As filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on September [●], 2026

Registration No. 333-290955

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

Amendment No. 1

to

FORM S-1

REGISTRATION STATEMENT
UNDER
THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933

21SHARES INJECTIVE ETF
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

158 W. 27th Street

New York, New York 10001

(646) 370-6016

(Address, including zip code, and telephone number, including area code, of registrant’s principal executive offices)

21Shares US LLC

Russell Barlow

158 W. 27th Street
New York, New York 10001
(646) 370-6016
(Address, including zip code, and telephone number, including area code, of agent for service)

Copy to:

Allison M. Fumai, Esq.

Anna Tomczyk, Esq.

Neel Maitra, Esq.

Dechert LLP

1095 Avenue of the Americas

New York, New York 10036

(212) 698-3526

Approximate date of commencement of proposed sale to the public: As soon as practicable after the effective date of this Registration Statement.

If any of the securities being registered on this Form are to be offered on a delayed or continuous basis pursuant to Rule 415 under the Securities Act of 1933 check the following box: ☒

If this Form is filed to register additional securities for an offering pursuant to Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act of 1933, please check the following box and list the Securities Act of 1933 registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering: ☐

If this Form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to Rule 462(c) under the Securities Act of 1933, check the following box and list the Securities Act of 1933 registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering. ☐

If this Form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to Rule 462(d) under the Securities Act of 1933, check the following box and list the Securities Act of 1933 registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “non-accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934.

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 7(a)(2)(B) of the Securities Act of 1933. ☐

The Registrant hereby amends this Registration Statement on such date or dates as may be necessary to delay its effective date until the Registrant shall file a further amendment which specifically states that this Registration Statement shall thereafter become effective in accordance with Section 8(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 or until the Registration Statement shall become effective on such date as the Securities and Exchange Commission, acting pursuant to said Section 8(a), may determine.

The information in this Preliminary Prospectus is not complete and may be changed. We may not sell these securities until the registration statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission is effective. This Preliminary Prospectus is not an offer to sell these securities and it is not soliciting an offer to buy these securities in any jurisdiction where the offer or sale is not permitted.

Subject to Completion Dated September 18, 2026

PRELIMINARY PROSPECTUS

Shares

21Shares Injective ETF

21Shares Injective ETF (the “Trust”) is an exchange-traded fund that issues common shares of beneficial interest (the “Shares”) that are anticipated to be listed on the Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (the “Exchange”). The Trust is a passive investment vehicle that does not seek to generate returns beyond tracking the price of INJ tokens (“INJ”), the native digital asset of the Injective Network. This means the Sponsor does not speculatively sell INJ at times when its price is high or speculatively acquire INJ at low prices in the expectation of future price increases. It also means the Trust will not utilize leverage, derivatives or any similar arrangements in seeking to meet its investment objective. The Trust’s investment objective is to seek to track the performance of INJ, as measured by the performance of the FTSE Injective Index (the “Pricing Benchmark”), as adjusted for the Trust’s expenses and other liabilities, and to reflect rewards from staking a portion of the Trust’s INJ, to the extent the Sponsor in its sole discretion determines that the Trust may do so without undue legal or regulatory risk, such as, without limitation, the risk of jeopardizing the Trust’s ability to qualify as a grantor trust for tax purposes. The Pricing Benchmark is calculated by FTSE International Limited (the “Benchmark Provider” or “FTSE”) based on the volume weighted average price across qualifying INJ spot markets (“Constituent Exchanges”). The Pricing Benchmark is designed to track the performance of INJ in U.S. dollars. In seeking to achieve its investment objective, the Trust will hold INJ and the Trust’s administrator will value the Trust’s Shares daily based on the Pricing Benchmark.

The Sponsor anticipates that it will engage one or more third party staking services providers (each a “Staking Services Provider”) to stake all or a portion of the Trust’s INJ (“Staking Activities”). The Sponsor’s choice of third party Staking Services Providers, and its decision to allocate INJ amongst chosen Staking Services Providers, will be based on a range of factors, including but not limited to the performance, reliability, and reputation of the Staking Services Providers, including monitoring their uptime and slashing history.

The Sponsor may also seek to utilize alternative means to engage in Staking Activities, subject to its determination that the Trust may do so without undue legal, regulatory or tax risk. No definitive determination has been made as of the date of this Prospectus as to which, if any, of these alternative means the Trust may adopt. Should such a change take place, if any, the Trust will notify the owners of the beneficial interests of Shares in a prospectus supplement or in its periodic reports filed pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), as applicable, and on the Sponsor’s website.

21Shares US LLC (the “Sponsor”) is the sponsor of the Trust, CSC Delaware Trust Company (the “Trustee”) is the trustee of the Trust, and Coinbase Custody Trust Company, LLC (the “Coinbase Custodian”) and BitGo Bank & Trust, N.A. (the “BitGo Custodian” and together with the Coinbase Custodian, the “INJ Custodians”) are the INJ Custodians for the Trust and are expected to hold all of the Trust’s INJ on the Trust’s behalf. The custodial services agreements with each of the INJ Custodians are collectively referred to herein as the “Custodial Services Agreements.”

The Trust is an exchange-traded fund. Barring a liquidation or extraordinary circumstances, the Trust does not intend on purchasing or selling INJ other than in connection with the creation and redemption of Shares. The Sponsor may also sell INJ to pay certain expenses, which may be facilitated by the Prime Broker or any other prime brokers with whom the Trust contracts.

When the Trust sells or redeems its Shares, INJ will be transferred into or out of the Trust, as applicable, in exchange for blocks of 10,000 Shares (a “Basket”) that are based on the quantity of INJ attributable to each Share of the Trust (net of accrued but unpaid Sponsor Fees and any accrued but unpaid extraordinary expenses or liabilities).

Financial firms that are authorized to purchase Shares from or redeem Shares to the Trust (known as “Authorized Participants”) may purchase Shares in cash by depositing cash in the Trust’s account with the Cash Custodian. This will cause the Sponsor, on behalf of the Trust, to automatically instruct a designated third party, who may be an Authorized Participant or an affiliate of an Authorized Participant, or the Prime Broker or Lender, as applicable and with whom the Sponsor has entered into an agreement on behalf of the Trust (each such third party, the Prime Broker and the Lender, as applicable, an “INJ Counterparty”), to (i) purchase the amount of INJ equivalent in value to the cash deposit amount associated with the order and (ii) deposit the resulting INJ amount in the Trust’s accounts with the INJ Custodians, resulting in the Transfer Agent crediting the applicable amount of Shares to the applicable Authorized Participant. Authorized Participants may also purchase Shares in-kind. To purchase Shares in-kind, an Authorized Participant delivers, or arranges for the delivery by the Authorized Participant’s designee of, INJ to the Trust’s accounts with the INJ Custodians in exchange for Shares.

When such an Authorized Participant redeems its Shares in cash, the Sponsor, on behalf of the Trust will direct an INJ Custodian to transfer INJ to an INJ Counterparty, who will sell the INJ to be executed, in the Sponsor’s reasonable efforts, at the Pricing Benchmark price used to calculate the Trust’s net asset value (“NAV”), taking into account any spread, commissions, or other trading costs and deposit the cash proceeds of such sale in the Trust’s account with the Cash Custodian for settlement with the Authorized Participant. Any slippage incurred (including, but not limited to, any trading fees, spreads, or commissions), on a cash equivalent basis, will be the responsibility of such Authorized Participant and not of the Trust or Sponsor. Authorized Participants may also redeem Shares in-kind. When such an Authorized Participant redeems Shares in-kind, the Trust, through an INJ Custodian, will deliver INJ to the Authorized Participant or its designee in exchange for Shares.

The Sponsor performs extensive due diligence as part of its INJ Counterparty selection and onboarding process. As part of this process, the Sponsor assesses INJ Counterparty candidates against various criteria, including those relating to candidates’ (1) financial standing, (2) reputation, (3) settlement history with the Sponsor, and (4) their regulatory oversight.

Authorized Participants may then offer Shares to the public at prices that depend on various factors, including the supply and demand for Shares, the value of the Trust’s assets, and market conditions at the time of a transaction. Shareholders who buy or sell Shares during the day from their broker on the secondary market may do so at a premium or discount relative to the NAV of the Shares of the Trust.

Except when aggregated in Baskets, Shares are not redeemable securities. Baskets are only redeemable by Authorized Participants.

On [●], 2026, the Pricing Benchmark was approximately $[●].

The Sponsor served as the Audit Seed Investor to the Trust. On [●], the Sponsor, in its capacity as Audit Seed Investor, subject to conditions, purchased 2 Shares at a per-Share price of $50.00 (the “Initial Seed Shares”) as described in “Audit Seed/Initial Seed Creation Investor.” Total proceeds to the Trust from the sale of the Initial Seed Shares were $100.00. Delivery of the Initial Seed Shares was made on [●]. The Initial Seed Shares were redeemed for cash on or about [●].

21Shares US LLC (in such capacity, the “Initial Seed Creation Investor”), is expected to purchase initial seed creation baskets comprising [●] Shares (the “Seed Creation Baskets”) at a price of $[●] per Share. The proceeds from such sale are anticipated to be approximately $[●]. Such proceeds are expected to be used by the Trust to purchase INJ at or immediately prior to the listing of the Shares on the Exchange. In this capacity, the Initial Seed Creation Investor will act as a statutory underwriter in connection with this purchase. The INJ acquired in connection with the Seed Creation Baskets will be held by the INJ Custodians. The actual price of the Shares comprising the Seed Creation Baskets will be determined as of the effective date of the registration statement of which this prospectus (this “Prospectus”) forms a part as described in this Prospectus, and such Shares could be sold at different prices if sold by the Initial Seed Creation Investor at different times. It is anticipated that the Initial Seed Creation Investor may redeem its Shares or sell its Shares to a third party following the initial listing of Shares on the Exchange. The Initial Seed Creation Investor may sell some or all of its Shares pursuant to the registration statement of which this Prospectus forms a part (in such capacity, the “Selling Shareholder”), which Shares will have been registered to permit the resale from time to time after purchase. The Trust will not receive any of the proceeds from the resale or redemption by the Selling Shareholder of these Shares. The Sponsor will not receive from the Trust or any of its affiliates any fee or other compensation in connection with the resale of these Shares.

Shareholders who decide to buy or sell Shares of the Trust will place their trade orders through their brokers and will incur customary brokerage commissions and charges. Prior to this offering, there has been no public market for the Shares. The Shares are expected to be listed for trading, subject to notice of issuance, on the Exchange under the ticker symbol “TINJ”. The Trust anticipates that, on or about the date on which the registration statement of which this Prospectus forms a part is declared effective by the SEC, pursuant to a subscription agreement (the “Voltedge Subscription Agreement”) entered into as of September 3, 2025, between the Trust and Voltedge Ltd, a BVI company (“Voltedge”), a company under the laws of the British Virgin Islands, the Trust will issue to Voltedge [●] Shares for an aggregate purchase price in an amount equivalent to $30,000,000 in INJ, as determined based on the 30-day average price of INJ to USD, with the last such period being the business day prior to the date such Shares are delivered to Voltedge, using the price data from the Pricing Benchmark. The Shares to be issued pursuant to the Voltedge Subscription Agreement are subject to certain lock-up restrictions, which are described in further detail below. See “Plan of Distribution – Initial Seed Creation Investor; Selling Shareholder – Lock-Up Period.”

The offering of an indeterminate amount of the Trust’s Shares is registered with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) in accordance with the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “1933 Act”). The offering is intended to be a continuous offering and is not expected to terminate until three years from the date of the original offering, unless extended as permitted by applicable rules under the 1933 Act. The Trust is not an investment company registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”), and is not subject to regulation under the 1940 Act. Investors in the Trust will not, therefore, receive the regulatory protections afforded by investment companies registered under the 1940 Act. The Sponsor is not acting in the capacity of an “Investment Adviser” (as defined in Section 202(a)(11) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended (the “Advisers Act”)), the Sponsor’s provision of services to the Trust will not be governed by the Advisers Act, and the Sponsor is not subject to a fiduciary standard of care. The Trust is not a commodity pool for purposes of the Commodity Exchange Act of 1936, as amended (the “CEA”), and the Sponsor is not subject to regulation by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (the “CFTC”) as a commodity pool operator or a commodity trading advisor. The Trust’s Shares are neither interests in nor obligations of the Sponsor or the Trustee. Shareholders in the Trust will not benefit from the protections afforded to investors in INJ futures contracts on regulated futures markets.

AN INVESTMENT IN THE TRUST INVOLVES SIGNIFICANT RISKS AND MAY NOT BE SUITABLE FOR SHAREHOLDERS WHO ARE NOT IN A POSITION TO ACCEPT MORE RISK THAN MAY BE INVOLVED WITH EXCHANGE-TRADED PRODUCTS THAT DO NOT HOLD INJ. THE SHARES ARE SPECULATIVE SECURITIES. THEIR PURCHASE INVOLVES A HIGH DEGREE OF RISK AND YOU COULD LOSE YOUR ENTIRE INVESTMENT. YOU SHOULD CONSIDER ALL RISK FACTORS BEFORE INVESTING IN THE TRUST. PLEASE REFER TO “RISK FACTORS” BEGINNING ON PAGE 16.

NEITHER THE SEC NOR ANY STATE SECURITIES COMMISSION HAS APPROVED OR DISAPPROVED OF THE SECURITIES OFFERED IN THIS PROSPECTUS, OR DETERMINED IF THIS PROSPECTUS IS TRUTHFUL OR COMPLETE. ANY REPRESENTATION TO THE CONTRARY IS A CRIMINAL OFFENSE.

THE TRUST IS AN “EMERGING GROWTH COMPANY” AS THAT TERM IS USED IN THE JUMPSTART OUR BUSINESS STARTUPS ACT (THE “JOBS ACT”) AND, AS SUCH, MAY ELECT TO COMPLY WITH CERTAIN REDUCED REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.

The date of this Prospectus is [●], 2026

TABLE OF CONTENTS

This Prospectus contains information you should consider when making an investment decision about the Shares of the Trust. You may rely on the information contained in this Prospectus. The Trust and the Sponsor have not authorized any person to provide you with different information and, if anyone provides you with different or inconsistent information, you should not rely on it. This Prospectus is not an offer to sell the Shares in any jurisdiction where the offer or sale of the Shares is not permitted.

The Shares of the Trust are not registered for public sale in any jurisdiction other than the United States.

Until 25 calendar days after the date of this Prospectus, all dealers effecting transactions in the Shares, whether or not participating in this offering, may be required to deliver a prospectus. This requirement is in addition to the dealer’s obligation to deliver a prospectus when acting as underwriters and with respect to unsold allotments or subscriptions.

STATEMENT REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Prospectus includes “forward-looking statements” that generally relate to future events or future performance. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by terminology such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “expect,” “intend,” “plan,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “predict,” “potential” or the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology. All statements (other than statements of historical fact) included in this Prospectus that address activities, events or developments that will or may occur in the future, including such matters as movements in the digital asset markets and indexes that track such movements, the Trust’s operations, the Sponsor’s plans and references to the Trust’s future success and other similar matters, are forward-looking statements. These statements are only predictions. Actual events or results may differ materially. These statements are based upon certain assumptions and analyses the Sponsor has made based on its perception of historical trends, current conditions and expected future developments, as well as other factors appropriate in the circumstances.

Whether or not actual results and developments will conform to the Sponsor’s expectations and predictions, however, is subject to a number of risks and uncertainties, including the special considerations discussed in this Prospectus, general economic, market and business conditions, changes in laws or regulations, including those concerning taxes, made by governmental authorities or regulatory bodies, and other world economic and political developments. Consequently, all the forward-looking statements made in this Prospectus are qualified by these cautionary statements, and there can be no assurance that actual results or developments the Sponsor anticipates to occur will be realized or, even if substantially realized, that they will result in the expected consequences to, or have the expected effects on, the Trust’s operations or the value of its Shares.

Should one or more of these risks discussed in “Risk Factors” or other uncertainties materialize, or should underlying assumptions prove incorrect, actual outcomes may vary materially from those described in forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are made based on the Sponsor’s beliefs, estimates and opinions on the date the statements are made, and neither the Trust nor the Sponsor is under a duty or undertakes an obligation to update forward-looking statements if these beliefs, estimates and opinions or other circumstances should change, other than as required by applicable laws. Investors are therefore cautioned against placing undue reliance on forward-looking statements.

RISK FACTORS

You should consider carefully the risks described below before making an investment decision. You should also refer to the other information included in this Prospectus, as well as information found in documents incorporated by reference in this Prospectus, before you decide to purchase any Shares. These risk factors may be amended, supplemented or superseded from time to time by risk factors contained in any periodic report, prospectus supplement, post-effective amendment or in other reports filed with the SEC in the future. See “Glossary of Defined Terms” for an explanation of certain industry and technical terms used in this Prospectus.

Risks Associated with INJ and the Injective Network

The value of the Shares relates directly to the price of INJ, which may be highly volatile and subject to fluctuations due to a number of factors.

The value of the Shares relates directly to the value of the INJ held by the Trust and fluctuations in the price of INJ could adversely affect the value of the Shares. The market price of INJ may be highly volatile, and subject to a number of factors, including:

In addition, there is no assurance that INJ will maintain its value in the long or intermediate term. In the event that the price of INJ declines, the Sponsor expects the value of the Shares to decline proportionately. The value of INJ as represented by the Pricing Benchmark or by the Trust’s principal market may also be subject to momentum pricing due to speculation regarding future appreciation in value, leading to greater volatility that could adversely affect the value of the Shares. Momentum pricing typically is associated with growth stocks and other assets whose valuation, as determined by the investing public, accounts for future appreciation in value, if any. The Sponsor believes that momentum pricing of INJ has resulted, and may continue to result, in speculation regarding future appreciation in the price of INJ, inflating and making the price of INJ more volatile. As a result, INJ may be more likely to fluctuate in value due to changing investor confidence, which could impact future appreciation or depreciation in the Pricing Benchmark and could adversely affect the value of the Shares.

INJ is a relatively new technological innovation with a limited operating history.

INJ has a relatively limited history of existence and operations and was first introduced in October 2020. There is a limited established performance record for the price of INJ and, in turn, a limited basis for evaluating an investment in INJ. Although past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results, if INJ had a more established history, such history might (or might not) provide investors with more information on which to evaluate an investment in the Trust.

INJ and the Injective Network generally.

INJ is the native digital asset and unit of account on the Injective Network. The market value of INJ is not related to any specific company, government or asset. The valuation of INJ depends on a number of factors, including future expectations for the value of the Injective Network, the number of INJ transactions, and the overall usage of INJ as an asset. This means that a significant amount of the value of INJ is speculative, which could lead to increased volatility. Investors could experience significant gains, losses and/or volatility in the Trust’s holdings, depending on the valuation of INJ.

Several factors may affect the price of INJ, including, but not limited to: supply and demand, investors’ expectations with respect to the rate of inflation, interest rates, currency exchange rates or future regulatory measures (if any) that restrict the trading of INJ, the Goal Bonded Percentage, the impact of the various modules and mechanisms native to the INJ Network, including the community buyback mechanism, as well as the use of INJ as a form of payment. The issuance of INJ is determined by a computer code, not by a central bank, and prices can be extremely volatile. For instance, during the period from January 1, 2025 to December 31, 2025, the price of INJ peaked at $25.72 and bottomed out at $4.1845, marking a drawdown of 83.73%. Similarly, during the period from January 1, 2026 to September 1, 2026, the price of INJ peaked at $14.55 and bottomed at $2.74. There is no assurance that INJ will maintain its long-term value in terms of purchasing power in the future, or that acceptance of INJ payments by mainstream retail merchants and commercial businesses will continue to grow. The value of the Trust’s investments in INJ could decline rapidly, including to zero.

The Injective Network is an open-source project without a controlling issuer or administrator of software development. Injective Labs is the core development entity responsible for protocol engineering, infrastructure upgrades, and long-term technical strategy. It operates in close coordination with the Injective Foundation which oversees governance, ecosystem development, and business development efforts. The Injective Foundation is incorporated in the Cayman Islands, while Injective Labs maintains an office in New York City. The Injective Network is an American-founded project with deep ties to both the U.S. and global crypto markets. The Injective Foundation continues to exert significant influence over the direction of the development of INJ, however, since the source code for the Injective Network is open-source, anyone can contribute to its development. Further, the Injective Network does not require governmental authorities or financial institution intermediaries to create, transmit or determine the value of INJ.

As a result, core developers contribute their time and propose upgrades and improvements to the Injective Network protocols and various software implementations thereof, often on the INJ repository on the website Github. Core developers’ roles evolve over time, largely based on self-determined participation. Although some market participants such as the Injective Foundation sponsor some developers, core developers are not generally compensated for their work on the Injective Network, and such developers may cease to provide services or migrate to alternate digital asset networks. In addition, a lack of resources may result in an inability of the Injective Network community to address novel technical issues or to achieve consensus around solutions therefor. As with other digital asset networks, the Injective Network faces significant scaling challenges due to the fact that public blockchains generally face a tradeoff between security and scalability. One means through which public blockchains achieve security is decentralization, meaning that no intermediary is responsible for securing and maintaining these systems. For example, a greater degree of decentralization generally means a given digital asset network is less susceptible to manipulation or capture. A digital asset network may be limited in the number of transactions it can process by the capabilities of the participating nodes.

Moreover, in the past, flaws in the source code for digital assets have been exposed and exploited, including flaws that disabled some functionality for users, exposed users’ personal information and/or resulted in the theft of users’ digital assets. The cryptography underlying INJ could prove to be flawed or ineffective, or developments in mathematics and/or technology, including advances in digital computing, algebraic geometry and quantum computing, could result in such cryptography becoming ineffective. In any of these circumstances, a malicious actor may be able to take the Trust’s INJ, which would adversely impact the value of the Shares. Moreover, the functionality of the Injective Network may be negatively affected such that it is no longer attractive to users, thereby dampening demand for INJ and the Injective Network. Even if another digital asset other than INJ were affected by similar circumstances, any reduction in confidence in the source code or cryptography underlying digital assets generally could negatively affect the demand for digital assets and therefore adversely affect the value of the Shares.

Finally, there can be no assurance that the community as a whole will not implement changes to the Injective Network protocols that have an adverse impact on the Trust or an investment in the Shares.

Proof-of-Stake (PoS) Consensus Mechanisms.

The Injective Network uses a proof-of-stake consensus mechanism to incentivize INJ holders to validate transactions. Unlike proof-of-work, in which miners expend computational resources to compete to validate transactions and are rewarded coins in proportion to the amount of computational resources expended, in proof-of-stake, validators “stake” coins to compete to be randomly selected to validate transactions and are rewarded coins in proportion to the amount of coins staked. Any malicious activity, such as disagreeing with the eventual consensus or otherwise violating protocol rules, may result in a reduction of staking rewards for the malicious actor and the “blacklisting” or “jailing” of such malicious actor. Should any of the Trust’s Staking Services Providers engage in malicious activity or perform poorly, then such Staking Services Providers may be blacklisted or jailed, which could, in each case negatively impact the Trust’s abilities to engage in Staking Activities and/or otherwise result in the Trust earning reduced staking rewards or having the INJ the Trust stakes with such Staking Services Provider being slashed and lost. Proof-of-stake is viewed as more energy efficient and scalable than proof-of-work and is sometimes referred to as “virtual mining.”

Limits on INJ supply.

The rates at INJ are redistributed as staking rewards and the rate at which INJ is burned through the Injective Network’s community buyback program are expected to vary. The Injective Network previously had a fixed maximum supply of 100 million tokens with 7.2 million tokens permanently burned as of September 1, 2026, according to Injective Labs.

There may not exist sufficient incentives to retain validators and users of the Injective Network.

Validators participating in the Injective Network’s PoS consensus mechanism can earn staking rewards in the form of INJ tokens at a rate determined per epoch. If staking rewards or priority fees voluntarily paid by users are not sufficiently high or if transaction fees increase to the point of being prohibitively expensive for users (leading to less blocks to validate and thus less potential for staking rewards), validators may not have adequate incentives to continue validating. Further, if the reward for validating new blocks is not sufficiently high to incentivize validators, validators may cease participating in the consensus mechanism which would reduce the collective processing power on the Injective Network, thereby adversely affecting the confirmation process for transactions (i.e., decreasing the speed at which blocks are added to the blockchain) and make the Injective Network more vulnerable to malicious actors obtaining sufficient control to alter the blockchain and hinder transactions. Any reduction in confidence in the confirmation process or processing power of the Injective Network may adversely affect the Trust’s investments in INJ.

The validating rewards associated with validating a block on the Injective Network varies per epoch. Earlier in its operations, the Injective Network regularly saw annual staking reward rates exceeding 10%. As of September 1, 2026, the estimated annual aggregate rate of return was approximately 7.24%, per Coinbase. As staking rewards represent a portion of transaction fees, should transaction fees be too low, validators may not be incentivized to expend processing power to validate transactions and confirmations of transactions on the blockchain could be slowed.

Digital assets may have concentrated ownership and large sales or distributions by holders of such digital assets, or any ability to participate in or otherwise influence a digital asset’s underlying network, could have an adverse effect on the market price of such digital asset.

According to Coincarp, as of September 1, 2026, the largest 100 INJ wallets (not including marked wallets) were believed to hold approximately 84% of the INJ then-in circulation. Moreover, it is possible that other persons or entities control multiple wallets that collectively hold a significant amount of INJ, even if they individually only hold a small amount, and it is possible that some of these wallets are controlled by the same person or entity. As a result of this concentration of ownership, large sales or distributions by such holders could have an adverse effect on the market price of INJ.

The significant holdings of INJ by early stakeholders could have an adverse effect on the market price of INJ.

In connection with the launch of the Injective Network, 100 million INJ were allocated across several categories, including approximately: (i) 36% to ecosystem development, supporting payment of staking rewards, ecosystem initiatives and incentives; (ii) 20% to Injective Labs and core contributors for protocol development, ecosystem tooling and strategic partnerships; (iii) 17% to private investors; (iv) 10% to foundation and community reserves to support grants, liquidity programs and operational infrastructure; (v) 9% to a public launch allocation, enabling broader user access and network participation; (vi) 6% to seed investors; and (vii) 2% to advisors. As of September 1, 2026, 100% of INJ’s supply had been released and circulated with approximately 7.2 million of such tokens having been permanently burned. The concentration of INJ in the hands of early stakeholders could affect the market’s confidence in INJ and may enable such holders, individually or collectively, to influence the development, governance or operation of the Injective Network. Further the sale of such INJ in large quantities could impact the market dynamics of INJ more generally.

A determination that INJ or any other digital asset is offered or sold as a “security” may adversely affect the price of INJ and the value of the Shares, and result in potentially extraordinary, nonrecurring expenses to, or termination of, the Trust.

Depending on its characteristics, a digital asset, including INJ, may be considered to be offered or sold as a “security” under U.S. federal securities laws. The tests for determining whether a particular digital asset is offered or sold as a “security” are complex and difficult to apply, and the outcome is difficult to predict. The SEC staff has also provided informal assurances via no-action letter to a handful of promoters that their digital assets are not offered or sold as securities.

On the other hand, the SEC has brought enforcement actions against the issuers and promoters of several other digital assets on the basis that the digital assets in question are securities. More recently, the SEC has also brought enforcement actions against digital asset trading platforms for allegedly operating unregistered securities exchanges on the basis that certain of the digital assets traded on their platforms are securities, although at least one or more of these actions has since been withdrawn or dismissed following a joint stipulation between the SEC and the entities allegedly operating an exchange. SEC and other government or regulatory enforcement actions have led, and may in the future lead, to further volatility in digital asset prices.

Whether a digital asset is offered or sold as a security under the U.S. federal securities laws depends on whether it is included in the lists of instruments making up the definition of “security” in the 1933 Act, the Exchange Act and the 1940 Act. Digital assets do not appear in any of these lists, although each list includes the terms “investment contract” and “note,” and the SEC has typically analyzed whether a particular digital asset is offered or sold as a security by reference to whether it meets the tests developed by the federal courts interpreting these terms, known as the “Howey” and “Reves” tests, respectively. For many digital assets, whether or not the Howey or Reves tests are met is difficult to resolve definitively, and substantial legal arguments can often be made both in favor of and against a particular digital asset qualifying as being offered or sold as a security under one or both of the Howey and Reves tests. Adding to the complexity, the SEC staff has indicated that the security status of a particular digital asset can change over time as the relevant facts evolve.

The SEC staff recently provided general guidance indicating that many crypto assets are not securities under the Howey test for investment contracts. Such guidance, however, notes that although a digital asset may not be a security in itself, the asset may nevertheless be offered and sold as part of an investment contract, and may therefore form part of a security. Accordingly, it is possible that the SEC, a state securities regulator, or a federal or state court could find that INJ (including the INJ held by the Trust) was offered and sold as part of an investment contract, and was therefore a security at the time of such sale. It is also unclear what, if any weight, the SEC’s guidance would be given by a federal or state court deciding the question of whether INJ is a security, or was offered and sold as part of a security.

