAPANESE FINANCIAL SERVICES AGENCY (“JFSA”) PUBLISHED A RISK RETENTION RULE AS PART OF THE REGULATORY CAPITAL REGULATION OF CERTAIN CATEGORIES OF JAPANESE INVESTORS SEEKING TO INVEST IN SECURITIZATION TRANSACTIONS (THE “JRR RULE”). THE JRR RULE MANDATES AN “INDIRECT” COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENT, MEANING THAT CERTAIN CATEGORIES OF JAPANESE INVESTORS WILL BE REQUIRED TO APPLY HIGHER RISK WEIGHTING TO SECURITIZATION EXPOSURES THEY

HOLD UNLESS THE RELEVANT ORIGINATOR COMMITS TO HOLD A RETENTION INTEREST IN THE SECURITIES ISSUED IN THE SECURITIZATION TRANSACTION EQUAL TO AT LEAST 5% OF THE EXPOSURE OF THE TOTAL UNDERLYING ASSETS IN THE SECURITIZATION TRANSACTION (THE “JAPANESE RETENTION REQUIREMENT”), OR SUCH INVESTORS DETERMINE THAT THE UNDERLYING ASSETS WERE NOT “INAPPROPRIATELY ORIGINATED.” IN THE ABSENCE OF SUCH A DETERMINATION BY SUCH INVESTORS THAT SUCH UNDERLYING ASSETS WERE NOT “INAPPROPRIATELY ORIGINATED,” THE JAPANESE RETENTION REQUIREMENT WOULD APPLY TO AN INVESTMENT BY SUCH INVESTORS IN SUCH SECURITIES.

NO PARTY TO THE TRANSACTION DESCRIBED IN THIS PROSPECTUS HAS COMMITTED TO HOLD A RISK RETENTION INTEREST IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE JAPANESE RETENTION REQUIREMENT, AND WE MAKE NO REPRESENTATION AS TO WHETHER THE TRANSACTION DESCRIBED IN THIS PROSPECTUS WOULD OTHERWISE COMPLY WITH THE JRR RULE.

NOTICE TO RESIDENTS OF CANADA

THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES MAY BE SOLD IN CANADA ONLY TO PURCHASERS PURCHASING, OR DEEMED TO BE PURCHASING, AS PRINCIPAL THAT ARE ACCREDITED INVESTORS, AS DEFINED IN NATIONAL INSTRUMENT 45-106 PROSPECTUS EXEMPTIONS OR SUBSECTION 73.3(1) OF THE SECURITIES ACT (ONTARIO), AND ARE PERMITTED CLIENTS, AS DEFINED IN NATIONAL INSTRUMENT 31-103 REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS, EXEMPTIONS AND ONGOING REGISTRANT OBLIGATIONS. ANY RESALE OF THE OFFERED CERTIFICATES MUST BE MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH AN EXEMPTION FROM, OR IN A TRANSACTION NOT SUBJECT TO, THE PROSPECTUS REQUIREMENTS OF APPLICABLE SECURITIES LAWS.

SECURITIES LEGISLATION IN CERTAIN PROVINCES OR TERRITORIES OF CANADA MAY PROVIDE A PURCHASER WITH REMEDIES FOR RESCISSION OR DAMAGES IF THIS PROSPECTUS (INCLUDING ANY AMENDMENT HERETO) CONTAINS A MISREPRESENTATION, PROVIDED THAT THE REMEDIES FOR RESCISSION OR DAMAGES ARE EXERCISED BY THE PURCHASER WITHIN THE TIME LIMIT PRESCRIBED BY THE SECURITIES LEGISLATION OF THE PURCHASER’S PROVINCE OR TERRITORY. THE PURCHASER SHOULD REFER TO ANY APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE SECURITIES LEGISLATION OF THE PURCHASER’S PROVINCE OR TERRITORY FOR PARTICULARS OF THESE RIGHTS OR CONSULT WITH A LEGAL ADVISOR.

PURSUANT TO SECTION 3A.3 OF NATIONAL INSTRUMENT 33-105 UNDERWRITING CONFLICTS (“NI 33-105”), THE UNDERWRITERS ARE NOT REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH THE DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS OF NI 33-105 REGARDING UNDERWRITER CONFLICTS OF INTEREST IN CONNECTION WITH THIS OFFERING.

[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]

Summary of Risk Factors

Investing in the certificates involves risks. Any of the risks set forth in this prospectus under the heading “Risk Factors” may have a material adverse effect on the cash flow on one or more mortgaged properties, the related borrowers’ ability to meet their respective payment obligations under the mortgage loans, and/or on your certificates. As a result, the market price of the certificates could decline significantly and you could lose a part or all of your investment. You should carefully consider all the information set forth in this prospectus and, in particular, evaluate the risks set forth in this prospectus under the heading “Risk Factors” before deciding to invest in the certificates. The following is a summary of some of the principal risks associated with an investment in the certificates:

Risks Relating to the Mortgage Loans

Risks Relating to Conflicts of Interest

Other Risks Relating to the Certificates

Risk Factors

You should carefully consider the following risks before making an investment decision. In particular, distributions on your certificates will depend on payments received on, and other recoveries with respect to the mortgage loans. Therefore, you should carefully consider the risk factors relating to the mortgage loans and the mortgaged properties.

If any of the following events or circumstances identified as risks actually occur or materialize, your investment could be materially and adversely affected. We note that additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us may also impair your investment.

This prospectus also contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of certain factors, including the risks described below and elsewhere in this prospectus.

Risks Related to Market Conditions and Other External Factors

Cyberattacks or Other Security Breaches Could Have a Material Adverse Effect on the Business of the Transaction Parties

In the normal course of business, the sponsors, the master servicer, the special servicer and the other transaction parties may collect, process and retain confidential or sensitive information regarding their customers (including mortgage loan borrowers and applicants). The sharing, use, disclosure and protection of this information is governed by the privacy and data security policies of such parties.  Moreover, there are federal, state and international laws regarding privacy and the storing, sharing, use, disclosure and protection of personally identifiable information and user data.  Although the transaction parties may devote significant resources and management focus to ensuring the integrity of their systems through information security and business continuity programs, their facilities and systems, and those of their third-party service providers, may be subject to external or internal security breaches, acts of vandalism, computer viruses, misplaced or lost data, programming or human errors, or other similar events. The access by unauthorized persons to, or the improper disclosure by the sponsors, the master servicer, the special servicer or any other transaction party of, confidential information regarding their customers or their own proprietary information, software, methodologies and business secrets could result in business disruptions, legal or regulatory proceedings, reputational damage, or other adverse consequences, any of which could materially adversely affect their financial condition or results of operations (including the servicing of the mortgage loans). Cybersecurity risks for organizations like the sponsors, the master servicer, the special servicer and the other transaction parties have increased recently in part because of new technologies, the use of the internet and telecommunications technologies (including mobile and other connected devices) to conduct financial and other business transactions, the increased sophistication and activities of organized crime, perpetrators of fraud, hackers, terrorists and others, and the evolving nature of these threats. Hackers engage in attacks against organizations from time to time that are designed to disrupt key business services.  There can be no assurance that the sponsors, the master servicer, the special servicer or the other transaction parties will not be subject to attacks and suffer any such losses in the future.

Cyberattacks or other breaches, whether affecting the sponsors, the master servicer, the special servicer or other transaction parties, could result in heightened consumer

concern and regulatory focus and increased costs, which could have a material adverse effect on the sponsors’, the master servicer’s, the special servicer’s or another transaction party’s businesses. If the business of the sponsors or any of their affiliates is materially adversely affected by such events, the sponsors may not be able to fulfill their remedy obligations with respect to a mortgage loan.

Risks Relating to the Mortgage Loans

Mortgage Loans Are Non-Recourse and Are Not Insured or Guaranteed

The mortgage loans are not insured or guaranteed by any person or entity, governmental or otherwise.

Investors should treat each mortgage loan as a non-recourse loan. If a default occurs on a non-recourse loan, recourse generally may be had only against the specific mortgaged properties and other assets that have been pledged to secure the mortgage loan. Consequently, payment prior to maturity is dependent primarily on the sufficiency of the net operating income of the mortgaged property. Payment at maturity is primarily dependent upon the market value of the mortgaged property or the borrower’s ability to refinance or sell the mortgaged property.

Although the mortgage loans generally are non-recourse in nature, certain mortgage loans contain non-recourse carveouts for liabilities such as liabilities as a result of fraud by the borrower, certain voluntary insolvency proceedings or other matters. Certain mortgage loans set forth under “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Non-Recourse Carveout Limitations” either do not contain non-recourse carveouts or contain material limitations to non-recourse carveouts. Often these obligations are guaranteed by an affiliate of the related borrower, although liability under any such guaranty may be capped or otherwise limited in amount or scope. Furthermore, certain guarantors may be foreign entities or individuals which, while subject to the domestic governing law provisions in the guaranty and related mortgage loan documents, could nevertheless require enforcement of any judgment in relation to a guaranty in a foreign jurisdiction, which could, in turn, cause a significant time delay or result in the inability to enforce the guaranty under foreign law. Certain of the Mortgage Loans may have “sunset” clauses that provide that recourse liability (including for environmental matters) terminates following repayment or defeasance in full. Additionally, the guarantor’s net worth and liquidity may be less (and in some cases, materially and substantially less) than amounts due under the related mortgage loan or the guarantor’s sole asset may be its interest in the related borrower. Moreover, certain mortgage loans may permit the replacement of the guarantor subject to the requirements set forth in the related mortgage loan documents. Certain mortgage loans may have the benefit of a general payment guaranty of a portion of the indebtedness under the mortgage loan.

With respect to certain of the mortgage loans the related guaranty and/or environmental indemnity contains provisions to the effect that, provided certain conditions are satisfied, the recourse liability of the guarantor will not apply to any action, event or condition arising after the foreclosure, delivery of a deed-in-lieu of foreclosure, or appointment of a receiver, of the mortgaged property, pursuant to such mortgage loan and/or after the foreclosure, acceptance of a transfer in lieu of foreclosure or appointment of a receiver by a mezzanine lender under any related mezzanine loan.

The non-recourse carveout provisions contained in certain of the mortgage loan documents may also limit the liability of the non-recourse carveout guarantor for certain

monetary obligations or covenants related to the use and operation of the mortgaged property to the extent that there is sufficient cash flow generated by the mortgaged property and made available to the related borrower and/or non-recourse carveout guarantor to take or prevent such required action.

In all cases, the mortgage loans should be considered to be non-recourse obligations because neither the depositor nor the sponsors make any representation or warranty as to the obligation or ability of any borrower or guarantor to pay any deficiencies between any foreclosure proceeds and the mortgage loan indebtedness. In addition, certain mortgage loans may provide for recourse to a guarantor for all or a portion of the indebtedness or for any loss or costs that may be incurred by the borrower or the lender with respect to certain borrower obligations under the related mortgage loan documents. In such cases, we cannot assure you any recovery from such guarantor will be made or that such guarantor will have asset sufficient to pay any otherwise recoverable claim under a guaranty.

Risks of Commercial and Multifamily Lending Generally

The mortgage loans will be secured by various income-producing commercial and multifamily properties. The repayment of a commercial or multifamily loan is typically dependent upon the ability of the related mortgaged property to produce cash flow through the collection of rents. Even the liquidation value of a commercial property is determined, in substantial part, by the capitalization of the property’s ability to produce cash flow. However, net operating income can be volatile and may be insufficient to cover debt service on the loan at any given time.

The net operating incomes and property values of the mortgaged properties may be adversely affected by a large number of factors. Some of these factors relate to the properties themselves, such as:

Other factors are more general in nature, such as:

The volatility of net operating income will be influenced by many of the foregoing factors, as well as by:

those that vary with revenues, and the level of capital expenditures required to maintain the property and to retain or replace tenants.

A decline in the real estate market or in the financial condition of a major tenant will tend to have a more immediate effect on the net operating income of properties with relatively higher operating leverage or short term revenue sources, such as short term or month-to-month leases, and may lead to higher rates of delinquency or defaults.

Sale-Leaseback Transactions Have Special Risks

Certain mortgaged properties were each the subject of a sale-leaseback transaction in connection with the acquisition of such property (or a portion of such property) by the related borrower or following such acquisition, including the Gateway Industrial Center mortgaged property (9.98%). Each of these mortgaged properties (or a portion thereof) are leased to a tenant, who is the former owner of the mortgaged property or portion thereof, pursuant to a lease. We cannot assure you that any of these tenants will not file for bankruptcy protection.

A bankruptcy with respect to a tenant in a sale-leaseback transaction could result in the related lease being recharacterized as a loan from the borrower to the tenant. If the lease were recharacterized as a loan, the lease would be a deemed loan and the tenant would gain a number of potential benefits in a bankruptcy case. The tenant could retain possession of the mortgaged property during the pendency of its bankruptcy case without having to comply with the ongoing post-petition rent requirements of section 365(d)(3) of the Bankruptcy Code, which requires a tenant to start paying rent within 60 days following the commencement of its bankruptcy case, while deciding whether to assume or reject a lease of nonresidential real property. The tenant desiring to remain in possession of the mortgaged property would not have to assume the lease within 120 days following the commencement of its bankruptcy case pursuant to section 365(d)(4) of the Bankruptcy Code or comply with the conditions precedent to assumption, including curing all defaults, compensating for damages and giving adequate assurance of future performance. To the extent the deemed loan is under-secured, the tenant would be able to limit the secured claim to the then-current value of the mortgaged property and treat the balance as a general unsecured claim. The tenant also might assert that the entire claim on the deemed loan is an unsecured claim. In Liona Corp., Inc. v. PCH Associates (In re PCH Associates), 949 F.2d 585 (2d Cir. 1991), the court considered the effect of recharacterizing a sale-leaseback transaction as a financing rather than a true lease. The court held that the landlord’s record title to the leased property should be treated as an equitable mortgage securing the deemed loan. Under the reasoning of that case, if a lease were recharacterized as a loan, the related borrower would have a claim against the tenant secured by an equitable mortgage. Here, that secured claim has been collaterally assigned to the mortgagees. However, the legal authority considering the effects of such a recharacterization is limited, and we cannot assure you that a bankruptcy court would follow the reasoning of the PCH Associates case.

There is also a risk that a tenant that files for bankruptcy protection may reject the related lease. It is likely that each lease constitutes an “unexpired lease” for purposes of the Bankruptcy Code. Federal bankruptcy law provides generally that rights and obligations under an unexpired lease of a debtor may not be terminated or modified at any time after the commencement of a case under the Bankruptcy Code solely on the basis of a provision in such lease providing for the termination or modification of such rights or obligations upon the filing of a bankruptcy petition or the occurrence of certain other similar events. This prohibition on so called “ipso facto clauses” could limit the ability of a borrower to exercise

certain contractual remedies with respect to a lease. In addition, the Bankruptcy Code provides that a trustee in bankruptcy or debtor in possession may, subject to approval of the court, (a) assume an unexpired lease and (i) retain it or (ii) unless applicable law excuses a party other than the debtor from accepting performance from or rendering performance to an entity other than the debtor, assign it to a third party (notwithstanding any other restrictions or prohibitions on assignment) or (b) reject such contract. In a bankruptcy case of a tenant, if the lease were to be assumed, the trustee in bankruptcy on behalf of the tenant, or the tenant as debtor in possession, or the assignee, if applicable, must cure any defaults under the lease, compensate the related borrower for its losses and provide such borrower with “adequate assurance” of future performance. Such remedies may be insufficient, however, as the borrower may be forced to continue under the lease with a tenant that is a poor credit risk or an unfamiliar tenant if the lease was assigned (if applicable state law does not otherwise prevent such an assignment), and any assurances provided to the borrower may, in fact, be inadequate. If the lease is rejected, such rejection generally constitutes a breach of the lease immediately before the date of the filing of the petition. As a consequence, the borrower would have only an unsecured claim against the tenant for damages resulting from such breach, which could adversely affect the security for the certificates.

Furthermore, there is likely to be a period of time between the date upon which a tenant files a bankruptcy petition and the date upon which the lease is assumed or rejected. Although the tenant is obligated to make all lease payments within 60 days following the commencement of the bankruptcy case, there is a risk that such payments will not be made due to the tenant’s poor financial condition. If the lease is rejected, the lessor will be treated as an unsecured creditor with respect to its claim for damages for termination of the lease and the borrower must re-let the mortgaged property before the flow of lease payments will recommence. In addition, pursuant to section 502(b)(6) of the Bankruptcy Code, a lessor’s damages for lease rejection are limited to the amount owed for the unpaid rent reserved under the lease for the periods prior to the bankruptcy petition (or earlier surrender of the leased premises) which are unrelated to the rejection, plus the greater of one year’s rent or 15% of the remaining rent reserved under the lease (but not to exceed three years’ rent).

As discussed above, bankruptcy courts, in the exercise of their equitable powers, have the authority to recharacterize a lease as a financing. We cannot assure you such recharacterization would not occur with respect to the mortgage loans as to which the related mortgaged properties were the subject of sale-leaseback transactions.

The application of any of these doctrines to any one of the sale-leaseback transactions could result in substantial, direct and material impairment of the rights of the certificateholders.

Performance of the Mortgage Loans Will Be Highly Dependent on the Performance of Tenants and Tenant Leases

General

Any tenant may, from time to time, experience a downturn in its business, which may weaken its financial condition and result in a reduction or failure to make rental payments when due. Tenants under certain leases included in the underwritten net cash flow, underwritten net operating income or occupancy may nonetheless be in financial distress. If tenants’ sales were to decline, percentage rents may decline and, further, tenants may be unable to pay their base rent or other occupancy costs. Factors unrelated to a tenant’s operations at a particular mortgaged property may also result in the tenant’s

failure to make payments under its lease (including, for example, economic sanctions imposed on the tenant’s parent company or other financial distress experienced by affiliates of the tenant). If a tenant defaults in its obligations to a property owner, that property owner may experience delays in enforcing its rights as lessor and may incur substantial costs and experience significant delays associated with protecting its investment, including costs incurred in renovating and reletting the property.

Additionally, the income from, and market value of, the mortgaged properties leased to various tenants would be adversely affected if:

In addition, certain tenants may be part of a chain that is in financial distress as a whole, or the tenant’s parent company may have implemented or expressed an intent to implement a plan to consolidate or reorganize its operations, close a number of stores in the chain, reduce exposure, relocate stores or otherwise reorganize its business to cut costs.

There may be (and there may exist from time to time) pending or threatened legal proceedings against, or disputes with, certain tenants and/or their parent companies that may have a material adverse effect on the related tenant’s ability to pay rent or remain open for business. We cannot assure you that any such litigation or dispute will not result in a material decline in net operating income at the related mortgaged property.

Certain tenants currently may be in a rent abatement period. We cannot assure you that such tenants will be in a position to pay full rent when the abatement period expires. We cannot assure you that the net operating income contributed by the mortgaged properties will remain at its current or past levels.

Certain tenants may have the right to assign their leases (and be released from their lease obligations) without landlord consent, either to other tenants meeting specific criteria, or more generally. In such event, the credit of the replacement tenant may be weaker than that of the assigning tenant.

A Tenant Concentration May Result in Increased Losses

Mortgaged properties that are owner-occupied or leased to a single tenant, or a tenant that makes up a significant portion of the rental income, also are more susceptible to interruptions of cash flow if that tenant’s business operations are negatively impacted or if such tenant fails to renew its lease. This is so because:

In the event of a default by that tenant, if the related lease expires prior to the mortgage loan maturity date and the related tenant fails to renew its lease or if such tenant exercises an early termination option, there would likely be an interruption of rental payments under the lease and, accordingly, insufficient funds available to the borrower to pay the debt service on the mortgage loan. In certain cases where the tenant owns the improvements on the mortgaged property, the related borrower may be required to purchase such improvements in connection with the exercise of its remedies.

With respect to certain of these mortgaged properties that are leased to a single tenant, the related leases may expire prior to, or soon after, the maturity dates of the mortgage loans or the related tenant may have the right to terminate the lease prior to the maturity date of the mortgage loan. If the current tenant does not renew its lease on comparable economic terms to the expired lease, if a single tenant terminates its lease or if a suitable replacement tenant does not enter into a new lease on similar economic terms, there could be a negative impact on the payments on the related mortgage loan.

A deterioration in the financial condition of a tenant, the failure of a tenant to renew its lease or the exercise by a tenant of an early termination right can be particularly significant if a mortgaged property is owner-occupied, leased to a single tenant, or if any tenant makes up a significant portion of the rental income at the mortgaged property.

Concentrations of particular tenants among the mortgaged properties or within a particular business or industry at one or multiple mortgaged properties increase the possibility that financial problems with such tenants or such business or industry sectors could affect the mortgage loans. In addition, the mortgage loans may be adversely affected if a tenant at the mortgaged property is highly specialized, or dependent on a single industry or only a few customers for its revenue. See “—Tenant Bankruptcy Could Result in a Rejection of the Related Lease” below, and “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Tenant Issues—Tenant Concentrations” for information on tenant concentrations in the mortgage pool.

Mortgaged Properties Leased to Multiple Tenants Also Have Risks

If a mortgaged property has multiple tenants, re-leasing expenditures may be more frequent than in the case of mortgaged properties with fewer tenants, thereby reducing the cash flow available for payments on the related mortgage loan. Multi-tenant mortgaged properties also may experience higher continuing vacancy rates and greater volatility in rental income and expenses. See Annex A-1 for tenant lease expiration dates for the 5 largest tenants at each mortgaged property.

Mortgaged Properties Leased to Borrowers or Borrower Affiliated Entities Also Have Risks

If a mortgaged property is leased in whole or substantial part to the borrower under the mortgage loan or to an affiliate of the borrower, there may be conflicts of interest. For instance, it is more likely a landlord will waive lease conditions for an affiliated tenant than it would for an unaffiliated tenant. We cannot assure you that the conflicts of interest

arising where a borrower is affiliated with a tenant at a mortgaged property will not adversely impact the value of the related mortgage loan.

In certain cases, an affiliated lessee may be a tenant under a master lease with the related borrower, under which the tenant is obligated to make rent payments but does not occupy any space at the mortgaged property. Master leases in these circumstances may be used to bring occupancy to a “stabilized” level with the intent of finding additional tenants to occupy some or all of the master leased space, but may not provide additional economic support for the mortgage loan. In addition, in certain circumstances lease payments of affiliated tenants may be higher relative to those of non-affiliated tenants and/or market rents, resulting in higher net operating income at the property. If a mortgaged property is leased in whole or substantial part to the borrower or to an affiliate of the borrower, a deterioration in the financial condition of the borrower or its affiliate could significantly affect the borrower’s ability to perform under the mortgage loan as it would directly interrupt the cash flow from the mortgaged property if the borrower’s or its affiliate’s financial condition worsens. We cannot assure you that any space leased by a borrower or an affiliate of the borrower will eventually be occupied by third party tenants.

Tenant Bankruptcy Could Result in a Rejection of the Related Lease

The bankruptcy or insolvency of a major tenant or a number of smaller tenants, such as in retail properties, may have an adverse impact on the mortgaged properties affected and the income produced by such mortgaged properties. Under the federal bankruptcy code, a tenant has the option of assuming or rejecting or, subject to certain conditions, assuming and assigning to a third party, any unexpired lease. If the tenant rejects the lease, the landlord’s claim for breach of the lease would (absent collateral securing the claim) be treated as a general unsecured claim against the tenant and a lessor’s damages for lease rejection are generally subject to certain limitations. We cannot assure you that tenants of the mortgaged properties will continue making payments under their leases or that tenants will not file for bankruptcy protection in the future or, if any tenants do file, that they will continue to make rental payments in a timely manner. See “Certain Legal Aspects of Mortgage Loans—Bankruptcy Laws” and “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Tenant Issues—Affiliated Leases”. See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Loan Purpose; Default History, Bankruptcy Issues and Other Proceedings” for information regarding bankruptcy issues with respect to certain mortgage loans.

In the case of certain mortgage loans included in the mortgage pool, it may be possible that the related master lease could be construed in a bankruptcy as a financing lease or other arrangement under which the related master lessee (and/or its affiliates) would be deemed as effectively the owner of the related mortgaged property, rather than a tenant, which could result in potentially adverse consequences for the trust, as the holder of such mortgage loan, including treatment of the mortgage loan as an unsecured obligation, a potentially greater risk of an unfavorable plan of reorganization and competing claims of creditors of the related master lessee and/or its affiliates. See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Tenant Issues—Affiliated Leases”.

Leases That Are Not Subordinated to the Lien of the Mortgage or Do Not Contain Attornment Provisions May Have an Adverse Impact at Foreclosure

In certain jurisdictions, if tenant leases are subordinated to the liens created by the mortgage but do not contain attornment provisions that require the tenant to recognize a successor owner, the tenants may terminate their leases upon the transfer of the property to a foreclosing lender or purchaser at foreclosure. Accordingly, if a mortgaged property is

located in such a jurisdiction and is leased to one or more desirable tenants under leases that are subordinate to the mortgage and do not contain attornment provisions, such mortgaged property could experience a further decline in value if such tenants’ leases were terminated. This is particularly likely if those tenants were paying above-market rents or could not be replaced. If a lease is not subordinate to a mortgage, the issuing entity will not possess the right to dispossess the tenant upon foreclosure of the mortgaged property (unless otherwise agreed to with the tenant). Also, if the lease contains provisions inconsistent with the mortgage (e.g., provisions relating to application of insurance proceeds or condemnation awards) or which could affect the enforcement of the lender’s rights (e.g., a right of first refusal to purchase the property), the provisions of the lease will take precedence over the provisions of the mortgage. Not all leases were reviewed to ascertain the existence of attornment or subordination provisions.

With respect to certain of the mortgage loans, the related borrower may have given to certain tenants or others an option to purchase, a right of first refusal and/or a right of first offer to purchase all or a portion of the mortgaged property in the event a sale is contemplated, and such right is not subordinate to the related mortgage. This may impede the mortgagee’s ability to sell the related mortgaged property at foreclosure, or, upon foreclosure, this may affect the value and/or marketability of the related mortgaged property. See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Tenant Issues—Purchase Options and Rights of First Refusal” for information regarding material purchase options and/or rights of first refusal, if any, with respect to mortgaged properties securing certain mortgage loans.

Early Lease Termination Options May Reduce Cash Flow

Leases often give tenants the right to terminate the related lease, abate or reduce the related rent, and/or exercise certain remedies against the related borrower for various reasons or upon various conditions, including:

In certain cases, compliance or satisfaction of landlord covenants may be the responsibility of a third party affiliated with the borrower or, in the event that partial releases of the applicable mortgaged property are permitted, an unaffiliated or affiliated third party.

Any exercise of a termination right by a tenant at a mortgaged property could result in vacant space at the related mortgaged property, renegotiation of the lease with the related tenant or re-letting of the space. Any such vacated space may not be re-let. Furthermore, such foregoing termination and/or abatement rights may arise in the future or materially adversely affect the related borrower’s ability to meet its obligations under the related mortgage loan documents. See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Tenant Issues—Lease Expirations and Terminations” for information on material tenant lease expirations and early termination options.