If the Sponsor determines that INJ is offered or sold as a security under the U.S. federal securities laws, whether that determination is initially made by the Sponsor itself, or because a federal court upholds an allegation that INJ is offered or sold as a security, the Sponsor does not intend to permit the Trust to continue holding INJ in a way that would violate the federal securities laws (and therefore would either dissolve the Trust or potentially seek to operate the Trust in a manner that complies with the federal securities laws, including the 1940 Act).

Any enforcement action by the SEC or a state securities regulator asserting that INJ is offered or sold as a security, or a court decision to that effect, would be expected to have an immediate material adverse impact on the trading price of INJ, as well as the Shares. This is because the business models behind most digital assets are incompatible with regulations applying to transactions in securities. If a digital asset is determined to be offered or sold as a security, it is likely to become difficult or impossible for the digital asset to be traded, cleared or custodied in the United States through the same channels used by non-security digital assets, which in addition to materially and adversely affecting the trading value of the digital asset is likely to significantly impact its liquidity and market participants’ ability to convert the digital asset into U.S. dollars. Any assertion that a digital asset is offered or sold as a security by the SEC or another regulatory authority may have similar effects.

If INJ is found by a court or other regulatory body to be offered or sold as a security, the Trust could be considered an unregistered “investment company” under the 1940 Act, which could necessitate the Trust’s liquidation under the terms of the Trust Agreement. Furthermore, the Trust could be considered to be engaged in a distribution (i.e., a public offering) of unregistered securities in violation of Section 5 of the 1933 Act, which could impose significant civil and criminal liability on the Trust. There is no guarantee that a court of regulatory body will agree with the Sponsor’s assessment that INJ is not offered or sold as a security.

Moreover, whether or not the Sponsor or the Trust were subject to additional regulatory requirements as a result of any determination that its assets include securities, the Sponsor may nevertheless decide to terminate the Trust, in order, if possible, to liquidate the Trust’s assets while a liquid market still exists. If the SEC or a federal court were to determine that INJ is offered or sold as a security, it is likely that the value of the Shares of the Trust would decline significantly. Furthermore, if a federal court upholds an allegation that INJ is offered or sold as a security, the Trust itself may be terminated and, if practical, its assets liquidated.

The trading prices of many digital assets, including INJ, have experienced extreme volatility in recent periods and may continue to do so. Extreme volatility in the future, including further decline in the trading prices of INJ, could have a material adverse effect on the value of the Shares and the Shares could lose all or substantially all of their value.

The trading prices of many digital assets, including INJ, have experienced extreme volatility in recent periods and may continue to do so. Several factors may affect the price of INJ, including, but not limited to: supply and demand, investors’ expectations with respect to the rate of inflation, interest rates, currency exchange rates or future regulatory measures (if any) that restrict the trading of INJ or the use of INJ as a form of payment. The issuance of INJ is determined by a computer code, not by a central bank, and prices can be extremely volatile. For instance, there were steep increases in the value of certain digital assets, including INJ, over the course of 2021, and multiple market observers asserted that digital assets were experiencing a “bubble.” These increases were followed by steep drawdowns throughout 2022 in digital asset trading prices. Such episodes of rapid price appreciation followed by steep drawdowns have also occurred multiple times throughout INJ’s history. For example, over the course of its lifespan, the closing price of INJ has exhibited extreme volatility, reaching an all-time low price of $0.6557 on November 3, 2020, and an all-time high price of $52.75 on March 14, 2024. During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2025, the price of INJ peaked at $25.72 and bottomed out at $4.1845, marking a drawdown of 83.73%. Similarly, during the period from January 1, 2026 to September 1, 2026, the price of INJ peaked at $14.55 and bottomed at $2.74 As of September 1, 2026, the price of INJ was $4.82. Like many digital assets, INJ surged in value in its initial trading period, but shortly thereafter saw a decline in market interest, resulting in a price decrease. Like many other digital assets, INJ’s volatility may be affected by a range of factors, including changes in technology, regulation, consumer and investor behavior and general economic trends, such as interest rates, availability of credit, credit defaults, inflation rates and economic uncertainty.

Extreme volatility may persist, and the value of the Shares may significantly decline in the future without recovery. The digital asset markets may still be experiencing a bubble or may experience a bubble again in the future. For example, in the first half of 2022, each of Celsius Network, Voyager Digital Ltd., and Three Arrows Capital declared bankruptcy, resulting in a loss of confidence in participants of the digital asset ecosystem and negative publicity surrounding digital assets more broadly. In November 2022, FTX Trading Ltd. (“FTX”) one of the largest digital asset exchanges by volume at the time, halted customer withdrawals amid rumors of the company’s liquidity issues and likely insolvency, which were subsequently corroborated by its CEO. Shortly thereafter, FTX’s CEO resigned, and FTX and many of its affiliates filed for bankruptcy in the United States, while other affiliates have entered insolvency, liquidation, or similar proceedings around the globe, following which the U.S. Department of Justice brought criminal fraud and other charges, and the SEC and CFTC brought civil securities and commodities fraud charges, against certain of FTX’s and its affiliates’ senior executives, including its former CEO, who was found guilty of these criminal charges in November 2023. In addition, several other entities in the digital asset industry filed for bankruptcy following FTX’s bankruptcy filing, such as BlockFi Inc. and Genesis Global Capital, LLC (“Genesis”). In response to these events, the digital asset markets have experienced extreme price volatility and other entities in the digital asset industry have been, and may continue to be, negatively affected, further undermining confidence in the digital asset markets. These events have also negatively impacted the liquidity of the digital asset markets as certain entities affiliated with FTX engaged in significant trading activity. If the liquidity of the digital asset markets continues to be negatively impacted by these events, digital asset prices, including INJ, may continue to experience significant volatility or price declines, and confidence in the digital asset markets may be further undermined. In addition, regulatory and enforcement scrutiny has been significant, including from, among others, the U.S. Department of Justice, the SEC, the CFTC, the White House and Congress, as well as state regulators and authorities. These events are continuing to develop, and the full facts are continuing to emerge. It is not possible to predict at this time all of the risks that they may pose to the Trust, its service providers or to the digital asset industry as a whole.

Extreme volatility in the future, including further declines in the trading prices of INJ, could have a material adverse effect on the value of the Shares, and the Shares could lose all or substantially all of their value. The Trust is not actively managed and will not take any actions to take advantage, or mitigate the impacts, of volatility in the price of INJ.

Spot markets on which INJ trades are relatively new and largely unregulated.

Digital asset markets, including spot markets for INJ, are growing rapidly. The spot markets through which INJ and other digital assets trade are new and, in some cases, may be subject to but not comply with their relevant jurisdiction’s regulations. These markets are local, national and international and include a broadening range of digital assets and participants. Significant trading may occur on systems and platforms with minimum predictability. Spot markets may impose daily, weekly, monthly or customer-specific transaction or withdrawal limits or suspend withdrawals entirely, rendering the exchange of INJ for fiat currency difficult or impossible. Participation in spot markets requires users to take on credit risk by transferring INJ from a personal account to a third party’s account.

Digital asset exchanges do not appear to be subject to, and may not comply with, regulation in a similar manner as other regulated trading platforms, such as national securities exchanges or designated contract markets. Many digital asset exchanges are unlicensed, unregulated, operate without extensive supervision by governmental authorities, and do not provide the public with significant information regarding their ownership structure, management team, corporate practices, cybersecurity, and regulatory compliance. In particular, those located outside the United States may be subject to significantly less stringent regulatory and compliance requirements in their local jurisdictions.

As a result, trading activity on or reported by these digital asset exchanges is generally significantly less regulated than trading in regulated U.S. securities and commodities markets, and may reflect behavior that would be prohibited in regulated U.S. trading venues. Furthermore, many spot markets lack certain safeguards put in place by more traditional exchanges to enhance the stability of trading on the exchange and prevent flash crashes, such as limit-down circuit breakers. As a result, the prices of digital assets such as INJ on digital asset exchanges may be subject to larger and/or more frequent sudden declines than assets traded on more traditional exchanges. Tools to detect and deter fraudulent or manipulative trading activities (such as market manipulation, front-running of trades, and wash-trading) may not be available to or employed by digital asset exchanges or may not exist at all. As a result, the marketplace may lose confidence in, or may experience problems relating to, these venues.

No INJ exchange is immune from these risks. While the Trust itself does not buy or sell INJ on INJ spot markets, the closure or temporary shutdown of INJ exchanges due to fraud, business failure, hackers or malware, or government-mandated regulation may reduce confidence in the Injective Network and can slow down the mass adoption of INJ. In addition, the Prime Broker may route orders through Connected Trading Venues and hold the Trust’s assets on Connected Trading Venues. Further, spot market failures or that of any other major component of the overall Injective ecosystem can have an adverse effect on INJ markets and the price of INJ and could therefore have a negative impact on the performance of the Trust.

Negative perception, a lack of stability in the INJ spot markets, manipulation of INJ spot markets by customers and/or the closure or temporary shutdown of such exchanges due to fraud, business failure, hackers or malware, or government-mandated regulation may reduce confidence in INJ generally and result in greater volatility in the market price of INJ and the Shares of the Trust. Furthermore, the closure or temporary shutdown of an INJ spot market may impact the Trust’s ability to determine the value of its INJ holdings or for the Trust’s Authorized Participants to effectively arbitrage the Trust’s Shares.

The use of cash creations and redemptions, as opposed to in-kind creations and redemptions, may adversely affect the arbitrage transactions by Authorized Participants intended to keep the price of the Shares closely linked to the price of INJ and, as a result, the price of the Shares may fall or otherwise diverge from NAV.

Authorized Participants must be registered broker-dealers. Registered broker-dealers are subject to various requirements of the federal securities laws and rules, including financial responsibility rules such as the customer protection rule, the net capital rule and recordkeeping requirements. In May 2025, the staff of the SEC’s Division of Trading and Markets stated that broker-dealers are permitted to facilitate in-kind creations and redemptions in connection with spot digital asset exchange-traded products; however, there is as yet no definitive regulatory guidance on the specific details of how registered broker-dealers can comply with SEC rules with regard to transacting in or holding spot INJ. Absent further regulatory clarity regarding whether and how registered broker-dealers can hold and deal in INJ under applicable broker-dealer financial responsibility and other rules, there is a risk that registered broker-dealers participating in the in-kind creation or redemption of Shares for INJ may be unable to demonstrate compliance with such rules. While compliance with rules such as the customer protection rule, the net capital rule and recordkeeping requirements are primarily the broker-dealer’s responsibility, a national securities exchange is required to enforce compliance by its member broker-dealers with applicable federal securities law and rules. Only certain Authorized Participants at present have the ability (either acting themselves or through their affiliates) to support in-kind creation and redemption activity.

Even with the SEC Staff’s recent statement clarifying that in-kind creations and redemptions are permitted, the Trust’s limited ability to facilitate in-kind creations and redemptions could result in the exchange-traded product arbitrage mechanism failing to function as efficiently as it otherwise would, leading to the potential for the Shares to trade at premiums or discounts to the NAV per Share, and such premiums or discounts could be substantial. Furthermore, if cash creations or redemptions are unavailable, either due to the Sponsor’s decision to reject or suspend such orders or otherwise, Authorized Participants will be limited in their ability to redeem or create Shares, in which case the arbitrage mechanism may not function as efficiently. This could result in impaired liquidity for the Shares, wider bid/ask spreads in secondary trading of the Shares and greater costs to investors and other market participants. In addition, the Trust’s limited ability to facilitate in-kind creations and redemptions, and resulting relative reliance on cash creations and redemptions, could cause the Sponsor to halt or suspend the creation or redemption of Shares during times of market volatility or turmoil, among other consequences. Further, there can be no assurance that broker-dealers would be willing to serve as Authorized Participants with respect to the in-kind creation and redemption of Shares. Any of these factors could adversely affect the performance of the Trust and the value of the Shares.

The use of cash creations and redemptions, as opposed to in-kind creations and redemptions, could cause delays in trade execution due to potential operational issues arising from implementing a cash creation and redemption model, which involves greater operational steps (and therefore execution risk) than the originally contemplated in-kind creation and redemption model, or the potential unavailability or exhaustion of the Trust’s ability to borrow INJ or cash as trade credit (the “Trade Credits”), which the Trust would not be able to use in connection with in-kind creations and redemptions. Such delays could cause the execution price associated with such trades to materially deviate from the Pricing Benchmark price used to determine the NAV. Even though the Authorized Participants are responsible for the dollar cost of such difference in prices, Authorized Participants could default on their obligations to the Trust, or such potential risks and costs could lead to Authorized Participants, who would otherwise be willing to purchase or redeem Baskets to take advantage of any arbitrage opportunity arising from discrepancies between the price of the Shares and the price of the underlying INJ, to elect to not participate in the Trust’s Share creation and redemption processes. This may adversely affect the arbitrage mechanism intended to keep the price of the Shares closely linked to the price of INJ, and as a result, the price of the Shares may fall or otherwise diverge from NAV. If the arbitrage mechanism is not effective, purchases or sales of Shares on the secondary market could occur at a premium or discount to NAV, which could harm Shareholders by causing them buy Shares at a price higher than the value of the underlying INJ held by the Trust or sell Shares at a price lower than the value of the underlying INJ held by the Trust, causing Shareholders to suffer losses.

To the knowledge of the Sponsor, exchange-traded products for spot-market commodities other than INJ, such as gold and silver, generally employ in-kind creations and redemptions with the underlying asset. The Sponsor believes that it is generally more efficient, and therefore less costly, for spot commodity exchange-traded products to utilize in-kind orders rather than cash orders, because there are fewer steps in the process and therefore there is less operational risk involved when an authorized participant can manage the buying and selling of the underlying asset itself, rather than depend on an unaffiliated party such as the issuer or sponsor of the exchange-traded product. As such, a spot commodity exchange-traded product that only employs cash creations and redemptions and does not permit in-kind creations and redemptions is a novel product that has not been tested, and could be impacted by any resulting operational inefficiencies.

Authorized Participants may act in the same or similar capacity for other competing products.

Authorized Participants play a critical role in supporting the U.S. spot INJ exchange-traded product ecosystem. Currently, the number of potential Authorized Participants willing and capable of serving as Authorized Participants to the Trust or other competing products is limited. Authorized Participants may act in the same or similar capacity for other competing products, including exchange-traded products offering exposure to the spot INJ market or other digital assets. The Trust is therefore subject to risks associated with these competing products utilizing the same Authorized Participants to support the trading activity of the Trust and liquidity in the Trust’s Shares.

To the extent Authorized Participants exit the business or otherwise become unable to process creation and/or redemption orders and no other Authorized Participants step forward to perform these services, Shares may trade at a material discount to NAV and possibly face delisting. To the extent that exchange-traded products offering exposure to the spot INJ market or other digital assets utilize substantially the same Authorized Participants, this industry concentration may have the effect of magnifying the risks associated with the Authorized Participants, as operational disruptions or adverse developments impacting the Authorized Participants may be felt on an industry-wide basis, which, in turn, may adversely affect not only the Trust and the value of an investment in the Shares, but also these competing products utilizing the same Authorized Participants and, more generally, exchange-traded products offering exposure to the spot INJ market or other digital assets. These industry-wide adverse effects could result in a broader loss of confidence in exchange-traded products offering exposure to the spot INJ market or other digital assets, which could further impact the Trust and the value of an investment in the Shares.

Spot markets may be exposed to security breaches.

The nature of the assets held at INJ spot markets makes them appealing targets for hackers and a number of INJ spot markets have been victims of cybercrimes. Over the past several years, some digital asset exchanges have been closed due to security breaches. In many of these instances, the customers of such digital asset exchanges were not compensated or made whole for the partial or complete losses of their account balances in such digital asset exchanges. While, generally speaking, smaller digital asset exchanges are less likely to have the infrastructure and capitalization that make larger digital asset exchanges more stable, larger digital asset exchanges are more likely to be appealing targets for hackers and malware.

For example, the collapse of Mt. Gox, which filed for bankruptcy protection in Japan in late February 2014, demonstrated that even the largest digital asset exchanges could be subject to abrupt failure with consequences for both users of digital asset exchanges and the digital asset industry as a whole. In particular, in the two weeks that followed the February 7, 2014, halt of bitcoin withdrawals from Mt. Gox, the value of one bitcoin fell on other exchanges from around $795 on February 6, 2014, to $578 on February 20, 2014. Additionally, in January 2015, Bitstamp announced that approximately 19,000 bitcoin had been stolen from its operational or “hot” wallets. Further, in August 2016, it was reported that almost 120,000 bitcoin worth around $78 million were stolen from Bitfinex, a large digital asset exchange. The value of bitcoin and other digital assets immediately decreased over 10% following reports of the theft at Bitfinex. In July 2017, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”) assessed a $110 million fine against BTC-E, a now defunct digital asset exchange, for facilitating crimes such as drug sales and ransomware attacks. In addition, in December 2017, Yapian, the operator of Seoul-based digital asset exchange Youbit, suspended digital asset trading and filed for bankruptcy following a hack that resulted in a loss of 17% of Yapian’s assets. Following the hack, Youbit users were allowed to withdraw approximately 75% of the digital assets in their exchange accounts, with any potential further distributions to be made following Yapian’s pending bankruptcy proceedings. In addition, in January 2018, the Japanese digital asset exchange, Coincheck, was hacked, resulting in losses of approximately $535 million, and in February 2018, the Italian digital asset exchange, Bitgrail, was hacked, resulting in approximately $170 million in losses. In May 2019, one of the world’s largest digital asset exchanges, Binance, was hacked, resulting in losses of approximately $40 million. In February 2025, Bybit, a digital asset exchange, experienced a significant security breach resulting in the loss of nearly $1.5 billion worth of ether.

Spot markets may be exposed to fraud and market manipulation.

The blockchain infrastructure could be used by certain market participants to exploit arbitrage opportunities through schemes such as front-running, spoofing, pump-and-dump and fraud across different systems, platforms or geographic locations. As a result of reduced oversight, these schemes may be more prevalent in digital asset markets than in the general market for financial products.

The SEC has identified possible sources of fraud and market manipulation in the digital asset market generally, including, among others (1) “wash trading”; (2) persons with a dominant position in digital assets manipulating digital asset pricing; (3) hacking of a digital asset network and trading platforms; (4) malicious control of digital asset networks; (5) trading based on material, non-public information (for example, plans of market participants to significantly increase or decrease their holdings in digital assets, new sources of demand for digital assets, etc.) or based on the dissemination of false and misleading information; (6) manipulative activity involving purported “stablecoins,” including Tether; and (7) fraud and market manipulation at digital asset trading platforms.

Over the past several years, a number of digital asset spot markets have been closed or faced issues due to fraud. In many of these instances, the customers of such spot markets were not compensated or made whole for the partial or complete losses of their account balances in such digital asset exchanges.

In 2019, there were reports claiming that 80.95% of bitcoin trading volume on digital asset exchanges was false or noneconomic in nature, with specific focus on unregulated exchanges located outside of the United States. Such reports alleged that certain overseas exchanges have displayed suspicious trading activity suggestive of a variety of manipulative or fraudulent practices. Other academics and market observers have put forth evidence to support claims that manipulative trading activity has occurred on certain digital asset exchanges. For example, in a 2017 paper titled “Price Manipulation in the Bitcoin Ecosystem” sponsored by the Interdisciplinary Cyber Research Center at Tel Aviv University, a group of researchers used publicly available trading data, as well as leaked transaction data from a 2014 Mt. Gox security breach, to identify and analyze the impact of “suspicious trading activity” on Mt. Gox between February and November 2013, which, according to the authors, caused the price of bitcoin to increase from around $150 to more than $1,000 over a two-month period. In August 2017, it was reported that a trader or group of traders nicknamed “Spoofy” was placing large orders on Bitfinex without actually executing them, presumably in order to influence other investors into buying or selling by creating a false appearance that greater demand existed in the market. In December 2017, an anonymous blogger (publishing under the pseudonym Bitfinex’d) cited publicly available trading data to support his or her claim that a trading bot nicknamed “Picasso” was pursuing a paint-the-tape-style manipulation strategy by buying and selling bitcoin and bitcoin cash between affiliated accounts in order to create the appearance of substantial trading activity and thereby influence the price of such assets.

In November 2022, FTX, one of the largest digital asset exchanges by volume at the time, halted customer withdrawals amid rumors of the company’s liquidity issues and likely insolvency, which were subsequently corroborated by its CEO. Shortly thereafter, FTX’s CEO resigned and FTX and many of its affiliates filed for bankruptcy in the United States, while other affiliates have entered insolvency, liquidation, or similar proceedings around the globe, following which the U.S. Department of Justice brought criminal fraud and other charges, and the SEC and CFTC brought civil securities and commodities fraud charges, against certain of FTX’s and its affiliates’ senior executives, including its former CEO. Around the same time, there were reports that approximately $300-600 million worth of digital assets were removed from FTX and the full facts remain unknown, including whether such removal was the result of a hack, theft, insider activity, or other improper behavior.

The potential consequences of a spot market’s failure or failure to prevent market manipulation could adversely affect the value of the Shares. Any market abuse, and a loss of investor confidence in INJ, may adversely impact pricing trends in INJ markets broadly, as well as an investment in the Shares of the Trust.

Spot markets may be exposed to wash trading.

Spot markets on which INJ trades may be susceptible to wash trading. Wash trading occurs when offsetting trades are entered into for other than bona fide reasons, such as the desire to inflate reported trading volumes. Wash trading may be motivated by non-economic reasons, such as a desire for increased visibility on popular websites that monitor markets for digital assets so as to improve their attractiveness to investors who look for maximum liquidity, or it may be motivated by the ability to attract listing fees from token issuers who seek the most liquid and high-volume exchanges on which to list their coins. Results of wash trading may include unexpected obstacles to trade and erroneous investment decisions based on false information.

Even in the United States, there have been allegations of wash trading even on regulated venues. Any actual or perceived false trading in the digital asset exchange market, and any other fraudulent or manipulative acts and practices, could adversely affect the value of INJ and/or negatively affect the market perception of INJ.

To the extent that wash trading either occurs or appears to occur in spot markets on which INJ trades, investors may develop negative perceptions about INJ and the digital assets industry more broadly, which could adversely impact the price of INJ and, therefore, the price of Shares. Wash trading also may place more legitimate digital asset exchanges at a relative competitive disadvantage.

Spot markets may be exposed to front-running.

Spot markets on which INJ trades may be susceptible to “front-running,” which refers to the process when someone uses technology or market advantage to get prior knowledge of upcoming transactions. Front-running is a frequent activity on centralized as well as decentralized exchanges. By using bots functioning on a millisecond-scale timeframe, bad actors are able to take advantage of the forthcoming price movement and make economic gains at the cost of those who had introduced these transactions. The objective of a front runner is to buy a chunk of tokens at a low price and later sell them at a higher price while simultaneously exiting the position. Front-running happens via manipulations of transaction fees or timestamps, also known as slow matching. To the extent that front-running occurs, it may result in investor frustrations and concerns as to the price integrity of digital asset exchanges and digital assets more generally.

The Trust’s Staking Activities involve legal and regulatory risk, such as, without limitation, the risk of jeopardizing the Trust’s ability to qualify as a grantor trust for tax purposes, which could harm the value of the Shares.

The Trust’s investment objective is to seek to track the performance of INJ, as measured by the performance of the Pricing Benchmark, as adjusted for the Trust’s expenses and other liabilities, and to reflect rewards from staking a portion of the Trust’s INJ, to the extent the Sponsor in its sole discretion determines that the Trust may do so without undue legal or regulatory risk, such as, without limitation, the risk of jeopardizing the Trust’s ability to qualify as a grantor trust for tax purposes. If the Sponsor determines the Trust is not able to so carry out Staking Activities, the Trust may cease some or all of its Staking Activities. Staking on the Injective Network involves delegating INJ to validators and carries risks discussed further below. Staked INJ may be subject to community-determined penalties for validator misbehavior, including slashing. If the Staking Services Provider causes the Trust’s staked INJ to be subject to such slashing losses, the Trust could suffer losses of the staked INJ. Additionally, the staking process includes protocol-defined warm-up, activation and withdrawal periods, during which staked INJ is temporarily locked and inaccessible. These phases affect when INJ begins earning rewards, participates in consensus and becomes available for transfer or redelegation.

Each Staking Services Provider will stake the Trust’s INJ as an operator of a validator node. Each Staking Services Provider will perform its staking services in collaboration with the INJ Custodians, as the INJ will be staked directly from the Trust’s INJ accounts with the INJ Custodians. The Trust will maintain control of the INJ while it is staked because it will remain in the Trust’s accounts with the INJ Custodians (i.e., it will be kept in separate accounts for which the Trust is the beneficial and record owner and will not be commingled with other parties’ accounts with the INJ Custodians). Staking will be a passive activity for the Trust, as it will not operate its own Staking Activities. The Sponsor’s role will be limited to evaluating and contracting with one or more Staking Services Providers and instructing the Staking Services Providers on when to stake and/or unstake the Trust’s INJ.

The rewards owed or paid to the Staking Services Providers reduce the amount of INJ rewards that are generated from the Trust’s Staking Activities that are available as the assets of the Trust. Each Staking Services Provider that generates staking rewards will be entitled to Staking Provider Consideration. The Staking Provider Consideration will be paid directly to the Staking Services Providers from the staking rewards or indirectly from the Trust’s accounts with the INJ Custodians. The Sponsor, Staking Services Provider and INJ Custodians are expected to receive an aggregate of [●]% of the staking rewards, with the remainder expected to be distributed. The expenses of staking the Trust’s INJ will be paid from the staking rewards generated by the Staking Activities. Rewards from staking of the Trust’s INJ are accrued every epoch and claimed by the Staking Services Provider each day. Such rewards are then redelegated to the validator to be used in staking activities and are otherwise added to the recorded assets of the Trust.

The Trust may be negatively impacted by Staking Activities.

The Injective Network uses a proof-of-stake consensus mechanism, to secure and operate the network, meaning that the voting power of a validator on the network is determined by the amount of stake delegated to them by INJ token holders. The more stake delegated to a validator, the more voting power they have, the higher the likelihood is that the validator will be selected to propose and validate blocks and the higher the associated reward will be. This, in turn, leads to higher INJ earnings for the INJ tokenholders who chose to stake with the validator in question.

If an INJ tokenholder chooses to engage in staking, they must either choose a specific validator to stake with or have sufficient INJ to be selected as a validator by the Injective Network themselves and also have the necessary hardware to run the validator. The choice of validator can potentially impact the amount of staking rewards the tokenholder receives. The factors determining this amount include, but are not limited to:

If any Staking Services Provider experiences operational or other difficulties, terminates their services, fails to comply with regulations, raises their prices or disputes key intellectual property rights sold or licensed to, the Trust, the Trust could suffer losses. The Trust may also suffer the consequences of such Staking Services Provider’s mistakes or the mistakes of any validators nominated by the Staking Services Providers. For example, if the Trust’s INJ Custodians or a Staking Services Provider selected to act as validators fail to behave as expected, default, fail to perform, suffer cybersecurity attacks, experience security issues or encounter other problems, the assets of the Trust may be irretrievably lost. The failure or capacity restraints of vendors and services, a cybersecurity breach involving any service providers or the termination or change in terms or price or commission rate of a vendor, third-party software license or service agreement on which the Trust relies, or the failure to operate nodes running with the latest required network updates, could disrupt the Trust’s Staking Activities or cause losses. The Staking Services Provider’s liability to the Trust for losses is subject to caps based on the services fees collected by the Staking Services Provider, except where losses arise from the Staking Services Provider’s gross negligence, fraud or willful misconduct. Replacing any Staking Services Provider or addressing other issues with vendors and service providers could entail significant delay, expense and disruption for the Trust. As a result, if these vendors and service providers experience difficulties, are subject to cybersecurity breaches, terminate their services, dispute the terms of intellectual property agreements or raise their prices, and the Sponsor is unable to replace them with other vendors and service providers, particularly on a timely basis, the Trust’s Staking Activities could be interrupted or disrupted, and the Trust could suffer a loss.

The Injective Network dictates requirements for participation in the network’s protocols and may impose penalties if the relevant activities are not performed correctly. Malicious or poorly performing validators may also be “blacklisted”, meaning that INJ tokenholders may decide to no longer delegate stake to such actors, and they may be “jailed,” meaning that they are excluded from the active validator set for a set period of time, in each case, resulting in such actors not being able to validate and would therefore be unable to generate staking rewards. Should any of the Trust’s Staking Services Providers engage in malicious activity or perform poorly, then such Staking Services Providers may be blacklisted, jailed and/or otherwise result in the Trust earning reduced staking rewards or having a portion of the Trust’s staked INJ being slashed and lost. There is no assurance that any Staking Services Provider will not act maliciously or be subject to penalties or that the Trust will be able to recover any percentage of the staking rewards that have been subject to penalties. As of September 1, 2026, publicly available records provide that there have only been 273 slashing events recorded on the Injective Network and that the rate of staked INJ was estimated to 0.01% in cases of downtime slashing penalties and 0.50% for double sign slashing penalties.

Staking requires that the Trust lock up the staked INJ and become subject to an unbonding period to unstake the staked INJ, meaning that the Trust cannot transfer the staked INJ during the time that the INJ is staked and during which it is being unbonded. As of September 1, 2026, the unbonding period for staked INJ is 21 days.