Mortgaged Properties Leased to Not-for-Profit Tenants Also Have Risks

Certain mortgaged properties may have tenants that are charitable institutions that generally rely on contributions from individuals and government grants or other subsidies to pay rent on office space and other operating expenses. We cannot assure you that the rate, frequency and level of individual contributions or governmental grants and subsidies will continue with respect to any such institution. A reduction in contributions or grants may impact the ability of the related institution to pay rent, and we cannot assure you that the related borrower will be in a position to meet its obligations under the related mortgage loan documents if such tenant fails to pay its rent.

Multifamily Properties Have Special Risks

In addition to the factors discussed in “—Risks of Commercial and Multifamily Lending Generally” and “—Performance of the Mortgage Loans Will Be Highly Dependent on

the Performance of Tenants and Tenant Leases” above, other factors may adversely affect the financial performance and value of multifamily properties, including:

Certain multifamily properties may have a significant percentage of units leased to companies or non-profit organizations that use such units to provide short term housing to transient tenants, including but not limited to corporate or leisure travelers, or transitional housing for people undergoing various types of rehabilitation. Such leases to companies or non-profits may pose additional risks, including the risk that a large block of units may be vacated at once if the short-term housing provider elects to stop leasing at the mortgaged property, as well as less ability to vet the ultimate tenants.

Certain states regulate the relationship between an owner and its tenants. Commonly, these laws require a written lease, good cause for eviction, disclosure of fees, and notification to residents of changed land use, while prohibiting unreasonable rules, retaliatory evictions, and restrictions on a resident’s choice of unit vendors. Apartment building owners have been the subject of suits under state “Unfair and Deceptive Practices Acts” and other general consumer protection statutes for coercive, abusive or unconscionable leasing and sales practices. A few states offer more significant protection. For example, in some states, there are provisions that limit the bases on which a landlord may terminate a tenancy or increase a tenant’s rent or prohibit a landlord from terminating a tenancy solely by reason of the sale of the owner’s building.

In addition to state regulation of the landlord tenant relationship generally, numerous counties and municipalities, or state law as applicable in designated counties and municipalities, impose rent control or rent stabilization on apartment buildings. These laws and ordinances generally impose limitations on rent increases, with such increases limited to fixed percentages, to percentages of increases in the consumer price index, to increases set or approved by a governmental agency, or to increases determined through mediation or binding arbitration. Any limitations on a borrower’s ability to raise property rents may impair such borrower’s ability to repay its multifamily loan from its net operating income or the proceeds of a sale or refinancing of the related multifamily property. In addition, prospective investors should assume that these laws and ordinances generally entitle existing tenants at rent-controlled and rent-stabilized units to a lease renewal upon the expiration of their existing lease; entitle certain family members of a tenant the right to a rent stabilized or rent controlled renewal lease notwithstanding the absence of the original tenant upon lease expiration; empower a court or a designated government agency, following a tenant complaint and fact-finding, to order a reduction in rent and impose penalties on the landlord if the tenant’s rights are violated or certain services are not maintained; and, for the purposes of any prohibitions on retaliatory evictions, establish presumptions of landlord retaliation in cases of recent tenant complaints or other prescribed circumstances. These provisions may result in rents that are lower, or operating costs that are higher, than would otherwise be the case, thereby impairing the borrower’s ability to repay its multifamily loan from its net operating income or the proceeds of a sale or refinancing of the related multifamily property.

Certain of the mortgage loans may be secured in the future by mortgaged properties that are subject to certain affordable housing covenants and other covenants and restrictions with respect to various tax credit, city, state and federal housing subsidies, rent stabilization or similar programs, in respect of various units within the mortgaged properties. The limitations and restrictions imposed by these programs could result in

losses on the mortgage loans. In addition, in the event that the program is cancelled, it could result in less income for the project. Furthermore, changes to such programs may impose additional limits on rent increases that were not contemplated when the related mortgage loans were originated. These programs may include, among others:

The difference in rents between subsidized or supported properties and other multifamily rental properties in the same area may not be a sufficient economic incentive for some eligible tenants to reside at a subsidized or supported property that may have fewer amenities or be less attractive as a residence. As a result, occupancy levels at a subsidized or supported property may decline, which may adversely affect the value and successful operation of such property.

Certain of the mortgage loans may be subject to New York’s Section 421-a (16) Program, which provides, among other things, that a market rate residential unit will be subject to rent stabilization unless the owner would be entitled to remove such market rate residential unit from rent stabilization upon vacancy of such unit by reason of the monthly rent exceeding any limit established under the rent stabilization laws. In general, in Section 421-a (16) Program buildings, apartments initially rented at a rent amount in excess of the high rent threshold qualify for permanent exemption from the rent regulations. Rent concessions given to a particular tenant may be relevant in determining whether a unit has been initially rented at a rent that is at or above the high rent threshold. However, there is currently no governing statute, judicial decision, or governmental authority regulatory guidance as to whether rent concessions such as free rent, should be included or excluded in determining whether a unit has been initially rented at a rent that is at or above the high rent threshold. Accordingly, if the lower net effective rent (taking any rent concessions into consideration) is used as the relevant rent (rather than the higher contractual stated rent), more units at such property could be subject to rent stabilization.

Some counties and municipalities may later impose stricter rent control regulations on apartment buildings. For example, on June 14, 2019, the New York State Senate passed the Housing Stability and Tenant Protection Act of 2019 (the “HSTP Act”), which, among other things, limits the ability of landlords to increase rents in rent stabilized apartments at the time of lease renewal and after a vacancy. The HSTP Act also limits potential rent increases for major capital improvements and for individual apartment improvements. In addition, the HSTP Act permits certain qualified localities in the State of New York to implement the rent stabilization system. In particular, the impact of the HSTP Act on the appraised value of mortgaged real properties located in the City of New York that have significant numbers of rent stabilized units is uncertain.

Moreover, legislative or judicial actions concerning rent-stabilized properties may adversely affect, among other things, existing market rent units and a borrower’s ability to convert rent-stabilized units to market rent units in the future or may give rise to liability in connection with previously converted units, which may adversely impact the net operating income or the appraised value of the property and/or the value of the property.

Certain of the mortgage loans may be secured currently or in the future by mortgaged properties as to which the borrower has, or plans to enter into, an agreement with a housing finance corporation (the “HFC”), pursuant to which a specified number of units will be reserved for tenants whose household income does not exceed certain thresholds and the rent charged with respect to the reserved units will be limited in exchange for certain tax abatements and temporary transfer of ownership of such mortgaged properties to the HFC. On May 28, 2025, the Governor of the State of Texas signed into law House Bill 21 (“House Bill 21”). House Bill 21, among other things, significantly restricts the usage of so-called “traveling HFCs”. “Traveling HFCs” are HFCs that are sponsored by one municipality or county and own real property in another municipality or county that are nevertheless exempted from taxation in the municipality or county where the real property is located. House Bill 21 generally restricts HFC ownership of real property to the boundaries of the municipalities and/or counties sponsoring the HFC. In addition, while House Bill 21 provides that multifamily residential developments that have entered into agreements with traveling HFCs prior to May 28, 2025 will generally be governed by the law that was in effect on the date the real property was acquired by the HFC, it also provides that such residential developments must obtain the consents of the municipalities and counties in which such real property is located, as well as HFCs sponsored by such municipalities and counties, by January 1, 2027 or lose the benefits of the ad valorem tax exemptions.

In addition, House Bill 21 imposes various additional requirements for a multifamily residential development owned by an HFC to qualify for ad valorem tax exemptions, including (i) more specific requirements as to the percentages of units that must be reserved for very low, low, moderate and middle income housing units, (ii) a requirement that generally at least 50% of the tax saving be passed through as rent reductions allocated to income-restricted housing units, (iii) caps on rent that may be charged to income-restricted housing units and (iv) audit requirements to ensure compliance. Although House Bill 21 requires compliance with certain administrative requirements by January 1, 2026, many of the more substantive requirements such as those described in clauses (i) through (iii) of the preceding sentence do not require compliance until the end of 2036 or, if earlier, the year following the year in which the mortgage indebtedness is refinanced, title to the real property is conveyed, or there is a sale or other transfer of a majority of the beneficial ownership interests in the HFC. Compliance with the audit requirements will be required as early as June 2026. Each of these requirements may have an adverse impact on the ability of borrowers to refinance underlying mortgage loans benefiting from HFC-related tax abatements.

We cannot predict what effect, if any, House Bill 21 will have on the continued viability of the current housing finance corporation programs or the tax abatements currently enjoyed by the Parkwyn Townhomes mortgaged property. We cannot assure you that House Bill 21 will not adversely affect cash flow at the related mortgaged property, whether through potential loss of tax abatements, costs associated with compliance with House Bill 21 or reductions in rental income. In addition, we cannot assure you that House Bill 21 will not adversely affect the ability of the related borrowers to refinance their underlying mortgage loan prior to maturity or sell the mortgaged property for a price sufficient to repay the underlying mortgage loan at maturity.

See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Mortgage Pool Characteristics—Property Types—Multifamily Properties”.

Industrial Properties Have Special Risks

In addition to the factors discussed in “—Risks of Commercial and Multifamily Lending Generally” and “—Performance of the Mortgage Loans Will Be Highly Dependent on the Performance of Tenants and Tenant Leases” above, other factors may adversely affect the financial performance and value of industrial properties, including:

Industrial properties may be adversely affected by reduced demand for industrial space occasioned by a decline in a particular industry segment in which the related tenants conduct their businesses (for example, a decline in consumer demand for products sold by a tenant using the property as a distribution center). In addition, a particular industrial or warehouse property that suited the needs of its original tenant may be difficult to relet to another tenant or may become functionally obsolete relative to newer properties. Furthermore, lease terms with respect to industrial properties are generally for shorter periods of time and may result in a substantial percentage of leases expiring in the same year at any particular industrial property. In addition, mortgaged properties used for many industrial purposes are more prone to environmental concerns than other property types.

Aspects of building site design and adaptability affect the value of an industrial property. Site characteristics that are generally desirable to a warehouse/industrial property include high clear ceiling heights, wide column spacing, a large number of bays (loading docks) and large bay depths, divisibility, a layout that can accommodate large truck minimum turning radii and overall functionality and accessibility.

In addition, because of unique construction requirements of many industrial properties, any vacant industrial property space may not be easily converted to other uses. Thus, if the operation of any of the industrial properties becomes unprofitable due to competition, age of the improvements or other factors such that the borrower becomes unable to meet its obligations on the related mortgage loan, the liquidation value of that industrial property may be substantially less, relative to the amount owing on the related mortgage loan, than would be the case if the industrial property were readily adaptable to other uses.

Location is also important because an industrial property requires the availability of labor sources, proximity to supply sources and customers and accessibility to rail lines, major roadways and other distribution channels.

Further, certain of the industrial properties may have tenants that are subject to risks unique to their business, such as cold storage facilities. Cold storage facilities may have unique risks such as short lease terms due to seasonal use, making income potentially more volatile than for properties with longer term leases, and customized refrigeration design, rendering such facilities less readily convertible to alternative uses. Because of seasonal use, leases at such facilities are customarily for shorter terms, making income potentially more volatile than for properties with longer term leases. In addition, such facilities require customized refrigeration design, rendering them less readily convertible to alternative uses.

See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Mortgage Pool Characteristics—Property Types—Industrial Properties”.

Office Properties Have Special Risks

In addition to the factors discussed in “—Risks of Commercial and Multifamily Lending Generally” and “—Performance of the Mortgage Loans Will Be Highly Dependent on the Performance of Tenants and Tenant Leases” above, other factors may adversely affect the financial performance and value of office properties, including:

Moreover, the cost of refitting office space for a new tenant is often higher than the cost of refitting other types of properties for new tenants.

In addition, as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic office properties have been experiencing lower than normal utilization levels and it is uncertain whether utilization levels will return to levels experienced prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. In the event that office tenants continue to utilize partial “work from home” or other remote work policies, the overall demand for office space may be adversely affected for a significant period of time, which may impact the ability of the borrowers to lease their properties, and may impact the

operation and cash flow of the properties and/or the borrowers’ ability to refinance the mortgage loans at maturity.

In addition, WeWork, which filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy on November 6, 2023, may cancel leases in certain locations in which they had been operating, which cancellations could in turn produce downward pressure on office rents in those locations.

Certain of the mortgaged properties contain life science laboratory and office buildings, leased to a tenant engaged in the life science industry. Properties with life science tenants have unique risk factors that may affect their performance, revenues and/or value. Life science tenants are subject to a number of risks unique to the life science industry, including (but not limited to): (i) high levels of regulation; (ii) failures in the safety and efficacy of their products; (iii) significant funding requirements for product research and development; and (iv) changes in technology, patent expiration, and intellectual property protection. Risks associated with life science laboratory buildings may affect the business, financial condition and results of operations of the related mortgaged property and such risks may adversely affect a life science tenant’s ability to make payments under its lease, and consequently, may materially adversely affect a borrower’s ability to make payments on the related mortgage loan.

In addition, in the case of tenants that offer co-working or office-sharing space designed for multiple, unaffiliated space users, licenses or subleases of space to users are generally of shorter-term duration, and user turnover is generally greater than with typical office leases. Co-working tenants may experience higher operating costs than typical office tenants, and revenues may lag expenses until the co-working space is filled out. Shorter-term space leases and users may be more impacted by economic fluctuations compared to traditional long term office leases. Further, if office rents decrease, shorter-term space users may move to properties with lower rent, while co-working tenants would be left with longer-term lease obligations. Additionally, if there is a concentration of subleases of the co-working space to a single tenant or affiliated tenants, expiration or termination of such subleases may leave a large block of the co-working space unoccupied. The business model for co-working tenants is evolving, and in markets where co-working tenants represent significant market share, deteriorating performance at any one location may create disruption across other co-working locations and affect the broader office market as well. The foregoing factors may subject the related mortgage loan to increased risk of default and loss.

If one or more major tenants at a particular office property were to close or remain vacant, we cannot assure you that such tenants would be replaced in a timely manner or without incurring material additional costs to the related borrower and resulting in an adverse effect on the financial performance of the property.

See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Mortgage Pool Characteristics—Property Types—Office Properties”.

Hospitality Properties Have Special Risks

In addition to the factors discussed in “—Risks of Commercial and Multifamily Lending Generally” above, various other factors may adversely affect the financial performance and value of hospitality properties, including:

Because hotel rooms are generally rented for short periods of time, the financial performance of hospitality properties tends to be affected by adverse economic conditions and competition more quickly than other commercial properties. Additionally, as a result of high operating costs, relatively small decreases in revenue can cause significant stress on a property’s cash flow.

Moreover, the hospitality and lodging industry is generally seasonal in nature and different seasons affect different hospitality properties differently depending on type and location. This seasonality can be expected to cause periodic fluctuations in a hospitality property’s room and restaurant revenues, occupancy levels, room rates and operating expenses. We cannot assure you that cash flow will be sufficient to offset any shortfalls that occur at the mortgaged property during slower periods or that the related mortgage loans provide for seasonality reserves, or if seasonality reserves are provided for, that such reserves will be funded or will be sufficient or available to fund such shortfalls.

In addition, certain hospitality properties are limited-service, select service or extended stay hotels. Hospitality properties that are limited-service, select service or extended stay hotels may subject a lender to more risk than full-service hospitality properties as they generally require less capital for construction than full-service hospitality properties. In addition, as limited-service, select service or extended stay hotels generally offer fewer amenities than full-service hospitality properties, they are less distinguishable from each other. As a result, it is easier for limited-service, select service or extended stay hotels to experience increased or unforeseen competition.

In addition to hotel operations, some hospitality properties also operate entertainment complexes that include restaurants, lounges, nightclubs, banquet and meeting spaces, pools, swimming facilities and/or waterparks and may derive a significant portion of the related property’s revenue from such operations. Consumer demand for entertainment resorts is particularly sensitive to downturns in the economy and the corresponding impact on discretionary spending on leisure activities. Changes in discretionary consumer spending or consumer preferences could be driven by factors such

as perceived or actual general economic conditions, high energy, fuel and food costs, the increased cost of travel, the weakened job market, perceived or actual disposable consumer income and wealth, fears of recession and changes in consumer confidence in the economy, or fears of war and future acts of terrorism. These factors could reduce consumer demand for the leisure activities that the property offers, thus imposing practical limits on pricing and harming operations. Restaurants and nightclubs are particularly vulnerable to changes in consumer preferences. In addition, a nightclub’s, restaurant’s, bar’s or waterpark’s revenue is extremely dependent on its popularity and perception. These characteristics are subject to change rapidly and we cannot assure you that any of a hospitality property’s nightclubs, restaurants, bars or waterparks will maintain their current level of popularity or perception in the market. Any such change could have a material adverse effect on the net cash flow of the property.

Some of the hospitality properties have liquor licenses associated with the mortgaged property. The liquor licenses for these mortgaged properties are generally held by affiliates of the related borrowers, unaffiliated managers or operating lessees. The laws and regulations relating to liquor licenses generally prohibit the transfer of such licenses to any person, or condition such transfer on the prior approval of the governmental authority that issued the license. In the event of a foreclosure of a hospitality property that holds a liquor license, the special servicer on behalf of the issuing entity or a purchaser in a foreclosure sale would likely have to apply for a new license, which might not be granted or might be granted only after a delay that could be significant. We cannot assure you that a new license could be obtained promptly or at all. The lack of a liquor license in a hospitality property could have an adverse impact on the revenue from the related mortgaged property or on the hospitality property’s occupancy rate.

In addition, hospitality properties may be structured with a master lease (or operating lease) in order to minimize potential liabilities of the borrower, including but not limited to certain tax liabilities related to a REIT borrower structure that is commonly utilized in connection with hospitality properties. Under the master lease or operating lease structure, an operating lessee (typically affiliated with the borrower) pays rent to the fee owner borrower. In addition, the operating lessee may also be an obligor under the related mortgage loan and the operating lessee borrower pays rent to the fee owner borrower. See “—Performance of the Mortgage Loans Will Be Highly Dependent on the Performance of Tenants and Tenant Leases—Mortgaged Properties Leased to Borrowers or Borrower Affiliated Entities Also Have Risks” and “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Tenant Issues—Affiliated Leases”.

In addition, there may be risks associated with hospitality properties that have not entered into or become a party to any franchise agreement, license agreement or other “flag”. Hospitality properties often enter into these types of agreements in order to align the hospitality property with a certain public perception or to benefit from a centralized reservation system. We cannot assure you that hospitality properties that lack such benefits will be able to operate successfully on an independent basis.

In addition, such hospitality properties are subject to the potential risks associated with concentration of the resorts under the same brand. A negative public image or other adverse event that becomes associated with such brand could adversely affect the related borrowers’ business and revenues.

If accidents, injuries or sicknesses occur at any such hospitality properties, the related borrowers may be held liable for costs related to the injuries or face litigation proceedings relating to such accidents and sicknesses. There can be no assurance that any

liability insurance maintained by the related borrowers against such risks will be adequate or available at all times and in all circumstances to cover any liability for these costs. In addition, many jurisdictions do not insure against punitive damages, and the related borrowers would not be covered if they experienced a judgment including punitive damages. Such borrowers’ business, financial condition and results of operations would be adversely affected to the extent claims and associated expenses resulting from accidents or injuries exceed insurance recoveries. See “—Insurance May Not Be Available or Adequate” and “—Litigation Regarding the Mortgaged Properties or Borrowers May Impair Your Distributions”.

See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Mortgage Pool Characteristics—Property Types—Hospitality Properties”.

Risks Relating to Affiliation with a Franchise or Hotel Management Company

The performance of a hospitality property affiliated with a franchise or hotel management company depends in part on:

The continuation of a franchise agreement, license agreement or management agreement is subject to specified operating standards and other terms and conditions set forth in such agreements. The failure of a borrower to maintain such standards or adhere to other applicable terms and conditions, such as property improvement plans, could result in the loss or cancellation of their rights under the franchise, license or hotel management agreement. We cannot assure you that a replacement franchise affiliation (either through a franchise, license or management agreement, as the case may be) could be obtained in the event of termination or that such replacement franchise affiliation would be of equal quality to the terminated franchise affiliation. In addition, a replacement franchise, license and/or hospitality property manager may require significantly higher fees as well as the investment of capital to bring the hospitality property into compliance with the requirements of the replacement franchisor, licensor and/or hospitality property manager. Any provision in a franchise agreement, license agreement or management agreement providing for termination because of a bankruptcy of a franchisor, licensor or manager generally will not be enforceable.

The transferability of franchise agreements, license agreements and property management agreements may be restricted. In the event of a foreclosure, the lender may not have the right to use the franchise license without the franchisor’s consent or the manager might be able to terminate the management agreement. Conversely, in the case of certain mortgage loans, the lender may be unable to remove a franchisor/licensor or a hotel management company that it desires to replace following a foreclosure and, further, may be limited as regards the pool of potential transferees for a foreclosure or real estate owned property.

In some cases where a hospitality property is subject to a license, franchise or management agreement, the licensor, franchisor or manager has required or may in the future require the completion of various repairs and/or renovations pursuant to a property improvement plan issued by the licensor, franchisor or manager. Failure to complete those

repairs and/or renovations in accordance with the plan could result in the hospitality property losing its license or franchise or in the termination of the management agreement. Annex A-1 and the related footnotes set forth the amount of reserves, if any, established under the related mortgage loans in connection with any of those repairs and/or renovations. We cannot assure you that any amounts reserved will be sufficient to complete the repairs and/or renovations required with respect to any affected hospitality property. In addition, in some cases, those reserves will be maintained by the franchisor, licensor or property manager. Furthermore, the lender may not require a reserve for repairs and/or renovations in all instances.

See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Mortgage Pool Characteristics—Property Types—Hospitality Properties”.

Retail Properties Have Special Risks

Certain of the mortgage loans are secured by retail properties. See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Mortgage Pool Characteristics—Property Types—Retail Properties”. The value of retail properties is significantly affected by the quality of the tenants as well as fundamental aspects of real estate, such as location and market demographics, as well as changes in shopping methods and choices. Some of the risks related to these matters are further described in “—Risks of Commercial and Multifamily Lending Generally” and “—Performance of the Mortgage Loans Will Be Highly Dependent on the Performance of Tenants and Tenant Leases” above, “—Changes in the Retail Sector, Such as Online Shopping and Other Uses of Technology, Could Affect the Business Models and Viability of Retailers”, “—The Performance of the Retail Properties is Subject to Conditions Affecting the Retail Sector” and “—Some Retail Properties Depend on Anchor Stores or Major Tenants to Attract Shoppers and Could be Materially Adversely Affected by the Loss of, or a Store Closure by, One or More of These Anchor Stores or Major Tenants” below.

Rental payments from tenants of retail properties typically comprise the largest portion of the net operating income of those mortgaged properties. The correlation between success of tenant business and a retail property’s value may be more direct with respect to retail properties than other types of commercial property because a component of the total rent paid by certain retail tenants is often tied to a percentage of gross sales. To the extent that a tenant changes the manner in which its gross sales are reported it could result in lower rent paid by that tenant. For example, if a tenant takes into account customer returns of merchandise purchased online and reduces the gross sales, this could result in lower gross sales relative to gross sales previously reported at that location even if the actual performance of the store remained unchanged. We cannot assure you that the net operating income contributed by the retail mortgaged properties or the rates of occupancy at the retail stores will remain at the levels specified in this prospectus or remain consistent with past performance.

Changes in the Retail Sector, Such as Online Shopping and Other Uses of Technology, Could Affect the Business Models and Viability of Retailers.

Online shopping and the use of technology, such as smartphone shopping applications, to transact purchases or to aid purchasing decisions have increased in recent years and are expected to continue to increase in the future. This trend is affecting business models, sales and profitability of some retailers and could adversely affect the demand for retail real estate and occupancy at retail properties securing the mortgage loans. Any resulting decreases in rental revenue could have a material adverse effect on the value of retail properties securing the mortgage loans.

Some of these developments in the retail sector have led to retail companies, including several national retailers, filing for bankruptcy and/or voluntarily closing certain of their stores. Borrowers may be unable to re-lease such space or to re-lease it on comparable or more favorable terms. As a result, the bankruptcy or closure of a national tenant may adversely affect a retail borrower’s revenues. In addition, such closings may allow other tenants to modify their leases to terms that are less favorable for borrowers or to terminate their leases, also adversely impacting their revenues. A number of retailers, including retailers that have stores located at the mortgaged properties, have announced ongoing store closures or are in financial distress, and other tenants at the mortgaged properties have co-tenancy clauses related to such retailers. See also “—Some Retail Properties Depend on Anchor Stores or Major Tenants to Attract Shoppers and Could be Materially Adversely Affected by the Loss of, or a Store Closure by, One or More of These Anchor Stores or Major Tenants” below.

In addition to competition from online shopping, retail properties face competition from sources outside a specific geographical real estate market. For example, all of the following compete with more traditional retail properties for consumers: factory outlet centers, discount shopping centers and clubs, catalog retailers, home shopping networks and telemarketing. Continued growth of these alternative retail outlets (which often have lower operating costs) could adversely affect the rents collectible at the retail properties included in the pool of mortgage loans, as well as the income from, and market value of, the mortgaged properties and the related borrower’s ability to refinance such property. Moreover, additional competing retail properties may be built in the areas where the retail properties are located.

Additionally, the grocery store industry is highly competitive and is characterized by intense price competition, narrow margins, increasing fragmentation of retail and online formats, entry of non-traditional competitors and market consolidation. In addition, evolving customer preferences and the advancement of online, delivery, ship to home, and mobile channels in the industry enhance the competitive environment. Grocery stores may be undercut by competition that have greater financial resources to take measures such as altering product mixes, reducing prices, providing home/in-store fulfillment, or online ordering.

We cannot assure you that these developments in the retail sector will not adversely affect the performance of retail properties securing the mortgage loans.

The Performance of the Retail Properties is Subject to Conditions Affecting the Retail Sector.

Retail properties are also subject to conditions that could negatively affect the retail sector, such as increased unemployment, increased federal income and payroll taxes, increased health care costs, increased state and local taxes, increased real estate taxes, industry slowdowns, lack of availability of consumer credit, weak income growth, increased levels of consumer debt, poor housing market conditions, adverse weather conditions, natural disasters, plant closings, and other factors. Similarly, local real estate conditions, such as an oversupply of, or a reduction in demand for, retail space or retail goods, and the supply and creditworthiness of current and prospective tenants may negatively impact those retail properties.

In addition, the limited adaptability of certain shopping malls or strip centers that have proven unprofitable may result in high (and possibly extremely high) loss severities on mortgage loans secured by those shopping malls or strip centers. For example, it is possible that a significant amount of advances made by the applicable servicer(s) of a mortgage loan

secured by a shopping mall or strip center property, combined with low liquidation proceeds in respect of that property, may result in a loss severity exceeding 100% of the outstanding principal balance of that mortgage loan.

Some Retail Properties Depend on Anchor Stores or Major Tenants to Attract Shoppers and Could be Materially Adversely Affected by the Loss of, or a Store Closure by, One or More of These Anchor Stores or Major Tenants.