Due to the time involved in “exiting” the staking process, there is a risk that the Trust could become unable to timely meet excessive redemption requests in amounts that are greater than the portion of the Trust’s INJ that remains un-staked, leading to temporary delays in settlement and, in extreme scenarios, the temporary unavailability of the Trust’s redemption program. Moreover, any staked INJ which must be un-staked in order to fulfill a redemption (to the extent such redemption cannot be fulfilled utilizing the portion of the Trust’s INJ that has not been staked, or through another mechanism to manage liquidity in connection with Redemption Orders) will be un-staked only after the redemption request is approved by the Trust, the Sponsor executes an un-stake or withdrawal transaction through the INJ Custodians, and such transaction is processed by the Injective Network. The Staking Services Providers will not be allowed to transfer unstaked INJ or Staking Provider Consideration to other addresses on the Injective Network in connection with any such redemption requests.

In addition, depending on the anticipated length of the unbonding period, the staked INJ may be classified as illiquid under the Trust’s liquidity risk management program. In addition, if INJ is determined to be a security under the 1933 Act, it could be subject to significant constraints in terms of any transfer or disposal of such INJ. In such event, the Trust may consider INJ to be an “illiquid security”, which it defines as a security that the Trust reasonably expects cannot be sold or disposed of in current market conditions in seven calendar days or less without the sale or disposition significantly changing the market value of the security.

Rewards for staked INJ may be accrued even before the staked INJ is unbonded. Once accrued, such INJ rewards are considered part of the Trust’s assets, even if unbonding has not occurred. The Sponsor and the Trust will manage liquidity in accordance with the Trust’s liquidity risk policies and procedures and will monitor staking and bonding/unbonding activity closely on a daily basis. For more information on the Trust’s liquidity risk policies and procedures, see “Staking of the Trust’s Assets—Liquidity Risk Policies and Procedures.”

There is no guarantee that the Trust will receive any rewards with respect to staked INJ. Past rewards are not indicative of future returns. The staking rewards that the Trust may receive from staking INJ, if any, may be affected by, among other factors:

The Staking Services Providers may not optimally execute the Staking Activities.

The Trust relies on the resources of the Staking Services Providers to facilitate the Sponsor’s Staking Activities. The Staking Providers will provide the hardware, software and services necessary to stake the INJ from their respective validator nodes. The hardware and software utilized by the Staking Provider may prove to be inadequate to maximize the Trust’s staking revenue. The Trust is dependent on the hardware, software and services of the Staking Services Providers to effectively execute the Staking Activities. The Sponsor will have no ability to supervise or direct the conduct of the Staking Services Providers.

In addition, the Staking Provider Consideration will be paid from the proceeds of the Staking Activities received by the Trust. The payment of the Staking Provider Consideration will reduce the portion of the staking rewards generated by the Staking Activities that are actually retained by the Trust. Accordingly, the staking rewards actually retained by the Trust will likely be less than what the Trust would retain if the Sponsor were to administer its own Staking Activities without the assistance of third-party service providers.

The Trust may vary the amount of INJ to be staked and the rewards received may accordingly change from time to time.

While the Trust may stake a maximum of 100% of its INJ holdings, the amount of INJ that remains unstaked is determined based on the Trust’s Utilization Rate analysis, and accordingly may vary from time to time. Based on Utilization Rate analysis applied to historical data, the Sponsor generally intends to stake between 40% and 60% of the INJ the Trust holds, although the amount of INJ that is staked may be lesser or greater from time to time. The precise percentage to be staked will be based on the estimated liquidity needs of the Trust and other factors, as determined by the Sponsor. Accordingly, changes in the percentage of INJ holdings that are staked could impact the value of the Shares held by investors.

The market value of INJ is subject to momentum pricing.

The market value of INJ is not based on any kind of claim, nor backed by any physical asset. Instead, the market value depends on the expectation of being usable in future transactions and continued interest from investors. This strong correlation between an expectation and market value is the basis for the current (and probable future) volatility of the market value of INJ and may increase the likelihood of momentum pricing.

Momentum pricing typically is associated with growth stocks and other assets whose valuation, as determined by the investing public, is impacted by appreciation in value. Momentum pricing may result in speculation regarding future appreciation in the value of digital assets, which inflates prices and leads to increased volatility. As a result, INJ may be more likely to fluctuate in value due to changing investor confidence in future appreciation or depreciation in prices, which could adversely affect the price of INJ, and, in turn, an investment in the Trust.

The value of INJ as represented by the Pricing Benchmark may also be subject to momentum pricing due to speculation regarding future appreciation in value, leading to greater volatility that could adversely affect the value of the Shares. Momentum pricing of INJ has previously resulted, and may continue to result, in speculation regarding future appreciation or depreciation in the value of INJ, further contributing to volatility and potentially inflating prices at any given time. These dynamics may impact the value of an investment in the Trust.

Some market observers have asserted that in time, the value of INJ will fall to a fraction of its current value, or even to zero. INJ has not been in existence long enough for market participants to assess these predictions with any precision, but if these observers are even partially correct, an investment in the Shares may turn out to be substantially worthless.

A decline in the adoption of INJ or the Injective Network could negatively impact the Trust.

The Sponsor will not have any strategy relating to the development of INJ and the Injective Network. However, a lack of expansion in usage of INJ and the Injective Network could adversely affect an investment in Shares.

The further development and acceptance of the Injective Network, which is part of a new and rapidly changing industry, is subject to a variety of factors that are difficult to evaluate. For example, the Injective Network faces significant obstacles to increasing the usage of INJ without resulting in higher fees or slower transaction settlement times, and attempts to increase the volume and speed of transactions may not be effective. The slowing, stopping or reversing of the development or acceptance or usage of the Injective Network and associated smart contracts. This may adversely affect the price of INJ and therefore an investment in the Shares. The further adoption of INJ will require growth in its usage and in the Injective Network. Adoption of INJ will also require an accommodating regulatory environment.

The use of digital assets such as INJ to, among other things, buy and sell goods and services or facilitate cross-border payments, is part of a new and rapidly evolving industry that employs digital assets based upon computer-generated mathematical and/or cryptographic protocols. INJ is a prominent, but not unique, part of this industry. The growth of this industry is subject to a high degree of uncertainty, as new assets and technological innovations continue to develop and evolve. Currently, there is relatively limited use of INJ in the retail and commercial marketplace in comparison to relatively extensive use as a store of value, thus contributing to price volatility that could adversely affect an investment in the Shares. However, INJ may not be suited for a number of commercial uses, including those requiring real time payments, partially due to the amount of time that Injective transactions may potentially require in order to clear. This could result in decreasing usage of the network, to the extent that INJ does not otherwise become a store of asset value or meet the needs of another commercial use.

Today, there is limited use of INJ in the retail, commercial, or payments spaces, and, on a relative basis, speculators make up a significant portion of users. Certain merchants and major retail and commercial businesses have only recently begun accepting INJ and the Injective Network as a means of payment for goods and services. This pattern may contribute to outsized price volatility, which in turn can make INJ less attractive to merchants and commercial parties as a means of payment. A lack of expansion by INJ into retail and commercial markets or a contraction of such use may result in a reduction in the price of INJ, which could adversely affect an investment in the Trust.

In addition, there is no assurance that INJ will maintain its value over the long-term. The value of INJ is subject to risks related to its usage. Even if growth in INJ adoption occurs in the near or medium-term, there is no assurance that INJ usage will continue to grow over the long-term. A contraction in use of INJ may result in increased volatility or a reduction in the price of INJ, which would adversely impact the value of the Shares.

The failure of one or more of the Injective Foundation’s and Injective Lab’s strategic partnerships with one or more institutional players may adversely affect demand for INJ, the price of INJ, or the price of the Shares. 

Each of the Injective Foundation and Injective Labs has entered into a number of partnerships with financial or other institutions. These collaborations may involve integrating INJ into investment and traditional financial sectors, boosting interoperability or broadening use cases. For example, the Trust and the Injective Foundation have entered into a strategic seed partnership whereby the Injective Foundation will provide initial funding to the Trust. The failure of one or more of these strategic partnerships, including the strategic seed partnership between the Trust and the Injective Foundation, or the inability to enter into further strategic partnerships may result in negative publicity and may limit the adoption of INJ, resulting in adverse consequences for the demand for INJ, the Trust and the Shares.

Irrevocable nature of blockchain-recorded transactions.

INJ transactions recorded on the Injective Network are not, from an administrative perspective, reversible without the consent and active participation of the recipient of the transaction or, in theory, control or consent of a majority of the Injective Network’s aggregate hash rate. Once a transaction has been verified and recorded in a block that is added to the blockchain, an incorrect transfer of INJ or a theft of INJ generally will not be reversible, and the Trust may not be capable of seeking compensation for any such transfer or theft. Although the Trust’s transfers of INJ will regularly be made to or from the Trust’s accounts with the INJ Custodians, it is possible that, through computer or human error, or through theft or criminal action, the Trust’s INJ could be transferred from the Trust’s accounts with the INJ Custodians in incorrect amounts or to unauthorized third parties, or to uncontrolled accounts. To the extent that the Trust is unable to successfully seek redress for such error or theft, such loss could adversely affect an investment in the Trust.

The loss or destruction of a private key required to access INJ may be irreversible.

Digital assets, including INJ, are controllable only by the possessor of both the unique public key and private key or keys relating to the “digital wallet” in which the digital asset is held. Private keys must be safeguarded and kept private in order to prevent a third party from accessing the digital asset held in such wallet. To the extent a private key is lost, destroyed or otherwise compromised and no backup of the private key is accessible, the Trust will be unable to access, and will effectively lose, the INJ held in the related digital wallet. In addition, if the Trust’s private keys are misappropriated and the Trust’s INJ holdings are stolen, including from or by an INJ Custodian, the Trust could lose some or all of its INJ holdings, which would adversely impact an investment in the Shares of the Trust. Any loss of private keys relating to digital wallets used to store the Trust’s INJ would adversely affect the value of the Shares.

An investment in the Trust is not a deposit and is not FDIC-insured. Shareholders’ limited rights of legal recourse against the Trust, Trustee, Sponsor, Administrator, Prime Broker and the INJ Custodians expose the Trust and its Shareholders to the risk of loss of the Trust’s INJ for which no person or entity is liable.

The Trust is not a banking institution or otherwise a member of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) or Securities Investor Protection Corporation (“SIPC”) and, therefore, deposits held with or assets held by the Trust are not subject to the protections enjoyed by depositors with FDIC or SIPC member institutions. In addition, neither the Trust nor the Sponsor insures the Trust’s INJ.

While the INJ Custodians have advised the Sponsor that they collectively have insurance coverage up to $585 million in the aggregate that covers losses of the digital assets they custody on behalf of their clients, including the Trust’s INJ, resulting from theft, Shareholders cannot be assured that the INJ Custodians will maintain adequate insurance, that such coverage will cover losses with respect to the Trust’s INJ, or that sufficient insurance proceeds will be available to cover the Trust’s losses in full. The INJ Custodians’ insurance policies may not cover the type of losses experienced by the Trust. Alternatively, the Trust may be forced to share such insurance proceeds with other clients or customers of the INJ Custodians, which could reduce the amount of such proceeds that are available to the Trust. In addition, the INJ insurance market is limited, and the level of insurance maintained by the INJ Custodians may be substantially lower than the assets of the Trust. While each of the INJ Custodians maintain certain capital reserve requirements depending on the assets under custody, and such capital reserves may provide additional means to cover client asset losses, the Trust cannot be assured that the INJ Custodians will maintain capital reserves sufficient to cover actual or potential losses with respect to the Trust’s digital assets. The insurance maintained by the INJ Custodians are shared among all of such INJ Custodian’s customers, are not specific to the Trust or to customers holding INJ with the INJ Custodians, and may not be available or sufficient to protect the Trust from all possible losses or sources of losses.

Furthermore, under the Custodial Services Agreements, the INJ Custodians’ liability is limited. With respect to the Coinbase Custodial Services Agreement, the Coinbase Custodian’s liability is as follows, among others: (i) the Coinbase Custodian’s aggregate liability with respect to any breach of its obligations under the Coinbase Custodial Services Agreement shall not exceed the aggregate amount of fees paid by the Trust to the Coinbase Custodian in respect of the services relating to custody, trade execution, lending or post-trade credit (if applicable), and other services (collectively, the “Prime Broker Services”) in the 12 months prior to the event giving rise to such liability; (ii) the Coinbase Custodian’s aggregate liability under the Coinbase Custodial Services Agreement shall not exceed the greater of (A) the aggregate fees paid by the Trust to the Coinbase Custodian in respect of the custodial services in the 12 months prior to the event giving rise to the Coinbase Custodian’s liability, and (B) the value of the supported INJ on deposit in the Trust’s custodial account(s) giving rise to the Coinbase Custodian’s liability at the time of the event giving rise to the Coinbase Custodian’s liability; (iii) the Coinbase Custodian’s aggregate liability in respect of each cold storage address shall not exceed $100 million; (iv) in respect of any incidental, indirect, special, punitive, consequential or similar losses, the Coinbase Custodian is not liable, even if the Coinbase Custodian has been advised of or knew of or should have known of the possibility thereof; and (v) in no event shall the Coinbase Custodian or its affiliates have any liability to the Trust or any third party with respect to any breach of its obligations under the Coinbase Custodial Services Agreement, express or implied, which does not result solely from its gross negligence, fraud or willful misconduct. The Coinbase Custodian is not liable for delays, suspension of operations, failure in performance, or interruption of service which result directly or indirectly from any cause or condition beyond the reasonable control of the Coinbase Custodian. In the event of potential losses incurred by the Trust as a result of the Coinbase Custodian losing control of the Trust’s INJ or failing to properly execute instructions on behalf of the Trust, the Coinbase Custodian’s liability with respect to the Trust will be subject to certain limitations which may allow it to avoid liability for potential losses or may be insufficient to cover the value of such potential losses, even if the Coinbase Custodian directly caused such losses. Furthermore, the insurance maintained by the Coinbase Custodian may be insufficient to cover its liabilities to the Trust.

With respect to the BitGo Custodial Services Agreement, the BitGo Custodian and its affiliates, including their officers, directors, agents, and employees, are not liable for any lost profits, special, incidental, indirect, intangible, or consequential damages resulting from authorized or unauthorized use of the Trust or Sponsor’s site or services. This includes damages arising from any contract, tort, negligence, strict liability, or other legal grounds, even if the BitGo Custodian was previously advised of, knew, or should have known about the possibility of such damages. However, this exclusion of liability does not extend to cases of the BitGo Custodian’s fraud, willful misconduct, or gross negligence. In situations of gross negligence, the BitGo Custodian’s liability is specifically limited to the value of the digital assets or fiat currency that were affected by the negligence. Additionally, the total liability of the BitGo Custodian for direct damages is capped at the fees paid or payable to them under the BitGo Custodial Services Agreement during the twelve-month period immediately preceding the first incident that caused the liability.

Similarly, under the Prime Broker Agreement, the Prime Broker’s liability is limited as follows, among others: (i) the Prime Broker’s aggregate liability shall not exceed the aggregate fees paid by the Trust to the Prime Broker in respect of the Prime Broker Services in the 12 months prior to the event giving rise to the Prime Broker’s liability; and (ii) in respect of any incidental, indirect, special, punitive, consequential or similar losses, the Prime Broker is not liable, even if the Prime Broker has been advised of or knew of or should have known of the possibility thereof. In general, with limited exceptions, the Prime Broker is not liable under the Prime Broker Agreement unless in the event of its gross negligence, fraud, or willful misconduct. The Prime Broker is not liable for delays, suspension of operations, failure in performance, or interruption of service which result directly or indirectly from any cause or condition beyond the reasonable control of the Prime Broker. These and the other limitations on the Prime Broker’s liability may allow it to avoid liability for potential losses or may be insufficient to cover the value of such potential losses, even if the Prime Broker directly caused such losses.

Moreover, in the event of an insolvency or bankruptcy of the Prime Broker (in the case of the Trading Balance) or the INJ Custodians (in the case of the Cold Vault Balance) in the future, given that the contractual protections and legal rights of customers with respect to digital assets held on their behalf by third parties are relatively untested in a bankruptcy of entities such as the INJ Custodians or the Prime Broker in the digital asset industry, there is a risk that customers’ assets – including the Trust’s assets – may be considered the property of the bankruptcy estate of the Prime Broker (in the case of the Trading Balance) or the INJ Custodians (in the case of the Cold Vault Balance), and customers – including the Trust – may be at risk of being treated as general unsecured creditors of such entities and subject to the risk of total loss or markdowns on value of such assets.

The Coinbase Custodial Services Agreement contains an agreement by the parties thereto to treat the INJ credited to the Trust’s Cold Vault Balance with the Coinbase Custodian as financial assets under Article 8 of the New York Uniform Commercial Code (“Article 8”), in addition to stating that the Coinbase Custodian will serve as fiduciary and custodian on the Trust’s behalf. The Coinbase Custodian’s parent, Coinbase Global Inc. (“Coinbase Global”), has stated in public securities filings that in light of the inclusion in its custody agreements of provisions relating to Article 8 it believes that a court would not treat custodied digital assets as part of its general estate in the event the Coinbase Custodian were to experience insolvency.

Due to the novelty of digital asset custodial arrangements courts have not yet considered this type of treatment for custodied digital assets and it is not possible to predict with certainty how they would rule in such a scenario. If the INJ Custodians become subject to insolvency proceedings and a court were to rule that the custodied INJ were part of the INJ Custodians’ general estate and not the property of the Trust, then the Trust would be treated as a general unsecured creditor in the INJ Custodians’ insolvency proceedings and the Trust could be subject to the loss of all or a significant portion of its assets. Moreover, in the event of the bankruptcy of the INJ Custodians, an automatic stay could go into effect and protracted litigation could be required in order to recover the assets held with the INJ Custodians, all of which could significantly and negatively impact the Trust’s operations and the value of the Shares.

With respect to the Prime Broker Agreement, there is a risk that the Trading Balance, in which the Trust’s INJ and cash is held in omnibus accounts by the Prime Broker, could be considered part of the Prime Broker’s bankruptcy estate in the event of the Prime Broker’s bankruptcy. The Prime Broker Agreement contains an Article 8 opt-in clause with respect to the Trust’s assets held in the Trading Balance.

The amount of INJ that may be held in the Trading Balance will be limited to the amount necessary to process a given creation or redemption transaction, as applicable, or to pay for Trust Expenses not assumed by the Sponsor in consideration for the Sponsor Fee.

The Prime Broker is not required to hold any of the INJ or cash in the Trust’s Trading Balance in segregation. Within the Trading Balance, the Prime Broker Agreement provides that the Trust does not have an identifiable claim to any particular INJ (and cash). Instead, the Trust’s Trading Balance represents an entitlement to a pro rata share of the INJ (and cash) the Prime Broker has allocated to the omnibus wallets the Prime Broker holds, as well as the accounts in the Prime Broker’s name that the Prime Broker maintains at Connected Trading Venues (the “Connected Trading Venue”) (which are typically held on an omnibus, rather than segregated, basis). If the Prime Broker suffers an insolvency event, there is a risk that the Trust’s assets held in the Trading Balance could be considered part of the Prime Broker’s bankruptcy estate and the Trust could be treated as a general unsecured creditor of the Prime Broker, which could result in losses for the Trust and Shareholders. Moreover, in the event of the bankruptcy of the Prime Broker, an automatic stay could go into effect and protracted litigation could be required in order to recover the assets held with the Prime Broker, all of which could significantly and negatively impact the Trust’s operations and the value of the Shares.

Under the Trust Agreement, the Trustee and the Sponsor will not be liable for any liability or expense incurred, including, without limitation, as a result of any loss of INJ by the INJ Custodians or the Prime Broker, absent willful misconduct, gross negligence, or bad faith on the part of the Trustee or the Sponsor, fraud of the Sponsor, or material breach by the Sponsor of the Trust Agreement, as the case may be. As a result, the recourse of the Trust or the Shareholders to the Trustee or the Sponsor, including in the event of a loss of INJ by the INJ Custodians or the Prime Broker, is limited.

The Shareholders’ recourse against the Sponsor, the Trustee, and the Trust’s other service providers for the services they provide to the Trust, including, without limitation, those relating to the holding of INJ or the provision of instructions relating to the movement of INJ, is limited. For the avoidance of doubt, neither the Sponsor, the Trustee, nor any of their affiliates, nor any other party has guaranteed the assets or liabilities, or otherwise assumed the liabilities, of the Trust, or the obligations or liabilities of any service provider to the Trust, including, without limitation, the INJ Custodians and the Prime Broker. The Prime Broker Agreement and Custodial Services Agreements provide that neither the Sponsor, the Trustee, nor their affiliates shall have any obligation of any kind or nature whatsoever, by guaranty, enforcement or otherwise, with respect to the performance of any of the Trust’s obligations, agreements, representations or warranties under the Prime Broker Agreement or the Custodial Services Agreements or any transactions thereunder. Consequently, a loss may be suffered with respect to the Trust’s INJ that is not covered by the INJ Custodians’ insurance policies and for which no person is liable in damages. As a result, the recourse of the Trust or the Shareholders, under applicable law, is limited.

Loss of a critical banking relationship for, or the failure of a bank used by, the Prime Broker or the Trust could adversely impact the Trust’s ability to create or redeem Baskets, or could cause losses to the Trust.

To the extent that the Trust or the Prime Broker faces difficulty establishing or maintaining banking relationships, the loss of the Trust or the Prime Broker’s banking partners, the imposition of operational restrictions by these banking partners and the inability for the Trust or the Prime Broker to utilize other financial institutions may result in a disruption of creation and redemption activity of the Trust or the Prime Broker, or cause other operational disruptions or adverse effects for the Trust or the Prime Broker. In the future, it is possible that the Trust or the Prime Broker could be unable to establish accounts at new banking partners or establish new banking relationships, or that the banks with which the Trust or the Prime Broker is able to establish relationships may not be as large or well-capitalized or subject to the same degree of prudential supervision as the existing providers.

The Trust could also suffer losses in the event that a bank in which the Trust holds assets fails, becomes insolvent, enters receivership, is taken over by regulators, enters financial distress, or otherwise suffers adverse effects to its financial condition or operational status. Recently, some banks have experienced financial distress. For example, on March 8, 2023, the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation (“DFPI”) announced that Silvergate Bank had entered voluntary liquidation, and on March 10, 2023, Silicon Valley Bank (“SVB”) was closed by the DFPI, which appointed the FDIC as receiver. Similarly, on March 12, 2023, the New York Department of Financial Services took possession of Signature Bank and appointed the FDIC as receiver. A joint statement by the U.S. Department of the Treasury (the “U.S. Treasury Department”), the Federal Reserve and the FDIC on March 12, 2023, stated that depositors in Signature and SVB will have access to all of their funds, including funds held in deposit accounts, in excess of the insured amount. On May 1, 2023, First Republic Bank was closed by the DFPI, which appointed the FDIC as receiver. Following a bidding process, the FDIC entered into a purchase and assumption agreement with JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, to acquire the substantial majority of the assets and assume certain liabilities of First Republic Bank from the FDIC.

The Prime Broker has historically maintained banking relationships with Silvergate Bank and Signature Bank. While the Sponsor does not believe there is a direct risk to the Trust’s assets from the failures of Silvergate Bank or Signature Bank, in the future, changing circumstances and market conditions, some of which may be beyond the Trust’s or the Sponsor’s control, could impair the Trust’s ability to access the Trust’s cash held with the Prime Broker. If the Prime Broker were to experience financial distress or its financial condition is otherwise affected by the failure of its banking partners, the Prime Broker’s ability to provide services to the Trust could be affected. Moreover, the future failure of a bank at which the Prime Broker maintains customer cash could result in losses to the Trust, to the extent the balances are not subject to deposit insurance, notwithstanding the regulatory requirements to which the Prime Broker is subject or other potential protections.

If the Custodial Services Agreements or the Prime Broker Agreement are terminated or the INJ Custodians or the Prime Broker fails to provide services as required, the Trustee may need to find and appoint a replacement custodian or prime broker, which could pose a challenge to the safekeeping of the Trust’s INJ, and the Trust’s ability to continue to operate may be adversely affected.

The Trust is dependent on the INJ Custodians, which are the Coinbase Custodian and the BitGo Custodian, and the Prime Broker, Coinbase Inc., to operate. The Coinbase Custodian performs essential functions in terms of safekeeping the Trust’s INJ in the Vault Balance, and its affiliate, Coinbase Inc., in its capacity as Prime Broker, facilitates the selling of INJ by the Trust to pay the Sponsor’s Fee and, to the extent applicable, other Trust expenses, and in extraordinary circumstances, to liquidate the Trust. If the Coinbase Custodian or Coinbase Inc. fails to perform the functions they perform for the Trust, the Trust may be unable to operate or create or redeem Baskets, which could force the Trust to liquidate or adversely affect the price of the Shares.

In March 2023, the Prime Broker and its parent, Coinbase Global, Inc. (such parent, “Coinbase Global” and together with Coinbase Inc., the “Relevant Coinbase Entities”) received a “Wells Notice” from the SEC staff stating that the SEC staff made a “preliminary determination” to recommend that the SEC file an enforcement action against the Relevant Coinbase Entities alleging violations of the federal securities laws, including the Exchange Act and the 1933 Act. According to Coinbase Global’s public reporting company disclosure, based on discussions with the SEC staff, the Relevant Coinbase Entities believe these potential enforcement actions would relate to aspects of the Relevant Coinbase Entities’ Coinbase Prime service, spot market, staking service Coinbase Earn, and Coinbase Wallet, and the potential civil action may seek injunctive relief, disgorgement, and civil penalties. In June 2023, the SEC filed a complaint against the Relevant Coinbase Entities in federal district court in the Southern District of New York, alleging, inter alia: (i) that Coinbase Inc. has violated the Exchange Act by failing to register with the SEC as a national securities exchange, broker-dealer, and clearing agency, in connection with activities involving certain identified digital assets that the SEC’s complaint alleges are securities, (ii) that Coinbase Inc. has violated the 1933 Act by failing to register with the SEC the offer and sale of its staking program, and (iii) that Coinbase Global is jointly and severally liable as a control person under the Exchange Act for Coinbase Inc.’s violations of the Exchange Act to the same extent as Coinbase Inc. In February 2025, the SEC announced that it had filed a joint stipulation with Coinbase Inc. and Coinbase Global to dismiss the ongoing civil enforcement action against the two entities. The SEC’s complaint against the Relevant Coinbase Entities did not allege that INJ is offered or sold as a security nor did it allege that Coinbase Inc’s activities involving INJ caused the alleged registration violations, and the Coinbase Custodian was not named as a defendant. Additionally, in March and May of 2025, the SEC announced that it filed a joint stipulation with Kraken and Binance, respectively, to dismiss the ongoing civil enforcement actions against the companies, and such stipulation was ultimately accepted by the court and the case dismissed.

In the event of any future SEC or other governmental, regulatory or other enforcement action or litigation,

Coinbase Inc., as Prime Broker, could be required, as a result of a judicial determination, or could choose, to restrict or curtail the services it offers, or its financial condition and ability to provide services to the Trust could be affected. If the Prime Broker were to be required or choose, as a result of a regulatory action or litigation, to restrict or curtail the services it offers, it could negatively affect the Trust’s ability to operate or process creations or redemptions of Baskets, which could force the Trust to liquidate or adversely affect the price of the Shares. While the Coinbase Custodian was not named in the complaint, if Coinbase Global, as the parent of the Coinbase Custodian, is required, as a result of a judicial determination, or could choose, to restrict or curtail the services its subsidiaries provide to the Trust, or its financial condition is negatively affected, it could negatively affect the Trust’s ability to operate.

Alternatively, the Trust could replace the Coinbase Custodian as an INJ Custodian with custody of the Trust’s INJ, pursuant to the Coinbase Custodial Services Agreement. Similarly, the Coinbase Custodian or Coinbase Inc. could terminate services under the Prime Broker Agreement respectively upon providing the applicable notice to the Trust for any reason, or immediately for Cause (as such term is defined in the Prime Broker Agreement). Transferring maintenance responsibilities of the Trust’s accounts with the INJ Custodians to other custodians would likely be complex and could subject the Trust’s INJ to the risk of loss during the transfer, which could have a negative impact on the performance of the Shares or result in loss of the Trust’s assets. As Prime Broker, Coinbase Inc. does not guarantee uninterrupted access to the Trading Platform or the services it provides to the Trust as Prime Broker. Under certain circumstances, Coinbase Inc. is permitted to halt or suspend trading on its trading platform, or impose limits on the amount or size of, or reject, the Trust’s orders, including in the event of, among others, (a) delays, suspension of operations, failure in performance, or interruption of service that are directly due to a cause or condition beyond the reasonable control of Coinbase Inc, (b) the Trust has engaged in unlawful or abusive activities or fraud, (c) the acceptance of the Trust’s order would cause the amount of Trade Credits extended to exceed the maximum amount of Trade Credit that the Trust’s agreement with the Trade Credit Lender permits to be outstanding at any one time, or (d) a security or technology issue occurred and is continuing that results in Coinbase Inc. being unable to provide trading services or accept the Trust’s order, in each case, subject to certain protections for the Trust. Also, if the Coinbase Custodian or Coinbase Inc. become insolvent, suffer business failure, cease business operations, default on or fail to perform their obligations under their contractual agreements with the Trust, or abruptly discontinue the services they provide to the Trust for any reason, the Trust’s operations would be adversely affected.

The Trustee may not be able to find a party willing to serve as a custodian of the Trust’s INJ or as the Trust’s prime broker under the same terms as the current Coinbase Custodial Services Agreement or the Prime Broker Agreement or at all. To the extent that the Trustee is not able to find a suitable party willing to serve as a custodian or as the prime broker, the Trustee may be required to terminate the Trust and liquidate the Trust’s INJ. In addition, to the extent that the Trustee finds a suitable party but must enter into a modified custodial services agreement or prime broker agreement that is less favorable for the Trust or Trustee, the value of the Shares could be adversely affected. If the Trust is unable to find a replacement prime broker, its operations could be adversely affected.

The INJ Custodians and the Prime Broker may act in the same or similar capacity for other competing products.

Currently, the number of digital assets intermediaries with the reputation and operational capability to serve as custodian and/or prime broker to the Trust or other competing products is limited. The INJ Custodians and the Prime Broker may act in the same or similar capacity for other competing products, including exchange-traded products offering exposure to the spot INJ market or other digital assets. The Trust is therefore subject to risks associated with these competing products utilizing the same service providers for INJ custodial and prime brokerage services.

To the extent that exchange-traded products offering exposure to the spot INJ market or other digital assets utilize substantially the same service providers for INJ custodial and prime brokerage services, this industry concentration may result in the development of fewer other digital assets intermediaries with the reputation and operational capability to provide INJ custodial and prime brokerage services to the Trust or other competing products. This, in turn, could make it difficult for the Trust to find and appoint a replacement INJ custodian or prime broker, to the extent the Sponsor deems such action necessary.

This industry concentration also may have the effect of magnifying the risks associated with the INJ Custodians and the Prime Broker, as operational disruptions or adverse developments impacting the INJ Custodians or the Prime Broker may be felt on an industry-wide basis. A loss of confidence in or security breach of an INJ Custodian or the Prime Broker may adversely affect not only the Trust and the value of an investment in the Shares, but also these competing products utilizing the same service providers for INJ custodial and prime brokerage services and, more generally, exchange-traded products offering exposure to the spot INJ market or other digital assets. These industry-wide adverse effects could result in a broader loss of confidence in exchange-traded products offering exposure to the spot INJ market or other digital assets, which could further impact the Trust and the value of an investment in the Shares.

The Prime Broker routes orders through Connected Trading Venues in connection with trading services under the Prime Broker Agreement. The loss or failure of any such Connected Trading Venues may adversely affect the Prime Broker’s business and cause losses for the Trust.

In connection with trading services under the Prime Broker Agreement, the Prime Broker routinely routes customer orders to Connected Trading Venues, which are third-party exchanges or other trading venues (including the trading venue operated by the Prime Broker). In connection with these activities, the Prime Broker may hold INJ with such Connected Trading Venues in order to effect customer orders, including the Trust’s orders. However, the Prime Broker has represented to the Sponsor that no customer cash is held at Connected Trading Venues. If the Prime Broker were to experience a disruption in the Prime Broker’s access to these Connected Trading Venues, the Prime Broker’s trading services under the Prime Broker Agreement could be adversely affected to the extent that the Prime Broker is limited in its ability to execute order flow for its customers, including the Trust. In addition, while the Prime Broker has policies and procedures to help mitigate the Prime Broker’s risks related to routing orders through third-party trading venues, if any of these third-party trading venues experience any technical, legal, regulatory, or other adverse events, such as shutdowns, delays, system failures, suspension of withdrawals, illiquidity, insolvency, or loss of customer assets, the Prime Broker might not be able to fully recover the customer’s INJ that the Prime Broker has deposited with these third parties. As a result, the Prime Broker’s business, operating results and financial condition could be adversely affected, potentially resulting in its failure to provide services to the Trust or perform its obligations under the Prime Broker Agreement, and the Trust could suffer resulting losses or disruptions to its operations. The failure of a Connected Trading Venue at which the Prime Broker maintains customer INJ, including INJ associated with the Trust, could result in losses to the Trust, notwithstanding the regulatory requirements to which the Prime Broker is subject or other potential protections.

A disruption of the Internet may affect Injective operations, which may adversely affect the Injective industry and an investment in the Trust.

The functionality of the Injective Network relies on the Internet. A significant disruption of Internet connectivity (i.e., affecting large numbers of users or geographic regions) could disrupt the Injective Network’s functionality and operations until the disruption in the Internet is resolved. A disruption in the Internet could adversely affect an investment in the Trust or the ability of the Trust to operate. In particular, some variants of digital assets have experienced a number of denial-of-service attacks, which have led to temporary delays in block creation and digital asset transfers. While in certain cases in response to an attack, blockchain networks have introduced additional “hard forks” (discussed below) to increase the cost of certain network functions, such networks have generally continued to be subject to additional attacks. Moreover, it is possible that as INJ increases in value, it may become a bigger target for hackers and subject to more frequent hacking and denial-of-service attacks.

Potential changes to the Injective Network’s protocols and software could, if accepted and authorized by the Injective Network community, adversely affect an investment in the Trust.

A loose community of core developers has evolved to informally manage the source code for the protocol underlying the Injective Network. Membership in the community of core developers evolves over time, largely based on self-determined participation in the resource section dedicated to the Injective Network on Github.com. The core developers can propose amendments to the Injective Network’s source code that, if accepted by validators and users, could alter the protocols and software of the Injective Network and the properties of INJ. These alterations occur through software upgrades and could potentially include changes to the irreversibility of transactions and changes to the current moratorium on the issuance of new INJ, which could undermine the appeal and market value of INJ. Alternatively, software upgrades and other changes to the protocols of the Injective Network could fail to work as intended or could introduce bugs, security risks, or otherwise adversely affect, the Injective Network. As a result, the Injective Network could be subject to new protocols and software in the future that may adversely affect an investment in the Trust.

The open-source structure of the Injective Network protocol means that the core developers and other contributors are generally not directly compensated for their contributions in maintaining and developing the Injective Network protocol. A failure to properly monitor and upgrade the Injective Network protocol could damage the Injective Network and an investment in the Trust.

The Injective Network operates based on an open-source protocol maintained by a group of core developers and other contributors, largely on the GitHub resource section dedicated to development of the Injective Network. As the Injective Network protocol is not sold or made available subject to licensing or subscription fees and its use does not generate revenues for its development team, the core developers are generally not compensated for maintaining and updating the source code for the Injective Network protocol. Consequently, there is a lack of financial incentive for developers to maintain or develop the Injective Network and the core developers may lack the resources to adequately address emerging issues with the Injective Network protocol. Although the Injective Network is currently supported by the core developers, there can be no guarantee that such support will continue or be sufficient in the future. Alternatively, entities whose interests are at odds with other participants in the Injective Network may seek to obtain control over the Injective Network by influencing core developers. For example, malicious actors could attempt to bribe a core developer or group of core developers to propose certain changes to the network core developers. In addition, a bad actor could also attempt to interfere with the operation of the Injective Network by attempting to exercise a malign influence over a core developer. To the extent that material issues arise with the Injective Network protocol and the core developers and open-source contributors are unable to address the issues adequately or in a timely manner, the Injective Network and an investment in the Trust may be adversely affected.

The governance of the Injective Network could have a negative impact on the performance of the Trust.

The governance of the Injective Network is achieved through voluntary consensus and open competition. Participants on the Injective Network come to an agreement through overwhelming consensus. The lack of clarity on governance may adversely affect INJ’s utility and ability to grow and face challenges, both of which may require solutions and directed effort to overcome problems, especially long-term problems. For example, a seemingly simple technical issue once divided the Bitcoin network community: namely, whether to increase the block size of the blockchain or implement another change to increase the scalability of bitcoin, known as “segregated witness,” and help the Injective Network continue to grow. See “Risk Factors—The Injective Network faces scaling challenges and efforts to increase the volume and speed of transactions may not be successful.”

To the extent lack of clarity in corporate governance of the Injective Network leads to ineffective decision-making that slows development and growth, the value of the Shares may be adversely affected.

Anonymity and illicit financing risk.

Although transaction details of peer-to-peer transactions are recorded on the Injective Network, a buyer or seller of digital assets on a peer-to-peer basis directly on the Injective Network may never know to whom the public key belongs or the true identity of the party with whom it is transacting. Public key addresses are randomized sequences of alphanumeric characters that, standing alone, do not provide sufficient information to identify users. In addition, certain technologies may obscure the origin or chain of custody of digital assets. The opaque nature of the market poses asset verification challenges for market participants, regulators and auditors and gives rise to an increased risk of manipulation and fraud, including the potential for Ponzi schemes, bucket shops and pump and dump schemes. Digital assets have in the past been used to facilitate illicit activities. If a digital asset was used to facilitate illicit activities, businesses that facilitate transactions in such digital assets could be at increased risk of potential criminal or civil lawsuits, or of having banking or other services cut off, and such digital asset could be removed from digital asset exchanges. Any of the aforementioned occurrences could adversely affect the price of the relevant digital asset, the attractiveness of the respective blockchain network and an investment in the Shares. If the Trust, the Sponsor or the Trustee were to transact with a sanctioned entity, the Trust, the Sponsor or the Trustee would be at risk of potential criminal or civil lawsuits or liability.

The Trust takes measures with the objective of reducing illicit financing risks in connection with the Trust’s activities. However, illicit financing risks are present in the digital asset markets, including markets for INJ. There can be no assurance that the measures employed by the Trust will prove successful in reducing illicit financing risks, and the Trust is subject to the complex illicit financing risks and vulnerabilities present in the digital asset markets. If such risks eventuate, the Trust, the Sponsor or the Trustee or their affiliates could face civil or criminal liability, fines, penalties, or other punishments, be subject to investigation, have their assets frozen, lose access to banking services or services provided by other service providers, or suffer disruptions to their operations, any of which could negatively affect the Trust’s ability to operate or cause losses in value of the Shares.

The Sponsor and the Trust have adopted and implemented policies and procedures that are designed to ensure that they do not violate applicable AML and sanctions laws and regulations and to comply with any applicable KYC laws and regulations. The Sponsor and the Trust will only interact with known third party service providers with respect to whom it has engaged in a due diligence process to ensure a thorough KYC process, such as the Authorized Participants and the INJ Custodians. Authorized Participants, as broker-dealers, and the INJ Custodians, as limited purpose trust companies subject to New York Banking Law in the case of the Coinbase Custodian and the National Bank Act of 1864, in the case of the BitGo Custodian, are subject to the U.S. Bank Secrecy Act (as amended) (“BSA”) and U.S. economic sanctions laws. In addition, the Trust will only accept creations and redemption requests from regulated Authorized Participants who themselves are subject to applicable sanctions and anti-money laundering laws and have compliance programs that are designed to ensure compliance with those laws. In addition, INJ Counterparties will be contractually obligated that all INJ they deliver to the Trust will be from lawful sources. The Trust will not hold any INJ except those that have been delivered by an INJ Counterparty in connection with creation requests.

The INJ Custodians have adopted and implemented anti-money laundering and sanctions compliance programs, which provide additional protections to ensure that the Sponsor and the Trust do not transact with a sanctioned party. Notably, the INJ Custodians perform Know-Your-Transaction (“KYT”) screening using blockchain analytics to identify, detect, and mitigate the risk of transacting with a sanctioned or other unlawful actor. Pursuant to the INJ Custodians’ KYT programs, any INJ that is delivered to the Trust’s custody accounts will undergo screening to ensure that the origins of such INJ are not illicit.

In accordance with their regulatory obligations, the Authorized Participants conduct customer due diligence and enhanced due diligence on their counterparties, which enable them to determine each counterparty’s AML and other risks and assign an appropriate risk rating.

As part of their counterparty onboarding processes, the Authorized Participants use third-party services to screen prospective counterparties against various watch lists, including the Specially Designated Nationals List of the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”) and countries and territories identified as non-cooperative by the Financial Action Task Force.

There is no guarantee that such procedures will always be effective. If the Authorized Participants or INJ Counterparties have inadequate policies, procedures and controls for complying with applicable anti-money laundering and applicable sanctions laws or the Trust’s diligence is ineffective, violations of such laws could result, which could result in regulatory liability for the Trust, the Sponsor, the Trustee or their affiliates under such laws, including governmental fines, penalties, and other punishments, as well as potential liability to or cessation of services by the Prime Broker and its affiliates, including the Coinbase Custodian. Any of the foregoing could result in losses to the Shareholders or negatively affect the Trust’s ability to operate.

The actual or perceived use of INJ and other digital assets in illicit transactions may adversely affect the INJ industry and an investment in the Trust.

Recent years have seen digital assets used at times as part of criminal activities and to launder criminal proceeds, as means of payment for illicit activities, or as an investment fraud currency. Although the number of cases involving digital assets for the financing of terrorism remains limited, criminals have nonetheless become more sophisticated in their use of digital assets.

Although INJ transaction details are logged on the blockchain, a buyer or seller of INJ may never know to whom the public key belongs or the true identity of the party with whom it is transacting, as public key addresses are randomized sequences of alphanumeric characters that, standing alone, do not provide sufficient information to identify users. Further, identifying users can be made even more difficult where a user utilizes a tumbling or mixing service (e.g., Tornado Cash) to further obfuscate transaction details.

The INJ industry and an investment in the Trust may be adversely affected to the extent that digital assets are increasingly used in connection with illicit transactions or are perceived as being used in connection with illicit transactions.

The inability to recognize the economic benefit of a “fork” or an “airdrop” could adversely impact an investment in the Trust.

From time to time, the Trust may be entitled to or come into possession of rights to acquire, or otherwise establish dominion and control over, any digital asset or other asset or right, which rights are incident to the Trust’s ownership of INJ and arise without any action of the Trust, or of the Sponsor on behalf of the Trust (“Incidental Rights”) and/or digital asset tokens, or other asset or right, acquired by the Trust through the exercise (subject to the applicable provisions of the Trust Agreement) of any Incidental Right (“IR Digital Assets”) by virtue of its ownership of INJ, generally through a fork in the Injective Network, an airdrop offered to holders of INJ or other similar event. In an airdrop, the promoters of a new digital asset announce to holders of another digital asset that they will be entitled to claim a certain amount of the new digital asset for free, based on the fact that they hold such other digital asset. See “Prospectus Summary — The FTSE Injective Index.”

Pursuant to the Trust Agreement, the Sponsor has the right, in their discretion, to determine what action to take in connection with the Trust’s entitlement to or ownership of Incidental Rights or any IR Digital Assets. Under the terms of the Trust Agreement, the Trust may take any lawful action necessary or desirable in connection with the Trust’s ownership of Incidental Rights, including the acquisition of IR Digital Assets, as determined by the Sponsor in the Sponsor’s sole discretion, unless such action would adversely affect the status of the Trust as a grantor trust for U.S. federal income tax purposes or otherwise be prohibited by the Trust Agreement.

With respect to any fork, airdrop or similar event, the Sponsor will cause the Trust to irrevocably abandon the Incidental Rights or IR Digital Assets. In the event the Trust seeks to change this position, an application would need to be filed with the SEC by the Exchange seeking approval to amend its listing rules. If such regulatory approval is received, the Trust will notify the owners of the beneficial interests of Shares in a prospectus supplement, in its periodic Exchange Act reports, as applicable, and on the Sponsor’s website.

Investors should be aware that investing in Shares of the Trust is not equivalent to investing directly in INJ. An investor does not have a claim to any “forked” assets. Unless otherwise announced, the Sponsor, on behalf of the Trust, will not support the inclusion of any forked assets.

Unless an announcement is made informing investors that a fork will be supported, a newly-forked asset should be considered ineligible for inclusion in the Trust.

Network Forks.

INJ, along with many other digital assets, are open source projects. The infrastructure and ecosystem that powers the Injective Network are developed by different parties, including affiliated and non-affiliated engineers, developers, validators, platform developers, evangelists, marketers, exchange operators and other companies based around a service regarding Injective, each of whom may have different motivations, drivers, philosophies and incentives.

As a result, any holder of INJ can propose refinements or improvements to the Injective Network’s source code through one or more software upgrades that could alter the protocols governing the Injective Network and the properties of INJ. When a modification is proposed and a substantial majority of users and validators consent to the modification, the change is implemented and the Injective Network remains uninterrupted. However, a “hard fork” occurs if less than a substantial majority of users and validators consent to the proposed modification, and the modification is not compatible with the software prior to its modification. In other words, two incompatible networks would then exist: (1) one network running the pre-modified software and (2) another network running the modified software. The effect of such a fork would be the existence of two versions of the Injective Network running in parallel, and the creation of a new digital asset which lacks interchangeability with its predecessor. This is in contrast to a “soft fork,” or a proposed modification to the software governing the network that results in a post-update network that is compatible with the network as it existed prior to the update, because it restricts the network operations that can be performed after the update.

Forks occur for a variety of reasons. A fork could occur after a significant security breach. Participants on the network could elect to “fork” the network to its state before the hack, effectively reversing the hack. A fork could also be introduced by an unintentional, unanticipated software flaw in the multiple versions of otherwise compatible software users run. Such a fork could adversely affect the Injective Network’s viability. It is possible, however, that a substantial number of users and validators could adopt an incompatible version of the digital asset while resisting community-led efforts to merge the two chains. This would result in a permanent fork. For example, in July 2016, Ethereum “forked” into Ethereum and a new digital asset, Ethereum Classic, as a result of the Ethereum network community’s response to a significant security breach in which an anonymous hacker exploited a smart contract running on the Ethereum network to syphon approximately $60 million of ether held by a decentralized autonomous organization, into a segregated account. In response to the hack, most participants in the Ethereum community elected to adopt a “fork” that effectively reversed the hack. However, a minority of users continued to develop the original blockchain, now referred to as “Ethereum Classic” with the digital asset on that blockchain now referred to as Ethereum Classic, or ETC. ETC now trades on several digital asset exchanges.

A fork may occur as a result of disagreement among network participants as to whether a proposed modification to the network should be accepted. For example, on August 1, 2017, after extended debates among developers as to how to improve the Bitcoin network’s transaction capacity, the Bitcoin network was forked by a group of developers and miners resulting in the creation of a new blockchain, which underlies the new digital asset “Bitcoin Cash.” Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash now operate on separate, independent blockchains. Since then, the Bitcoin network has forked several times to launch new digital assets, such as Bitcoin Gold, Bitcoin Silver and Bitcoin Diamond.

Significant forks are typically announced several months in advance. The circumstances of each fork are unique, and their relative significance varies. It is possible that a particular fork may result in a significant disruption to the Injective Network and, potentially, may result in broader market disruption should pricing become difficult following the fork. It is not possible to predict with accuracy the impact that any anticipated fork could have or for how long any resulting disruption may exist.

Forks may have a detrimental effect on the value of INJ, including by negatively affecting digital asset allocations or by failing to capture the full value of the newly-forked INJ if it is excluded from the Pricing Benchmark. Forks can also introduce new security risks. For example, forks may result in “replay attacks,” or attacks in which transactions from one network were rebroadcast to nefarious effect on the other network. After a hard fork, it may become easier for an individual validator or validating pool’s hashing power to exceed 50% of the processing power of the digital asset network, thereby making digital assets that rely on proof of work more susceptible to attack. For example, when the Ethereum and Ethereum Classic networks split in July 2016, replay attacks, in which transactions from one network were rebroadcast to nefarious effect on the other network, plagued ether exchanges through at least October 2016. An ether exchange announced in July 2016 that it had lost 40,000 Ethereum Classic, worth about $100,000 at that time, as a result of replay attacks. Similar replay attack concerns occurred in connection with the Bitcoin Cash and Bitcoin SV networks split in November 2018. Another possible result of a hard fork is an inherent decrease in the level of security.

A hard fork may adversely affect the price of INJ at the time of announcement or adoption. For example, the announcement of a hard fork could lead to increased demand for the pre fork digital asset, in anticipation that ownership of the pre fork digital asset would entitle holders to a new digital asset following the fork. The increased demand for the pre fork digital asset may cause the price of the digital asset to rise. After the hard fork, it is possible the aggregate price of the two versions of the digital asset running in parallel would be less than the price of the digital asset immediately prior to the fork. Furthermore, the Sponsor will, as permitted by the terms of the Trust Agreement, determine which network is generally accepted as the Injective Network and should therefore be considered the appropriate network for the Trust’s purposes. The Sponsor will base its determination on a variety of then relevant factors, including, but not limited to, the Sponsor’s beliefs regarding expectations of the core developers of the Injective Network, users, service providers, businesses, validators and other constituencies, as well as the actual continued acceptance of, mining power on, and community engagement with, the Injective Network. There is no guarantee that the Sponsor will choose the network and the associated digital asset that would ultimately end up as the most valuable fork. Either of these events could therefore adversely impact the value of the Shares. When Bitcoin Cash forked from the Bitcoin network, the value of Bitcoin went from $2,800 to $2,700.

A hard fork could change the source code for the Injective Network, including the source code which limits the supply of INJ. Although many observers believe this is unlikely at present, there is no guarantee that the current mechanisms limiting the supply of outstanding INJ will not be changed. If a hard fork changing the yearly supply cap is widely adopted, the limit on the supply of INJ could be lifted, which could have an adverse impact on the value of INJ and the value of the Shares.

If the Injective Network were to fork into two digital assets, the Trust may hold, in addition to its existing INJ balance, a right to claim an equivalent amount of the new “forked” asset following the hard fork. However, the Pricing Benchmark does not track forks involving the Injective Network. The Trust has adopted procedures to address situations involving a fork that results in the issuance of new alternative INJ that the Trust may receive. The holder of INJ has no discretion in a hard fork; it merely has the right to claim the new INJ on a pro rata basis while it continues to hold the same number of INJ.

Airdrops.

Injective may become subject to an occurrence similar to a fork, which is known as an “airdrop.” In an airdrop, the promoters of a new digital asset announce to holders of another digital asset that they will be entitled to claim a certain amount of the new digital asset for free, based on the fact that they hold such other digital asset. See “Prospectus Summary — The FTSE Injective Index.”

Accordingly, the Trust does not participate in airdrops.

Any name change and any associated rebranding initiative of INJ may not be favorably received by the digital asset community, which could negatively impact the value of INJ and the value of the Shares.

From time to time, digital assets may undergo name changes and associated rebranding initiatives. For example, Bitcoin Cash may sometimes be referred to as Bitcoin ABC in an effort to differentiate itself from any Bitcoin Cash hard forks, such as Bitcoin Satoshi’s Vision, and in the third quarter of 2018, the team behind ZEN rebranded and changed the name of ZenCash to “Horizen.” The Sponsor cannot predict the impact of any name change and any associated rebranding initiative on INJ. After a name change and an associated rebranding initiative, a digital asset may not be able to achieve or maintain brand name recognition or status that is comparable to the recognition and status previously enjoyed by such digital asset. The failure of any name change and any associated rebranding initiative by a digital asset may result in such digital asset not realizing some or all of the anticipated benefits contemplated by the name change and associated rebranding initiative, and could negatively impact the value of INJ and the value of the Shares.

The Injective Network is subject to cybersecurity risks, which could adversely affect an investment in the Trust or the ability of the Trust to operate.

Users of the Injective Network, and therefore investors in Injective-related investment products such as the Trust, are exposed to an elevated risk of fraud and loss, including, but not limited to, through cyber-attacks. INJ can be stolen, and INJ stored in a digital wallet, accessible via private key, can be compromised. While digital wallets do not store or contain the actual INJ, they store public and private keys, which are used as an address for receiving INJ or for spending the INJ, with both forms of transactions recorded on the public immutable ledger, the blockchain. By using the private key, a person is able to spend INJ, effectively sending it away from the account and recording that transaction on the blockchain. If a private key is compromised, INJ associated with that specific public key may be stolen. Unlike traditional banking transactions, once a transaction has been added to the blockchain, it cannot be reversed. Several exchanges specializing in sales of INJ, for example, have already had their operations impacted by cyber-attacks.

Thefts and cyber-attacks can have a negative impact on the reputation, market price, value, or liquidity of INJ. Through investment in the Trust, investors would be indirectly exposed to the risk and potential impact of a cyber-attack. A loss associated with a cyber-attack, including a total loss, is possible. While the Sponsor and the INJ Custodians have taken reasonable measures to prevent theft or hacking of the Trust’s INJ holdings, such an event cannot be fully excluded from the Trust’s overall market exposure, and the losses associated with such an event would be borne by investors.

Certain digital asset networks, including the Injective Network, are subject to control by entities that capture a significant amount of the network’s active validator nodes or a significant number of developers important for the operation and maintenance of such digital asset network.

At 50% of the staked INJ, a mischievous group of validators could theoretically split the chain into two equally sized forks and then simply use their entire 50% stake to vote contrarily to the honest validator set, thereby maintaining the two forks and preventing finality.

However, if the majority of the staked INJ dedicated to validating transactions on the Injective Network is controlled by a bad actor (often referred to as a “51% attack”), it may be able to alter the Injective Network on which the Injective Network and INJ transactions rely. At greater than 50% of the total stake, the attacker could dominate the fork choice algorithm. In this case, the attacker would be able to attest with the majority vote. This could occur if the bad actor were to construct fraudulent blocks or prevent certain transactions from completing in a timely manner, or at all. It could be possible for the malicious actor to control, exclude or modify the ordering of transactions, though it could not generate new INJ or transactions. Further, a bad actor could “double-spend” its own INJ (i.e., spend the same INJ in more than one transaction) and prevent the confirmation of other users’ transactions for so long as it maintained control. Reversing any changes made to the Injective Network may be impossible. Further, a malicious actor could create a flood of transactions in order to slow down confirmations of transactions on the Injective Network. If a bad actor gains control of a majority of the processing power on the Injective Network, or the feasibility of such an occurrence increases, there may be a negative effect on an investment in the Trust.

Other digital asset networks have been subject to malicious activity achieved through control of over 50% of the processing power on the network. Any similar attacks on the Injective Network could negatively impact the value of INJ and the value of the Shares.

A 51% attack is more likely to happen in the context of digital assets with smaller market capitalizations due to the reduced computing power threshold required to control a majority of a given network. Nevertheless, it is theoretically possible, albeit computationally expensive, to mount a similar 51% attack on the Injective Network or other digital assets with large market capitalization. If the feasibility of a bad actor gaining control of the processing power on the Injective Network increases, there may be a negative effect on an investment in the Trust.

Additionally, an attacker with 66% or more of the total staked INJ can finalize their preferred chain without having to coerce any honest validators. The attacker can simply vote for their preferred fork and then finalize it, simply because they can vote with a dishonest supermajority.

A malicious actor may also obtain control over the Injective Network through its influence over core developers or the infrastructure they use. For example, on July 8, 2026, a malicious actor successfully obtained access to the backend of the Injective Network’s Github account and uploaded a compromised data file that was downloaded by several hundred users of the network. Although the malicious upload was detected and deleted within minutes by the account’s authorized users, it is estimated that approximately 321 wallets were stolen by users who downloaded the malicious package. To the extent that users and validators accept amendments to the source code proposed by the controlled core developers or through their infrastructure and other core developers do not counter such amendments or breaches, and such amendments or breaches enable the malicious exploitation of the Injective Network, the risk that a malicious actor may be able to obtain control of the Injective Network in this manner exists, which may adversely affect the value of the Shares. If the malicious actor cannot control the validator nodes directly, they might attempt to compromise the validators that are already trusted by the network. This could involve hacking, bribery, deception or coercion.

Malicious actors may also target DeFi applications hosted on the Injective Network’s infrastructure. Such attacks may be more limited in scope and target vulnerabilities not otherwise applicable to the Injective Network’s mainnet source code or validation system. For instance, reports in early September 2026 suggest that hackers discovered and exploited a vulnerability in the Injective Network’s native insurance fund and successfully transferred an estimate $5 million in funds from the network. Although the vulnerability was promptly patched by developers of the Injective Network, the dissemination of the patch was widely criticized and lead to significant slowdown in block processing over several hours. As of September 4, 2026, information relating to the incident and its cause remains conflicting and both users and developers of the Injective Network continue to assess the nature of the event.

Compared to other digital asset networks such as the Bitcoin network and Ethereum network, the Injective Network relies on a relatively small number of validators. While this helps maintain a fast and efficient network, it could expose the Injective Network to additional vulnerabilities. For example, a malicious actor could attempt a “Sybil” attack whereby it would attempt to gain the trust of existing validators using a large number of fake identities. Such an attack would be difficult to execute because human intervention would be required for the malicious validators to become trusted, but the risk is made greater by the small number validators.

A malicious actor could also conduct an “eclipse attack.” In an eclipse attack, a malicious actor could isolate parts of the network so that the malicious actor’s nodes can influence the consensus in isolated sections of the network, eventually leading to a split or takeover.

To the extent that the Injective ecosystem, including the core validators and the administrators of the network’s validator nodes, does not act to ensure greater decentralization of validator processing power, the feasibility of a malicious actor obtaining control of the processing power on the Injective Network will increase, which may adversely affect the value of the Shares.

If any of these exploitations or attacks occur, it could result in a loss of public confidence in Injective and a decline in the value of INJ and, as a result, adversely impact an investment in the Shares.