The presence or absence of an “anchor tenant” or a “shadow anchor tenant” in or near a retail property also can be important to the performance of a retail property because anchors play a key role in generating customer traffic and making a retail property desirable for other tenants. Retail properties may also have shadow anchor tenants. An “anchor tenant” is located on the related mortgaged property, usually proportionately larger in size than most or all other tenants at the mortgaged property, and is vital in attracting customers to a retail property. A “shadow anchor tenant” is usually proportionally larger in size than most tenants at the mortgaged property, is important in attracting customers to a retail property and is located sufficiently close and convenient to the mortgaged property so as to influence and attract potential customers, but is not located on the mortgaged property.

If anchor stores in a mortgaged property were to close, the related borrower may be unable to replace those anchors in a timely manner or without suffering adverse economic consequences. In addition, anchor tenants and non-anchor tenants at anchored or shadow anchored retail centers may have co-tenancy clauses and/or operating covenants in their leases or operating agreements that permit those tenants or anchor stores to cease operating, reduce rent or terminate their leases if the anchor tenant, the shadow anchor tenant or another major tenant goes dark, a specified percentage of the property is vacant or if the subject store is not meeting the minimum sales requirement under its lease. Even if non-anchor tenants do not have termination or rent abatement rights, the loss of an anchor tenant or a shadow anchor tenant may have a material adverse impact on the non-anchor tenant’s ability to operate because the anchor tenant or shadow anchor tenant plays a key role in generating customer traffic and making a center desirable for other tenants. This, in turn, may adversely impact the borrower’s ability to meet its obligations under the related mortgage loan documents. Anchor tenants frequently have the right to go dark (i.e. cease operating), in their spaces and shadow anchor tenants frequently do not have operating covenants, and therefore are not required to continue operating in proximity to the related mortgaged property. In addition, in the event that a “shadow anchor” fails to renew its lease, terminates its lease or otherwise ceases to conduct business within a close proximity to the mortgaged property, customer traffic at the mortgaged property may be substantially reduced. If an anchor tenant goes dark, generally the borrower’s only remedy may be to terminate that lease after the anchor tenant has been dark for a specified amount of time.

Certain anchor tenants may have the right to demolish and rebuild, or substantially alter, their premises. Exercise of such rights may result in disruptions at the mortgaged property or reduce traffic to the mortgaged property, may trigger co-tenancy clauses if such activities result in the anchor tenants being dark for the period specified in the co-tenancy clause, and may result in reduced value of the structure or in loss of the structure if the tenant fails to rebuild.

If anchor tenants or shadow anchor tenants at a particular mortgaged property were to close or otherwise become vacant or remain vacant, we cannot assure you that the related borrower’s ability to repay its mortgage loan would not be materially and adversely affected.

Certain anchor tenant and tenant estoppels will have been obtained in connection with the origination of the mortgage loans. These estoppels may identify disputes between the related borrower and the applicable anchor tenant or tenant, or alleged defaults or potential defaults by the applicable property owner under the lease or a reciprocal easement and/or operating agreement (each, an “REA”). Such disputes, defaults or potential defaults could lead to a termination or attempted termination of the applicable lease or REA by the anchor tenant or tenant, the tenant withholding some or all of its rental payments, or litigation against the related borrower. We cannot assure you that the anchor tenant or tenant estoppels obtained identify all potential disputes that may arise with respect to the retail mortgaged properties, or that anchor tenant or tenant disputes will not have a material adverse effect on the ability of borrowers to repay their mortgage loans.

Certain retail properties may have specialty use tenants. See “—Some Mortgaged Properties May Not Be Readily Convertible to Alternative Uses” below. See also “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Mortgage Pool Characteristics—Property Types—Retail Properties” and “—Mortgage Pool Characteristics—Property Types—Specialty Use Concentrations”.

Certain retail or other properties may have one or more tenants that sell hemp derived cannabidiol-based products. The legality of certain cannabidiol-based products under federal, state and local laws is uncertain, and, as to state and local laws, may vary based on jurisdiction. Retail leases typically require the tenant to comply with applicable law, however, so any governmental action or definitive legal guidance restricting the possession or distribution of some or all cannabidiol-based products would require the affected tenants to cease possessing and/or distributing such products or otherwise be in breach of their respective leases.

Mixed Use Properties Have Special Risks

Certain properties are mixed use properties. Such mortgaged properties are subject to the risks relating to the property types described in “—Office Properties Have Special Risks” and “—Retail Properties Have Special Risks” as applicable. See Annex A-1 for the 5 largest tenants (by net rentable area leased) at the mixed use property. A mixed use property may be subject to additional risks, including the property manager’s inexperience in managing the different property types that comprise such mixed use property.

Parking Garage Properties Have Special Risks

Certain retail, office or mixed use properties may be partially comprised of a parking garage, or certain properties may be entirely comprised of a parking garage. Parking garages and parking lots present risks not associated with other properties. The primary source of income for parking lots and garages is the rental fees charged for parking spaces.

Factors affecting the success of a parking lot or garage include:

In instances where a parking garage does not have a long-term leasing arrangement with a parking lessee, but rather relies on individual short-term (i.e., daily or weekly) parking tenants for parking revenues, variations in any or all of the foregoing factors can result in increased volatility in the net operating income for such parking garage.

Aspects of building site design and adaptability affect the value of a parking garage facility. Site characteristics that are valuable to a parking garage facility include location, clear ceiling heights, column spacing, zoning restrictions, number of spaces and overall functionality and accessibility.

In addition, because of the unique construction requirements of many parking garages and because a parking lot is often vacant paved land without any structure, a vacant parking garage facility or parking lot may not be easily converted to other uses.

Self Storage Properties Have Special Risks

In addition to the factors discussed in “—Risks of Commercial and Multifamily Lending Generally” above, other factors may adversely affect the financial performance and value of self storage properties, including:

●                     decreased demand;

●                     lack of proximity to apartment complexes or commercial users;

●                     apartment tenants moving to single family homes;

●                     decline in services rendered, including security;

●                     dependence on business activity ancillary to renting units;

●                     security concerns;

●                     age of improvements; or

●                     competition or other factors.

Self storage properties are considered vulnerable to competition, because both acquisition costs and break-even occupancy are relatively low. The conversion of self storage facilities to alternative uses would generally require substantial capital expenditures. Thus, if the operation of any of the self storage properties becomes unprofitable, the liquidation value of that self storage mortgaged property may be substantially less, relative to the amount owing on the mortgage loan, than if the self storage mortgaged property were readily adaptable to other uses. In addition, storage units are typically engaged for shorter time frames than traditional commercial leases for office or retail space. In addition, in certain cases, self storage properties may be leased to commercial tenants, which lease a large block of units or other space. In such case, expiration or termination of the commercial lease will expose the mortgaged property to a concentrated vacancy.

Tenants at self storage properties tend to require and receive privacy, anonymity and efficient access, each of which may heighten environmental and other risks related to such property as the borrower may be unaware of the contents in any self storage unit. No environmental assessment of a self storage mortgaged property included an inspection of the contents of the self storage units at that mortgaged property, and there is no assurance that all of the units included in the self storage mortgaged properties are free from hazardous substances or other pollutants or contaminants or will remain so in the future.

Certain mortgage loans secured by self storage properties may be affiliated with a franchise company through a franchise agreement. The performance of a self storage property affiliated with a franchise company may be affected by the continued existence and financial strength of the franchisor, the public perception of a service mark, and the duration of the franchise agreement. The transferability of franchise license agreements is restricted. In the event of a foreclosure, the lender or its agent would not have the right to use the franchise license without the franchisor’s consent. In addition, certain self storage properties may derive a material portion of revenue from business activities ancillary to self storage such as truck rentals, parking fees and similar activities which require special use permits or other discretionary zoning approvals and/or from leasing a portion of the subject property for office or retail purposes. See Annex A-1 and the footnotes related thereto.

See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Mortgage Pool Characteristics—Property Types—Self Storage Properties”.

Mortgaged Properties Leased to Government Tenants Have Special Risks

Certain of the Mortgaged Properties may be leased in whole or in part by government sponsored tenants. Government sponsored tenants frequently have the right to cancel their leases at any time or after a specific time (in some cases after the delivery of notice) or for lack of appropriations or upon the loss of access to certain government programs or upon other events related to government status.

With respect to tenants that constitute United States government agencies or entities, generally if the related Mortgaged Property is transferred, the leases require the United States and the transferee to enter into novation agreements; however, if the United States determines that recognizing the transferee as landlord is not in its interest, it may continue to hold the transferor liable for performance of obligations under the lease. The United States’ obligation to pay rent to the transferee would be suspended until government transfer procedures are completed, and the United States has determined that recognizing the transferee is in its interest. The foregoing provisions may delay or impede the ability of the lender to realize on the related Mortgaged Properties following a default. In addition, the borrowers may be subject to certain requirements regarding management of the Mortgaged Property and the borrowers required by certain United States agencies.

Condominium Ownership May Limit Use and Improvements

The management and operation of a condominium is generally controlled by a condominium board representing the owners of the individual condominium units, subject to the terms of the related condominium rules or by-laws. Generally, the consent of a majority of the board members is required for any actions of the condominium board and a unit owner’s ability to control decisions of the board are generally related to the number of units owned by such owner as a percentage of the total number of units in the condominium. In certain cases, the related borrower does not have a majority of votes on the condominium board, which result in the related borrower not having control of the related condominium or owners association.

The board of managers or directors of the related condominium generally has discretion to make decisions affecting the condominium, and we cannot assure you that the related borrower under a mortgage loan secured by one or more interests in that condominium will have any control over decisions made by the related board of managers or directors. Even if a borrower or its designated board members, either through control of the appointment and voting of sufficient members of the related condominium board or by

virtue of other provisions in the related condominium documents, has consent rights over actions by the related condominium associations or owners, we cannot assure you that the related condominium board will not take actions that would materially adversely affect the related borrower’s unit. Thus, decisions made by that board of managers or directors, including regarding assessments to be paid by the unit owners, insurance to be maintained on the condominium and many other decisions affecting the maintenance of that condominium, may have a significant adverse impact on the related mortgage loans in the issuing entity that are secured by mortgaged properties consisting of such condominium interests. We cannot assure you that the related board of managers or directors will always act in the best interests of the related borrower under the related mortgage loans. See representation and warranty no. 8 on Annex D-1 and the exceptions thereto on Annex D-2 (subject to the limitations and qualifications set forth in the preamble to Annex D-1).

The condominium board is generally responsible for administration of the affairs of the condominium, including providing for maintenance and repair of common areas, adopting rules and regulations regarding common areas, and obtaining insurance and repairing and restoring the common areas of the property after a casualty. Notwithstanding the insurance and casualty provisions of the related mortgage loan documents, the condominium board may have the right to control the use of casualty proceeds. See representation and warranty no. 18 on Annex D-1 and the exceptions thereto on Annex D 2 (subject to the limitations and qualifications set forth in the preamble to Annex D-1).

In addition, the condominium board generally has the right to assess individual unit owners for their share of expenses related to the operation and maintenance of the common elements. In the event that an owner of another unit fails to pay its allocated assessments, the related borrower may be required to pay such assessments in order to properly maintain and operate the common elements of the property. Although the condominium board generally may obtain a lien against any unit owner for common expenses that are not paid, such lien generally is extinguished if a lender takes possession pursuant to a foreclosure. Each unit owner is responsible for maintenance of its respective unit and retains essential operational control over its unit.

In addition, due to the nature of condominiums, a default on the part of the borrower with respect to such mortgaged properties will not allow the special servicer the same flexibility in realizing on the collateral as is generally available with respect to commercial properties that are not condominium units. The rights of other unit or property owners, the documents governing the management of the condominium units and the state and local laws applicable to condominium units must be considered. In addition, in the event of a casualty with respect to a condominium, due to the possible existence of multiple loss payees on any insurance policy covering such property, there could be a delay in the allocation of related insurance proceeds, if any. Consequently, servicing and realizing upon the collateral described above could subject the certificateholders to a greater delay, expense and risk than with respect to a mortgage loan secured by a commercial property that is not a condominium unit.

Certain condominium declarations and/or local laws provide for the withdrawal of a property from a condominium structure under certain circumstances. For example, the New York Condominium Act provides for a withdrawal of the property from a condominium structure by vote of 80% of unit owners. If the condominium is terminated, the building will be subject to an action for partition by any unit owner or lienor as if owned in common. This could cause an early and unanticipated prepayment of the mortgage loan. We cannot assure you that the proceeds from partition would be sufficient to satisfy borrower’s obligations under the mortgage loan. See also “—Risks Related to Zoning Non-Compliance

and Use Restrictions” for certain risks relating to use restrictions imposed pursuant to condominium declarations or other condominium especially in a situation where the mortgaged property does not represent the entire condominium building.

A condominium regime can also be established with respect to land only, as an alternative to land subdivision in those jurisdictions where it is so permitted. In such circumstances, the condominium board’s responsibilities are typically limited to matters such as landscaping and maintenance of common areas, including private roadways, while individual unit owners have responsibility for the buildings constructed on their respective land units. Likewise, in land condominium regimes, individual unit owners would typically have responsibility for property insurance, although the condominium board might maintain liability insurance for the common areas. Accordingly, while some attributes of a building condominium form are shared by a land condominium, the latter would have a more limited scope of board responsibilities and shared costs.

In addition, vertical subdivisions and “fee above a plane” structures are property ownership structures in which owners have a fee simple interest in certain ground-level and above-ground parcels. Such structures often have risks similar to those of condominium structures. A vertical subdivision or fee above a plane structure is generally governed by a declaration or similar agreement defining the respective owner’s fee estates and relationship; one or more owners typically relies on one or more other owners’ parcels for structural support. Each owner is responsible for maintenance of its respective parcel and retains essential operational control over its parcel. We cannot assure you that owners of parcels supporting collateral interests in vertical subdivision and fee above a plane parcels will perform any maintenance and repair obligations that may be required under the declaration with respect to the supporting parcel, or that proceeds following a casualty would be used to reconstruct a supporting parcel. Owners of interests in a vertical subdivision or fee above a plane structure may be required under the related declaration to pay certain assessments relating to any shared interests in the related property, and a lien may be attached for failure to pay such assessments.

See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Mortgage Pool Characteristics—Condominium and Other Shared Interests”.

Operation of a Mortgaged Property Depends on the Property Manager’s Performance

The successful operation of a real estate project depends upon the property manager’s performance and viability. The property manager is responsible for:

Properties deriving revenues primarily from short term sources, such as hotel guests or short term or month-to-month leases, are generally more management intensive than properties leased to creditworthy tenants under long term leases.

Certain of the mortgaged properties will be managed by affiliates of the related borrower. If a mortgage loan is in default or undergoing special servicing, such relationship could disrupt the management of the related mortgaged property, which may adversely affect cash flow. However, the related mortgage loans will generally permit, in the case of mortgaged properties managed by borrower affiliates, the lender to remove the related property manager upon the occurrence of an event of default under the related mortgage loan beyond applicable cure periods (or, in some cases, in the event of a foreclosure following such default), and in some cases a decline in cash flow below a specified level or the failure to satisfy some other specified performance trigger.

Concentrations Based on Property Type, Geography, Related Borrowers and Other Factors May Disproportionately Increase Losses

The effect of mortgage pool loan losses will be more severe if the losses relate to mortgage loans that account for a disproportionately large percentage of the pool’s aggregate principal balance. As mortgage loans pay down or properties are released, the remaining certificateholders may face a higher risk with respect to the diversity of property types and property characteristics and with respect to the number of borrowers.

See the tables entitled “Remaining Term to Maturity” in Annex A-2 for a stratification of the remaining terms to maturity of the mortgage loans. Because principal on the certificates is payable in sequential order of payment priority, and a class receives principal only after the preceding class(es) have been paid in full, classes that have a lower sequential priority are more likely to face these types of risks of concentration than classes with a higher sequential priority.

Several of the mortgage loans have cut-off date balances that are substantially higher than the average cut-off date balance. In general, concentrations in mortgage loans with larger-than-average balances can result in losses that are more severe, relative to the size of the mortgage loan pool, than would be the case if the aggregate balance of the mortgage loan pool were more evenly distributed.

A concentration of mortgage loans secured by the same mortgaged property types can increase the risk that a decline in a particular industry or business would have a disproportionately large impact on the pool of mortgage loans. Mortgaged property types representing more than 5.0% of the aggregate principal balance of the pool of mortgage loans as of the cut-off date (based on allocated loan amount) are: multifamily, industrial, office, hospitality and retail. See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Mortgage Pool Characteristics—Property Types” for information on the types of mortgaged properties securing the mortgage loans in the mortgage pool.

Repayments by borrowers and the market value of the related mortgaged properties could be affected by economic conditions generally or specific to particular geographic areas or regions of the United States, and concentrations of mortgaged properties in particular geographic areas may increase the risk that conditions in the real estate market where the mortgaged property is located, or other adverse economic or other developments or natural disasters (e.g., earthquakes, floods, forest fires, tornadoes or hurricanes or changes in governmental rules or fiscal policies) affecting a particular region of the country, could increase the frequency and severity of losses on mortgage loans secured by those

mortgaged properties. In particular, there have been predictions that climate change may lead to an increase in the frequency of natural disasters and extreme weather conditions, with certain states bearing a greater risk of the adverse effects of climate change, which could increase the frequency and severity of losses on mortgage loans secured by mortgaged properties located in those states. For example, mortgaged real properties located in California may be more susceptible to certain hazards (such as earthquakes or widespread fires) than mortgaged real properties in other parts of the country and mortgaged real properties located in coastal states generally may be more susceptible to hurricanes than properties in other parts of the country. Hurricanes and related windstorms, floods, droughts, tornadoes and oil spills have caused extensive and catastrophic physical damage in and to coastal and inland areas located in the eastern, mid-Atlantic and Gulf Coast regions of the United States and certain other parts of the eastern and southeastern United States. A number of the mortgaged real properties may be located in areas that are susceptible to such hazards. The geographic locations of the mortgaged real properties are indicated on Annex A-1. As a result, areas affected by such events may experience disruptions in travel, transportation and tourism, loss of jobs, an overall decrease in consumer activity, or a decline in real estate-related investments. We cannot assure you that the economies in such impacted areas will recover sufficiently to support income-producing real estate at pre-event levels or that the costs of the related clean-up will not have a material adverse effect on the local or national economy. See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Mortgage Pool Characteristics—Geographic Concentrations” in this prospectus. We cannot assure you that any hurricane damage would be covered by insurance.

Mortgaged properties securing 5.0% or more of the aggregate principal balance of the pool of mortgage loans as of the cut-off date (based on allocated loan amount) are located in New York, California, Texas, Michigan, the District of Columbia, New Jersey, Connecticut and Louisiana. See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Mortgage Pool Characteristics—Geographic Concentrations”.

Some of the mortgaged properties are located in areas that, based on low population density, poor economic demographics (such as higher than average unemployment rates, lower than average annual household income and/or overall loss of jobs) and/or negative trends in such regards, would be considered secondary or tertiary markets.

A concentration of mortgage loans with the same borrower or related borrowers also can pose increased risks, such as:

managing members, thereby increasing the risk that financial or other difficulties experienced by such related parties could have a greater impact on the pool of mortgage loans. See “—A Bankruptcy Proceeding May Result in Losses and Delays in Realizing on the Mortgage Loans” below.

See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Mortgage Pool Characteristics” for information on the composition of the mortgage pool by property type and geographic distribution and loan concentration.

Adverse Environmental Conditions at or Near Mortgaged Properties May Result in Losses

The issuing entity could become liable for a material adverse environmental condition at an underlying mortgaged property. Any such potential liability could reduce or delay payments on the offered certificates.

Each of the mortgaged properties was either (i) subject to environmental site assessments prior to the time of origination of the related mortgage loan (or, in certain limited cases, after origination) including Phase I environmental site assessments or updates of previously performed Phase I environmental site assessments, or (ii) subject to a secured creditor environmental insurance policy or other environmental insurance policy. See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Environmental Considerations”.

We cannot assure you that the environmental assessments revealed all existing or potential environmental risks or that all adverse environmental conditions have been or will be completely abated or remediated or that any reserves, insurance or operations and maintenance plans will be sufficient to remediate the environmental conditions. Moreover, we cannot assure you that:

We cannot assure you that with respect to any mortgaged property any remediation plan or any projected remedial costs or time is accurate or sufficient to complete the remediation objectives, or that no additional contamination requiring environmental investigation or remediation will be discovered on any mortgaged property. Likewise, all environmental policies naming the lender as named insured cover certain risks or events specifically identified in the policy, but the coverage is limited by its terms, conditions, limitations and exclusions, and does not purport to cover all environmental conditions whatsoever affecting the applicable mortgaged property, and we cannot assure you that any environmental conditions currently known, suspected, or unknown and discovered in the future will be covered by the terms of the policy.

Before the trustee or the special servicer, as applicable, acquires title to a mortgaged property on behalf of the issuing entity or assumes operation of the property, it will be required to obtain an environmental assessment of such mortgaged property, or rely on a recent environmental assessment. This requirement is intended to mitigate the risk that the issuing entity will become liable under any environmental law. There is accordingly some risk that the mortgaged property will decline in value while this assessment is being

obtained or remedial action is being taken. Moreover, we cannot assure you that this requirement will effectively insulate the issuing entity from potential liability under environmental laws. Any such potential liability could reduce or delay distributions to certificateholders.

See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Environmental Considerations” for additional information on environmental conditions at mortgaged properties securing certain mortgage loans in the issuing entity. See also representation and warranty no. 43 on Annex D-1 and the exceptions thereto on Annex D-2 (subject to the limitations and qualifications set forth in the preamble to Annex D-1).

See “Transaction Parties—The Sponsors and Mortgage Loan Sellers—Wells Fargo Bank, National Association—Wells Fargo Bank’s Commercial Mortgage Loan Underwriting”; “—Argentic Real Estate Finance 2 LLC—Argentic’s Underwriting Standards and Processes”; “—Citi Real Estate Funding Inc.—Citi Real Estate Funding Inc.’s Underwriting Standards”; “—UBS AG— UBS AG New York Branch’s Underwriting Standards”; “—Bank of Montreal—BMO’s Origination Procedures and Underwriting Guidelines”; “—Greystone Commercial Mortgage Capital LLC— GCMC’s Origination Procedures and Underwriting Guidelines”; “—Zions Bancorporation, N.A.—ZBNA’s Underwriting Guidelines and Process”; “—BSPRT CMBS Finance, LLC—BSPRT’s Underwriting Standards”; and “—Natixis Real Estate Capital LLC—NREC’s Underwriting Standards”.

See “Certain Legal Aspects of Mortgage Loans—Environmental Considerations”.

Risks Related to Redevelopment, Expansion and Renovation at Mortgaged Properties

Certain of the mortgaged properties are currently undergoing or, in the future, are expected to undergo redevelopment, expansion or renovation. In addition, the related borrower may be permitted under the related mortgage loan documents, at its option and cost but subject to certain conditions, to undergo future construction, renovation or alterations of the mortgaged property. To the extent applicable, we cannot assure you that any escrow or reserve collected, if any, will be sufficient to complete the current renovation or be otherwise sufficient to satisfy any tenant improvement expenses at a mortgaged property. Failure to complete those planned improvements may have a material adverse effect on the cash flow at the mortgaged property and the related borrower’s ability to meet its payment obligations under the mortgage loan documents.

Certain of the hospitality properties securing the mortgage loans are currently undergoing or are scheduled to undergo renovations or property improvement plans. In some circumstances, these renovations or property improvement plans may necessitate taking a portion of the available guest rooms temporarily offline, temporarily decreasing the number of available rooms and the revenue generating capacity of the related hospitality property. In other cases, these renovations may involve renovations of common spaces or external features of the related hospitality property, which may cause disruptions or otherwise decrease the attractiveness of the related hospitality property to potential guests. These property improvement plans may be required under the related franchise or management agreement and a failure to timely complete them may result in a termination or expiration of a franchise or management agreement and may be an event of default under the related mortgage loan.

Certain of the properties securing the mortgage loans may currently be undergoing or are scheduled to undergo renovations or property expansions. Such renovations or

expansions may be required under tenant leases and a failure to timely complete such renovations or expansions may result in a termination of such lease and may have a material adverse effect on the cash flow at the mortgaged property and the related borrower’s ability to meet its payment obligations under the mortgage loan documents.

We cannot assure you that current or planned redevelopment, expansion or renovation will be completed at all, that such redevelopment, expansion or renovation will be completed in the time frame contemplated, or that, when and if such redevelopment, expansion or renovation is completed, such redevelopment, expansion or renovation will improve the operations at, or increase the value of, the related mortgaged property. Failure of any of the foregoing to occur could have a material negative impact on the related mortgaged property, which could affect the ability of the related borrower to repay the related mortgage loan.

In the event the related borrower fails to pay the costs for work completed or material delivered in connection with such ongoing redevelopment, expansion or renovation, the portion of the mortgaged property on which there are renovations may be subject to mechanic’s or materialmen’s liens that may be senior to the lien of the related mortgage loan.

The existence of construction or renovation at a mortgaged property may take rental units or rooms or leasable space “off-line” or otherwise make space unavailable for rental, impair access or traffic at or near the mortgaged property, or, in general, make that mortgaged property less attractive to tenants or their customers, and accordingly could have a negative effect on net operating income. In addition, any such construction or renovation at a mortgaged property may temporarily interfere with the use and operation of any portion of such mortgaged property. See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Redevelopment, Renovation and Expansion” for information regarding mortgaged properties which are currently undergoing or, in the future, are expected to undergo redevelopment, expansion or renovation. See also Annex A-3 for additional information on redevelopment, renovation and expansion at the mortgaged properties securing the 15 largest mortgage loans.

Some Mortgaged Properties May Not Be Readily Convertible to Alternative Uses

Certain mortgaged properties securing the mortgage loans may have specialty use tenants and may not be readily convertible (or convertible at all) to alternative uses if those properties were to become unprofitable for any reason.

For example, retail, office or mixed use properties may have theater tenants. Properties with theater tenants are exposed to certain unique risks. Aspects of building site design and adaptability affect the value of a theater. In addition, decreasing attendance at a theater could adversely affect revenue of such theater, which may, in turn, cause the tenant to experience financial difficulties, resulting in downgrades in their credit ratings and, in certain cases, bankruptcy filings. In addition, because of unique construction requirements of theaters, any vacant theater space would not easily be converted to other uses.

Retail, office or mixed use properties may also have health clubs as tenants. Several factors may adversely affect the value and successful operation of a health club, including:

In addition, there may be significant costs associated with changing consumer preferences (e.g., multipurpose clubs from single-purpose clubs or varieties of equipment, classes, services and amenities). In addition, health clubs may not be readily convertible to alternative uses if those properties were to become unprofitable for any reason. The liquidation value of any such health club consequently may be less than would be the case if the property were readily adaptable to changing consumer preferences for other uses.

Certain properties may be partially comprised of a parking garage, or certain properties may be entirely comprised of a parking garage. Parking garages and parking lots present risks not associated with other properties. The primary source of income for parking lots and garages is the rental fees charged for parking spaces.

Factors affecting the success of a parking lot or garage include:

In instances where a parking garage does not have a long-term leasing arrangement with a parking lessee, but rather relies on individual short-term (i.e., daily or weekly) parking tenants for parking revenues, variations in any or all of the foregoing factors can result in increased volatility in the net operating income for such parking garage.

Aspects of building site design and adaptability affect the value of a parking garage facility. Site characteristics that are valuable to a parking garage facility include location, clear ceiling heights, column spacing, zoning restrictions, number of spaces and overall functionality and accessibility.