A permanent “fork” or a “clone” of the Injective Network could adversely affect the value of the Shares. 

The Injective Network operates using open-source protocols, meaning that any user can download the software, modify it and then propose that the users and validators of INJ adopt the modification. When a modification is introduced and a substantial majority of users and validators’ consent to the modification, the change is implemented and the network remains uninterrupted. However, if less than a substantial majority of users and validators’ consent to the proposed modification, and the modification is not compatible with the software prior to its modification, the consequence would be what is known as a “hard fork” of the Injective Network, with one group running the pre-modified software and the other running the modified software. The effect of such a fork would be the existence of two versions of INJ running in parallel, yet lacking interchangeability. For example, in September 2022, the Ethereum Network transitioned to a proof-of-stake model, in an upgrade referred to as the “Merge.” Following the Merge, a hard fork of the Ethereum Network occurred, as certain Ethereum miners and network participants planned to maintain the proof-of-work consensus mechanism that was removed as part of the Merge. This version of the network was rebranded as “Ethereum Proof-of-Work.”

Forks may also occur as a digital asset network community’s response to a significant security breach. For example, in July 2016, Ethereum Classic “forked” into Ethereum Classic, the original blockchain, and a new digital asset network, Ethereum, as a result of the Ethereum Network community’s response to a significant security breach. In June 2016, an anonymous hacker exploited a smart contract running on the Ethereum Network to syphon approximately $60 million of Ether held by a decentralized autonomous organization, into a segregated account. In response to the exploit, most participants in the Ethereum community elected to adopt a “fork” that effectively reversed the exploit. However, a minority of users continued to develop the original blockchain, referred to as “Ethereum Classic” with the digital asset on that blockchain now referred to as ETC. ETC now trades on several digital asset trading platforms. A fork may also occur as a result of an unintentional or unanticipated software flaw in the various versions of otherwise compatible software that users run. Such a fork could lead to users and validators abandoning the digital asset with the flawed software. It is possible, however, that a substantial number of users and validators could adopt an incompatible version of the digital asset while resisting community-led efforts to merge the two chains. This could result in a permanent fork, as in the case of Ethereum and Ethereum Classic.

Furthermore, a hard fork can lead to new security concerns. For example, when the Ethereum and Ethereum Classic networks, two other digital asset networks, split in July 2016, replay attacks, in which transactions from one network were rebroadcast to nefarious effect on the other network, plagued Ethereum trading platforms through at least October 2016. An Ethereum trading platform announced in July 2016 that it had lost 40,000 Ethereum Classic, worth about $100,000 at that time, as a result of replay attacks. Similar replay attack concerns occurred in connection with the Bitcoin Cash and Bitcoin Satoshi’s Vision networks split in November 2018. Another possible result of a hard fork is an inherent decrease in the level of security due to significant amounts of validating power remaining on one network or migrating instead to the new forked network. After a hard fork, it may become easier for an individual validator or validating pool’s validating power to exceed 50% of the validating power of a digital asset network that retained or attracted less validating power, thereby making digital asset networks that rely on proof-of-stake more susceptible to attack.

Digital asset networks and related protocols may also be cloned. Unlike a fork of a digital asset network, which modifies an existing blockchain, and results in two competing digital asset networks, each with the same genesis block, a “clone” is a copy of a protocol’s codebase, but results in an entirely new blockchain and new genesis block. Tokens are created solely from the new “clone” network and, in contrast to forks, holders of tokens of the existing network that was cloned do not receive any tokens of the new network. A “clone” results in a competing network that has characteristics substantially similar to the network it was based on, subject to any changes as determined by the developer(s) that initiated the clone.

A hard fork may adversely affect the price of INJ at the time of announcement or adoption. For example, the announcement of a hard fork could lead to increased demand for the pre-fork digital asset, in anticipation that ownership of the pre-fork digital asset would entitle holders to a new digital asset following the fork. The increased demand for the pre-fork digital asset may cause the price of the digital asset to rise. After the hard fork, it is possible the aggregate price of the two versions of the digital asset running in parallel would be less than the price of the digital asset immediately prior to the fork. Furthermore, while the Trust would be entitled to both versions of the digital asset running in parallel, the Sponsor will, as permitted by the terms of the Trust Agreement, determine which version of the digital asset is generally accepted as the Injective Network and should therefore be considered the appropriate network for the Trust’s purposes, and there is no guarantee that the Sponsor will choose the digital asset that is ultimately the most valuable fork. Either of these events could therefore adversely impact the value of the Shares. As an illustrative example of a digital asset hard fork, following the decentralized autonomous organization hack in July 2016, holders of Ether voted on-chain to reverse the hack, effectively causing a hard fork. For the days following the vote, the price of Ether rose from $11.65 on July 15, 2016 to $14.66 on July 21, 2016, the day after the first Ethereum Classic block was mined.

A clone may also adversely affect the price of INJ at the time of announcement or adoption or subsequently. For example, on November 6, 2016, Rhett Creighton, a Zcash developer, cloned the Zcash network to launch Zclassic, a substantially identical version of the Zcash network that eliminated the founders’ reward. Following the date the first Zclassic block was mined, the price of ZEC fell from $504.57 on November 5, 2016 to $236.01 on November 7, 2016 in the midst of a broader sell off of ZEC beginning immediately after the Zcash network launch on October 28, 2016.

Cancer nodes.

Cancer nodes are computers that appear to be participating in the Injective Network but that are not in fact connected to the Injective Network, which a malicious actor sets up to place users onto a separate network or disconnect them from the Injective Network. By using cancer nodes, a malicious actor can disconnect the target user from the Injective economy entirely by refusing to relay any blocks or transactions.

Double-spending risks.

A malicious actor may attempt to double spend INJ (i.e., allow for the same units of INJ to be spent on multiple occasions) by altering the formation of the blockchain, where the malicious actor has enough network control to confirm and post such transactions to the blockchain. In a double spending situation, the related record of the transaction, posted on the Injective Network, would become falsified. This could have a detrimental effect on both the sender and the receiver.

There are several ways a malicious actor could attempt a double-spend, including, but not limited to, sending two conflicting transactions to the network, and creating one transaction but sending the Injective before releasing that associated block to the blockchain, which would invalidate it. On an exchange with multiple currency trading pairs, it would be possible for a person or individual controlling the majority of a blockchain network to double-spend the coins they control and then subsequently trade them for other currency pairs and transfer them off the exchange to their own private wallet(s).

All double-spend attacks require that the miner time and execute the steps of its attack with sufficient speed and accuracy. Double-spend attacks require extensive coordination and are very expensive. Typically, transactions that allow for a zero-confirmation acceptance tend to be prone to these types of attacks. Accordingly, traders and merchants may execute instantaneous/zero-confirmation transactions only if they are of sufficiently low-value. Users and merchants can take additional precautions by adjusting their network software programs to connect only to other well-connected participants in the Injective Network and to disable incoming connections. Tactics to avoid double-spend such as requiring multiple confirmations can slow down transaction speeds on the Injective Network and could impact the value of Injective.

Flaws in source code.

It is possible that flaws or mistakes in the released and public source code could lead to catastrophic damage to INJ, the Injective Network, and any underlying technology. It is possible that contributors to the Injective Network would be unable to stop this damage before it spreads further. It is further possible that a dedicated team or a group of contributors or other technical group may attack the code, directly leading to catastrophic damage. In any of these situations, the value of the Shares of the Trust can be adversely affected.

In the past, flaws in the source code for digital asset networks have been exposed and exploited, including flaws that disabled some functionality for users, exposed users’ personal information and/or resulted in the theft of users’ digital assets. Several errors and defects have been publicly found and corrected, including those that disabled some functionality for users and exposed users’ personal information. Discovery of flaws in or exploitations of the source code that allow malicious actors to take or create money in contravention of known network rules have occurred. The cryptography underlying INJ could prove to be flawed or ineffective, or negatively impacted by developments in mathematics and/or technology, such as advances in digital computing, algebraic geometry and quantum computing. In any of these circumstances, a malicious actor may be able to steal INJ held by others, which could adversely affect the demand for INJ and therefore adversely impact the price of INJ and the value of the Shares. Even if another digital asset other than INJ were affected by similar circumstances, any reduction in confidence in the robustness of the source code or cryptography underlying digital assets generally could negatively affect the demand for all digital assets, including INJ, and therefore adversely affect the value of the Shares.

Denial of Service Attacks.

Many digital asset networks have been subjected to a number of denial of service attacks, which has led to temporary delays in block creation and in the transfer of INJ. A denial-of-service attack is a cyber attack that aims to disrupt a network’s normal functioning by overwhelming it with requests. For example, in September 2021, the Solana Network experienced a significant disruption, later attributed to a type of denial of service attack, and was offline for 17 hours, only returning to full functionality 24 hours later. It is possible that any similar denial-of-service attack on the Injective Network could impact the ability to transfer INJ and could have a material adverse effect on the price of INJ and the value of the Shares.

Proof-of-stake blockchains are a relatively recent innovation and have not been subject to as widespread use or adoption over as long of a period of time as traditional proof-of-work blockchains.

Certain digital assets, such as bitcoin, use a “proof-of-work” consensus algorithm. The genesis block on the Bitcoin blockchain was mined in 2009, and Bitcoin’s blockchain has been in operation since then. Many newer blockchains enabling smart contract functionality use a newer consensus algorithm known as “proof-of-stake.” INJ operates a proof-of-stake consensus system based on a Byzantine Fault Tolerant Protocol, where INJ holders delegate their tokens to validators that produce blocks and distribute staking rewards less a commission.

While their proponents believe that they may have certain advantages, the “proof-of-stake” consensus mechanisms and governance systems underlying many newer blockchain protocols, and their associated digital assets — including the INJ held by the Trust — have not been tested at scale over as long of a period of time or subject to as widespread use or adoption as, for example, Bitcoin’s proof-of-work consensus mechanism has. This could lead to these blockchains, and their associated digital assets, having undetected vulnerabilities, structural design flaws, suboptimal incentive structures for network participants (e.g., validators), technical disruptions, or a wide variety of other problems, any of which could cause these blockchains not to function as intended, lead to outright failure to function entirely causing a total outage or disruption of network activity, or to suffer other operational problems or reputational damage, leading to a loss of users or adoption or a loss in value of the associated digital assets, including the Trust’s assets. Over the long term, there can be no assurance that the proof-of-stake blockchain on which the Trust’s assets rely will achieve widespread scale or adoption or perform successfully; any failure to do so could negatively impact the value of the Trust’s assets.

Validators may suffer losses due to staking, which could make the Injective Network less attractive.

Validation on the Injective Network requires INJ to be transferred into smart contracts on the underlying blockchain networks not under the Trust’s or anyone else’s control. If the Injective Network source code or protocol fail to behave as expected, suffer cybersecurity attacks or hacks, experience security issues, or encounter other problems, such assets may be irretrievably lost. In addition, the Injective Networks dictate requirements for participation in validation activity, and may impose penalties if the relevant activities are not performed correctly, such as if the staker acts maliciously on the network, “double signs” any transactions, or experience extended downtimes. Such penalties include the reduction of staking rewards for malicious actors and poorly performing validators and the “blacklisting” of such actors which may result in INJ tokenholders no longer delegating their stakes to such actors, and they may be “jailed,” meaning that they are excluded from the active validator set for a set period of time, in each case resulting in such actors being unable to engage in validating and thus unable to earn staking rewards. Should any of the Trust’s Staking Services Providers engage in malicious activity or perform poorly, then such Staking Services Providers may be blacklisted or jailed which could negatively impact the Trust’s abilities to engage in Staking Activities and/or otherwise result in the Trust earning reduced staking rewards or having the INJ the Trust stakes with such Staking Services Provider being slashed and lost. Furthermore, the Injective Network requires the payment of base fees and the practice of paying tips is common, and such fees can become significant as the amount and complexity of the transaction grows, depending on the degree of network congestion and the price of INJ. Any cybersecurity attacks, security issues, hacks, penalties, slashing events or other problems could damage validators’ willingness to participate in validation, discourage existing and future validators from serving as such, and adversely impact the Injective Network’s adoption or the price of INJ. Any disruption of validation on the Injective Network could interfere with network operations and cause the Injective Network to be less attractive to users and application developers than competing blockchain networks, which could cause the price of INJ to decrease.

The Injective Network imposes a mandatory unbonding period for staked INJ, during which tokens cannot be transferred or withdrawn. As of September 1, 2026, the Injective Network’s unbonding period was 21 days. This lock-up period may discourage some participants from staking if they require liquidity or short-term capital access. Validators who underperform or lose community support may be removed from the active validator set and become ineligible to receive rewards, reducing participation incentives and potential revenue.

The Injective Network faces scaling challenges and efforts to increase the volume and speed of transactions may not be successful.

Many digital asset networks face significant scaling challenges due to the fact that public blockchains generally face a tradeoff between security and scalability. One means through which public blockchains such as the Injective Network achieve security is decentralization, meaning that no intermediary is responsible for securing and maintaining these systems. For example, a greater degree of decentralization generally means a given digital asset network is less susceptible to manipulation or capture.

In an effort to increase the volume of transactions that can be processed on a given digital asset network, many digital assets are being upgraded with various features to increase the speed and throughput of digital asset transactions and to enhance inter-network bridge compatibility. As of September 1, 2026, the Injective Network supported cross-chain compatibility with several bridges, including for Solana, Cronos and ERC-20 tokens. Further, the network generally handled approximately 7.03 transactions per second (“TPS”), with a maximum theoretical TPS of 600,000 as of such date.

As the use of digital asset networks increases without a corresponding increase in transaction processing speed of the networks, average fees and settlement times can increase significantly. Increased fees and decreased settlement speeds could preclude use cases for INJ and could reduce demand for and the price of INJ, which could adversely impact the value of the Shares.

There is no guarantee that any of the mechanisms in place or being explored for increasing the scale of settlement of Injective Network transactions will be effective, or how long these mechanisms will take to become effective, or how long they will continue to be effective, which could adversely impact an investment in the Shares. Additionally, as the Injective Network’s cross-blockchain bridge capabilities expand in scope and use, the operations of the Network will grow increasingly subject to risks in delayed transaction processing speeds should issues arise within the bridged blockchain networks or otherwise disrupt the cross-chain compatibility mechanisms.

Smart contracts are new and their ongoing development and operation may result in problems or be subject to errors or hacks, which could reduce the demand for INJ or cause a wider loss of confidence in the Injective Network, either of which could have an adverse impact on the value of INJ.

Since smart contracts typically cannot be stopped or reversed, vulnerabilities in their programming (i.e., coding errors) can have damaging effects. For instance, coding errors may potentially create vulnerabilities that allow an attacker to drain the funds associated with the smart contract, cause issues or render the protocol unusable. Hackers have exploited vulnerabilities in various smart contract implementations, that have resulted in the loss of digital assets from accounts. For example, an attack in April of 2025 reportedly syphoned approximately 1,200 SOL from the Loopscale decentralized finance protocol housed on the Solana blockchain. In another example, in February of 2022, a vulnerability in a smart contract for Wormhole, a bridge between the Ethereum and Solana blockchain led to a $320 million theft of Ether. Other smart contracts, including bridges between blockchain networks and DeFi protocols have also been manipulated, exploited or used in ways that were not intended or envisioned by their creators such that attackers syphoned over $2.2 billion worth of digital assets from smart contracts in 2024. Problems with the development, deployment, and operation of smart contracts may have an adverse effect on the value of INJ.

In some cases, smart contracts can be controlled by one or more “admin keys” or users with special privileges, or “super users”. These users may have the ability to unilaterally make changes to the smart contract, enable or disable features on the smart contract, change how the smart contract receives external inputs and data, and make other changes to the smart contract.

Many applications associated with decentralized finance (“DeFi”) are currently deployed on the Injective Network, and smart contracts relating to DeFi applications currently represent a significant source of demand for INJ. For smart contracts that hold a pool of digital asset reserves, smart contract super users or admin key holders may be able to extract funds from the pool, liquidate assets held in the pool, or take other actions that decrease the value of the digital assets held by the smart contract in reserves. Even for digital assets that have adopted a decentralized governance mechanism, such as smart contracts that are governed by the holders of a governance token, such governance tokens can be concentrated in the hands of a small group of core community members, who would be able to make similar changes unilaterally to the smart contract. If any such super user or group of core members unilaterally make adverse changes to a smart contract, the design, functionality, features and value of the smart contract, its related digital assets may be harmed. In addition, assets held by the smart contract in reserves may be stolen, misused, burnt, locked up or otherwise become unusable and irrecoverable. Super users can also become targets of hackers and malicious attackers. Furthermore, the underlying smart contracts may be insecure, contain bugs or other vulnerabilities, or otherwise may not work as intended. Any of the foregoing could cause users of the DeFi application to be negatively affected, or could cause the DeFi application to be the subject of negative publicity. Because DeFi applications may be built on the Injective Network, public confidence in the Injective Network itself could be negatively affected, and the value of INJ could decrease.

New competing digital assets may pose a challenge to INJ’s current market position, resulting in a reduction in demand for INJ, which could have a negative impact on the price of INJ and may have a negative impact on the performance of the Trust.

INJ faces significant competition from other digital assets as well as from other technologies or payment forms, such as Swift, ACH, remittance networks, credit cards and cash. There is no guarantee that INJ will become a dominant form of payment, store of value or method of exchange. INJ is also supported by fewer exchanges than more established digital assets, which could impact its liquidity.

Although the Injective Network presents advantages such as lower fees and faster transactions compared to other digital assets, it is possible that real or perceived shortcomings in the Injective Network, or technological, regulatory or other developments, including the failure to fully implement planned changes could result in a decline in popularity and acceptance of INJ and the Injective Network, and other digital assets and trading systems could become more widely accepted and used than the Injective Network. Promoters of other digital assets claim that those digital assets have solved certain of the purported drawbacks of the Injective Network, for example, improving stability or preventing inflation. If these digital assets are successful, such success could reduce demand for INJ and adversely affect the value of INJ and an investment in the Trust. It is currently unclear which digital assets, if any, will become and remain dominant, as the sector continues to innovate and evolve. Changes in the viability of any digital asset ecosystem may adversely impact pricing and liquidity of INJ and, therefore, of the Trust.

Competition from central bank digital currencies (“CBDCs”) could adversely affect the value of INJ and other digital assets.

Central banks have introduced digital forms of legal tender. China’s CBDC project, known as Digital Currency Electronic Payment, has reportedly been tested in a live pilot program conducted in multiple cities in China. A recent study published by the Bank for International Settlements estimated that at least 36 central banks have published retail or wholesale CBDC work ranging from research to pilot projects. Whether or not they incorporate blockchain or similar technology, CBDCs, as legal tender in the issuing jurisdiction, could have an advantage in competing with, or replacing, INJ and other digital assets as a medium of exchange or store of value. Central banks and other governmental entities have also announced cooperative initiatives and consortia with private sector entities, with the goal of leveraging blockchain and other technology to reduce friction in cross-border and interbank payments and settlement, and commercial banks and other financial institutions have also recently announced a number of initiatives of their own to incorporate new technologies, including blockchain and similar technologies, into their payments and settlement activities, which could compete with, or reduce the demand for INJ. As a result of any of the foregoing factors, the value of INJ could decrease, which could adversely affect an investment in the Trust.

Prices of INJ may be affected due to stablecoins, the activities of stablecoin issuers and their regulatory treatment.

While the Trust does not invest in stablecoins, it may nonetheless be exposed to these and other risks that stablecoins pose for the INJ market through its investment in INJ. Stablecoins are digital assets designed to have a stable value over time as compared to typically volatile digital assets and are typically marketed as being pegged to a fiat currency, such as the U.S. dollar. Although the prices of stablecoins are intended to be stable, in many cases their prices fluctuate, sometimes significantly. This volatility has in the past apparently impacted the price of INJ. Stablecoins are a relatively new phenomenon and it is impossible to know all of the risks that they could pose to participants in the INJ market. In addition, some have argued that some stablecoins, particularly Tether, are improperly issued without sufficient backing in a way that could cause artificial rather than genuine demand for INJ, raising its price, and also argue that those associated with certain stablecoins are involved in laundering money.

Stablecoins are reliant on the U.S. banking system and U.S. treasuries, and the failure of either to function normally could impede the function of stablecoins, and therefore could adversely affect the value of the Shares.

Given the role that stablecoins play in global digital asset markets, their fundamental liquidity can have a dramatic impact on the broader digital asset market, including the market for INJ.

Volatility in stablecoins, operational issues with stablecoins (for example, technical issues that prevent settlement), concerns about the sufficiency of any reserves that support stablecoins, or regulatory concerns about stablecoin issuers or intermediaries, such as exchanges, that support stablecoins, could impact individuals’ willingness to trade on trading venues that rely on stablecoins and could impact the price of INJ, and in turn, an investment in the Shares.

Operational cost may exceed the award for validating transaction, and increased transaction fees may adversely affect the usage of the Injective Network.

If transaction confirmation fees become too high, the marketplace may be reluctant to use INJ. This may result in decreased usage and limit expansion of the Injective Network in the retail, commercial, blockchain-based services sectors as well as in the payments space, adversely impacting investment in the Trust. Conversely, if the reward for validators or the value of the transaction fees is insufficient to motivate validators, they may cease to validate transactions.

Ultimately, if the awards of INJ or the costs of validating transactions grow disproportionately to one another, validators may operate at a loss, transition to other networks, or cease operations altogether. Each of these outcomes could, in turn, slow transaction validation and usage, which could have a negative impact on the Injective Network and could adversely affect the value of the INJ held by the Trust.

An acute cessation of validator operations would reduce the collective processing power on the Injective Network, which would adversely affect the transaction verification process by temporarily decreasing the speed at which blocks are added to the blockchain and make the blockchain more vulnerable to a malicious actor obtaining control in excess of 50% of the processing power on the blockchain. Reductions in processing power could result in material, though temporary, delays in transaction confirmation time. Any reduction in confidence in the transaction verification process may adversely impact the value of the Shares of the Trust or the ability of the Sponsor to operate.

Electricity usage.

Concerns have been raised about the electricity required to secure and maintain digital asset networks. Although measuring the electricity consumed by the process of securing and maintaining digital asset networks is difficult because these operations are performed by various machines with varying levels of efficiency, the process consumes a significant amount of energy. Driven by concerns around energy consumption and the impact on public utility companies, various states and cities have implemented, or are considering implementing, moratoriums on mining activity in their jurisdictions.

INJ operates a proof-of-stake consensus system based on a Byzantine Fault Tolerant Protocol, where INJ holders delegate their tokens to validators that produce blocks and distribute staking rewards less a commission. Validators are elected by the INJ token holders through a delegation process, receiving voting power pro-rata according to the stake delegated to them, subject to limits on voting power concentration implemented via quadratic voting. Validators reach consensus on the state of the blockchain and are responsible for maintaining and running the routing and transfer protocols.

Other digital asset networks may use a system called proof-of-work to validate transaction information. These networks are called proof-of-work because solving the encrypted hash takes time and energy, which acts as proof that work was done. Proof of work requires users to mine or complete complex computational puzzles before submitting new transactions to the network.

Proof-of-stake digital assets allow people to pledge or lock up some of their holdings as a way of vouching for the accuracy of newly added information, and proof-of-history creates chains of timestamps to verify transactions. Meanwhile, proof-of-work digital assets require people to solve complex cryptographic puzzles — which can incur significant energy costs — before they are allowed to propose a new block. This expenditure of time, computing power and energy is intended to make the cost of fraud higher than the potential rewards of a dishonest action.

The operations of digital asset networks can consume significant amounts of electricity, which may have a negative environmental impact and give rise to public opinion against allowing, or government regulations restricting, the use of electricity for mining operations, in the case of proof-of-work networks. Additionally, miners on proof-of-work networks may be forced to cease operations during an electricity shortage or power outage, or if electricity prices increase where the mining activities are performed.

The operations of the Injective Network and other digital asset networks may also consume significant amounts of energy, even though the Injective Network is generally considered to consume significantly less energy than other digital asset networks, such as the Bitcoin blockchain, due to its use of proof-of-stake, rather than proof-of-work, transaction validation mechanisms. Further, in addition to the direct energy costs of performing calculations on any given digital asset network, there are indirect costs that impact a network’s total energy consumption, including the costs of cooling the machines that perform these calculations.

If the digital asset award or transaction fees for recording transactions on the Injective Network are not sufficiently high to incentivize validators, or if certain jurisdictions continue to limit or otherwise regulate validating activities, validators may cease expanding validating power or demand high transaction fees, which could negatively impact the value of INJ and the value of the Shares.

If the digital asset awards for validating blocks or the transaction fees for recording transactions on the Injective Network are not sufficiently high to incentivize validators, or if certain jurisdictions continue to limit or otherwise regulate validating activities, validators may cease expending validating power to validate blocks and confirmations of transactions on the Injective Network could be slowed. For example, the realization of one or more of the following risks could materially adversely affect the value of the Shares:

If regulators or public utilities take action that restricts or otherwise impacts validating activities of digital assets generally, such actions could result in decreased security of a digital asset network, including the Injective Network, and consequently adversely impact the value of the Shares. This could adversely affect the price of INJ, or the operation of the Injective Network, and accordingly decrease the value of the Shares, by creating negative sentiment around digital assets generally.

Validators may cease to record transactions as a result of low transaction fees, which may adversely affect the usage of the Injective Network.

To the extent that any validators cease to record transactions that do not include the payment of a transaction fee in solved blocks or do not record a transaction because the transaction fee is too low, such transactions will not be recorded on the Injective Network until a block is solved by a validator who does not require the payment of transaction fees or is willing to accept a lower fee, if there is one. Any widespread delays in the recording of transactions could result in a loss of confidence in the Injective Network, resulting in a decline in INJ prices.

Large-scale sales or distributions.

Some entities hold large amounts of INJ relative to other market participants, and to the extent such entities engage in large-scale hedging, sales or distributions on non-market terms, or sales in the ordinary course, it could result in a reduction in the price of INJ and adversely affect the value of the Shares. Additionally, political or economic crises may motivate large-scale acquisitions or sales of digital assets, including INJ, either globally or locally. Such large-scale sales or distributions could result in selling pressure that may reduce the price of INJ and adversely affect an investment in the Shares.

The largest INJ wallets are believed to hold, in aggregate, a significant percentage of the INJ in circulation. According to public reporting, as of September 1, 2026, the largest 100 INJ wallets were believed to hold approximately 84% of the INJ then in circulation. Moreover, it is possible that other persons or entities control multiple wallets that collectively hold a significant number of INJ, even if they individually only hold a small amount, and it is possible that some of these wallets are controlled by the same person or entity. As a result of this concentration of ownership, large sales or distributions by such holders could have an adverse effect on the market price of INJ. See “Risk Factors - Digital assets may have concentrated ownership and large sales or distributions by holders of such digital assets, or any ability to participate in or otherwise influence a digital asset’s underlying network, could have an adverse effect on the market price of such digital asset.”

Congestion or delay in the Injective Network may delay purchases or sales of INJ by the Trust.

The size of each block on the Injective Network is currently limited and is significantly below the level that centralized systems can provide. Increased transaction volume could result in delays in the recording of transactions due to congestion in the Injective Network. Moreover, unforeseen system failures, disruptions in operations, or poor connectivity may also result in delays in the recording of transactions on the Injective Network. Any delay in the Injective Network could affect an Authorized Participant’s ability to buy or sell INJ at an advantageous price resulting in decreased confidence in the Injective Network. Over the longer term, delays in confirming transactions could reduce the attractiveness to merchants and other commercial parties as a means of payment. As a result, the Injective Network and the value of the Trust’s Shares would be adversely affected.

Risks Associated with Investing in the Trust

Investment Related Risks.

Investing in INJ and, consequently, the Trust, is speculative. The price of INJ is volatile, and market movements of INJ are difficult to predict. Supply and demand changes rapidly and is affected by a variety of factors, including regulation and general economic trends, such as interest rates, availability of credit, credit defaults, inflation rates and economic uncertainty. All investments made by the Trust will risk the loss of capital. Therefore, an investment in the Trust involves a high degree of risk, including the risk that the entire amount invested may be lost. No guarantee or representation is made that the Trust’s investment program will be successful, that the Trust will achieve its investment objective or that there will be any return of capital invested to investors in the Trust, and investment results may vary.

The NAV or the Principal Market NAV may not always correspond to the market price of INJ.

The NAV or the Principal Market NAV of the Trust will change as fluctuations occur in the market price of the Trust’s INJ holdings. Shareholders should be aware that the public trading price per share may be different from the NAV for a number of reasons, including price volatility and the fact that supply and demand forces at work in the secondary trading market for Shares are related, but not identical, to the supply and demand forces influencing the market price of INJ as reflected in the Pricing Benchmark.

An Authorized Participant may be able to create or redeem a Basket at a discount or a premium to the public trading price per Share and the Trust will therefore maintain its intended fractional exposure to a specific amount of INJ per share.

Deviations between the Trust’s NAV and NAV per Share versus the Trust’s Principal Market NAV and Principal Market NAV per Share may occur.

The Administrator uses the Pricing Benchmark to determine the Trust’s NAV and NAV per Share. However, for financial statement purposes, the Trust’s INJ is carried at fair value as required by GAAP, which requires a determination based on the price of INJ on principal market as identified by the Trust as set for in Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 820-10, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures (“ASC 820-10”). See “NAV Determinations” below. The Sponsor expects the Trust’s applicable NAV and NAV per Share and corresponding Principal Market NAV and Principal Market NAV to accurately reflect the price of INJ. However, deviations can occur between the prices from the principal market chosen by the GAAP fair value methodology and Pricing Benchmark, which takes into consideration prices from the exchanges used to calculate the Pricing Benchmark.

If the process of creation and redemption of Baskets encounters any unanticipated difficulties, the possibility for arbitrage transactions by Authorized Participants intended to keep the price of the Shares closely linked to the price of INJ may not exist and, as a result, the price of the Shares may fall or otherwise diverge from NAV.

If the processes of creation and redemption of Shares (which depend on timely transfers of INJ to and by the INJ Custodians) encounter any unanticipated difficulties due to, for example, the price volatility of INJ, the insolvency, business failure or interruption, default, failure to perform, security breach, or other problems affecting the INJ Custodians, any operational issues that may arise from creating and redeeming Shares via cash transactions, the closing of INJ trading platforms due to fraud, failures, security breaches or otherwise, or network outages or congestion, spikes in transaction fees demanded by validators, or other problems or disruptions affecting the Injective Network, then potential market participants, such as the Authorized Participants and their customers, who would otherwise be willing to purchase or redeem Baskets to take advantage of any arbitrage opportunity arising from discrepancies between the price of the Shares and the price of the underlying INJ may not take the risk that, as a result of those difficulties, they may not be able to realize the profit they expect. In certain such cases, the Sponsor may suspend the process of creation and redemption of Baskets. During such times, trading spreads, and the resulting premium or discount, on Shares may widen. Alternatively, in the case of a network outage or other problems affecting the Injective Network, the processing of transactions on the Injective Network may be disrupted, which in turn could affect the creation or redemption of Baskets. If this is the case, the liquidity of the Shares may decline and the price of the Shares may fluctuate independently of the price of INJ and may fall or otherwise diverge from NAV. Furthermore, in the event that the market for INJ should become relatively illiquid and thereby materially restrict opportunities for arbitraging by delivering INJ in return for Baskets, the price of Shares may diverge from the value of INJ.

Owning Shares is different from directly owning INJ.

Investors should be aware that the market value of the Shares of the Trust may not have a direct relationship with the prevailing price of INJ, and changes in the prevailing price of INJ similarly will not necessarily result in a comparable change in the market value of the Shares of the Trust. The performance of the Trust will not reflect the specific return an investor would realize if the investor actually held or purchased INJ directly. The differences in performance may be due to factors such as fees, transaction costs, operating hours of the Exchange and Pricing Benchmark tracking risk. Investors will also forgo certain rights conferred by owning INJ directly, such as the right to claim airdrops. See “Risk Factors — The inability to recognize the economic benefit of a “fork” or an “airdrop” could adversely impact an investment in the Trust”.

Pricing Benchmark tracking risk.

Although the Trust will attempt to structure its portfolio so that investments track the Pricing Benchmark, the Trust may not achieve the desired degree of correlation between its performance and that of the Pricing Benchmark and thus may not achieve its investment objective. The difference in performance may be due to factors such as fees, transaction costs, redemptions of, and subscriptions for, Shares, pricing differences or the cost to the Trust of complying with various new or existing regulatory requirements.

Liquidity risk.

The ability of the Trust or an INJ Counterparty to buy or sell INJ may be adversely affected by limited trading volume, lack of a market maker in the digital asset markets, or legal restrictions. It is also possible that an INJ spot market or regulatory or governmental authority may suspend or restrict trading in INJ altogether. Therefore, it may not always be possible to execute a buy or sell order at the desired price or to liquidate an open position due to market conditions on spot markets, regulatory issues affecting INJ or other issues affecting counterparties. INJ is a new asset with a very limited trading history. Therefore, the markets for INJ may be less liquid and more volatile than other markets for more established products.

Shares of the Trust are intended to be listed and traded on the Exchange. There is no certainty that there will be liquidity available on the Exchange or that the market price will be in line with the NAV or the Principal Market NAV at any given time. There is also no guarantee that once the Shares of the Trust are listed or traded on the Exchange that they will remain so listed or traded.

If demand for Shares of the Trust exceeds the availability of INJ from exchanges and the Trust is not able to secure additional supply, Shares of the Trust may trade at a premium to their underlying value. Investors who pay a premium risk losing such premium if demand for the Shares of the Trust abates or the Sponsor is able to source more INJ. In such circumstances, Shares of the Trust could also trade at a discount.

Prior to their issuance, there was no public market for Shares of the Trust.

The INJ market, while growing, is still relatively small and less liquid in comparison to other digital asset markets. For example, as of September 1, 2026, INJ had a market capitalization of approximately $488 million. As of September 1, 2026, INJ had a liquidity ratio of 13.46%. Comparatively, as of September 1, 2026, bitcoin and ether had total market capitalizations of approximately $1.58 trillion and $298 billion, and as of September 1, 2026, had liquidity ratios of 1.88% and 4.14%, respectively. The liquidity ratio is calculated as a token’s total 24-hour trading volume divided by its market capitalization.

Counterparty risk.

The Sponsor, Trust, INJ Counterparty, and Authorized Participants are subject to counterparty risk. An INJ Counterparty may fail to deliver to the Trust’s accounts with the INJ Custodians the amount of INJ associated with a creation order, an INJ Counterparty may fail to deliver to the Trust’s account at the Cash Custodian the amount of cash associated with a redemption order, or the Cash Custodian may fail to deliver to an Authorized Participant at settlement the cash proceeds from the sale of INJ associated with a redemption order.

The value of the Shares may be influenced by a variety of factors unrelated to the value of INJ.

The value of the Shares may be influenced by a variety of factors unrelated to the price of INJ and the INJ exchanges included in the Pricing Benchmark that may have an adverse effect on the price of the Shares. These factors include, but are not limited to, the following factors:

Any of these factors could affect the value of the Shares, either directly or indirectly through their effect on the Trust’s assets.

The Administrator is solely responsible for determining the value of the Trust’s INJ, the Trust’s NAV and the Trust’s Principal Market NAV. The value of the Shares may experience an adverse effect in the event of any errors, discontinuance or changes in such valuation calculations.

The Administrator will determine the Trust’s NAV and the Trust’s Principal Market NAV. The Administrator’s determination is made utilizing data from the INJ Custodians’ operations and the Pricing Benchmark (in the case of the NAV) and the principal market for INJ as determined by the Trust (in the case of the Principal Market NAV). To the extent that the Trust’s NAV or the Principal Market NAV are incorrectly calculated, the Administrator may not be liable for any error and such misreporting of valuation data could adversely affect an investment in the Shares.

The Administrator determines the NAV of the Trust as of 4:00 p.m. ET, on each Business Day, as soon as practicable after that time and determines the Principal Market NAV as of 4:00 p.m. ET, on the valuation date. If the Pricing Benchmark is not available, or if the Sponsor determines in good faith that the Pricing Benchmark does not reflect an accurate INJ price, then the Administrator will determine NAV by reference to the Trust’s principal market. There are no predefined criteria to make a good faith assessment as to which of the rules the Sponsor will apply, and the Sponsor may make this determination in its sole discretion.

The Trust is subject to the risk that the Benchmark Provider may calculate the Pricing Benchmark in a manner that ultimately inaccurately reflects the price of INJ. To the extent that the NAV, Principal Market NAV, the Pricing Benchmark, the Administrator’s or the Sponsor’s other valuation methodology are incorrectly calculated, neither the Sponsor, the Administrator, Benchmark Provider nor the Trustee will be liable for any error and such misreporting of valuation data could adversely affect the value of the Shares and investors could suffer a substantial loss on their investment in the Trust. Moreover, the terms of the Trust Agreement do not prohibit the Sponsor from changing the Pricing Benchmark or other valuation method used to calculate the NAV and Principal Market NAV of the Trust. Any such change in the Pricing Benchmark or other valuation method could affect the value of the Shares and investors could suffer a substantial loss on their investment in the Trust.

INJ Counterparties’ buying and selling activity associated with the creation and redemption of Baskets may adversely affect an investment in the Shares.

The purchase of INJ in connection with Basket creation orders may cause the price of INJ to increase, which will result in higher prices for the Shares. Increases in the INJ prices may also occur as a result of INJ purchases by other market participants who attempt to benefit from an increase in the market price of INJ when Baskets are created. The market price of INJ may therefore decline immediately after Baskets are created.

Selling activity associated with sales of INJ in connection with redemption orders may decrease the INJ prices, which will result in lower prices for the Shares. Decreases in INJ prices may also occur as a result of selling activity by other market participants.

In addition to the effect that purchases and sales of INJ as part of the creation and redemption process may have on the price of INJ, sales and purchases of INJ by similar investment vehicles (if developed) could impact the price of INJ. If the price of INJ declines, the trading price of the Shares will generally also decline.

The inability of INJ Counterparties to hedge their INJ exposure may adversely affect the liquidity of Shares and the value of an investment in the Shares.

Authorized Participants and market makers will generally want to hedge their exposure in connection with Basket creation and redemption orders. To the extent Authorized Participants and market makers are unable to hedge their exposure due to market conditions (e.g., insufficient INJ liquidity in the market, inability to locate an appropriate hedge counterparty, etc.), such conditions may make it difficult for Authorized Participants to create or redeem Baskets (or cause them to not create or redeem Baskets). In addition, the hedging mechanisms employed by INJ Counterparties to hedge their exposure to INJ may not function as intended, which may make it more difficult for them to enter into such transactions. Such events could negatively impact the market price of Shares and the spread at which Shares trade on the open market. To the extent INJ Counterparties wish to use futures to hedge their exposure, note that while growing in recent years, the market for exchange-traded INJ futures has a limited trading history and operational experience and may be less liquid, more volatile and more vulnerable to economic, market and industry changes than more established futures markets. The liquidity of the market will depend on, among other things, the adoption of INJ and the commercial and speculative interest in the market.

Arbitrage transactions intended to keep the price of Shares closely linked to the price of INJ may be problematic if the process for the creation and redemption of Baskets encounters difficulties, which may adversely affect an investment in the Shares.

If the processes of creation and redemption of the Shares encounter any unanticipated difficulties, potential market participants who would otherwise be willing to purchase or redeem Baskets to take advantage of any arbitrage opportunity arising from discrepancies between the price of the Shares and the price of the underlying INJ may not take the risk that, as a result of those difficulties, they may not be able to realize the profit they expect. If this is the case, the liquidity of Shares may decline and the price of the Shares may fluctuate independently of the price of INJ and may fall.

Security threats and cyber-attacks could result in the halting of Trust operations and a loss of Trust assets or damage to the reputation of the Trust, each of which could result in a reduction in the price of the Shares.

Security breaches, cyber-attacks, computer malware and computer hacking attacks have been a prevalent concern in relation to digital assets. Thefts of digital assets, including INJ, from other holders of digital assets have occurred in the past.

Because of the decentralized process for transferring INJ, thefts can be difficult to trace, which may make INJ a particularly attractive target for theft. Cybersecurity failures or breaches of one or more of the Trust’s service providers (including but not limited to, the Benchmark Provider, the Transfer Agent, the Administrator, or the INJ Custodians) have the ability to cause disruptions and impact business operations, potentially resulting in financial losses, violations of applicable privacy and other laws, regulatory fines, penalties, reputational damage, reimbursement or other compensation costs, and/or additional compliance costs.

The Trust and its service providers’ use of internet, technology and information systems (including mobile devices and cloud-based service offerings) may expose the Trust to potential risks linked to cybersecurity breaches of those technological or information systems. Security breaches, computer malware, ransomware and computer hacking attacks have been a prevalent concern in relation to digital assets. The Sponsor believes that the Trust’s INJ held in the Trust’s accounts with the INJ Custodians will be appealing targets to hackers or malware distributors seeking to destroy, damage or steal the Trust’s INJ or private keys and will only become more appealing as the Trust’s assets grow. To the extent that the Trust, the Sponsor or the INJ Custodians are unable to identify and mitigate or stop new security threats or otherwise adapt to technological changes in the digital asset industry, the Trust’s INJ may be subject to theft, loss, destruction or other attack.

The Sponsor has evaluated the security procedures in place for safeguarding the Trust’s INJ. Nevertheless, the security procedures cannot guarantee the prevention of any loss due to a security breach, software defect or act of God that may be borne by the Trust. Access to the Trust’s INJ could be restricted by natural events (such as an earthquake or flood) or human actions (such as a terrorist attack).

The security procedures and operational infrastructure may be breached due to the actions of outside parties, error or malfeasance of an employee of the Sponsor, the INJ Custodians, or otherwise, and, as a result, an unauthorized party may obtain access to the Trust’s accounts with the INJ Custodians, the private keys (and therefore INJ) or other data of the Trust. Additionally, outside parties may attempt to fraudulently induce employees of the Sponsor, the INJ Custodians, or the Trust’s other service providers to disclose sensitive information in order to gain access to the Trust’s infrastructure. As the techniques used to obtain unauthorized access, disable or degrade service, or sabotage systems change frequently, or may be designed to remain dormant until a predetermined event and often are not recognized until launched against a target, the Sponsor and the INJ Custodians may be unable to anticipate these techniques or implement adequate preventative measures.

An actual or perceived breach of one of the Trust’s accounts with the INJ Custodians could harm the Trust’s operations, result in partial or total loss of the Trust’s assets, damage the Trust’s reputation and negatively affect the market perception of the effectiveness of the Trust, all of which could in turn reduce demand for the Shares, resulting in a reduction in the price of the Shares. The Trust may also cease operations, the occurrence of which could similarly result in a reduction in the price of the Shares.

While the Sponsor has established business continuity plans and systems that it believes are reasonably designed to prevent cyber-attacks, there are inherent limitations in such plans and systems including the possibility that certain risks have not been, or cannot be, identified. Service providers may have limited indemnification obligations to the Trust, which could be negatively impacted as a result.

If the Trust’s holdings of INJ are lost, stolen or destroyed under circumstances rendering a party liable to the Trust, the responsible party may not have the financial resources, including insurance coverage, sufficient to satisfy the Trust’s claim. For example, as to a particular event of loss, the only source of recovery for the Trust may be limited to the relevant custodian or, to the extent identifiable, other responsible third parties (for example, a thief or terrorist), any of which may not have the financial resources (including liability insurance coverage) to satisfy a valid claim of the Trust. Similarly, as noted below, the Trust’s INJ Custodians have extraordinarily limited liability to the Trust, which may adversely affect the Trust’s ability to seek recovery from them, even when they are at fault.

It may not be possible, either because of a lack of available policies or because of prohibitive cost, for the Trust to obtain insurance that would cover losses of the Trust’s INJ. If an uninsured loss occurs or a loss exceeds policy limits, the Trust could lose all of its assets.

The Trust’s INJ Custodians could become insolvent.

The Trust’s assets will be held in one or more accounts maintained for the Trust by the INJ Custodian and may in the future be held at other custodian banks which may be located in other jurisdictions. The INJ Custodians are not depository institutions as they are not insured by the FDIC. The insolvency of any of the INJ Custodians or of any broker, custodian bank or clearing corporation used by the INJ Custodians, may result in the loss of all or a substantial portion of the Trust’s assets or in a significant delay in the Trust having access to those assets. Additionally, custody of digital assets presents inherent and unique risks relating to access loss, theft and means of recourse in such scenarios.

The Trust may change the custodial arrangements described in this Prospectus at any time without prior notice to Shareholders.

The Trust is subject to risks due to its concentration of investments in a single asset.

Unlike other funds that may invest in diversified assets, the Trust’s investment strategy is concentrated in a single asset within a single asset class. This concentration maximizes the degree of the Trust’s exposure to a variety of market risks associated with INJ and digital assets. By concentrating its investment strategy solely in INJ, any losses suffered as a result of a decrease in the value of INJ can be expected to reduce the value of an interest in the Trust and will not be offset by other gains if the Trust were to invest in underlying assets that were diversified.

The lack of active trading markets for the Shares may result in losses on Shareholders’ investments at the time of disposition of Shares.

Although Shares of the Trust are expected to be publicly listed and traded on an exchange, there can be no guarantee that an active trading market for the Shares will develop or be maintained. If Shareholders need to sell their Shares at a time when no active market for them exists, the price Shareholders receive for their Shares, assuming that Shareholders are able to sell them, may be lower than the price that Shareholders would receive if an active market did exist and, accordingly, a Shareholder may suffer losses.

Several factors may affect the Trust’s ability to achieve its investment objective on a consistent basis.

There can be no assurance that the Trust will achieve its investment objective. Prospective investors should read this entire Prospectus and consult with their own advisers before subscribing for Shares. Factors that may affect the Trust’s ability to meet its investment objective include: (1) The Trust’s, an INJ Counterparty’s or an Authorized Participant’s ability to purchase and sell or transfer and receive INJ in an efficient manner to effectuate creation and redemption orders; (2) transaction fees associated with the Injective Network; (3) the INJ market becoming illiquid or disrupted; (4) the need to conform the Trust’s portfolio holdings to comply with investment restrictions or policies or regulatory or tax law requirements; (5) early or unanticipated closings of the markets on which INJ trades, resulting in the inability of Authorized Participants to execute intended portfolio transactions; and (6) accounting standards.

The amount of INJ represented by the Shares is expected to decline over time.

The amount of INJ represented by the Shares will continue to be reduced during the life of the Trust due to the transfer of the Trust’s INJ to pay for the Sponsor Fee and other liabilities.

Each outstanding Share represents a fractional, undivided interest in the INJ held by the Trust. The Trust does not generate any income and transfers INJ to pay for the Sponsor Fee and other liabilities. Therefore, the amount of INJ represented by each Share will gradually decline over time. This is also true with respect to Shares that are issued in exchange for additional INJ over time, as the amount of INJ required to create Shares proportionally reflects the amount of INJ represented by the Shares outstanding at the time of such Basket being created. Assuming a constant INJ price, the trading price of the Shares is expected to gradually decline relative to the price of INJ as the amount of INJ represented by the Shares gradually declines.

Shareholders should be aware that the gradual decline in the amount of INJ represented by the Shares will occur regardless of whether the trading price of the Shares rises or falls in response to changes in the price of INJ.

The development and commercialization of the Trust is subject to competitive pressures.

The Trust and the Sponsor face competition with respect to the creation of competing products, such as exchange-traded products offering exposure to the spot INJ market or other digital assets. If the SEC were to approve many or all of the currently pending applications for such exchange-traded INJ products, many or all of such products, including the Trust, could fail to acquire substantial assets, initially or at all.

The Sponsor’s competitors may have greater financial, technical and human resources than the Sponsor. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be effective competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. The Trust’s competitors may also charge a substantially lower fee than the Sponsor Fee in order to achieve initial market acceptance and scale. Accordingly, the Sponsor’s competitors may commercialize a competing product more rapidly or effectively than the Sponsor is able to, which could adversely affect the Sponsor’s competitive position, and the likelihood that the Trust will achieve initial market acceptance, and could have a detrimental effect on the scale and sustainability of the Trust and the Sponsor’s ability to generate meaningful revenues from the Trust.

If the Trust fails to achieve sufficient scale due to competition, the Sponsor may have difficulty raising sufficient revenue to cover the costs associated with launching and maintaining the Trust, and such shortfalls could impact the Sponsor’s ability to properly invest in robust ongoing operations and controls of the Trust to minimize the risk of operating events, errors, or other forms of losses to the Shareholders. In addition, the Trust may also fail to attract adequate liquidity in the secondary market due to such competition, resulting in a sub-standard number of Authorized Participants willing to make a market in the Shares, which in turn could result in a significant premium or discount in the Shares for extended periods and the Trust’s failure to reflect the performance of the price of INJ. There can be no assurance that the Trust will grow to or maintain an economically viable size. There is no guarantee that the Sponsor will maintain a commercial advantage relative to competitors offering similar products. Whether or not the Trust and the Sponsor are successful in achieving the intended scale for the Trust may be impacted by a range of factors, such as the Trust’s timing in entering the market and its fee structure relative to those of competitive products.

A loss of confidence in the INJ Custodians, including as the result of a security breach, may adversely affect the Trust and the value of an investment in the Shares.

Custody and security services for the Trust’s INJ are provided by the INJ Custodians, although the Trust may retain one or more additional INJ custodians at a later date. INJ held by the Trust may be custodied or secured in different ways (for example, a portion of the Trust’s INJ holdings may be custodied by the INJ Custodians and another portion by another third-party custodian). Over time, the Trust may change the custody or security arrangement for all or a portion of its holdings. The Sponsor will decide the appropriate custody and arrangements based on, among other factors, the availability of experienced INJ custodians and the Trust’s ability to securely safeguard its INJ.

The Sponsor expects that the INJ Custodians will custody most or all of its INJ holdings. A loss of confidence in an INJ Custodian, including as the result of a security breach, may adversely affect the Trust and the value of an investment in the Shares.

The Sponsor may need to find and appoint a replacement custodian or prime broker quickly, which could pose a challenge to the safekeeping of the Trust’s INJ.

The Sponsor could decide to replace the INJ Custodians as the custodians of the Trust’s INJ and could decide to replace the Prime Broker as the provider of prime brokerages to the Trust. Transferring maintenance responsibilities of the Trust’s accounts with the INJ Custodians and the Prime Broker to another party will likely be complex and could subject the Trust’s INJ to the risk of loss during the transfer, which could have a negative impact on the performance of the Shares or result in loss of the Trust’s assets.

The Sponsor may not be able to find a party willing to serve as an INJ Custodian under the same terms as the current Custodial Services Agreements, or as the Prime Broker under the same terms as the current Prime Broker Agreement. To the extent that Sponsor is not able to find a suitable party willing to serve as an INJ Custodian or as the Prime Broker, as applicable, the Sponsor may be required to terminate the Trust and liquidate the Trust’s INJ. In addition, to the extent that the Sponsor finds a suitable party but must enter into a modified custodial services agreement or prime broker agreement that costs more, the value of the Shares could be adversely affected.

Lack of recourse.

The INJ Custodians have limited liability, impairing the ability of the Trust to recover losses relating to its INJ and any recovery may be limited, even in the event of fraud. In addition, the INJ Custodians may not be liable for any delay in performance of any of their custodial obligations by reason of any cause beyond their reasonable control, including force majeure events, war or terrorism, and may not be liable for any system failure or third-party penetration of their systems. As a result, the recourse of the Trust to the INJ Custodians may be limited.

Under the Coinbase Custodial Services Agreement, the Coinbase Custodian’s liability is limited to the greater of (i) the market value of the Trust’s INJ held by the Coinbase Custodian at the time the events giving rise to the liability occurred and (ii) the fair market value of the Trust’s INJ held by the Coinbase Custodian at the time that the Coinbase Custodian notifies the Sponsor or Trustee in writing, or the Sponsor or the Trustee otherwise has actual knowledge of the events giving rise to the liability.

Under the BitGo Custodial Services Agreement, the BitGo Custodian and its affiliates, including their officers, directors, agents, and employees, are not liable for any lost profits, special, incidental, indirect, intangible, or consequential damages resulting from authorized or unauthorized use of the Trust or Sponsor’s site or services. This includes damages arising from any contract, tort, negligence, strict liability, or other legal grounds, even if the BitGo Custodian was previously advised of, knew, or should have known about the possibility of such damages. However, this exclusion of liability does not extend to cases of the BitGo Custodian’s fraud, willful misconduct, or gross negligence. In situations of gross negligence, the BitGo Custodian’s liability is specifically limited to the value of the digital assets or fiat currency that were affected by the negligence. Additionally, the total liability of the BitGo Custodian for direct damages is capped at the fees paid or payable to them under the BitGo Custodial Services Agreement during the twelve-month period immediately preceding the first incident that caused the liability.

In addition, the BitGo Custodian shall not be liable for delays, suspension of operations, whether temporary or permanent, failure in performance, or interruption of service which results directly or indirectly from any cause or condition beyond the reasonable control of the BitGo Custodian, including, but not limited to, any delay or failure due to an act of God, natural disasters, act of civil or military authorities, act of terrorists, including, but not limited to, cyber-related terrorist acts, hacking, government restrictions, exchange or market rulings, civil disturbance, war, strike or other labor dispute, fire, interruption in telecommunications or Internet services or network provider services, failure of equipment and/or software, other catastrophe or any other occurrence which is beyond the reasonable control of the BitGo Custodian.

Under the Trust Agreement, the Trustee and the Sponsor will not be liable for any liability or expense incurred absent gross negligence or willful misconduct on the part of the Trustee or the Sponsor or breach by the Sponsor of the Trust Agreement, as the case may be. As a result, the recourse of the Trust or the Shareholder to Trustee or the Sponsor may be limited.

The Benchmark Provider has limited liability relating to the use of the Pricing Benchmark, impairing the ability of the Trust to recover losses relating to its use of the Pricing Benchmark. The Benchmark Provider does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or performance of the Pricing Benchmark or the data included therein and shall have no liability in connection with the Pricing Benchmark calculation, errors, omissions or interruptions of the Pricing Benchmark or any data included therein. The Pricing Benchmark could be calculated now or in the future in a way that adversely affects an investment in the Trust.

The value of the Shares will be adversely affected if the Trust is required to indemnify the Sponsor, the Trustee, the Administrator, the Transfer Agent, the INJ Custodians or the Prime Broker.

Each of the Sponsor, the Trustee, the Administrator, the Transfer Agent, the INJ Custodians, and the Prime Broker has a right to be indemnified by the Trust for certain liabilities or expenses that it incurs without gross negligence, bad faith or willful misconduct on its part. Therefore, the Sponsor, the Trustee, the Administrator, the Transfer Agent, the INJ Custodians or the Prime Broker may require that the assets of the Trust be sold in order to cover losses or liability suffered by it. Any sale of that kind would reduce the INJ holdings of the Trust and the value of the Shares.

Intellectual property rights claims may adversely affect the Trust and the value of the Shares.

The Sponsor is not aware of any intellectual property rights claims that may prevent the Trust from operating and holding INJ. However, third parties may assert intellectual property rights claims relating to the operation of the Trust and the mechanics instituted for the investment in, holding of and transfer of INJ. Regardless of the merit of an intellectual property or other legal action, any legal expenses to defend or payments to settle such claims would be extraordinary expenses that would be borne by the Trust through the sale or transfer of its INJ and any threatened action that reduces confidence in long-term viability or the ability of end-users to hold and transfer INJ may adversely affect the value of the Shares. Additionally, a meritorious intellectual property rights claim could prevent the Trust from operating and force the Sponsor to terminate the Trust and liquidate its INJ. As a result, an intellectual property rights claim against the Trust could adversely affect the value of the Shares.

Potential conflicts of interest may arise among the Sponsor or its affiliates and the Trust. The Sponsor and its affiliates have no fiduciary duties to the Trust and its shareholders other than as provided in the Trust Agreement, which may permit them to favor their own interests to the detriment of the Trust and its shareholders.

The Sponsor will manage the affairs of the Trust. Conflicts of interest may arise among the Sponsor and its affiliates, on the one hand, and the Trust and its shareholders, on the other hand. As a result of these conflicts, the Sponsor may favor its own interests and the interests of its affiliates over the Trust and its shareholders. These potential conflicts include, among others, the following:

By purchasing the Shares, shareholders agree and consent to the provisions set forth in the Trust Agreement.

Further, the Sponsor may have a conflict with respect to any future transactions that may be entered into with either the Sponsor’s ultimate parent company, FalconX, a leading institutional digital asset prime brokerage, or with any of the other affiliates of FalconX.

The Sponsor’s receipt of a portion of staking rewards may create conflicts of interest.

The Sponsor, Staking Services Provider and INJ Custodians are expected to receive an aggregate of [●]% of the staking rewards, with the remainder being retained by the Trust. This arrangement creates a financial incentive for the Sponsor to maximize the amount of INJ staked by the Trust, as higher levels of staked INJ would generally result in greater staking rewards to the Sponsor. However, the Sponsor’s interest in maximizing staking rewards may conflict with the Trust’s need to maintain sufficient liquid INJ to meet redemption requests and other operational requirements. If the Sponsor directs the Trust to stake excessive amounts of INJ relative to the Trust’s liquidity needs, the Trust could become unable to timely meet redemption requests in amounts that are greater than the portion of the Trust’s INJ that remains unstaked, leading to temporary delays in settlement and, in extreme scenarios, the temporary unavailability of the Trust’s redemption program.

While the Trust’s staking policies are designed to balance expected yield against potential risks and are based on various factors including historical redemption patterns and liquidity analysis, the Sponsor has sole discretion in determining the amount of INJ to stake. Shareholders have no ability to influence or override the Sponsor’s determinations regarding staking levels. The Sponsor’s financial interest in staking rewards may cause it to prioritize staking income over maintaining adequate liquidity reserves, particularly during periods when staking yields are attractive relative to the costs and risks of maintaining liquid INJ reserves.

Any inability to meet redemption requests in a timely manner due to excessive staking could harm Authorized Participants’ ability to effectively arbitrage the Trust’s Shares, potentially causing the Shares to trade at significant premiums or discounts to NAV. This could result in Shareholders being unable to exit their positions at fair value or being forced to accept delays in redemption processing, either of which could cause substantial losses to Shareholders.