In addition, because of the unique construction requirements of many parking garages and because a parking lot is often vacant paved land without any structure, a vacant parking garage facility or parking lot may not be easily converted to other uses.

Mortgaged properties may have other specialty use tenants, such as retail bank branches, medical and dental offices, lab space, gas stations, data centers, urgent care

facilities, daycare centers, television studios, arcades, design showrooms and/or restaurants, as part of the mortgaged property.

In the case of specialty use tenants such as restaurants and theaters, aspects of building site design and adaptability affect the value of such properties and other retailers at the mortgaged property. Decreasing patronage at such properties could adversely affect revenue of the property, which may, in turn, cause the tenants to experience financial difficulties, resulting in downgrades in their credit ratings, lease defaults and, in certain cases, bankruptcy filings. See “—Performance of the Mortgage Loans Will Be Highly Dependent on the Performance of Tenants and Tenant Leases—Tenant Bankruptcy Could Result in a Rejection of the Related Lease” above. Additionally, receipts at such properties are also affected not only by objective factors but by subjective factors. For instance, restaurant receipts are affected by such varied influences as the current personal income levels in the community, an individual consumer’s preference for type of food, style of dining and restaurant atmosphere, the perceived popularity of the restaurant, food safety concerns related to personal health with the handling of food items at the restaurant or by food suppliers and the actions and/or behaviors of staff and management and level of service to the customers. In addition, because of unique construction requirements of such properties, any vacant space would not easily be converted to other uses.

Retail bank branches are specialty use tenants that are often outfitted with vaults, teller counters and other customary installations and equipment that may have required significant capital expenditures to install. The ability to lease these types of properties may be difficult due to the added cost and time to retrofit the property to allow for other uses.

Mortgaged properties with specialty use tenants may not be readily convertible (or convertible at all) to alternative uses if those properties were to become unprofitable, or the leased spaces were to become vacant, for any reason due to their unique construction requirements. In addition, converting commercial properties to alternate uses generally requires substantial capital expenditures and could result in a significant adverse effect on, or interruption of, the revenues generated by such properties.

In addition, a mortgaged property may not be readily convertible due to restrictive covenants related to such mortgaged property, including in the case of mortgaged properties that are subject to a condominium regime or subject to a ground lease, the use and other restrictions imposed by the condominium declaration and other related documents, especially in a situation where a mortgaged property does not represent the entire condominium regime. See “—Condominium Ownership May Limit Use and Improvements” above.

Some of the mortgaged properties may be part of tax-reduction programs that apply only if the mortgaged properties are used for certain purposes. Such properties may be restricted from being converted to alternative uses because of such restrictions.

Some of the mortgaged properties have government tenants or other tenants which may have space that was “built to suit” that particular tenant’s uses and needs. For example, a government tenant may require enhanced security features that required additional construction or renovation costs and for which the related tenant may pay above market rent. However, such enhanced features may not be necessary for a new tenant (and such new tenant may not be willing to pay the higher rent associated with such features). While a government office building or government leased space may be usable as a regular office building or tenant space, the rents that may be collected in the event the

government tenant does not renew its lease may be significantly lower than the rent currently collected.

Additionally, zoning, historical preservation or other restrictions also may prevent alternative uses. See “—Risks Related to Zoning Non-Compliance and Use Restrictions” below.

Risks Related to Zoning Non-Compliance and Use Restrictions

Certain of the mortgaged properties may not comply with current zoning laws, including use, density, parking, height, landscaping, open space and set back requirements, due to changes in zoning requirements after such mortgaged properties were constructed. These properties, as well as those for which variances or special permits were issued or for which non-conformity with current zoning laws is otherwise permitted, are considered to be a “legal non-conforming use” and/or the improvements are considered to be “legal non-conforming structures”. This means that the borrower is not required to alter its structure to comply with the existing or new law; however, the borrower may not be able to rebuild the premises “as-is” in the event of a substantial casualty loss. This may adversely affect the cash flow of the property following the loss. If a substantial casualty were to occur, we cannot assure you that insurance proceeds would be available to pay the mortgage loan in full. In addition, if a non-conforming use were to be discontinued and/or the property were repaired or restored in conformity with the current law, the value of the property or the revenue-producing potential of the property may not be equal to, and could be substantially less than, that before the casualty.

In some cases, the related borrower has obtained law and ordinance insurance to cover additional costs that result from rebuilding the mortgaged property in accordance with current zoning requirements, including, within the policy’s limitations, demolition costs, increased costs of construction due to code compliance and loss of value to undamaged improvements resulting from the application of zoning laws. However, if as a result of the applicable zoning laws, the improvements cannot be used for the current use, or the rebuilt improvements are smaller or less attractive to tenants than the original improvements, you should not assume that the resulting loss in income will be covered by law and ordinance insurance. Zoning protection insurance, if obtained, will generally reimburse the lender for the difference between (i) the mortgage loan balance on the date of damage loss to the mortgaged property from an insured peril and (ii) the total insurance proceeds at the time of the damage to the mortgaged property if such mortgaged property cannot be rebuilt to its former use due to new zoning ordinances.

In addition, certain of the mortgaged properties that do not conform to current zoning laws may not be “legal non-conforming uses” or “legal non-conforming structures”, thus constituting a zoning violation. The failure of a mortgaged property to comply with zoning laws or to be a “legal non-conforming use” or “legal non-conforming structure” may adversely affect the market value of the mortgaged property or the borrower’s ability to continue to use it in the manner it is currently being used or may necessitate material additional expenditures to remedy non-conformities. See representation and warranty no. 26 on Annex D-1 and the exceptions thereto on Annex D-2 (subject to the limitations and qualifications set forth in the preamble to Annex D-1).

The limited availability of zoning information and/or extent of zoning diligence may also present risks. Zoning information contained in appraisals may be based on limited investigation, and zoning comfort letters obtained from jurisdictions, while based on available records, do not customarily involve any contemporaneous site inspection. The

extent of zoning diligence will also be determined based on perceived risk and the cost and benefit of obtaining additional information. Even if law and ordinance insurance is required to mitigate rebuilding-related risks, we cannot assure you that other risks related to material zoning violations will have been identified under such circumstances, and that appropriate borrower covenants or other structural mitigants will have been required as a result.

In addition, certain of the mortgaged properties may be subject to certain use restrictions and/or operational requirements imposed pursuant to development agreements, regulatory agreements, ground leases, restrictive covenants, environmental restrictions, reciprocal easement agreements or operating agreements or historical landmark designations or, in the case of those mortgaged properties that are condominiums, condominium declarations or other condominium use restrictions or regulations, especially in a situation where the mortgaged property does not represent the entire condominium building. Such use restrictions could include, for example, limitations on the character of the improvements or the properties, limitations affecting noise and parking requirements, among other things, and limitations on the borrowers’ right to operate certain types of facilities within a prescribed radius. These limitations impose upon the borrower stricter requirements with respect to repairs and alterations, including following a casualty loss. These limitations could adversely affect the ability of the related borrower to lease the mortgaged property on favorable terms, thus adversely affecting the borrower’s ability to fulfill its obligations under the related mortgage loan. In addition, any alteration, reconstruction, demolition, or new construction affecting a mortgaged property designated a historical landmark may require prior approval. Any such approval process, even if successful, could delay any redevelopment or alteration of a related property. The liquidation value of such property, to the extent subject to limitations of the kind described above or other limitations on convertibility of use, may be substantially less than would be the case if such property was readily adaptable to other uses or redevelopment. Further, such agreements may give the related owners’ association the right to impose assessments which, if unpaid, would constitute a lien prior to that of the Mortgage Loan. See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Use Restrictions” for examples of mortgaged properties that are subject to restrictions relating to the use of the mortgaged properties.

Risks Relating to Inspections of Properties

Licensed engineers or consultants inspected the mortgaged properties at or about the time of the origination of the mortgage loans to assess items such as structural integrity of the buildings and other improvements on the mortgaged property, including exterior walls, roofing, interior construction, mechanical and electrical systems and general condition of the site, buildings and other improvements. However, we cannot assure you that all conditions requiring repair or replacement were identified. No additional property inspections were conducted in connection with the issuance of the offered certificates.

Risks Relating to Costs of Compliance with Applicable Laws and Regulations

A borrower may be required to incur costs to comply with various existing and future federal, state or local laws and regulations applicable to the related mortgaged property, for example, zoning laws and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended, which requires all public accommodations to meet certain federal requirements related to access and use by persons with disabilities. See “Certain Legal Aspects of Mortgage Loans—Americans with Disabilities Act”. In addition, a borrower may incur costs to comply with various existing and future federal, state or local laws and regulations enacted to address the potential impact of climate change, including, for example, laws that require mortgaged

properties to comply with certain green building certification programs (e.g. LEED and EnergyStar) and other laws which may impact commercial real estate as a result of efforts to mitigate the factors contributing to climate change. The expenditure of these costs or the imposition of injunctive relief, penalties or fines in connection with the borrower’s noncompliance could negatively impact the borrower’s cash flow and, consequently, its ability to pay its mortgage loan.

Insurance May Not Be Available or Adequate

Although the mortgaged properties are required to be insured, or self-insured by a sole tenant of a related building or group of buildings, against certain risks, there is a possibility of casualty loss with respect to the mortgaged properties for which insurance proceeds may not be adequate or which may result from risks not covered by insurance.

In addition, certain types of mortgaged properties, such as manufactured housing and recreational vehicle communities, have few or no insurable buildings or improvements and thus do not have casualty insurance or low limits of casualty insurance in comparison with the related mortgage loan balances.

In addition, hazard insurance policies will typically contain co-insurance clauses that in effect require an insured at all times to carry insurance of a specified percentage, generally 80% to 90%, of the full replacement value of the improvements on the related mortgaged property in order to recover the full amount of any partial loss. As a result, even if insurance coverage is maintained, if the insured’s coverage falls below this specified percentage, those clauses generally provide that the insurer’s liability in the event of partial loss does not exceed the lesser of (1) the replacement cost of the improvements less physical depreciation and (2) that proportion of the loss as the amount of insurance carried bears to the specified percentage of the full replacement cost of those improvements.

Certain of the mortgaged properties may be located in areas that are considered a high earthquake risk (seismic zones 3 or 4). See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Mortgage Pool Characteristics—Geographic Concentrations”.

Furthermore, with respect to certain mortgage loans, the insurable value of the related mortgaged property as of the origination date of the related mortgage loan was lower than the principal balance of the related mortgage loan. In the event of a casualty when a borrower is not required to rebuild or cannot rebuild, we cannot assure you that the insurance required with respect to the related mortgaged property will be sufficient to pay the related mortgage loan in full and there is no “gap” insurance required under such mortgage loan to cover any difference. In those circumstances, a casualty that occurs near the maturity date may result in an extension of the maturity date of the mortgage loan if the special servicer, in accordance with the servicing standard, determines that such extension was in the best interest of certificateholders.

The mortgage loans do not all require flood insurance on the related mortgaged properties unless they are in a flood zone and flood insurance is available and, in certain instances, even where the related mortgaged property was in a flood zone and flood insurance was available, flood insurance was not required.

The National Flood Insurance Program (the “NFIP”) is scheduled to expire on September 30, 2025. We cannot assure you if or when the program will be reauthorized. Expiration of the NFIP could have an adverse effect on the value of properties in flood zones or their ability to be repaired or rebuilt after flood damage.

We cannot assure you that any damage caused by hurricanes, windstorms, floods, droughts, tornadoes, wildfires, oil spills or other events will be covered by insurance, or even if covered by insurance, that the insurer will have sufficient financial resources to make any payment on the insurance policy or that the insurer will not challenge any claim resulting in a delay or reduction of the ultimate insurance proceeds. Any such lack of coverage, insufficiency of resources or challenge to a claim could have a material adverse effect on the performance of the certificates.

We cannot assure you that the borrowers will in the future be able to comply with requirements to maintain adequate insurance with respect to the mortgaged properties, and any uninsured loss could have a material adverse impact on the amount available to make payments on the related mortgage loan, and consequently, the offered certificates. As with all real estate, if reconstruction (for example, following fire or other casualty) or any major repair or improvement is required to the damaged property, changes in laws and governmental regulations may be applicable and may materially affect the cost to, or ability of, the borrowers to effect such reconstruction, major repair or improvement. As a result, the amount realized with respect to the mortgaged properties, and the amount available to make payments on the related mortgage loan, and consequently, the offered certificates, could be reduced. In addition, we cannot assure you that the amount of insurance required or provided would be sufficient to cover damages caused by any casualty, or that such insurance will be available in the future at commercially reasonable rates. See representation and warranty no. 18 on Annex D-1 and the exceptions thereto on Annex D-2 (subject to the limitations and qualifications set forth in the preamble to Annex D-1).

Inadequacy of Title Insurers May Adversely Affect Distributions on Your Certificates

Title insurance for a mortgaged property generally insures a lender against risks relating to a lender not having a first lien with respect to a mortgaged property, and in some cases can insure a lender against specific other risks. The protection afforded by title insurance depends on the ability of the title insurer to pay claims made upon it. We cannot assure you that with respect to any mortgage loan:

Certain of the mortgaged properties are either completing initial construction or undergoing renovation or redevelopment. Under such circumstances, there may be limitations to the amount of coverage or other exceptions to coverage that could adversely affect the issuing entity if losses are suffered.

Terrorism Insurance May Not Be Available for All Mortgaged Properties

The occurrence or the possibility of terrorist attacks could (1) lead to damage to one or more of the mortgaged properties if any terrorist attacks occur or (2) result in higher costs for security and insurance premiums or diminish the availability of insurance coverage for losses related to terrorist attacks, particularly for large properties, which could adversely affect the cash flow at those mortgaged properties.

After the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in New York City and the Washington, D.C. area, all forms of insurance were impacted, particularly from a cost and availability perspective, including comprehensive general liability and business interruption or rent loss insurance policies required by typical mortgage loans. To give time for private markets to develop a pricing mechanism for terrorism risk and to build capacity to absorb future losses that may occur due to terrorism, the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 was enacted on November 26, 2002 (as amended, “TRIPRA”), establishing the Terrorism Insurance Program. The Terrorism Insurance Program has since been extended and reauthorized a few times. Most recently, it was reauthorized on December 20, 2019 for a period of seven years through December 31, 2027 pursuant to the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2019.

The Terrorism Insurance Program requires insurance carriers to provide terrorism coverage in their basic “all-risk” policies. Any commercial property and casualty terrorism insurance exclusion that was in force on November 26, 2002 is automatically void to the extent that it excluded losses that would otherwise be insured losses. Any state approval of those types of exclusions in force on November 26, 2002 is also void.

Under the Terrorism Insurance Program, the federal government shares in the risk of losses occurring within the United States resulting from acts committed in an effort to influence or coerce United States civilians or the United States government. The federal share of compensation for insured losses of an insurer equals 80% of the portion of such insured losses that exceed a deductible equal to 20% of the value of the insurer’s direct earned premiums over the immediately preceding calendar year. Federal compensation in any program year is capped at $100 billion (with insurers being liable for any amount that exceeds such cap), and no compensation is payable with respect to a terrorist act unless the aggregate industry losses relating to such act exceed $200 million. The Terrorism Insurance Program does not cover nuclear, biological, chemical or radiological attacks. Unless a borrower obtains separate coverage for events that do not meet the thresholds or other requirements above, such events will not be covered.

If the Terrorism Insurance Program is not reenacted after its expiration in 2027, premiums for terrorism insurance coverage will likely increase and the terms of such insurance policies may be materially amended to increase stated exclusions or to otherwise effectively decrease the scope of coverage available (perhaps to the point where it is effectively not available). In addition, to the extent that any insurance policies contain “sunset clauses” (i.e., clauses that void terrorism coverage if the federal insurance backstop program is not renewed), such policies may cease to provide terrorism insurance upon the expiration of the Terrorism Insurance Program. We cannot assure you that the Terrorism Insurance Program or any successor program will create any long term changes in the availability and cost of such insurance. Moreover, future legislation, including regulations expected to be adopted by the Treasury Department pursuant to TRIPRA, may have a material effect on the availability of federal assistance in the terrorism insurance market. To the extent that uninsured or underinsured casualty losses occur with respect to the related mortgaged properties, losses on the mortgage loans may result. In addition, the failure to maintain such terrorism insurance may constitute a default under the related mortgage loan.

Some of the mortgage loans do not require the related borrower to maintain terrorism insurance. In addition, most of the mortgage loans contain limitations on the related borrower’s obligation to obtain terrorism insurance, such as (i) waiving the requirement that such borrower maintain terrorism insurance if such insurance is not available at commercially reasonable rates, (ii) providing that the related borrower is not

required to spend in excess of a specified dollar amount (or in some cases, a specified multiple of what is spent on other insurance) in order to obtain such terrorism insurance, (iii) requiring coverage only for as long as the TRIPRA is in effect, or (iv) requiring coverage only for losses arising from domestic acts of terrorism or from terrorist acts certified by the federal government as “acts of terrorism” under the TRIPRA. See Annex A-3 for a summary of the terrorism insurance requirements under each of the 10 largest mortgage loans. See representation and warranty no. 31 on Annex D-1 and the exceptions thereto on Annex D-2 (subject to the limitations and qualifications set forth in the preamble to Annex D-1).

We cannot assure you that all of the mortgaged properties will be insured against the risks of terrorism and similar acts. As a result of any of the foregoing, the amount available to make distributions on your certificates could be reduced.

Other mortgaged properties securing mortgage loans may also be insured under a blanket policy or self-insured or insured by a sole tenant. See “—Risks Associated with Blanket Insurance Policies or Self-Insurance” below.

Risks Associated with Blanket Insurance Policies or Self-Insurance

Certain of the mortgaged properties are covered by blanket insurance policies, which also cover other properties of the related borrower or its affiliates (including certain properties in close proximity to the mortgaged properties). In the event that such policies are drawn on to cover losses on such other properties, the amount of insurance coverage available under such policies would thereby be reduced and could be insufficient to cover each mortgaged property’s insurable risks.

Certain mortgaged properties may also be insured or self-insured by a sole or significant tenant, as further described under “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Insurance Considerations”. We cannot assure you that any insurance obtained by a sole or significant tenant will be adequate or that such sole or significant tenant will comply with any requirements to maintain adequate insurance. Additionally, to the extent that insurance coverage relies on self-insurance, there is a risk that the “insurer” will not be willing or have the financial ability to satisfy a claim if a loss occurs. See also representation and warranty no. 18 on Annex D-1 and the exceptions thereto on Annex D-2 (subject to the limitations and qualifications set forth in the preamble to Annex D-1).

Additionally, the risks related to blanket or self-insurance may be aggravated if the mortgage loans that allow such coverage are part of a group of mortgage loans with related borrowers, some or all of which are covered under the same self-insurance or blanket insurance policy, and which may also cover other properties owned by affiliates of such borrowers.

Condemnation of a Mortgaged Property May Adversely Affect Distributions on Certificates

From time to time, there may be condemnations pending or threatened against one or more of the mortgaged properties securing the mortgage loans. The proceeds payable in connection with a total condemnation may not be sufficient to restore the related mortgaged property or to satisfy the remaining indebtedness of the related mortgage loan. The occurrence of a partial condemnation may have a material adverse effect on the continued use of, or income generated by, the affected mortgaged property. The application of condemnation proceeds may be subject to the leases of certain major tenants and, in some cases, the tenant may be entitled to a portion of the condemnation proceeds.

Therefore, we cannot assure you that the occurrence of any condemnation will not have a negative impact upon distributions on your offered certificates. See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Litigation and Other Considerations” in this prospectus.

Limited Information Causes Uncertainty

Historical Information

Some of the mortgage loans that we intend to include in the issuing entity are secured in whole or in part by mortgaged properties for which limited or no historical operating information is available. As a result, you may find it difficult to analyze the historical performance of those mortgaged properties.

A mortgaged property may lack prior operating history or historical financial information because it is newly constructed or renovated, it is a recent acquisition by the related borrower or it is a single-tenant property that is subject to a triple-net lease. In addition, a tenant’s lease may contain confidentiality provisions that restrict the sponsors’ access to or disclosure of such tenant’s financial information. The underwritten net cash flows and underwritten net operating income for such mortgaged properties are derived principally from current rent rolls or tenant leases and historical expenses, adjusted to account for inflation, significant occupancy increases and a market rate management fee. In some cases, underwritten net cash flows and underwritten net operating income for mortgaged properties are based all or in part on leases (or letters of intent) that are not yet in place (and may still be under negotiation) or on tenants that may have signed a lease (or letter of intent), or lease amendment expanding the leased space, but are not yet in occupancy and/or paying rent, which present certain risks described in “—Underwritten Net Cash Flow Could Be Based On Incorrect or Flawed Assumptions” below.

See Annex A-1 for certain historical financial information relating to the mortgaged properties, including net operating income for the most recent reporting period and prior three calendar years, to the extent available.

Ongoing Information

The primary source of ongoing information regarding the offered certificates, including information regarding the status of the related mortgage loans and any credit support for the offered certificates, will be the periodic reports delivered to you. See “Description of the Certificates—Reports to Certificateholders; Certain Available Information”. We cannot assure you that any additional ongoing information regarding the offered certificates will be available through any other source. The limited nature of the available information in respect of the offered certificates may adversely affect their liquidity, even if a secondary market for the offered certificates does develop.

We are not aware of any source through which pricing information regarding the offered certificates will be generally available on an ongoing basis or on any particular date.

Underwritten Net Cash Flow Could Be Based On Incorrect or Flawed Assumptions

As described under “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Certain Calculations and Definitions”, underwritten net cash flow generally includes cash flow (including any cash flow from master leases) adjusted based on a number of assumptions used by the sponsors. We make no representation that the underwritten net cash flow set forth in this prospectus as of the cut-off date or any other date represents actual future net cash flows. For

example, with respect to certain mortgage loans included in the issuing entity, the occupancy of the related mortgaged property reflects tenants that (i) may not have yet actually executed leases (but have in some instances signed letters of intent), (ii) have signed leases but have not yet taken occupancy and/or are not paying full contractual rent, (iii) are seeking or may in the future seek to sublet all or a portion of their respective spaces, (iv) are “dark” tenants but paying rent, or (v) are affiliates of the related borrower and are leasing space pursuant to a master lease or a space lease. Similarly, with respect to certain mortgage loans included in the issuing entity, the underwritten net cash flow may be based on certain tenants that have not yet executed leases or that have signed leases but are not yet in place and/or are not yet paying rent, or have a signed lease or lease amendment expanding the leased space, but are not yet in occupancy of all or a portion of their space and/or paying rent, or may assume that future contractual rent steps (during some or all of the remaining term of a lease) have occurred. In many cases, co-tenancy provisions were assumed to be satisfied and vacant space was assumed to be occupied and space that was due to expire was assumed to have been re-let, in each case at market rates that may have exceeded current rent. You should review these and other similar assumptions and make your own determination of the appropriate assumptions to be used in determining underwritten net cash flow.

In addition, underwritten or adjusted cash flows, by their nature, are speculative and are based upon certain assumptions and projections. The failure of these assumptions or projections in whole or in part could cause the underwritten net operating income (calculated as described in “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Certain Calculations and Definitions”) to vary substantially from the actual net operating income of a mortgaged property.

In the event of the inaccuracy of any assumptions or projections used in connection with the calculation of underwritten net cash flow, the actual net cash flow could be significantly different (and, in some cases, may be materially less) than the underwritten net cash flow presented in this prospectus, and this would change other numerical information presented in this prospectus based on or derived from the underwritten net cash flow, such as the debt service coverage ratios or debt yield presented in this prospectus. We cannot assure you that any such assumptions or projections made with respect to any mortgaged property will, in fact, be consistent with that mortgaged property’s actual performance.

In addition, the debt service coverage ratios set forth in this prospectus for the mortgage loans and the mortgaged properties vary, and may vary substantially, from the debt service coverage ratios for the mortgage loans and the mortgaged properties as calculated pursuant to the definition of such ratios as set forth in the related mortgage loan documents. See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Certain Calculations and Definitions” in this prospectus for additional information on certain of the mortgage loans in the issuing entity.

Frequent and Early Occurrence of Borrower Delinquencies and Defaults May Adversely Affect Your Investment

If you calculate the anticipated yield of your offered certificates based on a rate of default or amount of losses lower than that actually experienced on the mortgage loans and those additional losses result in a reduction of the total distributions on, or the certificate balance of, your offered certificates, your actual yield to maturity will be lower than expected and could be negative under certain extreme scenarios. The timing of any loss on a liquidated mortgage loan that results in a reduction of the total distributions on or the

certificate balance of your offered certificates will also affect the actual yield to maturity of your offered certificates, even if the rate of defaults and severity of losses are consistent with your expectations. In general, the earlier a loss is borne by you, the greater the effect on your yield to maturity.

Delinquencies on the mortgage loans, if the delinquent amounts are not advanced, may result in shortfalls in distributions of interest and/or principal to the holders of the offered certificates for the current month. Furthermore, no interest will accrue on this shortfall during the period of time that the payment is delinquent. Additionally, in instances where the principal portion of any balloon payment scheduled with respect to a mortgage loan is collected by the master servicer following the end of the related collection period, no portion of the principal received on such payment will be passed through for distribution to the certificateholders until the subsequent distribution date, which may result in shortfalls in distributions of interest to the holders of the offered certificates in the following month. Furthermore, in such instances no provision is made for the master servicer or any other party to cover any such interest shortfalls that may occur as a result. In addition, if interest and/or principal advances and/or servicing advances are made with respect to a mortgage loan after a default and the related mortgage loan is thereafter worked out under terms that do not provide for the repayment of those advances in full at the time of the workout, then any reimbursements of those advances prior to the actual collection of the amount for which the advance was made may also result in shortfalls in distributions of principal to the holders of the offered certificates with certificate balances for the current month. Even if losses on the mortgage loans are not allocated to a particular class of offered certificates with certificate balances, the losses may affect the weighted average life and yield to maturity of that class of offered certificates. In the case of any material monetary or material non-monetary default, the special servicer may accelerate the maturity of the related mortgage loan, which could result in an acceleration of principal distributions to the certificateholders. The special servicer may also extend or modify a mortgage loan, which could result in a substantial delay in principal distributions to the certificateholders. In addition, losses on the mortgage loans, even if not allocated to a class of offered certificates with certificate balances, may result in a higher percentage ownership interest evidenced by those offered certificates in the remaining mortgage loans than would otherwise have resulted absent the loss. The consequent effect on the weighted average life and yield to maturity of the offered certificates will depend upon the characteristics of those remaining mortgage loans in the trust fund.

The Mortgage Loans Have Not Been Reviewed or Re-Underwritten by Us; Some Mortgage Loans May Not Have Complied With Another Originator’s Underwriting Criteria

Although the sponsors have conducted a review of the mortgage loans to be sold to us for this securitization transaction, we, as the depositor for this securitization transaction, have neither originated the mortgage loans nor conducted a review or re-underwriting of the mortgage loans. Instead, we have relied on the representations and warranties made by the applicable sponsors and the remedies for breach of a representation and warranty as described under “Description of the Mortgage Loan Purchase Agreements” and the sponsor’s description of its underwriting criteria and the review conducted by each sponsor for this securitization transaction described under “Transaction Parties—The Sponsors and Mortgage Loan Sellers—Wells Fargo Bank, National Association—Wells Fargo Bank’s Commercial Mortgage Loan Underwriting”; “—Argentic Real Estate Finance 2 LLC—Argentic’s Underwriting Standards and Processes”; “—Citi Real Estate Funding Inc.—Citi Real Estate Funding Inc.’s Underwriting Standards”; “—UBS AG— UBS AG New York Branch’s Underwriting Standards”; “—Bank of Montreal—BMO’s Origination Procedures and

Underwriting Guidelines”; “—Greystone Commercial Mortgage Capital LLC— GCMC’s Origination Procedures and Underwriting Guidelines”; “—Zions Bancorporation, N.A.—ZBNA’s Underwriting Guidelines and Process”; “—BSPRT CMBS Finance, LLC—BSPRT’s Underwriting Standards”; and “—Natixis Real Estate Capital LLC—NREC’s Underwriting Standards”.

The representations and warranties made by the sponsors may not cover all of the matters that one would review in underwriting a mortgage loan and you should not view them as a substitute for re-underwriting the mortgage loans. Furthermore, these representations and warranties in some respects represent an allocation of risk rather than a confirmed description of the mortgage loans. If we had re-underwritten the mortgage loans, it is possible that the re-underwriting process may have revealed problems with a mortgage loan not covered by a representation or warranty or may have revealed inaccuracies in the representations and warranties. See “—Other Risks Relating to the Certificates—Sponsors May Not Make Required Repurchases or Substitutions of Defective Mortgage Loans or Pay Any Loss of Value Payment Sufficient to Cover All Losses on a Defective Mortgage Loan” below, and “Description of the Mortgage Loan Purchase Agreements”.

In addition, we cannot assure you that all of the mortgage loans would have complied with the underwriting criteria of the other originators or, accordingly, that each originator would have made the same decision to originate every mortgage loan included in the issuing entity or, if they did decide to originate an unrelated mortgage loan, that they would have been underwritten on the same terms and conditions.

As a result of the foregoing, you are advised and encouraged to make your own investment decision based on a careful review of the information set forth in this prospectus and your own view of the mortgage pool.

Static Pool Data Would Not Be Indicative of the Performance of this Pool

As a result of the distinct nature of each pool of commercial mortgage loans, and the separate mortgage loans within the pool, this prospectus does not include disclosure concerning the delinquency and loss experience of static pools of periodic originations by any sponsor of assets of the type to be securitized (known as “static pool data”). In particular, static pool data showing a low level of delinquencies and defaults would not be indicative of the performance of this pool or any other pools of mortgage loans originated by the same sponsor or sponsors.

While there may be certain common factors affecting the performance and value of income-producing real properties in general, those factors do not apply equally to all income-producing real properties and, in many cases, there are unique factors that will affect the performance and/or value of a particular income-producing real property. Moreover, the effect of a given factor on a particular real property will depend on a number of variables, including but not limited to property type, geographic location, competition, sponsorship and other characteristics of the property and the related commercial mortgage loan. Each income-producing real property represents a separate and distinct business venture and, as a result, each of the mortgage loans requires a unique underwriting analysis. Furthermore, economic and other conditions affecting real properties, whether worldwide, national, regional or local, vary over time. The performance of a pool of mortgage loans originated and outstanding under a given set of economic conditions may vary significantly from the performance of an otherwise comparable mortgage pool originated and outstanding under a different set of economic conditions.

Therefore, you should evaluate this offering on the basis of the information set forth in this prospectus with respect to the mortgage loans, and not on the basis of the performance of other pools of securitized commercial mortgage loans.

Appraisals May Not Reflect Current or Future Market Value of Each Property

Appraisals were obtained with respect to each of the mortgaged properties at or about the time of origination of the related mortgage loan (or whole loan, if applicable) or at or around the time of the acquisition of the mortgage loan (or whole loan, if applicable) by the related sponsor. See Annex A-1 for the dates of the latest appraisals for the mortgaged properties. We have not obtained new appraisals of the mortgaged properties or assigned new valuations to the mortgage loans in connection with the offering of the offered certificates. The market values of the mortgaged properties could have declined since the origination of the related mortgage loans. In addition, in certain cases where a mortgage loan is funding the acquisition of the related mortgaged property or portfolio of mortgaged properties, the purchase price may be less than the related appraised value set forth herein.

In general, appraisals represent the analysis and opinion of qualified appraisers and are not guarantees of present or future value. One appraiser may reach a different conclusion than that of a different appraiser with respect to the same property. The appraisals seek to establish the amount a typically motivated buyer would pay a typically motivated seller and, in certain cases, may have taken into consideration the purchase price paid by the borrower. The amount could be significantly higher than the amount obtained from the sale of a mortgaged property in a distress or liquidation sale.

Information regarding the appraised values of the mortgaged properties (including loan-to-value ratios) presented in this prospectus is not intended to be a representation as to the past, present or future market values of the mortgaged properties. For example, in some cases, a borrower or its affiliate may have acquired the related mortgaged property for a price or otherwise for consideration in an amount that is less than the related appraised value specified on Annex A-1, including at a foreclosure sale or through acceptance of a deed-in-lieu of foreclosure. Historical operating results of the mortgaged properties used in these appraisals, as adjusted by various assumptions, estimates and subjective judgments on the part of the appraiser, may not be comparable to future operating results. In addition, certain appraisals may be based on extraordinary assumptions, including without limitation, that certain tenants are in-place and paying rent when such tenants have not yet taken occupancy or that certain renovations or property improvement plans have been completed. Additionally, certain appraisals with respect to mortgage loans secured by multiple mortgaged properties may have been conducted on a portfolio basis rather than on an individual property basis, and the sum of the values of the individual properties may be different from (and in some cases may be less than) the appraised value of the aggregate of such properties on a portfolio basis. In addition, other factors may impair the mortgaged properties’ value without affecting their current net operating income, including:

In certain cases, appraisals may reflect both the “as-is” value and an “as-stabilized”, “as-complete” or other hypothetical value. However, the appraised value reflected in this prospectus with respect to each mortgaged property reflects only the “as-is” value (or, in certain cases, may reflect certain values other than “as-is” values as a result of the satisfaction of the related conditions or assumptions or the establishment of reserves estimated to complete the renovations) unless otherwise specified. Any non-“as-is” value may be based on certain assumptions, such as future construction completion, projected re-tenanting or increased tenant occupancies. We cannot assure you that those assumptions are or will be accurate or that any such non-“as-is” value will be the value of the related mortgaged property at maturity or other specified date. In addition, with respect to certain mortgage loans secured by multiple mortgaged properties, the appraised value may be an “as portfolio” value that assigns a premium to the value of the mortgaged properties as a whole, which value exceeds the sum of their individual appraised values. See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Appraised Value”.

Any engineering report, site inspection or appraisal represents only the analysis of the individual consultant, engineer or inspector preparing such report at the time of such report, and may not reveal all necessary or desirable repairs, maintenance and capital improvement items. See “Transaction Parties—The Sponsors and Mortgage Loan Sellers—Wells Fargo Bank, National Association—Wells Fargo Bank’s Commercial Mortgage Loan Underwriting”; “—Argentic Real Estate Finance 2 LLC—Argentic’s Underwriting Standards and Processes”; “—Citi Real Estate Funding Inc.—Citi Real Estate Funding Inc.’s Underwriting Standards”; “—UBS AG— UBS AG New York Branch’s Underwriting Standards”; “—Bank of Montreal—BMO’s Origination Procedures and Underwriting Guidelines”; “—Greystone Commercial Mortgage Capital LLC— GCMC’s Origination Procedures and Underwriting Guidelines”; “—Zions Bancorporation, N.A.—ZBNA’s Underwriting Guidelines and Process”; “—BSPRT CMBS Finance, LLC—BSPRT’s Underwriting Standards”; and “—Natixis Real Estate Capital LLC—NREC’s Underwriting Standards”. for additional information regarding the appraisals. We cannot assure you that the information set forth in this prospectus regarding the appraised values or loan-to-value ratios accurately reflects past, present or future market values of the mortgaged properties or the amount that would be realized upon a sale of the related mortgaged property.

The Performance of a Mortgage Loan and Its Related Mortgaged Property Depends in Part on Who Controls the Borrower and Mortgaged Property

The operation and performance of a mortgage loan will depend in part on the identity of the persons or entities who control the borrower and the mortgaged property. The performance of a mortgage loan may be adversely affected if control of a borrower changes, which may occur, for example, by means of transfers of direct or indirect ownership interests in the borrower, or if the mortgage loan is assigned to and assumed by another person or entity along with a transfer of the property to that person or entity.

Many of the mortgage loans generally place certain restrictions on the transfer and/or pledging of general partnership and managing member equity interests in a borrower, such as specific percentage or control limitations, although some have current or permit future mezzanine or subordinate debt. We cannot assure you the ownership of any of the borrowers would not change during the term of the related mortgage loan and result in a material adverse effect on your certificates. See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Additional Indebtedness” and “—Certain Terms of the Mortgage Loans—‘Due-On-Sale’ and ‘Due-On-Encumbrance’ Provisions”.

The Borrower’s Form of Entity May Cause Special Risks

The borrowers are legal entities rather than individuals. Mortgage loans made to legal entities may entail greater risks of loss than those associated with mortgage loans made to individuals. For example, a legal entity, as opposed to an individual, may be more inclined to seek legal protection from its creditors under the bankruptcy laws. Unlike individuals involved in bankruptcies, most legal entities generally, but not in all cases, do not have personal assets and creditworthiness at stake.

The terms of certain of the mortgage loans require that the borrowers be single-purpose entities and, in most cases, such borrowers’ organizational documents or the terms of the mortgage loans limit their activities to the ownership of only the related mortgaged property or mortgaged properties and limit the borrowers’ ability to incur additional indebtedness. Such provisions are designed to mitigate the possibility that the borrower’s financial condition would be adversely impacted by factors unrelated to the related mortgaged property and mortgage loan. Such borrower may also have previously owned property other than the related mortgaged property or may be a so-called “recycled” single-purpose entity that previously had other business activities and liabilities. However, we cannot assure you that such borrowers have in the past complied, or in the future will comply, with such requirements. Additionally, in some cases unsecured debt exists and/or is allowed in the future. Furthermore, in many cases such borrowers are not required to observe all covenants and conditions which typically are required in order for such borrowers to be viewed under standard rating agency criteria as “single-purpose entities”.

Although a borrower may currently be a single-purpose entity, in certain cases the borrowers were not originally formed as single-purpose entities, but at origination of the related mortgage loan their organizational documents were amended. Such borrower may have previously owned property other than the related mortgaged property and may not have observed all covenants that typically are required to consider a borrower a “single-purpose entity” and thus may have liabilities arising from events prior to becoming a single-purpose entity.

In addition, certain mortgage loans may have been structured similarly to a Maryland indemnity deed of trust (an “IDOT”). An IDOT is structured so that the lender makes the loan to the owner of the property owner and the property owner guarantees in full the payment of the loan and secures such guaranty with a mortgage on the property owner’s property. Accordingly, the mortgagor/payment guarantor and the borrower are two different, but affiliated, entities. In the case of a mortgage loan structured as an IDOT, references herein to “borrower” will mean the actual borrower or the mortgagor/payment guarantor, as the context may require.

The organizational documents of a borrower or the direct or indirect general partner or managing member of a borrower may also contain requirements that there be one or two independent directors, managers or trustees (depending on the entity form of such borrower) whose vote is required before the borrower files a voluntary bankruptcy or insolvency petition or otherwise institutes insolvency proceedings. Generally, but not always, the independent directors, managers or trustees may only be replaced with certain other independent successors. Although the requirement of having independent directors, managers or trustees is designed to mitigate the risk of a voluntary bankruptcy filing by a solvent borrower, a borrower could file for bankruptcy without obtaining the consent of its independent director(s) (and we cannot assure you that such bankruptcy would be dismissed as an unauthorized filing), and in any case the independent directors, managers or trustees may determine that a bankruptcy filing is an appropriate course of action to be

taken by such borrower. Although the independent directors, managers or trustees generally owe no fiduciary duties to entities other than the borrower itself, such determination might take into account the interests and financial condition of such borrower’s parent entities and such parent entities’ other subsidiaries in addition to those of the borrower. Consequently, the financial distress of an affiliate of a borrower might increase the likelihood of a bankruptcy filing by a borrower.

The bankruptcy of a borrower, or a general partner or managing member of a borrower, may impair the ability of the lender to enforce its rights and remedies under the related mortgage loan. Certain of the mortgage loans may have been made to single-purpose limited partnerships that have a general partner or general partners that are not themselves single-purpose entities. Such loans are subject to additional bankruptcy risk. The organizational documents of the general partner in such cases do not limit it to acting as the general partner of the partnership. Accordingly there is a greater risk that the general partner may become insolvent for reasons unrelated to the mortgaged property. The bankruptcy of a general partner may dissolve the partnership under applicable state law. In addition, even if the partnership itself is not insolvent, actions by the partnership and/or a bankrupt general partner that are outside the ordinary course of their business, such as refinancing the related mortgage loan, may require prior approval of the bankruptcy court in the general partner’s bankruptcy case. The proceedings required to resolve these issues may be costly and time-consuming.

Any borrower, even an entity structured as a single-purpose entity, as an owner of real estate, will be subject to certain potential liabilities and risks. We cannot assure you that any borrower will not file for bankruptcy protection or that creditors of a borrower or a corporate or individual general partner or managing member of a borrower will not initiate a bankruptcy or similar proceeding against such borrower or corporate or individual general partner or managing member.

Certain mortgage loans may have the benefit of a general payment guaranty of a portion of the indebtedness under the mortgage loan, or in lieu of one or more reserve funds. A payment guaranty for a portion of the indebtedness under the mortgage loan that is greater than 10% presents a risk for consolidation of the assets of a borrower and the guarantor.

Certain borrowers’ organizational documents or the terms of certain mortgage loans permit an affiliated property manager to maintain a custodial account on behalf of such borrower and certain affiliates of such borrower into which funds available to such borrower under the terms of the related mortgage loans and funds of such affiliates are held, but which funds are and will continue to be separately accounted for as to each item of income and expense for each related mortgaged property and each related borrower. A custodial account structure for affiliated entities, while common among certain REITs, institutions or independent owners of multiple properties, presents a risk for consolidation of the assets of such affiliates as commingling of funds is a factor a court may consider in considering a request by other creditors for substantive consolidation. Substantive consolidation is an equitable remedy that could result in an otherwise solvent company becoming subject to the bankruptcy proceedings of an insolvent affiliate, making its assets available to repay the debts of affiliated companies. A court has the discretion to order substantive consolidation in whole or in part and may include non-debtor affiliates of the bankrupt entity in the proceedings. In particular, consolidation may be ordered when corporate funds are commingled and used for a principal’s personal purposes, inadequate records of transfers are made and corporate entities are deemed an alter ego of a principal. Strict adherence to maintaining separate books and records, avoiding commingling of assets and otherwise

maintaining corporate policies designed to preserve the separateness of corporate assets and liabilities make it less likely that a court would order substantive consolidation, but we cannot assure you that the related borrowers, property managers or affiliates will comply with these requirements as set forth in the related mortgage loans.

Furthermore, with respect to any affiliated borrowers, creditors of a common parent in bankruptcy may seek to consolidate the assets of such borrowers with those of the parent. Consolidation of the assets of such borrowers would likely have an adverse effect on the funds available to make distributions on your certificates, and may lead to a downgrade, withdrawal or qualification of the ratings of your certificates.

See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Certain Terms of the Mortgage Loans—Single-Purpose Entity Covenants” and “Certain Legal Aspects of Mortgage Loans—Bankruptcy Laws”.

In addition, borrowers may own a mortgaged property as tenants-in-common. In the case of a mortgaged property that is owned by tenants-in-common, there is a risk that obtaining the consent of the tenants-in-common will be time consuming and cause delays with respect to the taking of certain actions by or on behalf of the borrower, including with respect to the related mortgaged property. See “—Tenancies-in-Common May Hinder Recovery” below. See also “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Mortgage Pool Characteristics—Tenancies-in-Common and Crowd-Funded Entities” in this prospectus.

In addition, certain of the mortgage loans may have borrowers that are wholly or partially (directly or indirectly) owned by one or more crowd funding investor groups or other diversified ownership structures. Investments in the commercial real estate market through crowd funding investor groups are a relatively recent development and there may be certain unanticipated risks to this new ownership structure which may adversely affect the related mortgage loan. Typically, the crowd funding investor group is made up of a large number of individual investors who invest relatively small amounts in the group pursuant to a securities offering. With respect to an equity investment in the borrower, the crowd funding investor group in turn purchases a stake in the borrower. Accordingly, equity in the borrower is indirectly held by the individual investors in the crowd funding group. We cannot assure you that either the crowd funding investor group or the individual investors in the crowd funding investor group or other diversified ownership structure have relevant expertise in the commercial real estate market. Additionally, crowd funding investor groups are required to comply with various securities regulations related to offerings of securities and we cannot assure you that any enforcement action or legal proceeding regarding failure to comply with such securities regulations would not delay enforcement of the related mortgage loan or otherwise impair the borrower’s ability to operate the related mortgaged property. Furthermore, we cannot assure you that a bankruptcy proceeding by the crowd funding investor group or other diversified ownership structure will not delay enforcement of the related mortgage loan or impair the borrower’s ability to operate the related mortgaged property. See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Mortgage Pool Characteristics—Tenancies-in-Common and Crowd-Funded Entities” in this prospectus. See “—Litigation Regarding the Mortgaged Properties or Borrowers May Impair Your Distributions”, “—Frequent and Early Occurrence of Borrower Delinquencies and Defaults May Adversely Affect Your Investment” and “—The Performance of a Mortgage Loan and Its Related Mortgaged Property Depends in Part on Who Controls the Borrower and Mortgaged Property”.

A Bankruptcy Proceeding May Result in Losses and Delays in Realizing on the Mortgage Loans

Numerous statutory provisions, including the federal bankruptcy code and state laws affording relief to debtors, may interfere with and delay the ability of a secured mortgage lender to obtain payment of a loan, to realize upon collateral and/or to enforce a deficiency judgment. For example, under the federal bankruptcy code, virtually all actions (including foreclosure actions and deficiency judgment proceedings) are automatically stayed upon the filing of a bankruptcy petition, and, often, no interest or principal payments are made during the course of the bankruptcy proceeding. Also, under federal bankruptcy law, the filing of a petition in bankruptcy by or on behalf of a junior lien holder may stay the senior lender from taking action to foreclose out such junior lien. Certain of the mortgage loans have sponsors that have previously filed bankruptcy and we cannot assure you that such sponsors will not be more likely than other sponsors to utilize their rights in bankruptcy in the event of any threatened action by the mortgagee to enforce its rights under the related mortgage loan documents. As a result, the issuing entity’s recovery with respect to borrowers in bankruptcy proceedings may be significantly delayed, and the aggregate amount ultimately collected may be substantially less than the amount owed. See “—Other Financings or Ability To Incur Other Indebtedness Entails Risk” below, “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Loan Purpose; Default History, Bankruptcy Issues and Other Proceedings” and “Certain Legal Aspects of Mortgage Loans—Bankruptcy Laws”.

Additionally, the courts of any state may refuse the foreclosure of a mortgage or deed of trust when an acceleration of the indebtedness would be inequitable or unjust or the circumstances would render the action unconscionable. See “Certain Legal Aspects of Mortgage Loans—Foreclosure”.

See also “—Performance of the Mortgage Loan Will Be Highly Dependent on the Performance of Tenants and Tenant Leases—Tenant Bankruptcy Could Result in a Rejection of the Related Lease” above.

Litigation Regarding the Mortgaged Properties or Borrowers May Impair Your Distributions

There may be (and there may exist from time to time) pending or threatened legal proceedings against, or disputes with, the borrowers, the borrower sponsors, the managers of the mortgaged properties and their respective affiliates arising out of their ordinary business. It is also possible that, under certain extraordinary circumstances, economic or other sanctions may be imposed upon such entities or any individuals that own interests in such entities. We have not undertaken a search for all legal proceedings that relate to the borrowers, borrower sponsors, managers for the mortgaged properties or their respective affiliates or owners. Potential investors are advised and encouraged to perform their own searches related to such matters to the extent relevant to their investment decision. Any of the foregoing issues, even if ultimately settled or resolved, may materially impair distributions to certificateholders. For example, property income may not be available to make debt service payments if borrowers must use property income to pay judgments, legal fees or litigation costs. Similarly, borrowers’ and borrower sponsors’ operations at the related mortgaged properties may be restricted, including the use of property income or borrower sponsor contributions to pay debt service or otherwise support mortgaged property operations. We cannot assure you that any litigation or dispute or any settlement of any litigation or dispute will not have a material adverse effect on your investment.

Additionally, a borrower or a principal of a borrower or affiliate may have been a party to a bankruptcy, foreclosure, litigation or other proceeding, particularly against a lender, or may have been convicted of a crime in the past. In addition, certain of the borrower sponsors, property managers, affiliates of any of the foregoing and/or entities controlled thereby have been a party to bankruptcy proceedings, mortgage loan defaults and restructures, discounted payoffs, foreclosure proceedings or deed-in-lieu of foreclosure transactions, or other material proceedings (including criminal proceedings) in the past, whether or not related to the mortgaged property securing a mortgage loan in this securitization transaction. In some cases, mortgaged properties securing certain of the mortgage loans previously secured other loans that had been in default, restructured or the subject of a discounted payoff, foreclosure or deed-in-lieu of foreclosure.

Certain of the borrower sponsors may have a history of litigation or other proceedings against their lender, in some cases involving various parties to a securitization transaction. We cannot assure you that the borrower sponsors that have engaged in litigation or other proceedings in the past will not commence action against the issuing entity in the future upon any attempt by the special servicer to enforce the mortgage loan documents. Any such actions by the borrower or borrower sponsor may result in significant expense and potential loss to the issuing entity and a shortfall in funds available to make payments on the offered certificates. In addition, certain principals or borrower sponsors may have in the past been convicted of, or pled guilty to, a felony. We cannot assure you that such borrower or principal will not be more likely than other borrowers or principals to avail itself or cause a borrower to avail itself of its legal rights, under the federal bankruptcy code or otherwise, in the event of an action or threatened action by the lender or its servicer to enforce the related mortgage loan documents, or otherwise conduct its operations in a manner that is in the best interests of the lender and/or the mortgaged property. We cannot assure you that any such proceedings or actions will not have a material adverse effect upon distributions on your certificates. Further, borrowers, principals of borrowers, property managers and affiliates of such parties may, in the future, be involved in bankruptcy proceedings, foreclosure proceedings or other material proceedings (including criminal proceedings), whether or not related to the mortgage loans. We cannot assure you that any such proceedings will not negatively impact a borrower’s or borrower sponsor’s ability to meet its obligations under the related mortgage loan and, as a result could have a material adverse effect upon your certificates.

Often it is difficult to confirm the identity of owners of all of the equity in a borrower, which means that past issues may not be discovered as to such owners. See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Litigation and Other Considerations” and “—Loan Purpose; Default History, Bankruptcy Issues and Other Proceedings” for additional information on certain mortgage loans in the issuing entity. Accordingly, we cannot assure you that there are no undisclosed bankruptcy proceedings, foreclosure proceedings, deed-in-lieu-of-foreclosure transaction and/or mortgage loan workout matters that involved one or more mortgage loans or mortgaged properties, and/or a guarantor, borrower sponsor or other party to a mortgage loan.

In addition, in the event the owner of a borrower experiences financial problems, we cannot assure you that such owner would not attempt to take actions with respect to the mortgaged property that may adversely affect the borrower’s ability to fulfill its obligations under the related mortgage loan. See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Litigation and Other Considerations” for information regarding litigation matters with respect to certain mortgage loans.

Other Financings or Ability to Incur Other Indebtedness Entails Risk

When a borrower (or its constituent members) also has one or more other outstanding loans (even if they are pari passu, subordinated, mezzanine, preferred equity or unsecured loans or another type of equity pledge), the issuing entity is subjected to additional risk such as:

Although no companion loan related to a whole loan will be an asset of the issuing entity, the related borrower is still obligated to make interest and principal payments on such companion loan. As a result, the issuing entity is subject to additional risks, including:

With respect to mezzanine financing (if any), while a mezzanine lender has no security interest in the related mortgaged properties, a default under a mezzanine loan could cause a change in control of the related borrower. With respect to mortgage loans that permit mezzanine financing, the relative rights of the mortgagee and the related mezzanine lender will generally be set forth in an intercreditor agreement, which agreements typically provide that the rights of the mezzanine lender (including the right to payment) against the borrower and mortgaged property are subordinate to the rights of the

mortgage lender and that the mezzanine lender may not take any enforcement action against the mortgage borrower and mortgaged property.

In addition, the mortgage loan documents related to certain mortgage loans may have or permit future “preferred equity” structures, where one or more special limited partners or members receive a preferred return in exchange for an infusion of capital or other type of equity pledge that may require payments of a specified return or of excess cash flow. Such arrangements can present risks that resemble mezzanine debt, including dilution of the borrower’s equity in the mortgaged property, stress on the cash flow in the form of a preferred return or excess cash payments, and/or potential changes in the management of the related mortgaged property in the event the preferred return is not satisfied.

Additionally, the terms of certain mortgage loans permit or require the borrowers to post letters of credit and/or surety bonds for the benefit of the related mortgage loan, which may constitute a contingent reimbursement obligation of the related borrower or an affiliate. The issuing bank or surety will not typically agree to subordination and standstill protection benefiting the mortgagee.

In addition, borrowers under most of the mortgage loans are generally permitted to incur trade payables and equipment financing, which may not be limited or may be significant, in order to operate the related mortgaged properties. Also, with respect to certain mortgage loans the related borrower either has incurred or is permitted to incur unsecured debt from an affiliate of either the borrower or the sponsor of the borrower. See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Additional Indebtedness—Other Unsecured Indebtedness”.

For additional information, see “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Additional Indebtedness” and “Pooling and Servicing Agreement—Servicing of the Non-Serviced Mortgage Loans”.

Tenancies-in-Common May Hinder Recovery

Certain of the mortgage loans included in the issuing entity have borrowers that own the related mortgaged properties as tenants-in-common. In general, with respect to a tenant-in-common ownership structure, each tenant-in-common owns an undivided share in the property and if such tenant-in-common desires to sell its interest in the property (and is unable to find a buyer or otherwise needs to force a partition) the tenant-in-common has the ability to request that a court order a sale of the property and distribute the proceeds to each tenant in common proportionally. As a result, if a tenant-in-common that has not waived its right of partition or similar right exercises a right of partition, the related mortgage loan may be subject to prepayment. The bankruptcy, dissolution or action for partition by one or more of the tenants-in-common could result in an early repayment of the related mortgage loan, significant delay in recovery against the tenant-in-common borrowers, particularly if the tenant-in-common borrowers file for bankruptcy separately or in series (because each time a tenant-in-common borrower files for bankruptcy, the bankruptcy court stay will be reinstated), a material impairment in property management and a substantial decrease in the amount recoverable upon the related mortgage loan. Not all tenants-in-common under the mortgage loans will be single-purpose entities. Each tenant-in-common borrower has waived its right to partition, reducing the risk of partition. However, we cannot assure you that, if challenged, this waiver would be enforceable. In addition, in some cases, the related mortgage loan documents may provide for full recourse (or in an amount equal to its pro rata share of the debt) to the related tenant-in-common

borrower or the guarantor if a tenant-in-common files for partition. See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Mortgage Pool Characteristics—Tenancies-in-Common and Crowd-Funded Entities”.