Unforeseeable risks.

INJ has gained commercial acceptance only within recent years and, as a result, there is little data on its long-term investment potential. Additionally, due to the rapidly evolving nature of the INJ market, including advancements in the underlying technology or advancements in competing technologies, changes to INJ may expose investors in the Trust to additional risks which are impossible to predict.

Risks Associated with the Pricing Benchmark and Pricing Benchmark Pricing

The Pricing Benchmark has a limited history.

The Pricing Benchmark has only been in operation since [●], and has featured its current roster of Constituent Exchanges since [●]. A longer history of actual performance through various economic and market conditions would provide greater and more reliable information for an investor to assess the Pricing Benchmark’s performance. The Benchmark Provider has substantial discretion at any time to change the methodology used to calculate the Pricing Benchmark, including the spot markets that contribute prices to the Trust’s NAV. The Benchmark Provider does not have any obligation to take the needs of the Trust, the Trust’s Shareholders, or anyone else into consideration in connection with such changes. There is no guarantee that the methodology currently used in calculating the Pricing Benchmark will appropriately track the price of INJ in the future. The Benchmark Provider has no obligation to take the needs of the Trust or the Shareholders into consideration in determining, composing, or calculating the Pricing Benchmark.

Pricing sources used by the Pricing Benchmark are qualifying digital asset spot markets that facilitate the buying and selling of INJ and other digital assets. Although many pricing sources refer to themselves as “exchanges,” they are not registered with, or supervised by, the SEC or CFTC and do not meet the regulatory standards of a national securities exchange or designated contract market. For these reasons, among others, purchases and sales of INJ may be subject to temporary distortions or other disruptions due to various factors, including the lack of liquidity in the markets and government regulation and intervention. These circumstances could affect the price of INJ used in Pricing Benchmark calculations and, therefore, could adversely affect the INJ price as reflected by the Pricing Benchmark.

The Pricing Benchmark is based on various inputs which include price data from various third-party INJ spot markets. The Benchmark Provider does not guarantee the validity of any of these inputs, which may be subject to technological error, manipulative activity, or fraudulent reporting from their initial source.

Right to change the Pricing Benchmark.

The Sponsor, in its sole discretion, may cause the Trust to track (or price its portfolio based upon) a pricing benchmark or standard other than the Pricing Benchmark at any time, with prior notice to the Shareholders, if investment conditions change or the Sponsor believes that another pricing benchmark or standard better aligns with the Trust’s investment objective and strategy. The Sponsor may make this decision for a number of reasons, including, but not limited to the following:

The Sponsor, however, is under no obligation whatsoever to make such changes in any circumstance.

Risks related to pricing.

As set forth under “NAV Determinations” below, the Trust’s portfolio will be priced, including for purposes of determining the NAV, based upon the Pricing Benchmark. The price of INJ in U.S. Dollars or in other currencies available from other data sources may not be equal to the prices used to calculate the Trust’s NAV.

The NAV or the Principal Market NAV of the Trust will change as fluctuations occur in the market price of the Trust’s INJ holdings as reflected in the Pricing Benchmark. Shareholders should be aware that the public trading price per Share may be different from the NAV and the Principal Market NAV for a number of reasons, including price volatility, trading activity, the closing of INJ trading platforms due to fraud, failure, security breaches or otherwise, and the fact that supply and demand forces at work in the secondary trading market for Shares are related, but not identical, to the supply and demand forces influencing the market price of INJ.

An Authorized Participant may be able to create or redeem a Basket at a discount or a premium to the public trading price per Share and the Trust will therefore maintain its intended fractional exposure to a specific amount of INJ per Share.

Shareholders also should note that the size of the Trust in terms of total INJ held may change substantially over time and as Baskets are created and redeemed.

In the event that the value of the Trust’s INJ holdings or INJ holdings per Share is incorrectly calculated, neither the Sponsor nor the Administrator will be liable for any error and such misreporting of valuation data could adversely affect the value of the Shares.

Regulatory Risk

INJ’s status as being offered or sold as a “security” under U.S. federal securities laws remains unsettled.

The SEC has asserted its belief that a number of digital assets are properly classified as “securities” under U.S. federal securities laws in a number of complaints against the issuers of such assets, or against platforms trading or transacting in such assets. Courts have agreed that such assets may have been offered or sold in transactions that constituted securities, or have agreed that the SEC has a plausible case that such assets may have been offered or sold in transactions that constituted securities. In future litigation, other courts might disagree with the assessment that these or other digital assets, such as INJ, are offered or sold as securities depending on the characteristics of the transaction. To the extent that a court were to find that the Trust had engaged in unregistered sales of securities, the Trust would be subject to penalties, disgorgement and other sanctions, which would significantly negatively impact the Trust and the value of the Shares.

In accordance with the Sponsor’s internal policies and procedures, the Sponsor engaged in a review process to determine whether INJ has been offered or sold as a security and based off the review it has determined it has not. The Sponsor has reviewed publicly available materials relating to INJ and Injective Labs. Among other things, the Sponsor has reviewed publicly available materials relating to the circumstances around the creation of INJ, the market and technological needs that the Injective Network was intended to address, the Injective Network’s role in enabling blockchain interoperability and cross-blockchain communications, the Injective Network’s consensus mechanism, the Injective Labs’ marketing and delivery of the product to initial customers. Based on the Sponsor’s review of these materials, the Sponsor believes there is a reasonable basis to conclude that at this time offers and sales of INJ would not constitute offers and sales of a “security” as that term is defined under Section 2(a)(1) of the 1933 Act. This determination is a risk-based judgement by the Sponsor that is attendant with legal risk as it is possible regulatory agencies or courts could disagree with this determination.

If INJ is determined to be offered or sold as a security by a federal court or transactions in INJ are determined to be securities transactions by a federal court, the Trust could be considered an unregistered “investment company” under the 1940 Act, which could necessitate the Trust’s liquidation. In this case, the Trust and the Sponsor may be deemed to have participated in an illegal offering of investment company securities and there is no guarantee that the Sponsor will be able to register the Trust under the 1940 Act at such time or take such other actions as may be necessary to ensure the Trust’s activities comply with applicable law, which could force the Sponsor to liquidate the Trust.

It may also become more difficult for INJ to be traded, cleared and custodied as compared to other digital assets that are not considered to be offered or sold as securities, which could in turn negatively affect the liquidity and general acceptance of INJ and cause users to migrate to other digital assets. Further, if any other digital asset with widespread markets is determined to be offered or sold as a “security” under federal or state securities laws by the SEC or any other agency, or in a proceeding in a court of law or otherwise, it may have material adverse consequences for INJ as a digital asset due to negative publicity or a decline in the general acceptance of digital assets. In addition, digital asset trading platforms that feature digital assets that are determined to be offered or sold as securities may face penalties or be required to shut down if they do not have the licenses required to facilitate electronic markets in securities, which could result in a reduction of the liquidity of INJ markets. As such, any determination that INJ or any other digital asset is offered or sold as a security under federal or state securities laws may adversely affect the price of INJ and, as a result, the value of the Shares.

To the extent that INJ is deemed to fall within the definition of being offered or sold as a security under U.S. federal securities laws, the Trust and the Sponsor may be subject to additional requirements under the 1940 Act and the Advisers Act. The Sponsor or the Trust may be required to register as an investment adviser under the Advisers Act. Such additional registration may result in extraordinary, recurring and/or non-recurring expenses of the Trust, thereby materially and adversely impacting the Shares. If the Sponsor and/or the Trust determines not to comply with such additional regulatory and registration requirements, the Sponsor may terminate the Trust. Any such termination could result in the liquidation of the Trust’s INJ at a time that is disadvantageous to Shareholders.

There is a lack of consensus regarding the regulation of digital assets, including INJ.

Regulation of digital assets continues to evolve across different jurisdictions worldwide, which may cause uncertainty and insecurity as to the legal and tax status of a given digital asset. As INJ and digital assets have grown in both popularity and market size, the U.S. Congress and a number of U.S. federal and state agencies (including FinCEN, SEC, OCC, CFTC, FINRA, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”), the Department of Justice, the Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the IRS, state financial institution regulators, and others) have been examining the operations of digital asset networks, digital asset users and the digital asset spot market. Many of these state and federal agencies have brought enforcement actions and issued advisories and rules relating to digital asset markets. Ongoing and future regulatory actions with respect to digital assets generally or any single digital asset in particular may alter, perhaps to a materially adverse extent, the nature of an investment in the Shares and/or the ability of the Trust to continue to operate.

For example, certain events in 2022, including among others the bankruptcy filings of FTX and its subsidiaries, Three Arrows Capital, Celsius Network, Voyager Digital, Genesis, BlockFi and others, and other developments in the digital asset markets, have resulted in calls for heightened scrutiny and regulation of the digital asset industry, with a specific focus on intermediaries such as digital asset exchanges, platforms, and custodians. Federal and state legislatures and regulatory agencies may introduce and enact new laws and regulations to regulate digital asset intermediaries, such as digital asset exchanges and custodians. The March 2023 collapses of Silicon Valley Bank, Silvergate Bank, and Signature Bank, which in some cases provided services to the digital assets industry, or similar future events, may amplify and/or accelerate these trends. In January 2023, the federal banking agencies issued a joint statement on digital-asset risks to banking organizations following events which exposed vulnerabilities in the digital-asset sector, including the risk of fraud and scams, legal uncertainties, significant volatility, and contagion risk. Although banking organizations are not prohibited from digital-asset related activities, the agencies have expressed significant safety and soundness concerns with business models that are concentrated in digital-asset related activities or have concentrated exposures to the digital-asset sector.

U.S. federal and state regulators have issued reports and releases concerning digital assets, including INJ and digital asset markets. Further, in 2023 the House of Representatives formed two new subcommittees: the Digital Assets, Financial Technology and Inclusion Subcommittee and the Commodity Markets, Digital Assets, and Rural Development Subcommittee, each of which were formed in part to analyze issues concerning digital assets and demonstrate a legislative intent to develop and consider the adoption of federal legislation designed to address the perceived need for regulation of and concerns surrounding the digital asset industry. However, the extent and content of any forthcoming laws and regulations are not yet ascertainable with certainty, and it may not be ascertainable in the near future. It is difficult to predict how these and other related events will affect us or the digital asset business.

It is not possible to predict whether Congress will grant additional authorities to the SEC or to other regulators, what the nature of such additional authorities might be, how they might impact the ability of digital asset markets to function or how any new regulations that may flow from such authorities might impact the value of digital assets generally and INJ held by the Trust more specifically. The consequences of increased federal regulation of digital assets and digital asset activities could have a material adverse effect on the Trust and the Shares.

FinCEN requires any administrator or exchanger of convertible digital assets to register with FinCEN as a money transmitter and comply with the anti-money laundering regulations applicable to money transmitters. In 2015, FinCEN assessed a $700,000 fine against a sponsor of a digital asset for violating several requirements of the BSA by acting as a money services business and selling the digital asset without registering with FinCEN, and by failing to implement and maintain an adequate anti-money laundering program. In a March 2018 letter from FinCEN’s assistant secretary for legislative affairs to U.S. Senator Ron Wyden, the assistant secretary indicated that under current law both the developers and the exchanges involved in the sale of tokens in an initial coin offering may be required to register with FinCEN as money transmitters and comply with the anti-money laundering regulations applicable to money transmitters.

OFAC has added digital asset addresses to the list of Specially Designated Nationals whose assets are blocked, and with whom U.S. persons are generally prohibited from dealing. Such actions by OFAC, or by similar organizations in other jurisdictions, may introduce uncertainty in the market as to whether INJ that has been associated with such addresses in the past can be easily sold. This “tainted” INJ may trade at a substantial discount to untainted INJ. Reduced fungibility in the INJ markets may reduce the liquidity of INJ and therefore adversely affect their price.

In February 2020, then-U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin stated that digital assets were a “crucial area” on which the U.S. Treasury Department has spent significant time. Secretary Mnuchin announced that the U.S. Treasury Department is preparing significant new regulations governing digital asset activities to address concerns regarding the potential use for facilitating money laundering and other illicit activities. In December 2020, FinCEN, a bureau within the U.S. Treasury Department, proposed a rule that would require financial institutions to submit reports, keep records, and verify the identity of customers for certain transactions to or from so-called “unhosted” wallets, also commonly referred to as self-hosted wallets. In January 2021, U.S. Treasury Secretary nominee Janet Yellen stated her belief that regulators should “look closely at how to encourage the use of digital assets for legitimate activities while curtailing their use for malign and illegal activities.”

In February 2022, Representative Warren Davidson introduced the “Keep Your Coins Act,” which is intended “[t]o prohibit Federal agencies from restricting the use of convertible virtual currency by a person to purchase goods or services for the person’s own use, and for other purposes.”

In March 2022, Senators Elizabeth Warren, Jack Reed, Mark Warner, and Jon Tester introduced the Digital Asset Sanctions Compliance Enhancement Act in an attempt to ensure blacklisted Russian individuals and businesses do not use digital assets to evade economic sanctions.

In January 2025, President Trump issued an executive order titled “Executive Order on Strengthening American Leadership in Digital Financial Technology” that outlined the administration’s commitment to strengthening U.S. leadership in the digital asset space and established an inter-agency working group for artificial intelligence and digital assets that is tasked with proposing a regulatory framework governing the issuance and operation of digital assets, including stablecoins, in the United States.

In March 2022, Representative Stephen Lynch, along with co-sponsors Jesús G. García, Rashida Tlaib, Ayanna Pressley, and Alma Adams, introduced H.R. 7231, the Electronic Currency and Secure Hardware Act, which would direct the Secretary of the U.S. Treasury Department (not the Federal Reserve) to develop and issue a digital analogue to the U.S. dollar, or “e-cash,” which is intended to “replicate and preserve the privacy, anonymity-respecting, and minimal transactional data-generating properties of physical currency instruments such as coins and notes to the greatest extent technically and practically possible,” all without requiring a bank account. E-cash would be legal tender, payable to the bearer and functionally identical to physical U.S. coins and notes, “capable of instantaneous, final, direct, peer-to-peer, offline transactions using secured hardware devices that do not involve or require subsequent or final settlement on or via a common or distributed ledger, or any other additional approval or validation by the United States Government or any other third party payments processing intermediary,” including fully anonymous transactions, and “interoperable with all existing financial institutions and payment systems and generally accepted payments standards and network protocols, as well as other public payments programs.”

In April 2022, Senator Pat Toomey released a draft of his Stablecoin Transparency of Reserves and Uniform Safe Transactions Act, or Stablecoin TRUST Act. The draft bill contemplates a “payment stablecoin,” which is convertible directly to fiat currency by the issuer. Only an insured depository institution, a money transmitting business (authorized by its respective state authority) or a new “national limited payment stablecoin issuer” would be eligible to issue payment stablecoins. Additionally, payment stablecoins would be exempt from the federal securities requirements, including the 1933 Act, the Exchange Act, and the 1940 Act.

In June 2022, Senators Kirsten Gillibrand and Cynthia Lummis introduced the “Responsible Financial Innovation Act,” which was drafted to “create a complete regulatory framework for digital assets that encourages responsible financial innovation, flexibility, transparency and robust consumer protections while integrating digital assets into existing law.” Importantly, the legislation would assign regulatory authority over digital asset spot markets to the CFTC and codify that digital assets that meet the definition of a commodity, such as bitcoin and ether, would be regulated by the CFTC.

In 2023, Congress continued to consider several stand-alone digital asset bills, including a formal process to determine when digital assets will be treated as either securities to be regulated by the SEC or commodities under the purview of the CFTC, what type of federal/state regulatory regime will exist for payment stablecoins and how the BSA will apply to digital asset providers. The Financial Innovation and Technology for the 21^st Century Act (“FIT21”) advanced through the United States House of Representatives in a vote along bipartisan lines.

FIT21 would require the SEC and the CFTC to jointly issue rules or guidance that would outline their process in delisting a digital asset that they deem inconsistent with the CEA, federal securities laws and FIT21. The bill, in part, would also provide a certification process for blockchains to be recognized as decentralized, which would allow the SEC to challenge claims made by token issuers about meeting the outlined standards.

Legislative efforts have also focused on setting criteria for stablecoin issuers and what rules will govern redeemability and collateral. The Clarity for Payment Stablecoins Act of 2023, as introduced by House Finance Committee Chair Patrick McHenry (the “McHenry Bill”), would make it unlawful for any entity other than a permitted payment stablecoin issuer to issue a payment stablecoin. The McHenry Bill would establish bank-like regulation and supervision for federal qualified nonbank payment stablecoin issuers. These requirements include capital, liquidity and risk management requirements, application of the BSA and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act’s customer privacy requirements, certain activities limits, and broad supervision and enforcement authority. The McHenry Bill would grant state regulators primary supervision, examination and enforcement authority over state stablecoin issuers, leaving the Federal Reserve Board with secondary, backup enforcement authority for “exigent” circumstances. The McHenry Bill would also amend the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended (the “Advisers Act”), the 1940 Act, the 1933 Act, the Exchange Act and the Securities Investor Protection Act of 1970 to specify that payment stablecoins are not securities for purposes of those federal securities laws. In February 2025, Sen. Bill Hagerty introduced the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins of 2025 Act – the GENIUS Act – cosponsored by Senate Banking Chair Tim Scott and Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand and Cynthia Lummis, which would establish a U.S. regulatory framework for payment stablecoins. The GENIUS Act was passed by the U.S. Senate in June 2025 and by the U.S. House of Representatives in July 2025. It was signed into law by President Trump in July 2025. Like the McHenry Bill, the GENIUS Act provides for a regulatory framework where payment stablecoin issuers may be either a subsidiary of an insured bank, an uninsured depository institution or trust bank, or a nonbank, and primarily regulated at either the federal or state level. It also provides for stablecoin reserve requirements and require bank-like regulation for both bank and nonbank stablecoin issuers.

Several other bills have advanced through Congress to curb digital assets as a payment gateway for illicit activity and money laundering. The “Blockchain Regulatory Clarity Act” would provide clarity to the regulatory classification of digital assets, providing market certainty for innovators and clear jurisdictional boundaries for regulators by affirming that blockchain developers and other related service providers that do not custody customer funds are not money transmitters. The “Financial Technology Protection Act,” another bipartisan measure, would set up an independent Financial Technology Working Group to combat terrorism and illicit financing in digital assets. The “Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act” aims to protect certain blockchain platforms from being designated as money-services businesses. Both acts advanced through the House with bipartisan support.

In a similar effort to prevent money laundering and stop digital-asset-facilitated crime and sanctions violations, bipartisan legislation was introduced to require DeFi services to meet the same anti-money laundering and economic sanctions compliance obligations as other financial companies. DeFi generally refers to applications that facilitate peer-to-peer financial transactions that are recorded on blockchains. By design, DeFi provides anonymity, which can allow malicious and criminal actors to evade traditional financial regulatory tools. Noting that transparency and sensible rules are vital for protecting the financial system from crime, the “Crypto-Asset National Security Enhancement and Enforcement (‘CANSEE’) Act” was introduced. The CANSEE Act would end special treatment for DeFi by applying the same national security laws that apply to banks and securities brokers, casinos and pawn shops, and other digital asset companies like centralized trading platforms. DeFi services would be forced to meet basic obligations, most notably to maintain anti-money laundering programs, conduct due diligence on their customers, and report suspicious transactions to FinCEN.

Under regulations from the New York State Department of Financial Services (“NYDFS”), businesses involved in digital asset business activity for third parties in or involving New York, excluding merchants and consumers, must apply for a license, commonly known as a BitLicense, from the NYDFS and must comply with anti-money laundering, cybersecurity, consumer protection, and financial and reporting requirements, among others. As an alternative to a BitLicense, a firm can apply for a charter to become a limited purpose trust company under New York law qualified to engage in digital asset business activity. Other states have considered or approved digital asset business activity statutes or rules, passing, for example, regulations or guidance indicating that certain digital asset business activities constitute money transmission requiring licensure.

The inconsistency in applying money transmitting licensure requirements to certain businesses may make it more difficult for these businesses to provide services, which may affect consumer adoption of INJ and its price. In an attempt to address these issues, the Uniform Law Commission passed a model law in July 2017, the Uniform Regulation of Virtual Currency Businesses Act, which has many similarities to the BitLicense and features a multistate reciprocity licensure feature, wherein a business licensed in one state could apply for accelerated licensure procedures in other states. It is still unclear, however, how many states, if any, will adopt some or all of the model legislation.

The transparency of blockchains has in the past facilitated investigations by law enforcement agencies. However, certain privacy-enhancing features have been or are expected to be introduced to a number of digital asset networks, and these features may provide law enforcement agencies with less visibility into transaction histories. Although no regulatory action has been taken to treat privacy-enhancing digital assets differently, this may change in the future.

In addition, a determination that INJ is offered or sold as a security under U.S. or foreign law could adversely affect an investment in the Trust.

Shareholders do not have the protections associated with ownership of shares in an investment company registered under the 1940 Act or commodity pools under the CEA.

The 1940 Act establishes a comprehensive federal regulatory framework for investment companies. Regulation of investment companies under the 1940 Act is designed to, among other things: prevent insiders from managing the companies to their benefit and to the detriment of public investors; prevent the inequitable or discriminate issuance of investment company securities and prevent the use of unsound or misleading methods of computing asset values. For example, registered investment companies subject to the 1940 Act must have a board of directors, a certain minimum percentage of whom must be independent (generally, at least a majority). Further, after an initial two-year period, such registered investment companies’ advisory and sub-advisory contracts must be annually reapproved by a majority of (1) the entire board of directors and (2) the independent directors. Additionally, such registered investment companies are subject to prohibitions and restrictions on transactions with their affiliates and required to maintain fund assets with special types of custodians (generally, banks or broker-dealers). Moreover, such registered investment companies are subject to significant limits on the use of leverage, as well as limits on the form of capital structure and the types of securities a registered fund can issue.

The Trust is not registered as an investment company under the 1940 Act, and the Sponsor believes that the Trust is not permitted or required to register under such act. Consequently, Shareholders do not have the regulatory protections provided to investors in investment companies.

The Trust will not hold or trade in commodity interests regulated by the CEA, as administered by the CFTC. Furthermore, the Sponsor believes that the Trust is not a commodity pool for purposes of the CEA, and that neither the Sponsor nor the Trustee is subject to regulation by the CFTC as a commodity pool operator or a commodity trading advisor in connection with the operation of the Trust. Consequently, Shareholders will not have the regulatory protections provided to investors in CEA-regulated instruments or commodity pools.

Future and current laws and regulations by a United States or foreign government or quasi-governmental agencies could have an adverse effect on an investment in the Trust.

The regulation of INJ and related products and services continues to evolve, may take many different forms and will, therefore, impact INJ and its usage in a variety of manners. The inconsistent, unpredictable, and sometimes conflicting regulatory landscape may make it more difficult for INJ businesses to provide services, which may impede the growth of the INJ economy and have an adverse effect on consumer adoption of INJ. There is a possibility of future regulatory change altering, perhaps to a material extent, the nature of an investment in the Trust or the ability of the Trust to continue to operate. Additionally, changes to current regulatory determinations that INJ is not offered or sold as a security, changes to regulations surrounding INJ digital asset futures or derivatives or other related products, or actions by a United States or foreign government or quasi-governmental agencies exerting regulatory authority over INJ, the Injective Network, INJ trading, or related activities impacting other parts of the digital asset market, may adversely impact INJ and therefore may have an adverse effect on the value of your investment in the Trust.

A number of jurisdictions worldwide have adopted prohibitions or restrictions on INJ trading and/or other activity relating to digital assets, which could negatively affect INJ prices or demand. For instance, some observers believe that Chinese governmental regulatory actions regarding digital asset mining and trading activity were one factor that contributed to the drawdowns in global INJ prices in May 2021.

The legal status of INJ and other digital assets varies substantially from country to country. In many countries, the legal status of INJ is still undefined or changing. Some countries have deemed the usage of certain digital assets illegal. Other countries have banned digital assets or securities or derivatives in respect to them (including for certain categories of investors), banned the local banks from working with digital assets or have restricted digital assets in other ways. For example, INJ and other digital assets currently face an uncertain regulatory landscape in many foreign jurisdictions, such as the European Union, China, the United Kingdom, Australia, Russia, Israel, Poland, India and Canada. In some countries, such as the United States, different government agencies define digital assets differently, leading to further regulatory conflict and uncertainty.

In addition, cybersecurity attacks by state actors, particularly for the purpose of evading international economic sanctions, are likely to attract additional regulatory scrutiny to the acquisition, ownership, sale and use of digital assets, including INJ. The effect of any existing regulation or future regulatory change on the Trust or INJ is impossible to predict, but such change could be substantial and adverse to the Trust and the value of the Shares.

The CFTC may have regulatory jurisdiction over INJ derivatives markets, if these were ever to develop in the U.S. In addition, if the CFTC determines that INJ is a “commodity” under the CEA and the rules thereunder, it may have jurisdiction to prosecute fraud and market manipulation in the cash, or spot, market for INJ. The CFTC may pursue enforcement actions relating to fraud and market manipulation involving INJ and INJ markets. Beyond instances of fraud or manipulation, the CFTC generally would not oversee cash or spot market exchanges or transactions involving INJ that do not use collateral, leverage, or financing.

Various foreign jurisdictions have adopted, and may continue to adopt in the near future, laws, regulations or directives that affect INJ, particularly with respect to INJ spot markets, trading venues and service providers that fall within such jurisdictions’ regulatory scope. Countries may, in the future, explicitly restrict, outlaw or curtail the acquisition, use, trade or redemption of INJ. Such laws, regulations or directives may conflict with those of the United States and may negatively impact the acceptance of INJ by users, merchants and service providers outside the United States and may therefore impede the growth or sustainability of the INJ economy in these jurisdictions as well as in the United States and elsewhere, or otherwise negatively affect the value of INJ, and, in turn, the value of the Shares.

Any change in regulation in any particular jurisdiction may impact the supply and demand of that specific jurisdiction and other jurisdictions due to the global network of exchanges for INJ, as well as composite prices used to calculate the underlying value of the Trust’s INJ, as such data sources span multiple jurisdictions.

Future legal or regulatory developments may negatively affect the value of INJ or require the Trust or the Sponsor to become registered with the SEC or CFTC, which may cause the Trust to incur unforeseen expenses or liquidate.

Current and future legislation, SEC and CFTC rulemaking, and other regulatory developments may impact the manner in which INJ are treated for classification and clearing purposes. In particular, although INJ is currently understood to be a commodity when transacted on a spot basis, INJ itself in the future might be classified by the CFTC as a “commodity interest” under the CEA, subjecting all transactions in INJ to full CFTC regulatory jurisdiction. Alternatively, in the future INJ might be classified by the SEC or one or more federal courts as being offered or sold as a “security” under U.S. federal securities laws. In the face of such developments, the required registrations and compliance steps may result in extraordinary, nonrecurring expenses to the Trust. In particular, the Trust may be required to rapidly unwind its entire position in INJ at potentially unfavorable prices and potentially terminate, in the event that transactions of INJ were determined to fall under the definition of being offered or sold as securities under U.S. securities laws. If the Sponsor decides to terminate the Trust in response to the changed regulatory circumstances, the Trust may be dissolved or liquidated at a time that is disadvantageous to Shareholders. As of the date of this Prospectus, the Sponsor is not aware of any rules that have been proposed to regulate INJ as a commodity interest or as being offered or sold as a security.

To the extent that INJ is determined to be offered or sold as a security, the Trust and the Sponsor may also be subject to additional regulatory requirements, including under the 1940 Act, and the Sponsor may be required to register as an investment adviser under the Advisers Act. If the Sponsor determines not to comply with such additional regulatory and registration requirements, the Sponsor will terminate the Trust. Any such termination could result in the liquidation of the Trust’s INJ at a time that is disadvantageous to Shareholders. Alternatively, compliance with these requirements could result in additional expenses to the Trust or significantly limit the ability of the Trust to pursue its investment objective.

To the extent that INJ is deemed to fall within the definition of a “commodity interest” under the CEA, the Trust and the Sponsor may be subject to additional regulation under the CEA and CFTC regulations. The Sponsor may be required to register as a commodity pool operator or commodity trading advisor with the CFTC and become a member of the National Futures Association and may be subject to additional regulatory requirements with respect to the Trust, including disclosure and reporting requirements. These additional requirements may result in extraordinary, recurring and/or nonrecurring expenses of the Trust, thereby materially and adversely impacting the Shares. If the Sponsor and/or the Trust determines not to comply with such additional regulatory and registration requirements, the Sponsor may terminate the Trust. Any such termination could result in the liquidation of the Trust’s INJ at a time that is disadvantageous to Shareholders.