Risks Relating to Enforceability of Cross-Collateralization

Cross-collateralization arrangements may be terminated in certain circumstances under the terms of the related mortgage loan documents. Cross-collateralization arrangements whereby multiple borrowers grant their respective mortgaged properties as security for one or more mortgage loans could be challenged as fraudulent conveyances by the creditors or the bankruptcy estate of any of the related borrowers.

Among other things, a legal challenge to the granting of the liens may focus on the benefits realized by that borrower from the respective mortgage loan proceeds, as well as the overall cross-collateralization. If a court were to conclude that the granting of the liens was an avoidable fraudulent conveyance, that court could subordinate all or part of the mortgage loan to other debt of that borrower, recover prior payments made on that mortgage loan, or take other actions such as invalidating the mortgage loan or the mortgages securing the cross-collateralization. See “Certain Legal Aspects of Mortgage Loans—Bankruptcy Laws”.

In addition, when multiple real properties secure a mortgage loan, the amount of the mortgage encumbering any particular one of those properties may be less than the full amount of the related aggregate mortgage loan indebtedness, to minimize recording tax. This mortgage amount is generally established at 100% to 150% of the appraised value or allocated loan amount for the mortgaged property and will limit the extent to which proceeds from the property will be available to offset declines in value of the other properties securing the same mortgage loan.

See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Mortgage Pool Characteristics” for a description of any mortgage loans that secured by multiple properties owned by multiple borrowers.

Risks Relating to Enforceability of Yield Maintenance Charges, Prepayment Premiums or Defeasance Provisions

Provisions requiring yield maintenance charges, prepayment premiums or lockout periods may not be enforceable in some states and under federal bankruptcy law. Provisions requiring prepayment premiums or yield maintenance charges also may be interpreted as constituting the collection of interest for usury purposes. Accordingly, we cannot assure you that the obligation to pay a yield maintenance charge or prepayment premium will be enforceable. Also, we cannot assure you that foreclosure proceeds will be sufficient to pay an enforceable yield maintenance charge or prepayment premium.

Additionally, although the collateral substitution provisions related to defeasance do not have the same effect on the certificateholders as prepayment, we cannot assure you that a court would not interpret those provisions as the equivalent of a yield maintenance charge or prepayment premium. In certain jurisdictions those collateral substitution provisions might therefore be deemed unenforceable or usurious under applicable law or public policy.

Risks Associated with One Action Rules

Several states (such as California) have laws that prohibit more than one “judicial action” to enforce a mortgage obligation, and some courts have construed the term “judicial action” broadly. Accordingly, the special servicer will be required to obtain advice of counsel prior to enforcing any of the issuing entity’s rights under any of the mortgage loans that include mortgaged properties where a “one action” rule could be applicable. In the case of a multi-property mortgage loan which is secured by mortgaged properties located in multiple states, the special servicer may be required to foreclose first on properties located in states where “one action” rules apply (and where non-judicial foreclosure is permitted) before foreclosing on properties located in states where judicial foreclosure is the only permitted method of foreclosure. See “Certain Legal Aspects of Mortgage Loans—Foreclosure”.

State Law Limitations on Assignments of Leases and Rents May Entail Risks

Generally mortgage loans included in an issuing entity secured by mortgaged properties that are subject to leases typically will be secured by an assignment of leases and rents pursuant to which the related borrower (or with respect to any indemnity deed of trust structure, the related property owner) assigns to the lender its right, title and interest as landlord under the leases of the related mortgaged properties, and the income derived from those leases, as further security for the related mortgage loan, while retaining a license to collect rents for so long as there is no default. If the borrower defaults, the license terminates and the lender is entitled to collect rents. Some state laws may require that the lender take possession of the related property and obtain a judicial appointment of a receiver before becoming entitled to collect the rents. In addition, if bankruptcy or similar proceedings are commenced by or in respect of the borrower, the lender’s ability to collect the rents may be adversely affected. In particular, with respect to properties that are subject to master leases, operating leases or a similar structure, state law may provide that the lender will not have a perfected security interest in the underlying property rents (even if covered by an assignment of leases and rents), unless there is also a mortgage on the master tenant’s, operating lessee’s or similar party’s leasehold interest. Such a mortgage is not typically obtained. See “Certain Legal Aspects of Mortgage Loans—Leases and Rents” and “—Bankruptcy Laws”.

Various Other Laws Could Affect the Exercise of Lender’s Rights

The laws of the jurisdictions in which the mortgaged properties are located (which laws may vary substantially) govern many of the legal aspects of the mortgage loans. These laws may affect the ability to foreclose on, and, in turn the ability to realize value from, the mortgaged properties securing the mortgage loans. For example, state law determines:

In addition, the laws of some jurisdictions may render certain provisions of the mortgage loans unenforceable or subject to limitations which may affect lender’s rights under the mortgage loans. Delays in liquidations of defaulted mortgage loans and shortfalls in amounts realized upon liquidation as a result of the application of these laws may create delays and shortfalls in payments to certificateholders. See “Certain Legal Aspects of Mortgage Loans”.

Cash Management Operations Entail Certain Risks That Could Adversely Affect Distributions on Your Certificates

On March 10, 2023, the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation appointed the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the “FDIC”) as receiver for Silicon Valley Bank (“SVB”).  To protect insured depositors, the FDIC ultimately transferred all the deposits and substantially all of the assets of SVB to Silicon Valley Bridge Bank, N.A., a full-service bridge bank that will be operated by the FDIC as it stabilizes the institution and implements an orderly resolution. On March 12, 2023, Signature Bank was closed by the New York State Department of Financial Services, which appointed the FDIC as receiver. To protect depositors, the FDIC transferred all the deposits and substantially all of the assets of Signature Bank to Signature Bridge Bank, N.A. (“Bridge Bank”), a full-service bank that will be operated by the FDIC as it markets the institution to potential bidders. On March 20, 2023, the FDIC announced that it had entered into a purchase and assumption agreement for substantially all deposits and certain loan portfolios of Bridge Bank by Flagstar Bank, National Association (“Flagstar”). On May 1, 2023, the FDIC announced that it entered into a purchase and assumption agreement with JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, to assume all of the deposits and substantially all of the assets of First Republic Bank. Other banks have also come under pressure as a result of the failure of SVB, Signature Bank and First Republic Bank and we cannot assure you as to whether or not the FDIC will take similar or different actions with respect to other banking institutions. Under the related mortgage loan documents, all accounts, including the lockbox accounts, are required to be held at institutions meeting certain financial and ratings requirements. In many cases, Flagstar does not meet the requirements for an eligible institution under the applicable mortgage loan documents. Recently, a number of rating agencies have downgraded certain regional banks and other financial institutions and have put others on watch for possible downgrades. Such downgrades may trigger the obligation to transfer accounts held at certain institutions if any such downgrades cause them not to meet the requirements of the mortgage loan documents. Failure to meet those requirements could result in a default by the related borrower until the lockbox account is transferred to an institution meeting the necessary financial and ratings requirements. We cannot assure you that the operation of any lockbox accounts at Bridge Bank or Flagstar, or the transfer of those lockbox accounts (or other accounts held at other institutions) to other qualified institutions, if required, will not have an adverse impact on the operational cash flows from the related mortgaged properties or the related borrowers’ ability to meet their respective obligations under the mortgage loan documents during that time.

In addition, in some cases the related mortgage loan documents permit lockbox accounts to be maintained at institutions that do not meet the customary rating requirements under such mortgage loan documents, so long as such institutions meet certain other requirements under the mortgage loan documents related to the lockbox account, such as, without limitation, the requirement to transfer all amounts on deposit in the related lockbox account once every business day.

Certain of the mortgage loans may not require the related borrower to cause rent and other payments to be made into a lockbox account maintained on behalf of the

mortgagee, although some of those mortgage loans do provide for a springing lockbox. If rental payments are not required to be made directly into a lockbox account, there is a risk that the borrower will divert such funds for other purposes.

Borrower May Be Unable to Repay Remaining Principal Balance on Maturity Date; Longer Amortization Schedules and Interest-Only Provisions Increase Risk

Mortgage loans with substantial remaining principal balances at their stated maturity date involve greater risk than fully-amortizing mortgage loans because the borrower may be unable to repay the mortgage loan at that time. In addition, fully amortizing mortgage loans which may pay interest on an “actual/360” basis but have fixed monthly payments may, in effect, have a small balloon payment due at maturity.

Most of the mortgage loans have amortization schedules that are significantly longer than their respective terms to maturity, and many of the mortgage loans require only payments of interest for part or all of their respective terms. See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Certain Terms of the Mortgage Loans—Due Dates; Mortgage Rates; Calculations of Interest”. A longer amortization schedule or an interest-only provision in a mortgage loan will result in a higher amount of principal outstanding under the mortgage loan at any particular time, including at the maturity date of the mortgage loan, than would have otherwise been the case had a shorter amortization schedule been used or had the mortgage loan had a shorter interest-only period or not included an interest-only provision at all. That higher principal amount outstanding could both (i) make it more difficult for the related borrower to make the required balloon payment at maturity and (ii) lead to increased losses for the issuing entity either during the loan term or at maturity if the mortgage loan becomes a defaulted mortgage loan.

A borrower’s ability to repay a mortgage loan on its stated maturity date typically will depend upon its ability either to refinance the mortgage loan or to sell the mortgaged property at a price sufficient to permit repayment. A borrower’s ability to achieve either of these goals will be affected by a number of factors, including:

The interest rate on certain of the mortgage loans may have been reduced significantly as a result of an upfront fee paid to the applicable originator by each of the related borrowers. As a result, the interest rate on those mortgage loans may not reflect the current “market rate” that the related originator would have otherwise charged the related borrower based solely on the credit and collateral characteristics of the related mortgaged property and structural features of the applicable mortgage loan. See the corresponding description of the underwriting standards for each applicable mortgage loan seller under “Transaction Parties” in this prospectus.

With respect to any mortgage loan that is part of a whole loan, the risks relating to balloon payment obligations are enhanced by the existence and amount of any related companion loan.

None of the sponsors, any party to the pooling and servicing agreement or any other person will be under any obligation to refinance any mortgage loan. However, in order to maximize recoveries on defaulted mortgage loans, the pooling and servicing agreement permits the special servicer (and the trust and servicing agreement or pooling and servicing agreement governing the servicing of a non-serviced whole loan may permit the related special servicer) to extend and modify mortgage loans in a manner consistent with the servicing standard, subject to the limitations described under “Pooling and Servicing Agreement—Realization Upon Mortgage Loans” and “—Modifications, Waivers and Amendments”.

Neither the master servicer nor the special servicer will have the ability to extend or modify a non-serviced mortgage loan because such mortgage loan is being serviced by the master servicer or special servicer pursuant to the trust and servicing agreement or pooling and servicing agreement governing the servicing of the applicable non-serviced whole loan. See “Pooling and Servicing Agreement—Servicing of the Non-Serviced Mortgage Loans”.

We cannot assure you that any extension or modification will increase the present value of recoveries in a given case. Whether or not losses are ultimately sustained, any delay in collection of a balloon payment that would otherwise be distributable on your certificates, whether such delay is due to borrower default or to modification of the related mortgage loan, will likely extend the weighted average life of your certificates.

In any event, we cannot assure you that each borrower under a balloon loan will have the ability to repay the principal balance of such mortgage loan on the related maturity date.

See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Mortgage Pool Characteristics”.

Climate Change May Directly or Indirectly Have an Adverse Effect on the Mortgage Pool

Climate change and legal, technological and political developments related to climate change could have an adverse effect on the underlying mortgaged properties and borrowers and consequently on an investment in the certificates. Such developments include the adoption of local laws or regulations designed to improve energy efficiency or reduce greenhouse gas emissions that have been linked to climate change, which could require

borrowers to incur significant costs to retrofit the related properties to comply or subject the borrowers to fines.

For example, with respect to any mortgage loans secured by properties located in New York City, the related borrowers may face fines or retrofitting costs related to compliance with New York City Local Law 97 of 2019 (“Local Law 97”). Local Law 97 generally requires, with some exceptions, that (i) buildings that exceed 25,000 gross square feet, (ii) two or more buildings on the same tax lot that together exceed 50,000 square feet and (iii) two or more buildings owned by a condominium association that are governed by the same board of managers and that together exceed 50,000 square feet meet new energy efficiency and greenhouse gas emissions limits by 2024, with stricter limits coming into effect in 2030. Noncompliant building owners may face fines starting in 2025, unless they are able to bring their building into timely compliance by retrofitting their buildings.

We cannot assure you that any retrofitting of properties to comply with new laws or regulations or any change in tenant mix due to the characteristics of the mortgaged property will improve the operations at, or increase the value of, the related mortgaged property. However, failure to comply with any required retrofitting or a concentration of tenants in industries subject to heightened regulation or “green” competition could have a material negative impact on the related mortgaged property, which could affect the ability of the related borrower to repay the related mortgage loan. Properties that are less energy efficient or that produce higher greenhouse gas emissions may also be at a competitive disadvantage to more efficient or cleaner properties in attracting potential tenants.

Tenants at certain properties may also be in, or may be dependent upon, industries, such as oil and gas, that are or may become subject to heightened regulation due to climate change or the development of competing “green” technologies, which may have a material adverse effect on such tenants and lead to, among other things, vacancies or tenant bankruptcies at certain mortgaged properties.

Climate change may also have other effects, such as increasing the likelihood of extreme weather and natural disasters in certain geographic areas. See “Risk Factors—Risks Relating to the Mortgage Loans—Concentrations Based on Property Type, Geography, Related Borrowers and Other Factors May Disproportionately Increase Losses”.

Risks Related to Ground Leases and Other Leasehold Interests

With respect to certain mortgaged properties, the encumbered interest will be characterized as a “fee interest” if (i) the borrower has a fee interest in all or substantially all of the mortgaged property (provided that if the borrower has a leasehold interest in any portion of the mortgaged property, such portion is not material to the use or operation of the mortgaged property), or (ii) the mortgage loan is secured by the borrower’s leasehold interest in the mortgaged property as well as the borrower’s (or other fee owner’s) overlapping fee interest in the related mortgaged property.

Leasehold mortgage loans are subject to certain risks not associated with mortgage loans secured by a lien on the fee estate of the borrower. The most significant of these risks is that if the related borrower’s leasehold were to be terminated upon a lease default, the lender would lose its security in the leasehold interest. Generally, each related ground lease or a lessor estoppel requires the lessor to give the lender notice of the borrower’s defaults under the ground lease and an opportunity to cure them, permits the leasehold interest to be assigned to the lender or the purchaser at a foreclosure sale, in some cases only upon the consent of the lessor, and contains certain other protective provisions

typically included in a “mortgageable” ground lease, although not all these protective provisions are included in each case.

Upon the bankruptcy of a lessor or a lessee under a ground lease, the debtor has the right to assume or reject the lease. If a debtor lessor rejects the lease, the lessee has the right pursuant to the federal bankruptcy code to treat such lease as terminated by rejection or remain in possession of its leased premises for the rent otherwise payable under the lease for the remaining term of the ground lease (including renewals) and to offset against such rent any damages incurred due to the landlord’s failure to perform its obligations under the lease. If a debtor lessee/borrower rejects any or all of the lease, the leasehold lender could succeed to the lessee/borrower’s position under the lease only if the lease specifically grants the lender such right. If both the lessor and the lessee/borrower are involved in bankruptcy proceedings, the issuing entity may be unable to enforce the bankrupt lessee/borrower’s pre-petition agreement to refuse to treat a ground lease rejected by a bankrupt lessor as terminated. In such circumstances, a ground lease could be terminated notwithstanding lender protection provisions contained in the ground lease or in the mortgage.

A leasehold lender could lose its security unless (i) the leasehold lender holds a fee mortgage, (ii) the ground lease requires the lessor to enter into a new lease with the leasehold lender upon termination or rejection of the ground lease, or (iii) the bankruptcy court, as a court of equity, allows the leasehold lender to assume the ground lessee’s obligations under the ground lease and succeed to the ground lessee’s position. Although not directly covered by the 1994 amendments to the federal bankruptcy code, such a result would be consistent with the purpose of the 1994 amendments to the federal bankruptcy code granting the holders of leasehold mortgages permitted under the terms of the lease the right to succeed to the position of a leasehold mortgagor. Although consistent with the federal bankruptcy code, such position may not be adopted by the applicable bankruptcy court.

Further, in a decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit (Precision Indus. v. Qualitech Steel SBQ, LLC, 327 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2003)) the court ruled with respect to an unrecorded lease of real property that where a statutory sale of the fee interest in leased property occurs under the federal bankruptcy code upon the bankruptcy of a landlord, such sale terminates a lessee’s possessory interest in the property, and the purchaser assumes title free and clear of any interest, including any leasehold estates. Pursuant to the federal bankruptcy code, a lessee may request the bankruptcy court to prohibit or condition the statutory sale of the property so as to provide adequate protection of the leasehold interest; however, the court ruled that this provision does not ensure continued possession of the property, but rather entitles the lessee to compensation for the value of its leasehold interest, typically from the sale proceeds. While there are certain circumstances under which a “free and clear” sale under the federal bankruptcy code would not be authorized (including that the lessee could not be compelled in a legal or equitable proceeding to accept a monetary satisfaction of his possessory interest, and that none of the other conditions of the federal bankruptcy code otherwise permits the sale), we cannot assure you that those circumstances would be present in any proposed sale of a leased premises. As a result, we cannot assure you that, in the event of a statutory sale of leased property pursuant to the federal bankruptcy code, the lessee will be able to maintain possession of the property under the ground lease. In addition, we cannot assure you that the lessee and/or the lender will be able to recoup the full value of the leasehold interest in bankruptcy court. Most of the ground leases contain standard protections typically obtained by securitization lenders. Certain of the ground leases with respect to a mortgage loan included in the issuing entity may not. See also representation and warranty no. 36 on

Annex D-1 and the exceptions thereto on Annex D-2 (subject to the limitations and qualifications set forth in the preamble to Annex D-1).

Except as noted in “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Mortgage Pool Characteristics—Fee & Leasehold Estates; Ground Leases” in this prospectus, each of the ground leases has a term that extends at least 20 years beyond the maturity date of the mortgage loan (taking into account all freely exercisable extension options) and contains customary mortgagee protection provisions, including notice and cure rights and the right to enter into a new lease with the applicable ground lessor in the event a ground lease is rejected or terminated.

Some of the ground leases securing the mortgage loans may provide that the ground rent payable under the related ground lease increases during the term of the mortgage loan. These increases may have a material effect on the cash flow and net income of the related borrower.

With respect to certain of the mortgage loans, the related borrower may have given to certain lessors under the related ground lease a right of first refusal in the event a sale is contemplated or an option to purchase all or a portion of the mortgaged property and these provisions, if not waived, may impede the mortgagee’s ability to sell the related mortgaged property at foreclosure or adversely affect the foreclosure process. See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Mortgage Pool Characteristics—Fee & Leasehold Estates; Ground Leases”.

See “Certain Legal Aspects of Mortgage Loans—Bankruptcy Laws”.

Increases in Real Estate Taxes May Reduce Available Funds

Certain of the mortgaged properties securing the mortgage loans have or may in the future have the benefit of reduced real estate taxes in connection with a local government “payment in lieu of taxes” program or other tax abatement arrangements. Upon expiration of such program or if such programs were otherwise terminated, the related borrower would be required to pay higher, and in some cases substantially higher, real estate taxes. Prior to expiration of such program, the tax benefit to the mortgaged property may decrease throughout the term of the expiration date until the expiration of such program. An increase in real estate taxes may impact the ability of the borrower to pay debt service on the mortgage loan.

See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Real Estate and Other Tax Considerations” for descriptions of real estate tax matters relating to certain mortgaged properties.

State and Local Mortgage Recording Taxes May Apply Upon a Foreclosure or Deed-in-Lieu of Foreclosure and Reduce Net Proceeds

Many jurisdictions impose recording taxes on mortgages which, if not paid at the time of the recording of the mortgage, may impair the ability of the lender to foreclose the mortgage. Such taxes, interest, and penalties could be significant in amount and would, if imposed, reduce the net proceeds realized by the issuing entity in liquidating the real property securing the related mortgage loan.

Collective Bargaining Activity May Disrupt Operations, Increase Labor Costs or Interfere with Business Strategies

A number of employees at certain of the mortgaged properties may be covered by a collective bargaining agreement. If relationships with such employees or the unions that represent them become adverse, such mortgaged properties could experience labor disruptions such as strikes, lockouts, boycotts and public demonstrations. Labor disputes, which may be more likely when collective bargaining agreements are being negotiated, could harm relationships with employees, result in increased regulatory inquiries and enforcement by governmental authorities. Further, adverse publicity related to a labor dispute could harm such mortgaged properties’ reputation and reduce customer demand for related services. Labor regulation and the negotiation of new or existing collective bargaining agreements could lead to higher wage and benefit costs, changes in work rules that raise operating expenses, legal costs, and limitations on the related borrower’s ability to take cost saving measures during economic downturns. We cannot assure you that the related borrower will be able to control the negotiations of collective bargaining agreements covering unionized labor employed at such mortgaged properties.

In addition, certain union employees working at a borrower’s premises may participate in multiemployer pension plans. In the event that the borrower or property manager, as applicable, were to withdraw from one or more of these pension plans with respect to the employees working at the borrower’s premises, the borrower could be subject to substantial withdrawal liability under ERISA, including without limitation for any unfunded or underfunded pension liability. Members of a borrower’s controlled group could also be liable for the borrower’s pension obligations.

Risks Related to Conflicts of Interest

Interests and Incentives of the Originators, the Sponsors and Their Affiliates May Not Be Aligned With Your Interests

The originators, the sponsors and their affiliates (including certain of the underwriters) expect to derive ancillary benefits from this offering and their respective incentives may not be aligned with those of purchasers of the offered certificates. The sponsors originated or purchased the mortgage loans in order to securitize the mortgage loans by means of a transaction such as the offering of the offered certificates. The sponsors will sell the mortgage loans to the depositor (an affiliate of Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, a sponsor, an originator and the holder of one or more companion loans relating to The Wharf whole loan, and of Wells Fargo Securities, LLC, one of the underwriters) on the closing date in exchange for cash, derived from the sale of the offered certificates to investors and/or in exchange for offered certificates. A completed offering would reduce the sponsors’ exposure to the mortgage loans. The originators made the mortgage loans with a view toward securitizing them and distributing the exposure by means of a transaction such as this offering of offered certificates. The originators may also earn origination fees in connection with the origination of the mortgage loans to be included in the mortgage pool. In certain cases, additional upfront fees may be earned in connection with a reduction of the mortgage rate of the related mortgage loan, in light of the other credit characteristics of such mortgage loan. In addition, certain mortgaged properties may have tenants that are affiliated with the related originator. See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Tenant Issues—Affiliated Leases”. This offering of offered certificates will effectively transfer the sponsors’ exposure to the mortgage loans to purchasers of the offered certificates.

The originators, the sponsors and their affiliates expect to receive various benefits, including compensation, commissions, payments, rebates, remuneration and business opportunities, in connection with or as a result of this offering of offered certificates and their interests in the mortgage loans. The sponsors and their affiliates will effectively receive compensation, and may record a profit, in an amount based on, among other things, the amount of proceeds (net of transaction expenses) received from the sale of the offered certificates to investors relative to their investment in the mortgage loans. The benefits to the originators, the sponsors and their affiliates arising from the decision to securitize the mortgage loans may be greater than they would have been had other assets been selected.

Furthermore, the sponsors and/or their affiliates may benefit from a completed offering of the offered certificates because the offering would establish a market precedent and a valuation data point for securities similar to the offered certificates, thus enhancing the ability of the sponsors and their affiliates to conduct similar offerings in the future and permitting them to adjust the fair value of the mortgage loans or other similar assets or securities held on their balance sheet, including increasing the carrying value or avoiding decreasing the carrying value of some or all of such similar positions.

In some cases, the originators, the sponsors or their affiliates are the holders of the mezzanine loans, subordinate loans, unsecured loans and/or companion loans related to their mortgage loans. The originators, the sponsors and/or their respective affiliates may retain existing mezzanine loans, subordinate loans, unsecured loans and/or companion loans or originate future permitted mezzanine indebtedness, subordinate indebtedness or unsecured indebtedness with respect to the mortgage loans. These transactions may cause the originators, the sponsors and their affiliates or their clients or counterparties who purchase the mezzanine loans, subordinate loans, unsecured loans and/or companion loans, as applicable, to have economic interests and incentives that do not align with, and that may be directly contrary to, those of an investor in the offered certificates. In addition, these transactions or actions taken to maintain, adjust or unwind any positions in the future, may, individually or in the aggregate, have a material effect on the market for the offered certificates (if any), including adversely affecting the value of the offered certificates, particularly in illiquid markets. The originators, the sponsors and their affiliates will have no obligation to take, refrain from taking or cease taking any action with respect to such companion loans or any existing or future mezzanine loans, subordinate loans and/or unsecured loans, based on the potential effect on an investor in the offered certificates, and may receive substantial returns from these transactions. In addition, the originators, the sponsors or any of their respective affiliates may benefit from certain relationships, including financial dealings, with any borrower, any non-recourse carveout guarantor or any of their respective affiliates, aside from the origination of mortgage loans or contribution of mortgage loans into this securitization. Conflicts may also arise because the sponsors and their respective affiliates intend to continue to actively acquire, develop, operate, finance and dispose of real estate-related assets in the ordinary course of their businesses. During the course of their business activities, the sponsors and their respective affiliates may acquire, sell or lease properties, or finance loans secured by properties, which may include the properties securing the mortgage loans or properties that are in the same markets as the mortgaged properties. Such other properties, similar to other third-party owned real estate, may compete with the mortgaged properties for existing and potential tenants. The sponsors may also, from time to time, be among the tenants at the mortgaged properties, and they should be expected to make occupancy-related decisions based on their self-interest and not that of the issuing entity. We cannot assure you that the activities of these parties with respect to such other properties will not adversely impact the performance of the mortgaged properties.

In addition, certain of the mortgage loans included in the issuing entity may have been refinancings of debt previously held by a sponsor, an originator or one of their respective key employees or affiliates, or a sponsor, an originator or one of their respective key employees or affiliates may have or have had equity investments in the borrowers or mortgaged properties under certain of the mortgage loans included in the issuing entity. Each of the sponsors, the originators and their respective key employees and affiliates have made and/or may make loans to, or equity investments in, affiliates of the borrowers under the related mortgage loans. In the circumstances described above, the interests of the sponsors, the originators and their respective key employees and affiliates may differ from, and compete with, the interests of the issuing entity.

In addition, Argentic Real Estate Finance 2 LLC or its “majority-owned affiliate(s)” (as defined under Regulation RR) will be required to retain the VRR Interest and the HRR Interest as described in “Credit Risk Retention” in this prospectus, and Argentic Real Estate Finance 2 LLC, as retaining sponsor, has the right to appoint a risk retention consultation party. The risk retention consultation party may, upon request and on a strictly non-binding basis, and subject to the limitations described in this prospectus, consult with the special servicer and recommend that such special servicer take certain actions that may conflict with the interests of holders of certain classes of the certificates. However, the special servicer is not required to follow any such recommendations or take directions from the risk retention consultation party and is not permitted to take actions that are prohibited by law or that violate the servicing standard or the terms of the mortgage loan documents. In addition, Argentic Real Estate Finance 2 LLC is affiliated with the b-piece buyer and Argentic Services Company LP, the special servicer. While the risk retention consultation party only has consultation rights, the b-piece buyer and the special servicer have rights which are not merely consultive. The risk retention consultation party and the holder of the majority of the VRR Interest by whom it is appointed may have interests that are in conflict with those of certain other certificateholders, in particular if any such party or an affiliate thereof holds companion loans or companion loan securities, or has financial interests in or other financial dealings (as a lender or otherwise) with a borrower or an affiliate of a borrower under any of the mortgage loans. In order to minimize the effect of certain of these conflicts of interest, for so long as, with respect to any mortgage loan, any related borrower party is the risk retention consultation party, the retaining sponsor or the holder of the majority of the VRR Interest (any such mortgage loan referred to in this context as an “excluded loan” as to such party), then the risk retention consultation party will not have consultation rights solely with respect to any such excluded loan. See “Credit Risk Retention” in this prospectus.

There can be no assurance that the retaining sponsor, the holder of the majority of the VRR Interest or the risk retention consultation party will not obtain sensitive information related to the strategy of any contemplated workout or liquidation related to any such mortgage loan or whole loan or otherwise seek to exert its influence over the special servicer in the event such mortgage loan or whole loan becomes subject to a workout or liquidation. See “Description of the Certificates—Reports to Certificateholders; Certain Available Information” in this prospectus.

Further, various originators, sponsors and their respective affiliates are acting in multiple capacities in or with respect to this transaction, which may include, without limitation, acting as one or more transaction parties or a subcontractor or vendor of such party, participating in or contracting for interim servicing and/or custodial services with certain transaction parties, providing warehouse financing to, or receiving warehouse financing from, certain other originators or sponsors prior to transfer of the related

mortgage loans to the issuing entity, and/or conducting due diligence on behalf of an investor with respect to the mortgage loans prior to their transfer to the issuing entity.

In addition, Argentic Real Estate Finance 2 LLC, a mortgage loan seller, originator, sponsor and the retaining sponsor is an affiliate of (i) Argentic Services Company LP, the special servicer, (ii) Argentic Securities Holdings 2 Cayman Limited, the entity that will be the holder of the VRR Interest and the HRR Interest, (iii) Argentic CMBS Holdings II Limited, the entity that will purchase the Class X-E and Class E certificates (in each case, other than the portion of each such class of certificates that constitutes a part of the “VRR Interest” as described in “Credit Risk Retention” in this prospectus) on the closing date and (iv) Argentic Securities Income USA 2 LLC, the entity that will be appointed as the initial directing certificateholder.

For a description of certain of the foregoing relationships and arrangements that exist among the parties to this securitization, see “Certain Affiliations, Relationships and Related Transactions Involving Transaction Parties” and “Transaction Parties”.

These roles and other potential relationships may give rise to conflicts of interest as described in “—Interests and Incentives of the Underwriter Entities May Not Be Aligned With Your Interests”, “—Potential Conflicts of Interest in the Selection of the Underlying Mortgage Loans” and “—Other Potential Conflicts of Interest May Affect Your Investment” below. Each of the foregoing relationships and related interests should be considered carefully by you before you invest in any offered certificates.

The Servicing of the Shaw Park Plaza Whole Loan Will Shift to Other Servicers

The servicing of the Shaw Park Plaza whole loan will be governed by the BMO 2025-5C11 pooling and servicing agreement only temporarily, until the securitization of the related controlling pari passu companion loan. Upon the securitization of such companion loan, the servicing and administration of the related whole loan will shift to the applicable master servicer and the special servicer under the pooling and servicing agreement that governs the securitization of such companion loan and will be governed exclusively by such pooling and servicing agreement and the related intercreditor agreement. Neither the closing date of any such securitization nor the identity of any such master servicer or special servicer has been determined. In addition, the provisions of any such pooling and servicing agreement that governs the securitization of any such companion loan have not yet been determined. Prospective investors should be aware that they will not have any control over the identity of the master servicer or special servicer under any pooling and servicing agreement that governs the securitization of such companion loan, nor will they have any assurance as to the particular terms of any such pooling and servicing agreement except to the extent of compliance with any requirements set forth in the related intercreditor agreement. Moreover, the directing certificateholder for this securitization will not have any consent or consultation rights with respect to the servicing of the Shaw Park Plaza whole loan other than those limited consent and consultation rights as are provided in each related intercreditor agreement, and the holder of the related controlling pari passu companion loan or the controlling party in each related securitization of such controlling pari passu companion loan or such other party specified in the related intercreditor agreement is expected to have rights substantially similar to, but not necessarily identical to, those granted to the directing certificateholder in this transaction. See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—The Whole Loans”.

The Servicing of Servicing Shift Whole Loans Will Shift to Other Servicers

The servicing of any servicing shift whole loans will be governed by the pooling and servicing agreement for this securitization only temporarily, in each case until the related servicing shift securitization date. At that time, the servicing and administration of the related servicing shift whole loan will shift to the master servicer and the special servicer under the related servicing shift pooling and servicing agreement and will be governed exclusively by such servicing shift pooling and servicing agreement and the related intercreditor agreement. Neither the closing date of any such securitization nor the identity of any such servicing shift master servicer or servicing shift special servicer has been determined. In addition, the provisions of the servicing shift pooling and servicing agreements have not yet been determined. Prospective investors should be aware that they will not have any control over the identity of the servicing shift master servicers or servicing shift special servicers, nor will they have any assurance as to the particular terms of the servicing shift pooling and servicing agreements except to the extent of compliance with any requirements set forth in the related intercreditor agreement. Moreover, the directing certificateholder for this securitization will not have any consent or consultation rights with respect to the servicing of the servicing shift whole loans other than those limited consent and consultation rights as are provided in the related intercreditor agreement, and the holder of the related controlling companion loan or the controlling party in the related securitization of such controlling companion loan or such other party specified in the related intercreditor agreement is expected to have rights substantially similar to, but not necessarily identical to, those granted to the directing certificateholder in this transaction. See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—The Whole Loans”. As of the closing date, The Roosevelt New Orleans whole loan will be a servicing shift whole loan.

Interests and Incentives of the Underwriter Entities May Not Be Aligned With Your Interests

The activities and interests of the underwriters and their respective affiliates (collectively, the “Underwriter Entities”) will not align with, and may in fact be directly contrary to, those of the certificateholders. The Underwriter Entities are each part of separate global investment banking, securities and investment management firms that provide a wide range of financial services to a substantial and diversified client base that includes corporations, financial institutions, governments and high-net-worth individuals. As such, they actively make markets in and trade financial instruments for their own account and for the accounts of customers. These financial instruments include debt and equity securities, currencies, commodities, bank loans, indices, baskets and other products. The Underwriter Entities’ activities include, among other things, executing large block trades and taking long and short positions directly and indirectly, through derivative instruments or otherwise. The securities and instruments in which the Underwriter Entities take positions, or expect to take positions, include loans similar to the mortgage loans, securities and instruments similar to the offered certificates and other securities and instruments. Market making is an activity where the Underwriter Entities buy and sell on behalf of customers, or for their own account, to satisfy the expected demand of customers. By its nature, market making involves facilitating transactions among market participants that have differing views of securities and instruments. Any short positions taken by the Underwriter Entities and/or their clients through marketing or otherwise will increase in value if the related securities or other instruments decrease in value, while positions taken by the Underwriter Entities and/or their clients in credit derivative or other derivative transactions with other parties, pursuant to which the Underwriter Entities and/or their clients sell or buy credit protection with respect to one or more classes of the offered certificates, may increase in value if the offered certificates default, are expected to default, or decrease in value.

The Underwriter Entities and their clients acting through them may execute such transactions, modify or terminate such derivative positions and otherwise act with respect to such transactions, and may exercise or enforce, or refrain from exercising or enforcing, any or all of their rights and powers in connection therewith, without regard to whether any such action might have an adverse effect on the offered certificates or the certificateholders. Additionally, none of the Underwriter Entities will have any obligation to disclose any of these securities or derivatives transactions to you in your capacity as a certificateholder. As a result, you should expect that the Underwriter Entities will take positions that are inconsistent with, or adverse to, the investment objectives of investors in the offered certificates.

As a result of the Underwriter Entities’ various financial market activities, including acting as a research provider, investment advisor, market maker or principal investor, you should expect that personnel in various businesses throughout the Underwriter Entities will have and express research or investment views and make recommendations that are inconsistent with, or adverse to, the objectives of investors in the offered certificates.

If an Underwriter Entity becomes a holder of any of the certificates, through market-making activity or otherwise, any actions that it takes in its capacity as a certificateholder, including voting, providing consents or otherwise will not necessarily be aligned with the interests of other holders of the same class or other classes of the certificates. To the extent an Underwriter Entity makes a market in the certificates (which it is under no obligation to do), it would expect to receive income from the spreads between its bid and offer prices for the certificates. The price at which an Underwriter Entity may be willing to purchase certificates, if it makes a market, will depend on market conditions and other relevant factors and may be significantly lower than the issue price for the certificates and significantly lower than the price at which it may be willing to sell certificates.

In addition, none of the Underwriter Entities will have any obligation to monitor the performance of the certificates or the actions of the parties to the pooling and servicing agreement and will have no authority to advise any party to the pooling and servicing agreement or to direct their actions.

Furthermore, each Underwriter Entity expects that a completed offering will enhance its ability to assist clients and counterparties in the transaction or in related transactions (including assisting clients in additional purchases and sales of the certificates and hedging transactions). The Underwriter Entities expect to derive fees and other revenues from these transactions. In addition, participating in a successful offering and providing related services to clients may enhance the Underwriter Entities’ relationships with various parties, facilitate additional business development, and enable them to obtain additional business and generate additional revenue.

Further, certain Underwriter Entities and their respective affiliates are acting in multiple capacities in or with respect to this transaction, which may include, without limitation, acting as one or more transaction parties or a subcontractor or vendor of such party, participating in or contracting for interim servicing and/or custodial services with certain transaction parties, providing warehouse financing to, or receiving warehouse financing from, certain other originators or sponsors prior to transfer of the related mortgage loans to the issuing entity, and/or conducting due diligence on behalf of an investor with respect to the mortgage loans prior to their transfer to the issuing entity.

For a description of certain of the foregoing and additional relationships and arrangements that exist among the parties to this securitization, see “Transaction Parties—

The Sponsors and Mortgage Loan Sellers” and “Certain Affiliations, Relationships and Related Transactions Involving Transaction Parties”. Each of the foregoing relationships should be considered carefully by you before you invest in any certificates.

Potential Conflicts of Interest of the Master Servicer and Special Servicer

The pooling and servicing agreement provides that the mortgage loans serviced thereunder are required to be administered in accordance with the servicing standard without regard to ownership of any certificate by the master servicer, the special servicer or any of their respective affiliates. See “Pooling and Servicing Agreement—Servicing Standard”. The pooling and servicing agreement governing the servicing of a non-serviced whole loan provides that such non-serviced whole loan is required to be administered in accordance with a servicing standard that is substantially similar in all material respect but not necessarily identical to the servicing standard set forth in the pooling and servicing agreement. See “Pooling and Servicing Agreement—Servicing of the Non-Serviced Mortgage Loans”.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, the master servicer, each sub-servicer and the special servicer or any of their respective affiliates and, as it relates to servicing and administration of a non-serviced mortgage loan, the master servicer, sub-servicer, special servicer or any of their respective affiliates under the trust and servicing agreement or pooling and servicing agreement governing the servicing of a non-serviced whole loan, may have interests when dealing with the mortgage loans that are in conflict with those of holders of the certificates, especially if such master servicer, sub-servicer, special servicer or any of their respective affiliates holds certificates or securities relating to any applicable companion loan, or has financial interests in or financial dealings with a borrower or a borrower sponsor.

Furthermore, nothing in the pooling and servicing agreement or otherwise will prohibit the master servicer or special servicer or an affiliate thereof from soliciting the refinancing of any of the mortgage loans. In the event that the master servicer or special servicer or an affiliate thereof refinances any of the mortgage loans included in the mortgage pool, an earlier than expected payoff of any such mortgage loan could occur, which would result in a prepayment, which such prepayment could have an adverse effect on the yield of the certificates. See “—Other Risks Relating to the Certificates—Your Yield May Be Affected by Defaults, Prepayments and Other Factors” in this prospectus.

In order to minimize the effect of certain of these conflicts of interest as they relate to the special servicer, for so long as the special servicer obtains knowledge that it has become a borrower party with respect to an excluded special servicer loan, such special servicer will be required to resign as special servicer with respect to that mortgage loan and, prior to the occurrence of a control termination event under the pooling and servicing agreement, the directing certificateholder will be required to select a separate special servicer that is not a borrower party (referred to herein as an “excluded special servicer”) with respect to any excluded special servicer loan, unless such excluded special servicer loan is also an excluded loan (as to the directing certificateholder or the holder of the majority of the controlling class). At any time after the occurrence and during the continuance of a control termination event, or if the applicable excluded special servicer loan is also an excluded loan (as to the directing certificateholder or the holder of the majority of the controlling class) or if the directing certificateholder is entitled to appoint the excluded special servicer but does not select a replacement special servicer within 30 days of notice of resignation (provided that the conditions required to be satisfied for the appointment of the replacement special servicer to be effective are not required to be

completed within such 30 day period but in any event are to be completed within 120 days), the resigning special servicer will be required to use reasonable efforts to select the related excluded special servicer. See “Pooling and Servicing Agreement—Replacement of Special Servicer Without Cause”. Any excluded special servicer will be required to perform all of the obligations of the special servicer with respect to such excluded special servicer loan and will be entitled to all special servicing compensation with respect to such excluded special servicer loan earned during such time as the related mortgage loan is an excluded special servicer loan. While the special servicer will have the same access to information related to the excluded special servicer loan as it does with respect to the other mortgage loans, the special servicer will covenant in the pooling and servicing agreement that it will not directly or indirectly provide any information related to any excluded special servicer loan to the related borrower party, any of the special servicer’s employees or personnel or any of its affiliates involved in the management of any investment in the related borrower party or the related mortgaged property or, to its actual knowledge, any non-affiliate that holds a direct or indirect ownership interest in the related borrower party, and will maintain sufficient internal controls and appropriate policies and procedures in place in order to comply with those obligations. Notwithstanding those restrictions, there can be no assurance that the related borrower party will not obtain sensitive information related to the strategy of any contemplated workout or liquidation related to an excluded special servicer loan.

Each of these relationships may create a conflict of interest. For instance, if the special servicer or its affiliate holds a subordinate class of certificates, the special servicer might seek to reduce the potential for losses allocable to those certificates from the mortgage loans by deferring acceleration in hope of maximizing future proceeds. However, that action could result in less proceeds to the issuing entity than would be realized if earlier action had been taken. In addition, no servicer is required to act in a manner more favorable to the offered certificates or any particular class of certificates than to the Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Trust 2025-5C5 non-offered certificates, any serviced companion loan holder or the holder of any serviced companion loan securities.

The master servicer and special servicer service and are expected to continue to service, in the ordinary course of their respective businesses, existing and new mortgage loans for third parties, including portfolios of mortgage loans similar to the mortgage loans. The real properties securing these other mortgage loans may be in the same markets as, and compete with, certain of the mortgaged properties securing the mortgage loans. Consequently, personnel of the master servicer or special servicer, as applicable, may perform services, on behalf of the issuing entity, with respect to the mortgage loans at the same time as they are performing services, on behalf of other persons, with respect to other mortgage loans secured by properties that compete with the mortgaged properties securing the mortgage loans. In addition, the mortgage loan sellers will determine who will service mortgage loans that the mortgage loan sellers originate in the future, and that determination may be influenced by the mortgage loan seller’s opinion of servicing decisions made by the master servicer or the special servicer under the pooling and servicing agreement including, among other things, the manner in which such master servicer or special servicer enforces breaches of representations and warranties against the related mortgage loan seller. Such enforcement may also be influenced by any affiliation between such master servicer or special servicer, as applicable, and the related mortgage loan seller. This may pose inherent conflicts for such master servicer or special servicer.

The special servicer may enter into one or more arrangements with the directing certificateholder, a controlling class certificateholder, a serviced companion loan holder or other certificateholders (or an affiliate or a third party representative of one or more of the preceding parties) to provide for a discount and/or revenue sharing with respect to certain

of the special servicer compensation in consideration of, among other things, such special servicer’s appointment (or continuance) as special servicer under the pooling and servicing agreement and/or the related intercreditor agreement and limitations on the right of such person to replace the special servicer. See “—Other Potential Conflicts of Interest May Affect Your Investment” below.

Trimont LLC is expected to act as the master servicer, and it serves in various capacities pursuant to the non-serviced pooling and servicing agreements as described in the chart entitled “Non-Serviced Whole Loans” under “Summary of Terms—The Mortgage Pool”.

Similarly, the master servicer and special servicer for this transaction may act in one or more other capacities in the securitizations governing the servicing of non-serviced mortgage loans. See “Certain Affiliations, Relationships and Related Transactions Involving Transaction Parties”.

Although the master servicer and the special servicer will be required to service and administer the mortgage loan pool in accordance with the servicing standard and, accordingly, without regard to their rights to receive compensation under the pooling and servicing agreement and without regard to any potential obligation to repurchase or substitute a mortgage loan if the master servicer or special servicer is (or is affiliated with) a mortgage loan seller, the possibility of receiving additional servicing compensation in the nature of assumption and modification fees, the continuation of receiving fees to service or specially service a mortgage loan, or the desire to avoid a repurchase demand resulting from a breach of a representation and warranty or material document default may under certain circumstances provide the master servicer or the special servicer, as the case may be, with an economic disincentive to comply with this standard.

Each of the foregoing relationships should be considered carefully by you before you invest in any certificates.

Potential Conflicts of Interest of the Operating Advisor

Park Bridge Lender Services LLC has been appointed as the initial operating advisor with respect to all of the mortgage loans other than any non-serviced mortgage loan or servicing shift mortgage loan. See “Transaction Parties—The Operating Advisor and Asset Representations Reviewer”. In the normal course of conducting its business, the initial operating advisor and its affiliates may have rendered services to, performed surveillance of, provided valuation services to, and negotiated with, numerous parties engaged in activities related to structured finance and commercial mortgage securitization. These parties may have included institutional investors, the depositor, the sponsors, the mortgage loan sellers, the originators, the certificate administrator, the trustee, the master servicer, the special servicer, the directing certificateholder, mortgaged property owners and their vendors or affiliates of any of those parties. In the normal course of business, Park Bridge Lender Services LLC and its affiliates are hired by trustees and other transaction parties to perform valuation services with respect to properties that may have mortgages attached. Each of these relationships, to the extent they exist, may continue in the future and may involve a conflict of interest with respect to the initial operating advisor’s duties as operating advisor. We cannot assure you that the existence of these relationships and other relationships in the future will not impact the manner in which the initial operating advisor performs its duties under the pooling and servicing agreement.

Additionally, Park Bridge Lender Services LLC or its affiliates, in the ordinary course of their business, may in the future (a) perform for third parties contract underwriting services and advisory services as well as service or specially service mortgage loans and (b) acquire mortgage loans for their own account, including, in each such case, mortgage loans similar to the mortgage loans that will be included in the issuing entity. The real properties securing these other mortgage loans may be in the same markets as, and compete with, certain of the mortgaged properties securing the mortgage loans that will be included in the issuing entity. Consequently, personnel of Park Bridge Lender Services LLC may perform services, on behalf of the issuing entity, with respect to the mortgage loans included in the issuing entity at the same time as they are performing services with respect to, or while Park Bridge Lender Services LLC or its affiliates are holding, other mortgage loans secured by properties that compete with the mortgaged properties securing the mortgage loans included in the issuing entity. This may pose inherent conflicts of interest for Park Bridge Lender Services LLC. Although the operating advisor is required to consider the servicing standard in connection with its activities under the pooling and servicing agreement, the operating advisor will not itself be bound by the servicing standard.

In addition, the operating advisor and its affiliates may acquire or have interests that are in conflict with those of certificateholders if the operating advisor or any of its affiliates has financial interests in or financial dealings with a borrower, a parent or a sponsor of a borrower, a servicer or any of their affiliates. Each of these relationships may also create a conflict of interest.

Potential Conflicts of Interest of the Asset Representations Reviewer

Park Bridge Lender Services LLC has been appointed as the initial asset representations reviewer with respect to all of the mortgage loans. See “Transaction Parties—The Operating Advisor and Asset Representations Reviewer”. In the normal course of conducting its business, the initial asset representations reviewer and its affiliates have rendered services to, performed surveillance of, provided valuation services to, and negotiated with, numerous parties engaged in activities related to structured finance and commercial mortgage securitization. These parties may have included institutional investors, the depositor, the sponsors, the mortgage loan sellers, the originators, the certificate administrator, the trustee, the master servicer, the special servicer or the directing certificateholder, mortgaged property owners and their vendors or affiliates of any of those parties. Each of these relationships, to the extent they exist, may continue in the future and may involve a conflict of interest with respect to the initial asset representations reviewer’s duties as asset representations reviewer. We cannot assure you that the existence of these relationships and other relationships in the future will not impact the manner in which the initial asset representations reviewer performs its duties under the pooling and servicing agreement.

Additionally, Park Bridge Lender Services LLC or its affiliates, in the ordinary course of their business, may in the future (a) perform for third parties contract underwriting services and advisory services as well as service or specially service mortgage loans and (b) acquire mortgage loans for their own account, including, in each such case, mortgage loans similar to the mortgage loans that will be included in the issuing entity. The real properties securing these other mortgage loans may be in the same markets as, and compete with, certain of the mortgaged properties securing the mortgage loans that will be included in the issuing entity. Consequently, personnel of Park Bridge Lender Services LLC may perform services, on behalf of the issuing entity, with respect to the mortgage loans included in the issuing entity at the same time as they are performing services with respect to, or while Park Bridge Lender Services LLC or its affiliates are holding, other mortgage loans secured

by properties that compete with the mortgaged properties securing the mortgage loans included in the issuing entity. This may pose inherent conflicts of interest for Park Bridge Lender Services LLC.

In addition, the asset representations reviewer and its affiliates may acquire or have interests that are in conflict with those of certificateholders if the asset representations reviewer or any of its affiliates has financial interests in or financial dealings with a borrower, a parent or a sponsor of a borrower, a servicer or any of their affiliates. Each of these relationships may also create a conflict of interest.

Potential Conflicts of Interest of the Directing Certificateholder and the Companion Holders

It is expected that Argentic Securities Income USA 2 LLC will be appointed as the initial directing certificateholder. The special servicer may, at the direction of the directing certificateholder (for so long as a control termination event does not exist and is not continuing and, at all times, other than with respect to certain excluded loans) (or, in the case of the servicing shift mortgage loans, at the direction of the related controlling noteholder, prior to the applicable servicing shift securitization date), take actions with respect to the specially serviced loans that could adversely affect the holders of some or all of the classes of certificates. The directing certificateholder will be controlled by the controlling class certificateholders.

The controlling class certificateholders and the holder of any companion loan or securities backed by such companion loan may have interests in conflict with those of the other certificateholders. As a result, it is possible that (i) the directing certificateholder on behalf of the controlling class certificateholders (for so long as a control termination event does not exist and, at all times, other than with respect to any applicable excluded loans or non-serviced whole loans), (ii) the controlling noteholder of any servicing shift whole loan prior to the applicable servicing shift securitization date or (iii) the directing certificateholder (or equivalent entity) under the trust and servicing agreement or pooling and servicing agreement governing the servicing of a non-serviced whole loan, may direct the special servicer or the applicable special servicer under such trust and servicing agreement or pooling and servicing agreement relating to the other securitization transaction, as the case may be, to take actions that conflict with the interests of holders of certain classes of the certificates. Set forth in the table entitled “Non-Serviced Whole Loans” under “Summary of Terms—Non-Serviced Whole Loans” is the identity of the initial directing certificateholder (or equivalent entity) for each non-serviced whole loan, the securitization trust or other entity holding the controlling note in such non-serviced whole loan and the trust and servicing agreement or pooling and servicing agreement, as applicable, under which it is being serviced.

The controlling noteholder or directing certificateholder indicated in such table has certain consent and/or consultation rights with respect to the related non-serviced whole loan under the trust and servicing agreement or pooling and servicing agreement governing the servicing of that non-serviced whole loan. Such controlling noteholder or directing certificateholder does not have any duties to the holders of any class of certificates and may have similar conflicts of interest with the holders of other certificates backed by the companion loans. As a result, it is possible that a non-serviced companion loan holder (solely with respect to the related non-serviced whole loan) may advise a non-serviced special servicer to take actions that conflict with the interests of holders of certain classes of the certificates. However, such non-serviced special servicer is not permitted to take actions that are prohibited by law or that violate its servicing standard or the terms of the

related mortgage loan documents. See “Pooling and Servicing Agreement—Servicing of the Non-Serviced Mortgage Loans”. In addition, except as limited by certain conditions described under “Description of the Mortgage Pool—The Whole Loans”, a non-serviced special servicer may be replaced by the related directing certificateholder or controlling noteholder for cause at any time and without cause for so long as a control termination event (or its equivalent) does not exist (or, in the case of a servicing shift mortgage loan, prior to the applicable servicing shift securitization date, by the holder of the controlling companion loan at any time, for cause or without cause). See “Pooling and Servicing Agreement —Servicing of the Non-Serviced Mortgage Loans” below and “Description of the Mortgage Pool—The Whole Loans”.

With respect to a servicing shift whole loan, prior to the applicable servicing shift securitization date, the related controlling companion loan holder will have certain consent and/or consultation rights, and the related non-controlling companion loan holders will have non-binding consultation rights, in each case with respect to such servicing shift whole loan under the pooling and servicing agreement. Such companion loan holders do not have any duties to the holders of any class of certificates and may have similar conflicts of interest with the holders of other certificates backed by the companion loans, if any. As a result, it is possible that such controlling companion loan holder (solely with respect to the related servicing shift whole loan and prior to the applicable servicing shift securitization date) may advise the special servicer to take actions that conflict with the interests of holders of certain classes of the certificates. Additionally, it is possible that such non-controlling companion loan holders (solely with respect to the related servicing shift whole loan and prior to the applicable servicing shift securitization date) may, on a strictly non-binding basis, consult with the special servicer and recommend that the special servicer take actions that conflict with the interests of holders of certain classes of the certificates. Accordingly, prior to the applicable servicing shift securitization date, the special servicer may take actions with respect to the related serviced whole loan that could adversely affect the holders of some or all of the classes of certificates, to the extent described under “Description of the Mortgage Pool—The Whole Loans”. However, the special servicer is not permitted to take actions that are prohibited by law or that violate its servicing standard or the terms of the related mortgage loan documents. After the related servicing shift securitization date, the related servicing shift whole loan will become a non-serviced whole loan and, thereafter, be subject to the conflicts described herein applicable to non-serviced mortgage loans. See “Pooling and Servicing Agreement—Servicing of the Non-Serviced Mortgage Loans”.