The SEC has recently proposed rule changes amending and redesignating rule 206(4)-2 under the Advisers Act (the “Custody Rule”). The proposed “Safeguarding Rule” would amend the definition of a “qualified custodian” under the Custody Rule and expand the scope of the Custody Rule to cover all digital assets, including INJ, and related advisory activities. If enacted as proposed, these rule changes would likely impose additional regulatory requirements with respect to the custody and storage of digital assets, including INJ. The Sponsor is studying the impact that such amendments may have on the Trust and its arrangements with the INJ Custodians. It is possible that such amendments, if adopted, could prevent the INJ Custodians from serving as service providers to the Trust, or require potentially significant modifications to existing arrangements, which could cause the Trust to bear potentially significant increased costs. If the Sponsor is unable to make such modifications or appoint successor service providers to fill the roles that the INJ Custodians currently play, the Trust’s operations (including in relation to creations and redemptions of Baskets and the holding of INJ) could be negatively affected, the Trust could dissolve (including at a time that is potentially disadvantageous to Shareholders), and the value of the Shares or an investment in the Trust could be affected. Further, the proposed amendments could have a severe negative impact on the price of INJ and therefore the value of the Shares if enacted, by, among other things, making it more difficult for investors to gain access to INJ, or causing certain holders of INJ to sell their holdings.

If regulatory changes or interpretations of an Authorized Participant’s, the Trust’s or the Sponsor’s activities require the regulation of an Authorized Participant, the Trust or the Sponsor as a money service business under the regulations promulgated by FinCEN under the authority of the U.S. Bank Secrecy Act or as a money transmitter or digital asset business under state regimes for the licensing of such businesses, an Authorized Participant, the Trust or the Sponsor may be required to register and comply with such regulations, which could result in extraordinary, recurring and/or nonrecurring expenses to the Authorized Participants, Trust or Sponsor or increased commissions for the Authorized Participants’ clients, thereby reducing the liquidity of the Shares.

To the extent that the activities of any Authorized Participant, the Trust or the Sponsor cause it to be deemed a “money services business” under the regulations promulgated by FinCEN under the authority of the BSA, such Authorized Participant, the Trust or the Sponsor may be required to comply with FinCEN regulations, including those that would mandate an Authorized Participant to implement anti-money laundering programs, make certain reports to FinCEN and maintain certain records. Similarly, the activities of an Authorized Participant, the Trust or the Sponsor may require it to be licensed as a money transmitter or as a digital asset business, such as under NYDFS’ BitLicense regulation.

Such additional regulatory obligations may cause an Authorized Participant, the Trust or the Sponsor to incur extraordinary expenses. If an Authorized Participant, the Trust or the Sponsor decide to seek the required licenses, there is no guarantee that they will receive them in a timely manner. In addition, to the extent an Authorized Participant, the Trust, or the Sponsor is found to have operated without appropriate state or federal licenses, it may be subject to investigation, administrative or court proceedings, and civil or criminal monetary fines and penalties, all of which could harm the reputation of an Authorized Participant, the Trust or the Sponsor and affect the value of the Shares. Furthermore, an Authorized Participant, the Trust, or the Sponsor may not be able to acquire necessary state licenses or be capable of complying with certain federal or state regulatory obligations applicable to money services businesses, money transmitters, and businesses engaged in digital asset activity in a timely manner. An Authorized Participant may also instead decide to terminate its role as an Authorized Participant of the Trust, or the Sponsor may decide to terminate the Trust. Termination by an Authorized Participant of their role as an authorized participant may decrease the liquidity of the Shares, which may adversely affect the value of the Shares, and any termination of the Trust in response to the changed regulatory circumstances may be at a time that is disadvantageous to the Shareholders.

Tax Risk

The ongoing activities of the Trust may generate tax liabilities for Shareholders.

As described below under “United States Federal Income Tax Consequences—Taxation of U.S. Shareholders,” it is expected that each Shareholder will include in the computation of their taxable income their proportionate share of the taxable income and expenses of the Trust, including gains and losses realized in connection with the use or sale of INJ to pay Trust expenses or facilitate redemption transactions, as well as any amounts received in connection with staking, as applicable. Although the Trust anticipates making quarterly distributions to Shareholders, any tax liability that a Shareholder incurs as a result of holding Shares would need to be satisfied from some other source of funds in the event that quarterly distributions are insufficient to cover such tax liability. If a Shareholder sells Shares in order to raise funds to satisfy such a tax liability, the sale itself may generate additional taxable gain or loss.

The tax treatment of INJ and transactions involving INJ for United States federal income tax purposes may change.

Under current IRS guidance, INJ is treated as property, not as currency, for U.S. federal income tax purposes and transactions involving payment in INJ in return for goods and services are treated as barter exchanges. Such exchanges result in capital gain or loss measured by the difference between the price at which INJ is exchanged and the taxpayer’s basis in the INJ. However, because INJ is a new technological innovation, because IRS guidance has taken the form of administrative pronouncements that may be modified without prior notice and comment, and because there is as yet little case law on the subject, the U.S. federal income tax treatment of an investment in INJ or in transactions relating to investments in INJ may change from that described in this Prospectus, possibly with retroactive effect. Any such change in the U.S. federal income tax treatment of INJ may have a negative effect on prices of INJ and may adversely affect the value of the Shares. In this regard, the IRS has indicated that it has made it a priority to issue additional guidance related to the taxation of digital asset transactions, such as transactions involving INJ. In addition, the IRS and U.S. Treasury Department have promulgated final Treasury regulations regarding the tax information reporting rules for digital asset transactions. While the U.S. Treasury Department and the IRS have started to issue such additional guidance, whether any future guidance will adversely affect the U.S. federal income tax treatment of an investment in INJ or in transactions relating to investments in INJ is unknown. Moreover, future developments that may arise with respect to digital assets may increase the uncertainty with respect to the treatment of digital assets for U.S. federal income tax purposes.

Investors should consult their personal tax advisors before making any decision to purchase the Shares of the Trust. Additionally, the tax considerations contained herein are in summary form and may not be used as the sole basis for the decision to invest in the Shares from a tax perspective, since the individual situation of each investor must also be taken into account. Accordingly, the considerations regarding taxation contained herein do not constitute any sort of material information or tax advice nor are they in any way to be construed as a representation or warranty with respect to specific tax consequences.

The tax treatment of INJ and transactions involving INJ for state and local tax purposes is not settled.

Because INJ is a new technological innovation, the tax treatment of INJ for state and local tax purposes, including without limitation state and local income and sales and use taxes, is not settled. It is uncertain what guidance, if any, on the treatment of INJ for state and local tax purposes may be issued in the future. A state or local government authority’s treatment of INJ may have negative consequences, including the imposition of a greater tax burden on investors in INJ or the imposition of a greater cost on the acquisition and disposition of INJ generally. Moreover, it cannot be ruled out that the tax treatment by tax authorities and courts could be interpreted differently or could be subject to changes in the future. Any such treatment may have a negative effect on prices of INJ and may adversely affect the value of the Shares.

The taxation of INJ and associated companies can vary significantly by jurisdiction and is subject to risk of significant revision. Such revision, or the application of new tax schemes or taxation in additional jurisdictions, may adversely impact the Trust’s performance. Before making a decision to invest in the Trust, investors should consult their local tax advisor on taxation.

A hard “fork” of the Injective Network could result in Shareholders incurring a tax liability.

The Trust intends to disclaim any digital assets created by a fork of the Injective Network. Although in certain circumstances the Sponsor may claim or receive new digital assets created by such a fork and use good faith efforts to make those digital assets (or at the Sponsor’s discretion, the proceeds thereof) available to Shareholders as of the record date of the fork, there can be no assurance that the Sponsor will do so. Therefore, if a fork of the Injective Network results in holders of INJ receiving a new digital asset of value, the Trust and the Shareholders may not participate in that value.

If a hard fork occurs in the Injective Network and the Trust claims the new forked asset, the Trust could hold both the original INJ and the new “forked” asset. Under current IRS guidance, a hard fork resulting in the receipt of new units of a digital asset is a taxable event giving rise to ordinary income equal to the value of the new digital asset. The Trust Agreement will require that, if such a transaction occurs, the Trust will as soon as possible direct the INJ Custodians to distribute the new forked asset in-kind to the Sponsor, as agent for the Shareholders, and the Sponsor will arrange to sell the new forked asset and for the proceeds to be distributed to the Shareholders. Such a sale will give rise to gain or loss, for U.S. federal income tax purposes, if the amount realized on the sale differs from the value of the new forked asset at the time it was received by the Trust. A hard fork may therefore give rise to additional tax liabilities for Shareholders.

INJ staking may result in adverse tax consequences for Shareholders.

To the extent the Sponsor determines to stake a portion of the Trust’s INJ, the staking of the Trust’s INJ is expected to result in the Trust’s receipt of amounts received in connection with staking in the form of additional INJ. Any such rewards are expected to be treated as ordinary income for U.S. federal income tax purposes. Thus, the Trust’s receipt of rewards derived from INJ staking activities could result in beneficial owners of Shares incurring tax liability which may not correspond in amount or timing with a distribution from the Trust. Additionally, the Trust’s receipt of amounts received in connection with staking could have implications for investors sensitive to unrelated business taxable income, U.S. withholding taxes or taxable income effectively connected with a U.S. trade or business. The U.S. federal income tax treatment of staking may change from that described in this Prospectus, possibly with retroactive effect.

The treatment of staking in a grantor trust for U.S. federal income tax purposes is still developing.

As a grantor trust, the Trust can undertake only certain types of activities. For example, generally, the Trust cannot vary its investment portfolio to take advantage of market fluctuations. The Trust may receive income from investment activities that do not require such decision-making. In November 2025, the U.S. Treasury Department and IRS issued guidance providing a safe harbor for certain staking activities with an investment trust treated as a grantor trust for U.S. federal income tax purposes. The requirements under the safe harbor and under existing law are subject to interpretation. If the Trust were viewed as undertaking the types of activities that would not be allowable for U.S. federal income tax purposes, then the Trust could lose its income tax status as a grantor trust, and the Trust could be reclassified as a partnership. If the Trust were reclassified as a partnership, a more complex reporting regime would apply, and Shareholders would receive a Form K-1. If the Trust were reclassified as a partnership but did not satisfy a safe harbor or exception to the publicly traded partnership rules, it could be reclassified as a corporation, which would subject the Trust to corporate level tax, and the Shareholder’s return on investment would likely be affected.

The intended tax treatment of the Trust will limit the flexibility of the Trust’s investment decisions.

The Trust is intended to be a grantor trust for U.S. federal income tax purposes. A grantor trust is not permitted to vary the investment portfolio of the Shareholders to take advantage of market fluctuations. Thus, the Sponsor may allow the Trust to hold when an actively managed fund would sell. The Sponsor may distribute proceeds when an actively managed fund would reinvest the proceeds. In addition, a fund treated as a grantor trust may not participate in trading or lending activity without raising a risk of change in status. This means that the returns of the Trust may be less than a successfully actively managed fund.

Other Risks

The Sponsor is leanly staffed and relies heavily on key personnel to manage its activities.

The Sponsor is leanly staffed and relies heavily on key personnel to manage its activities. These key personnel intend to allocate their time managing the Trust in a manner that they deem appropriate. If such key personnel were to leave or be unable to carry out their present responsibilities, it may have an adverse effect on the management of the Sponsor.

The Exchange on which the Shares are listed may halt trading in the Trust’s Shares, which would adversely impact a Shareholder’s ability to sell Shares.

The Trust’s Shares are expected to be listed for trading on the Exchange under the market symbol “[●]”. Trading in Shares may be halted due to market conditions or, in light of the Exchange rules and procedures, for reasons that, in the view of the Exchange, make trading in Shares inadvisable. In addition, trading is subject to trading halts or pauses caused by extraordinary market volatility pursuant to “circuit breaker” rules and/or “limit up/limit down” rules that require trading to be halted or paused for a specified period based on a specified market decline. Additionally, there can be no assurance that the requirements necessary to maintain the listing of the Trust’s Shares will continue to be met or will remain unchanged.

The liquidity of the Shares may also be affected by the withdrawal from participation of Authorized Participants, which could adversely affect the market price of the Shares.

In the event that one or more Authorized Participants or market makers that have substantial interests in the Trust’s Shares withdraw or “step away” from participation in the purchase (creation) or sale (redemption) of the Trust’s Shares, the liquidity of the Shares will likely decrease, which could adversely affect the market price of the Shares and result in Shareholders incurring a loss on their investment.

The market infrastructure of the INJ spot market could result in the absence of active Authorized Participants able to support the trading activity of the Trust, which would affect the liquidity of the Shares in the secondary market and make it difficult to dispose of Shares.

INJ is extremely volatile, and concerns exist about the stability, reliability and robustness of many spot markets where INJ trades. In a highly volatile market, or if one or more spot markets supporting the INJ market faces an issue, it could be extremely challenging for any Authorized Participants to provide continuous liquidity in the Shares. There can be no guarantee that the Sponsor will be able to find an Authorized Participant to actively and continuously support the Trust.

Shareholders that are not Authorized Participants may only purchase or sell their Shares in secondary trading markets, and the conditions associated with trading in secondary markets may adversely affect Shareholders’ investment in the Shares.

Only Authorized Participants may create or redeem Baskets. All other Shareholders that desire to purchase or sell Shares must do so through the Exchange or in other markets, if any, in which the Shares may be traded. Shares may trade at a premium or discount to the NAV per Share or the Principal Market NAV per Share.

The Sponsor relies heavily on key personnel. The departure of any such key personnel could negatively impact the Trust’s operations and adversely impact an investment in the Trust.

The Sponsor relies heavily on key personnel to manage its activities. These key personnel intend to allocate their time managing the Trust in a manner that they deem appropriate. If such key personnel were to leave or be unable to carry out their present responsibilities, it may have an adverse effect on the management of the Sponsor.

Shareholders have no right or power to take part in the management of the Trust. Accordingly, no investor should purchase Shares unless such investor is willing to entrust all aspects of the management of the Trust to the Trustee and the Sponsor.

In addition, certain personnel performing services on behalf of the Sponsor will be shared with the respective affiliates of the Sponsor, including with respect to execution, Trust operations and legal, regulatory and tax oversight. Such individuals will devote a small percentage of their time to those activities.

Additionally, there can be no assurance that all of the personnel who provide services to the Trust will continue to be associated with the Trust for any length of time. The loss of the services of one or more such individuals could have an adverse impact on the Trust’s ability to realize its investment objective.

The Trust is new, and if it is not profitable, the Trust may terminate and liquidate at a time that is disadvantageous to Shareholders.

The Trust is new. If the Trust does not attract sufficient assets to remain open (such as, for example, where the current and anticipated total assets of the Trust relative to the current and anticipated total expenses of the Trust would make continued operation of the Trust impracticable), then the Trust could be terminated and liquidated at the direction of the Sponsor (or required to do so because it is delisted by the Exchange). Termination and liquidation of the Trust could occur at a time that is disadvantageous to Shareholders. When the Trust’s assets are sold as part of the Trust’s liquidation, the resulting proceeds distributed to Shareholders may be less than those that may be realized in a sale outside of a liquidation context.

Shareholders do not have the rights enjoyed by investors in certain other vehicles and may be adversely affected by a lack of statutory rights and by limited voting and distribution rights.

The Shares have limited voting and distribution rights. For example, Shareholders do not have the right to elect directors, the Trust may enact splits or reverse splits without Shareholder approval, and the Trust is not required to pay regular distributions, although the Trust may pay distributions at the discretion of the Sponsor.

The exclusive jurisdiction for certain types of actions and proceedings and waiver of trial by jury clauses set forth in the Trust Agreement may have the effect of limiting a Shareholder’s rights to bring legal action against the Trust and could limit a purchaser’s ability to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with the Trust.

The Trust Agreement provides that the courts of the state of Delaware and any federal courts located in Wilmington, Delaware will be the exclusive jurisdiction for any claims, suits, actions or proceedings. However, pursuant to the Trust Agreement, this shall not apply to causes of actions for violations of U.S. federal or state securities laws. Section 22 of the 1933 Act creates concurrent jurisdiction for federal and state courts over all suits brought to enforce any duty or liability created by the 1933 Act or the rules and regulations thereunder. Investors cannot waive compliance with the federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder.

By purchasing Shares in the Trust, Shareholders waive certain claims that the courts of the state of Delaware and any federal courts located in Wilmington, Delaware are inconvenient venues or are otherwise inappropriate. As such, Shareholders could be required to litigate a matter relating to the Trust in a Delaware court, even if that court may otherwise be inconvenient for such Shareholders.

The Trust Agreement also waives the right to trial by jury in any such claim, suit, action or proceeding, provided that causes of actions for violations of the Exchange Act or the 1933 Act will not be governed by the waiver of the right to trial by jury provision of the Trust Agreement. If a lawsuit is brought against the Trust, it may be heard only by a judge or justice of the applicable trial court, which would be conducted according to different civil procedures and may result in different outcomes than a trial by jury would have, including results that could be less favorable to the plaintiffs in any such action. By purchasing Shares in the Trust, Shareholders waive a right to a trial by jury which may limit a Shareholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with the Trust.

The Trust Agreement includes a provision restricting Shareholders’ right to bring a derivative action.

Under Section 7.4 of the Trust Agreement, Shareholders’ statutory right under Delaware law to bring a derivative action (i.e., to initiate a lawsuit in the name of the Trust in order to assert a claim belonging to the Trust against a fiduciary of the Trust or against a third-party when the Trust’s management has refused to do so) is restricted. Under Delaware law, a shareholder may bring a derivative action if the shareholder is a shareholder at the time the action is brought and either (i) was a shareholder at the time of the transaction at issue or (ii) acquired the status of shareholder by operation of law or the Trust’s governing instrument from a person who was a shareholder at the time of the transaction at issue. Additionally, Section 3816(e) of the Delaware Statutory Trust Act specifically provides that a “beneficial owner’s right to bring a derivative action may be subject to such additional standards and restrictions, if any, as are set forth in the governing instrument of the statutory trust, including, without limitation, the requirement that beneficial owners owning a specified beneficial interest in the statutory trust join in the bringing of the derivative action.” In addition to the requirements of applicable law and in accordance with Section 3816(e) of the Delaware Statutory Trust Act, the Trust Agreement provides that no Shareholder will have the right, power or authority to bring or maintain a derivative action, suit or other proceeding on behalf of the Trust unless two or more Shareholders who are eligible to bring such derivative action under the Delaware Trust Statute and who (i) are not “Affiliates” (as defined in the Trust Agreement and below) of one another and (ii) collectively hold at least 10% of the outstanding Shares join in the bringing or maintaining of such action, suit or other proceeding. “Affiliate” means (i) any Person directly or indirectly owning, controlling or holding with power to vote 10% or more of the outstanding voting securities of such Person, (ii) any Person 10% or more of whose outstanding voting securities are directly or indirectly owned, controlled or held with power to vote by such Person, (iii) any Person, directly or indirectly, controlling, controlled by or under common control of such Person, (iv) any employee, officer, director, member, manager or partner of such Person, or (v) if such Person is an employee, officer, director, member, manager or partner, any Person for which such Person acts in any such capacity; and “Person” means any natural person and any partnership, limited liability company, statutory trust, corporation, association, or other legal entity.

In addition to the 10% ownership threshold described above, the Trust Agreement imposes the following further procedural conditions on any Shareholder seeking to bring a derivative action on behalf of the Trust: (1) prior to bringing any such action, two or more non-affiliated Shareholders collectively holding at least 10% of the outstanding Shares must first make a pre-suit demand upon the Sponsor to bring the subject action, unless an effort to cause the Sponsor to bring such an action is not likely to succeed (a demand shall only be deemed not likely to succeed, and therefore excused, if the Sponsor has a personal financial interest in the transaction at issue, and the Sponsor shall not be deemed interested in a transaction or otherwise disqualified from ruling on the merits of a Shareholder demand by virtue of the fact that the Sponsor receives remuneration for his or her service as Sponsor of the Trust or as a trustee or director of one or more trusts that are under common management with or otherwise affiliated with the Trust); and (2) unless a demand is excused pursuant to clause (1) of this paragraph, the Sponsor must be afforded a reasonable amount of time to consider such Shareholder request and to investigate the basis of such claim and the Sponsor shall be entitled to retain counsel or other advisors in considering the merits of the request, and the Sponsor shall require an undertaking by the Shareholders making such request to reimburse the Trust for the expense of any such advisor in the event the Sponsor determines not to take action. Any decision by the Sponsor to bring, maintain, or compromise (or not to bring, maintain, or compromise) any such court action, proceeding or claim, or to submit the matter to a vote of Shareholders, shall be made by the Sponsor in good faith and shall be binding upon the Shareholders. In addition to claims that must be brought derivatively under applicable law, the Trust Agreement requires that any claim affecting all Shareholders of the Trust proportionately, based on their number of Shares of the Trust, must also be brought as a derivative claim subject to these conditions, regardless of whether such claim involves a violation of a Shareholder’s rights under the Trust Agreement or any other alleged violation of contractual or individual rights that might otherwise give rise to a direct claim (and regardless, in each case, of whether such claims sound in tort, fraud or otherwise, or are based on common law, statutory, equitable, legal or other grounds).

Shareholders may be adversely affected by creation or redemption orders that are subject to postponement, suspension or rejection under certain circumstances.

The Trust may, in its discretion, suspend the right of creation or redemption or may postpone the redemption or purchase settlement date, for (1) any period during which an emergency exists as a result of which the fulfillment of a purchase order or the redemption distribution is not reasonably practicable (for example, as a result of a significant technical failure, power outage, or network error), or (2) such other period as the Sponsor determines to be necessary for the protection of the Shareholders of the Trust (for example, where acceptance of the total deposit required to create each Basket (a “Creation Basket Deposit”) would have certain adverse tax consequences to the Trust or its Shareholders). In addition, the Trust may reject a redemption order if the order is not in proper form as described in the applicable Authorized Participant Agreement or if the fulfillment of the order might be unlawful. Any such postponement, suspension or rejection could adversely affect a redeeming Authorized Participant. Suspension of creation privileges may adversely impact how the Shares are traded and arbitraged on the secondary market, which could cause them to trade at levels materially different (premiums and discounts) from the fair value of their underlying holdings.

Shareholders may be adversely affected by an overstatement or understatement of the NAV or the Principal Market NAV calculation of the Trust due to the valuation methodology employed on the date of the NAV or the Principal Market NAV calculation.

The value established by using the Pricing Benchmark may be different from what would be produced through the use of another methodology. INJ valued using techniques other than those employed by the Pricing Benchmark, including INJ investments that are “fair valued,” may differ from the value established by the Pricing Benchmark.

Shareholders may be adversely affected by the amendment of the Trust Agreement without shareholder consent.

Subject to certain exceptions set forth in the Trust Agreement the Trust Agreement can be amended by the Sponsor in its sole discretion and without the shareholders’ consent by making an amendment, an agreement supplemental to the Trust Agreement, or an amended and restated trust agreement, which amendments may materially adversely affect the interests of the Shareholders.

INJ, INJ MARKETS AND REGULATION OF INJ

This section of the Prospectus provides a more detailed description of INJ, including information about the historical development of INJ, how a person holds INJ, how to use INJ in transactions, how to trade INJ, the spot markets where INJ can be bought, held and sold, the Injective over-the-counter (“OTC”) market and INJ validating.

INJ and the Injective Network

The Injective Network is a Layer 1 blockchain designed for decentralized financial services (“DeFi”), with a transactions-per-second threshold of over 600,000 as of April 2026 and a native token, INJ, that secures the network via a Proof-of-Stake consensus mechanism that fuels the network’s core protocol functionalities. As a finance-optimized base layer, the Injective Network intends to address infrastructure-level limitations such as fragmented liquidity, slow finality, and restrictive smart contract execution, by combining chain-level financial primitives and multi-virtual-machine capability with institutional-grade scalability and finality powered by the network’s custom implementation of the Tendermint BFT consensus mechanism.

The value of INJ is determined in part by the supply of and demand for INJ in the markets for exchange that have been organized to facilitate the trading of INJ. As of September 1, 2026, INJ had a total market capitalization of approximately $488 million. INJ is maintained on the Injective Network. No single entity controls or administers the operations of the Injective Network, although some entities like Injective Labs exert significant influence. The Injective Network is accessed through software and governs INJ’s creation and movement. The source code for the Injective Network is open-source, and anyone can contribute to its development.

The primary function of the Injective Network is to serve as a universal financial infrastructure layer, enabling developers and institutions to launch decentralized derivatives, spot exchanges, prediction markets, tokenized real world assets, and synthetic assets, all on a shared order book and execution layer.

The Injective Network intends to address critical on-chain problems around liquidity fragmentation, capital inefficiency, and limited composability of financial products. Through its fully on-chain central limit order books, low transaction costs, native insurance fund, and its “iAssets” tokenized real world asset framework, the Injective Network is intended to create a unified environment for trading complex financial instruments at scale with low latency and deep interoperability across chains. The Injective Network’s chain-level exchange module, allows DApps to plug directly into the protocol’s matching engine and liquidity without needing to build their own infrastructure. Unlike general-purpose chains like Ethereum or Solana, the Injective Network has a built-in exchange logic, designed to give it a significant performance and developer user experience advantage. Moreover, cross-chain compatibility via inter-block communication and compatibility with the Ethereum Virtual Machine, Solana Virtual Machine, and many other VMs, is intended to position Injective as a liquidity hub across ecosystems. A VM is the deterministic, sandboxed execution environment inside a blockchain node that runs smart-contract code and applies state changes so every node reaches the same result.

The Injective Network is also secured by a proof of stake consensus mechanism. Validators and delegators can freely participate in the Injective Network by staking. Validators operate nodes on the Injective Network, and delegators can assign INJ to a particular node of choice operated by such stakers. Staked INJ enables a robust decentralized environment which is designed to ensure that security is achieved via a penalty and rewards systems. INJ staked by or delegated to validators can be subject to slashing in the event of malicious behavior by such validator or their failure to effectively fulfill responsibilities. More specifically, staking on the Injective Network refers to using INJ, or permitting INJ to be used, directly or indirectly, through an agent or otherwise, in the Injective Network’s proof-of-stake validation protocol, in exchange for the receipt of consideration, including, but not limited to, staking rewards paid in kind.

The Injective Network’s mainnet launched in November 2021, giving the network roughly five years of operational history. As of September 1, 2026, the total value locked (“TVL”) on the Injective Network sat at around $9.12 million, below its 2025 peak of approximately $50 million, and the market capitalization of INJ was approximately $488 million. Despite the network’s modest TVL, the Injective ecosystem has facilitated over $75 billion in cumulative trading volume across spot markets and $145.1 million on derivative markets as of September 1, 2026. The Injective Network has onboarded hundreds of thousands of users and saw an average of approximately 90,000 daily active wallets during the third calendar quarter of 2026, as of September 13, 2026.

The Injective Network’s revenue model is powered primarily by trading fees from DeFi applications, including perpetual futures and spot markets, hosted on the Injective Network. These fees are routed to the network’s community buyback program, a monthly on-chain event where participants commit INJ, and in return receive a pro rata share of the revenue by participating applications on the Injective Network and from direct contributions of individual users. The committed INJ is exchanged, or “bought back”, and then permanently removed from circulation (or “burned”), reducing the total supply of INJ. This creates a deflationary flywheel helping align token value with usage and network activity. The Injective Network’s deflationary mechanism primarily relies on trading fees from DeFi apps hosted on the network in contrast to most other Layer 1 blockchains that primarily burn a portion of transaction fees from mainnet transactions, which helps further the goal of keeping transaction fees low.

The INJ token model is designed to be sustainable with staking rewards, protocol fee sinks, and broad utility across governance, collateral, and access rights. Core to the Injective Network’s deflationary model is the network’s community buyback programs, helping position INJ it as one of the few DeFi-native assets with an emphasis on long-term value accrual embedded at the protocol level.

Overview of the Injective Network’s Operations

In order to own, transfer or use INJ directly on the Injective Network on a peer-to-peer basis (as opposed to through an intermediary, such as a custodian or centralized exchange), a person generally must have internet access to connect to the Injective Network. INJ transactions may be made directly between end-users without the need for a third-party intermediary. To prevent the possibility of double-spending INJ, a user must notify the Injective Network of the transaction by broadcasting the transaction data to its network peers. The Injective Network provides confirmation against double-spending by memorializing every peer-to-peer transaction in the Injective Network, which is publicly accessible and transparent. This memorialization and verification against double-spending of peer-to-peer transactions is accomplished through the Injective Network validation process, which adds “blocks” of data, including recent transaction information, to the Injective Network.

Smart Contracts and Development on the Injective Network

Smart contracts are programs that run on a blockchain that can execute automatically when certain conditions are met. Smart contracts facilitate the exchange of anything representative of value, such as money, information, property, or voting rights. Using smart contracts, users can send or receive digital assets, create markets, store registries of debts or promises, represent ownership of property or a company, move funds in accordance with conditional instructions and create new digital assets.

Development on the Injective Network involves building more complex tools on top of smart contracts, such as DApps; organizations that are autonomous, known as decentralized autonomous organizations; and entirely new decentralized networks. For example, a company that distributes charitable donations on behalf of users could hold donated funds in smart contracts that are paid to charities only if the charity satisfies certain pre-defined conditions. Moreover, the Injective Network has also been used as a platform for creating new digital assets and conducting their associated offerings.

More recently, the Injective Network has been used for DeFi or open finance platforms, which seek to democratize access to financial services, such as borrowing, lending, custody, trading, derivatives and insurance, by removing third-party intermediaries. DeFi can allow users to lend and earn interest on their digital assets, exchange one digital asset for another