In addition, except as limited by certain conditions described under “Pooling and Servicing Agreement—Termination of the Master Servicer or Special Servicer for Cause—Servicer Termination Events”, the special servicer may be replaced by the directing certificateholder at any time for cause or without cause (for so long as a control termination event does not exist and other than in respect of any applicable excluded loan). See “Pooling and Servicing Agreement—The Directing Certificateholder” and “—Termination of the Master Servicer or Special Servicer for Cause—Servicer Termination Events”.

With respect to serviced whole loans other than any servicing shift whole loan, the special servicer, upon strictly non-binding consultation with a serviced companion loan holder or its representative, may take actions with respect to the related serviced whole loan that could adversely affect the holders of some or all of the classes of certificates, to the extent described under “Description of the Mortgage Pool—The Whole Loans”. In connection with the whole loans serviced under the pooling and servicing agreement for this securitization, a serviced companion loan holder does not have any duties to the holders of any class of certificates, and it may have interests in conflict with those of the

certificateholders. As a result, it is possible that a serviced companion loan holder with respect to a serviced whole loan other than any servicing shift whole loan (solely with respect to the related serviced whole loan) may, on a strictly non-binding basis, consult with the special servicer and recommend that the special servicer take actions that conflict with the interests of holders of certain classes of the certificates. However, the special servicer is not required to follow such recommendations and is not permitted to take actions that are prohibited by law or that violate the servicing standard or the terms of the mortgage loan documents and is otherwise under no obligation to take direction from a serviced companion loan holder. In addition, except as limited by certain conditions described under “Pooling and Servicing Agreement—Termination of the Master Servicer or Special Servicer for Cause—Rights Upon Servicer Termination Events”, the special servicer may be replaced by the directing certificateholder for cause or without cause (for so long as a control termination event does not exist and other than in respect of any applicable excluded loans). See “Pooling and Servicing Agreement—The Directing Certificateholder” and “—Termination of the Master Servicer or Special Servicer for Cause—Servicer Termination Events”. Notwithstanding the foregoing, with respect to a servicing shift whole loan, prior to the applicable servicing shift securitization date, the special servicer may be replaced by the holder of the related controlling companion loan at any time, for cause or without cause.

The directing certificateholder, any controlling noteholder or their respective affiliates (and the directing certificateholder (or equivalent entity) under the trust and servicing agreement or pooling and servicing agreement governing the servicing of a non-serviced whole loan and their respective affiliates) may have interests that are in conflict with those of certain certificateholders, especially if the applicable directing certificateholder, controlling noteholder or their respective affiliates holds certificates or companion loan securities, or has financial interests in or other financial dealings (as lender or otherwise) with a borrower or an affiliate of a borrower. In order to minimize the effect of certain of these conflicts of interest, for so long as any borrower party is the directing certificateholder or the holder of the majority of the controlling class (any such loan referred to herein as an “excluded loan” with respect to the directing certificateholder), the directing certificateholder will not have consent or consultation rights solely with respect to such excluded loan (however, the directing certificateholder will be provided certain notices and certain information relating to any such excluded loan as described in the pooling and servicing agreement). In addition, for so long as any borrower party is the directing certificateholder or a controlling class certificateholder, as applicable, the directing certificateholder or such controlling class certificateholder, as applicable, will not be given access to any “excluded information” solely relating to any such mortgage loan and/or the related mortgaged properties pursuant to the terms of the pooling and servicing agreement. Notwithstanding those restrictions, there can be no assurance that the directing certificateholder or any controlling class certificateholder will not obtain sensitive information related to the strategy of any contemplated workout or liquidation related to any such mortgage loan or otherwise seek to exert its influence over the special servicer in the event any such mortgage loan becomes subject to a workout or liquidation. See “Description of the Certificates—Reports to Certificateholders; Certain Available Information” in this prospectus. Each of these relationships may create a conflict of interest.

Potential Conflicts of Interest in the Selection of the Underlying Mortgage Loans

The anticipated initial investor in the Class F-RR and Class G-RR certificates, which is referred to in this prospectus as the “b-piece buyer” (see “Pooling and Servicing Agreement—The Directing Certificateholder—General”), was given the opportunity by the sponsors to perform due diligence on the mortgage loans originally identified by the sponsors for inclusion in the issuing entity, and to request the removal, re-sizing or change

in the expected repayment dates or other features of some or all of the mortgage loans. The mortgage pool as originally proposed by the sponsors was adjusted based on certain of these requests. In addition, the b-piece buyer received or may have received price adjustments or cost mitigation arrangements in connection with accepting certain mortgage loans in the mortgage pool.

We cannot assure you that you or another investor would have made the same requests to modify the original pool as the b-piece buyer or that the final pool as influenced by the b-piece buyer’s feedback will not adversely affect the performance of your certificates and benefit the performance of the b-piece buyer’s certificates. Because of the differing subordination levels, the b-piece buyer has interests that may, in some circumstances, differ from those of purchasers of other classes of certificates, and may desire a portfolio composition that benefits the b-piece buyer but that does not benefit other investors. In addition, the b-piece buyer may enter into hedging or other transactions (except as may be restricted pursuant to the risk retention rules) or otherwise have business objectives that also could cause its interests with respect to the mortgage pool to diverge from those of other purchasers of the certificates. The b-piece buyer performed due diligence solely for its own benefit and has no liability to any person or entity for conducting its due diligence. The b-piece buyer is not required to take into account the interests of any other investor in the certificates in exercising remedies or voting or other rights in its capacity as owner of its certificates or in making requests or recommendations to the sponsors as to the selection of the mortgage loans and the establishment of other transaction terms. Investors are not entitled to rely on in any way the b-piece buyer’s acceptance of a mortgage loan. The b-piece buyer’s acceptance of a mortgage loan does not constitute, and may not be construed as, an endorsement of such mortgage loan, the underwriting for such mortgage loan or the originator of such mortgage loan.

The b-piece buyer will have no liability to any certificateholder for any actions taken by it as described in the preceding two paragraphs and the pooling and servicing agreement will provide that each certificateholder, by its acceptance of a certificate, waives any claims against such buyers in respect of such actions.

The b-piece buyer or an affiliate will constitute the initial directing certificateholder. The directing certificateholder will have certain rights to direct and consult with the master servicer and special servicer. In addition, the directing certificateholder will generally have certain consultation rights with regard to the non-serviced mortgage loans under the trust and servicing agreement or pooling and servicing agreement, as applicable, governing the servicing of such non-serviced whole loan and the related intercreditor agreement, and with regard to any servicing shift whole loan following the applicable servicing shift securitization date, under the related pooling and servicing agreement governing the servicing of such servicing shift whole loan. See “Pooling and Servicing Agreement—The Directing Certificateholder” and “Description of the Mortgage Pool—The Whole Loans”.

It is expected that Argentic Securities Income USA 2 LLC will be the initial directing certificateholder. Argentic Services Company LP is expected to act as the special servicer and it or an affiliate assisted Argentic Securities Income USA 2 LLC and/or one or more of its affiliates with its due diligence of the mortgage loans prior to the closing date.

Because the incentives and actions of the b-piece buyer may, in some circumstances, differ from or be adverse to those of purchasers of the offered certificates, you are advised and encouraged to make your own investment decision based on a careful review of the information set forth in this prospectus and your own view of the mortgage pool.

Conflicts of Interest May Occur as a Result of the Rights of the Applicable Directing Certificateholder to Terminate the Applicable Special Servicer of the Applicable Whole Loan

With respect to any whole loan, the directing certificateholder exercising control rights over that whole loan (or, with respect to a servicing shift whole loan, or if applicable, a non-serviced whole loan, the holder of the related controlling companion loan) will be entitled, under certain circumstances, to remove the applicable special servicer under the applicable pooling and servicing agreement or trust and servicing agreement governing the servicing of such whole loan and, in such circumstances, appoint a successor special servicer for such whole loan (or have certain consent rights with respect to such removal or replacement). The party with this appointment power may have special relationships or interests that conflict with those of the holders of one or more classes of certificates. In addition, that party does not have any duties to the holders of any class of certificates, may act solely in its own interests, and will have no liability to any certificateholders for having done so. No certificateholder may take any action against the directing certificateholder or, with respect to a servicing shift whole loan, or if applicable, a non-serviced whole loan, the holder of the related controlling companion loan, under the pooling and servicing agreement for this securitization or under the pooling and servicing agreement or trust and servicing agreement governing the servicing of such non-serviced whole loan, or against any other parties for having acted solely in their respective interests. See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—The Whole Loans” for a description of these rights to terminate the applicable special servicer.

Other Potential Conflicts of Interest May Affect Your Investment

The managers of the mortgaged properties and the borrowers may experience conflicts in the management and/or ownership of the mortgaged properties because:

None of the borrowers, property managers or any of their affiliates or any employees of the foregoing has any duty to favor the leasing of space in the mortgaged properties over the leasing of space in other properties, one or more of which may be adjacent to or near the mortgaged properties. In certain such cases where the borrower under a mortgage loan in this transaction is affiliated with the owner of a competing property, the related mortgage loan documents will often contain so-called “anti-poaching” provisions, which are designed to prevent borrowers and their affiliates from steering or directing existing or prospective tenants to the competing property. However, not all mortgage loan documents will contain such provisions and violations of such anti-poaching provisions might not trigger the non-recourse carve-out and may not be easily discovered and/or proven. See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Non-Recourse Carveout Limitations”.

Each of the foregoing relationships should be considered carefully by you before you invest in any certificates.

Other Risks Relating to the Certificates

EU Securitization Rules and UK Securitization Rules

Prospective investors should be aware of the following matters which may, in certain cases, be relevant to an investor’s own regulatory obligations; and may, in any case, adversely affect the value and liquidity of the certificates.

In the European Union (“EU”), certain restrictions and obligations with regard to securitizations are imposed pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2017/2402 and related technical standards (in each case, as amended, and collectively the “EU Securitization Rules”). These include certain requirements (the “EU Investor Requirements”) imposed on institutional investors, as defined for purposes of the EU Securitization Rules. An institutional investor is a person holding a securitization position (i.e., an exposure to a securitization, as defined for purposes of the EU Securitization Rules) and which is one of the following: (a) an insurance undertaking or a reinsurance undertaking, each as defined in Directive 2009/138/EC; (b) an institution for occupational retirement provision falling within the scope of Directive (EU) 2016/2341 (unless not subject thereto), or an investment manager or an authorized entity appointed by such an institution; (c) an alternative investment fund manager, as defined in Directive 2011/61/EU, that manages and/or markets alternative investment funds in the EU; (d) an internally-managed UCITS, which is an investment company authorized in accordance with Directive 2009/65/EC and which has not designated a management company authorized under that Directive for its management, or a management company, as defined in that Directive; or (e) a credit institution or an investment firm, each as defined in Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (as amended, the “EU CRR”). In addition, the EU CRR makes provision as to the application of the EU Investor Requirements to consolidated affiliates, wherever established or located, of institutional investors that are subject to the EU CRR. Each such institutional investor and each relevant affiliate is referred to herein as an “EU Institutional Investor”.

Pursuant to the EU Investor Requirements, an EU Institutional Investor is required (amongst other things), prior to holding a securitization position, to verify certain matters in accordance with the EU Securitization Rules, including that (a) except in specified cases, certain credit-granting requirements are satisfied; (b) the originator, sponsor or original lender retains a material net economic interest in the securitization of not less than 5%, in accordance with the EU Securitization Rules; and (c) the originator, sponsor or securitization special purpose entity has, where applicable, made information available in accordance with the EU Securitization Rules. Aspects of the EU Investor Requirements, and what is or will be required for an EU Institutional Investor to be able to demonstrate compliance to its regulator, may be unclear.

The EU Securitization Rules will apply also in the non-EU member states of the European Economic Area, to the extent (if at all) implemented in such member states.

The consequences of a failure to comply with the EU Investor Requirements with respect to an investment in the certificates would depend on the characteristics of the relevant EU Institutional Investor. For example, an EU Institutional Investor that is subject to regulatory capital requirements may be subject to a penalty regulatory capital charge on the relevant certificates; and an EU Institutional Investor that is an alternative investment

fund manager may be required to take corrective action in the best interest of investors in the relevant fund.

In the United Kingdom (“UK”), certain restrictions and obligations with regard to securitizations are imposed pursuant to the Securitisation Regulations 2024 and related rules made by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority (in each case, as amended, and collectively the “UK Securitization Rules”). These include certain requirements (the “UK Investor Requirements”) imposed on institutional investors, as defined for purposes of the UK Securitization Rules. An institutional investor is a person holding a securitization position (i.e., an exposure to a securitization, as defined for purposes of the UK Securitization Rules) and which is one of the following: (a) an insurance undertaking or a reinsurance undertaking, each as defined in the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (as amended, the “FSMA”); (b) the trustees or managers of an occupational pension scheme, as defined in the Pension Schemes Act 1993, that has its main administration in the UK, or a fund manager of such a scheme appointed under the Pensions Act 1995 that, in respect of activity undertaken pursuant to that appointment, is authorized for the purposes of the FSMA; (c) an AIFM, as defined in the Alternative Investment Fund Managers Regulations 2013 (as amended, the “AIFM Regulations”) that has permission under the FSMA for managing an AIF (as defined in the AIFM Regulations) and markets or manages an AIF in the UK, or a small registered UK AIFM, as defined in the AIFM Regulations; (d) a UCITS, as defined in the FSMA, which is an authorized open ended investment company, as defined in the FSMA, or a management company, as defined in the FSMA; or (e) a CRR firm or an FCA investment firm, each as defined in Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, as it forms part of UK domestic law by virtue of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 (as amended, the “UK CRR”). In addition, the UK CRR makes provision as to the application of the UK Investor Requirements to consolidated affiliates, wherever established or located, of institutional investors that are subject to the UK CRR. Each such institutional investor and each relevant affiliate is referred to herein as a “UK Institutional Investor”.

Pursuant to the UK Investor Requirements, a UK Institutional Investor is required (amongst other things), prior to holding a securitization position, to verify certain matters in accordance with the UK Securitization Rules to which it is subject, including that (a) except in specified cases, certain credit-granting requirements are satisfied; (b) the originator, sponsor or original lender retains a material net economic interest in the securitization of not less than 5%, in accordance with the UK Securitization Rules; and (c) the originator, sponsor or securitization special purpose entity has made information available (and committed to make further information available) in accordance with the UK Securitization Rules to which the UK Institutional Investor is subject. Aspects of the UK Investor Requirements, and what is or will be required for a UK Institutional Investor to be able to demonstrate compliance to its regulator, may be unclear.

The consequences of a failure to comply with the UK Investor Requirements with respect to an investment in the certificates would depend on the characteristics of the relevant UK Institutional Investor. For example, a UK Institutional Investor that is subject to regulatory capital requirements may be subject to a penalty regulatory capital charge on the relevant certificates; and a UK Institutional Investor that is an AIFM may be required to take corrective action in the best interest of investors in the relevant AIF.

None of the sponsors, the depositor or the underwriters, or their respective affiliates, or any other person, intends to retain a material net economic interest in the securitization constituted by the issuance of the certificates, or to take any other action in respect of such securitization, in a manner prescribed or contemplated by the EU Securitization Rules or the UK Securitization Rules. In particular, no such person undertakes to take any action, or

refrain from taking any action, for purposes of, or in connection with, compliance by any prospective investor or certificateholder with any EU Investor Requirements or any UK Investor Requirements.

In addition, the arrangements described under “Credit Risk Retention” in this prospectus have not been structured with the objective of ensuring or facilitating compliance by any person with any applicable requirement of the EU Securitization Rules or the UK Securitization Rules.

Consequently, the certificates may not be a suitable investment for an EU Institutional Investor or a UK Institutional Investor; and this may, amongst other things, have a negative impact on the value and liquidity of the certificates, and otherwise affect the secondary market for the certificates.

Prospective investors and certificateholders are responsible for analyzing their own legal and regulatory position; and are encouraged (where relevant) to consult their own legal, accounting and other advisors and/or any relevant regulator or other authority, and to make their own assessment, regarding the suitability of the certificates for investment, and, in particular, the scope and applicability of the EU Securitization Rules or the UK Securitization Rules (as relevant) and their compliance with any applicable requirement thereof.

In addition, prospective investors should note that a legislative procedure is underway in the EU that is expected to result in the adoption of legislation which, if implemented in the terms currently proposed, would (amongst other things) amend certain aspects of the EU Investor Requirements. It is not known whether, when, or in what terms such proposed legislation will be implemented. Each prospective investor in the certificates that is an EU Institutional Investor should make its own assessment as to the implications (if any) of such proposed legislation.

Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organizations May Assign Different Ratings to the Certificates; Ratings of the Certificates Reflect Only the Views of the Applicable Rating Agencies as of the Dates Such Ratings Were Issued; Ratings May Affect ERISA Eligibility; Ratings May Be Downgraded

Ratings assigned to the offered certificates by the nationally recognized statistical rating organizations engaged by the depositor:

The nationally recognized statistical rating organizations that assign ratings to any class of offered certificates will establish the amount of credit support, if any, for such class of offered certificates based on, among other things, an assumed level of defaults, delinquencies and losses with respect to the mortgage loans. Actual losses may, however, exceed the assumed levels. If actual losses on the mortgage loans exceed the assumed levels, you may be required to bear the additional losses.

In addition, the rating of any class of offered certificates below an investment grade rating by any nationally recognized statistical rating organization, whether upon initial issuance of such class of certificates or as a result of a ratings downgrade, could adversely affect the ability of an employee benefit plan or other investor to purchase or retain those offered certificates. See “Certain ERISA Considerations” and “Legal Investment”.

Nationally recognized statistical rating organizations that were not engaged by the depositor to rate the offered certificates may nevertheless issue unsolicited credit ratings on one or more classes of offered certificates, relying on information they receive pursuant to Rule 17g-5 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), or otherwise. If any such unsolicited ratings are issued, we cannot assure you that they will not be different from any ratings assigned by a rating agency engaged by the depositor. The issuance of unsolicited ratings by any nationally recognized statistical rating organization on a class of the offered certificates that are lower than ratings assigned by a rating agency engaged by the depositor may adversely impact the liquidity, market value and regulatory characteristics of that class.

As part of the process of obtaining ratings for the offered certificates, the depositor had initial discussions with and submitted certain materials to five nationally recognized statistical rating organizations. Based on preliminary feedback from those nationally recognized statistical rating organizations at that time, the depositor selected three of those nationally recognized statistical rating organizations to rate certain classes of the certificates and not the other nationally recognized statistical rating organizations, due in part to their initial subordination levels for the various classes of the certificates. If the depositor had selected the other nationally recognized statistical rating organizations to rate the certificates, we cannot assure you that the ratings such other nationally recognized statistical rating organizations would have assigned to the certificates would not have been lower than the ratings assigned by the nationally recognized statistical rating organizations engaged by the depositor. Further, in the case of one nationally recognized statistical rating organization engaged by the depositor, the depositor only requested ratings for certain classes of offered certificates, due in part to the final subordination levels provided by such nationally recognized statistical rating organization for such classes of certificates. If the depositor had selected such nationally recognized statistical rating organization to rate those classes of offered certificates not rated by it, such ratings on those other certificates may have been different, and potentially lower, than those ratings ultimately assigned to those certificates by the other nationally recognized statistical rating organizations hired by

the depositor. In addition, the decision not to engage one or more other rating agencies in the rating of certain classes of certificates to be issued in connection with this transaction may negatively impact the liquidity, market value and regulatory characteristics of those classes of certificates. Although unsolicited ratings may be issued by any nationally recognized statistical rating organization, a nationally recognized statistical rating organization might be more likely to issue an unsolicited rating if it was not selected after having provided preliminary feedback to the depositor. Neither the depositor nor any other person or entity will have any duty to notify you if any other nationally recognized statistical rating organization issues, or delivers notice of its intention to issue, unsolicited ratings on one or more classes of certificates after the date of this prospectus.

Furthermore, the Securities and Exchange Commission may determine that any or all of the rating agencies engaged by the depositor to rate the certificates no longer qualifies as a nationally recognized statistical rating organization, or is no longer qualified to rate the certificates or may no longer rate similar securities for a limited period as a result of an enforcement action, and that determination may also have an adverse effect on the liquidity, market value and regulatory characteristics of the offered certificates.

On September 29, 2020, a settlement was reached between Kroll Bond Rating Agency, LLC and the Securities and Exchange Commission in connection with an investigation into the policies and procedures deployed by Kroll Bond Rating Agency, LLC to establish, maintain, enforce and document an effective internal control structure governing the implementation of and adherence to policies, procedures, and methodologies for determining credit ratings for conduit/fusion commercial mortgage-backed securities in accordance with Section 15E(c)(3)(A) of the Exchange Act. The Securities and Exchange Commission found that Kroll Bond Rating Agency, LLC’s internal controls relating to its rating of conduit/fusion commercial mortgage-backed securities had deficiencies that resulted in material weaknesses in its internal control structure. Under the settlement, Kroll Bond Rating Agency, LLC, without admitting or denying the findings of the Securities and Exchange Commission, agreed (a) to pay a civil penalty of $1.25 million, (b) to undertake, among other things, a review of the application of its internal processes, policies and procedures regarding the implementation of and adherence to procedures and methodologies for determining credit ratings, and (c) to take the necessary actions to ensure that such internal processes, policies and procedures accurately reflect the strictures of Section 15E(c)(3)(A) of the Exchange Act. Any change in Kroll Bond Rating Agency, LLC’s rating criteria or methodology could result in a downgrade, withdrawal or qualification of any rating assigned to any class of certificates, despite the fact that such class might still be performing fully to the specifications described in this prospectus and set forth in the pooling and servicing agreement.

To the extent that the provisions of any mortgage loan or the pooling and servicing agreement condition any action, event or circumstance on the delivery of a rating agency confirmation, the pooling and servicing agreement will require delivery or deemed delivery of a rating agency confirmation only from the rating agencies engaged by the depositor to rate the certificates or, in the case of a serviced whole loan, any related companion loan securities.

We are not obligated to maintain any particular rating with respect to the certificates, and the ratings initially assigned to the certificates by any or all of the rating agencies engaged by the depositor to rate the certificates could change adversely as a result of changes affecting, among other things, the mortgage loans, the mortgaged properties, the parties to the pooling and servicing agreement, or as a result of changes to ratings criteria employed by any or all of the rating agencies engaged by the depositor to

rate the certificates. Although these changes would not necessarily be or result from an event of default on any mortgage loan, any adverse change to the ratings of the offered certificates would likely have an adverse effect on the market value, liquidity and/or regulatory characteristics of those certificates.

Further, certain actions provided for in loan agreements may require a rating agency confirmation be obtained from the rating agencies engaged by the depositor to rate the certificates and, in the case of a serviced whole loan, any companion loan securities as a precondition to taking such action. In certain circumstances, this condition may be deemed to have been met or waived without such a rating agency confirmation being obtained. In the event such an action is taken without a rating agency confirmation being obtained, we cannot assure you that the applicable rating agency will not downgrade, qualify or withdraw its ratings as a result of the taking of such action. See “Description of the Mortgage Pool—Certain Terms of the Mortgage Loans—‘Due-On-Sale’ and ‘Due-On-Encumbrance’ Provisions”, “Pooling and Servicing Agreement—Rating Agency Confirmations” and “Ratings” for additional considerations regarding the ratings, including a description of the process of obtaining confirmations of ratings for the offered certificates.

Recently, a number of rating agencies have downgraded certain regional banks and other financial institutions and have put others on watch for possible downgrade. Under the terms of the pooling and servicing agreement, the certificate administrator and trustee are required to maintain certain minimum credit ratings. Computershare Trust Company, National Association (“Computershare”) has entered into a backup advancing agreement with a national banking association that meets the rating requirements provided for in the pooling and servicing agreement which will apply to this securitization transaction. Subject to the terms and conditions of such backup advancing agreement, upon a failure by the master servicer to make any advance required to be made under the pooling and servicing agreement, such national banking association has agreed to fund such amount to or on behalf of Computershare if, pursuant to the pooling and servicing agreement, Computershare, in its capacity as backup advancing party, is required to but does not make such advance. Failure to maintain the ongoing rating requirements may require the certificate administrator and trustee, as applicable, to resign and be replaced with an entity meeting those required ratings. See “Pooling and Servicing Agreement—Resignation and Removal of the Trustee and the Certificate Administrator”. If the certificate administrator and/or trustee were required to resign due to a credit rating downgrade or otherwise, we cannot assure you that an appropriate replacement could be identified or that a replacement would agree to the appointment or would be appointed within the time periods required in the pooling and servicing agreement. In addition, accounts established and maintained under the pooling and servicing agreement by the master servicer, the special servicer, the certificate administrator or any institution designated by those parties on behalf of the parties to the pooling and servicing agreement, including, in certain circumstances, borrower reserve accounts, are required to be held at institutions meeting certain eligibility criteria, including minimum long term and/or short term credit ratings depending on the time period funds will be held in those accounts. If an institution holding accounts established and maintained under the pooling and servicing agreement were downgraded below the applicable eligibility criteria and a rating agency confirmation was not delivered, those accounts may be required to be transferred to an institution satisfying the applicable eligibility criteria. Any downgrade or required replacement of the certificate administrator and/or trustee or required transfer of accounts may negatively impact the servicing and administration of the mortgage loans and may also adversely impact the performance, ratings, liquidity and/or value of your certificates.

Your Yield May Be Affected by Defaults, Prepayments and Other Factors

General

The yield to maturity on each class of offered certificates will depend in part on the following:

For this purpose, principal payments include voluntary and involuntary prepayments, such as prepayments resulting from the application of loan reserves, property releases, casualty or condemnation, defaults and liquidations as well as principal payments resulting from repurchases due to material breaches of representations and warranties or material document defects or purchases by a companion loan holder or mezzanine lender (if any) pursuant to a purchase option or sales of defaulted mortgage loans.

Any changes in the weighted average lives of your certificates may adversely affect your yield. In general, if you buy a certificate at a premium, and principal distributions occur faster than expected, your actual yield to maturity will be lower than expected. If principal distributions are very high, holders of certificates purchased at a premium might not fully recover their initial investment. Conversely, if you buy a certificate at a discount and principal distributions occur more slowly than expected, your actual yield to maturity will be lower than expected.

Prepayments resulting in a shortening of weighted average lives of your certificates may be made at a time of low interest rates when you may be unable to reinvest the resulting payment of principal on your certificates at a rate comparable to the effective yield anticipated by you in making your investment in the certificates, while delays and extensions resulting in a lengthening of those weighted average lives may occur at a time of high interest rates when you may have been able to reinvest principal payments that would otherwise have been received by you at higher rates.

In addition, the extent to which prepayments on the mortgage loans in the issuing entity ultimately affect the weighted average life of the certificates will depend on the terms of the certificates, more particularly:

The Timing of Prepayments and Repurchases May Change Your Anticipated Yield

The rate at which voluntary prepayments occur on the mortgage loans will be affected by a variety of factors, including: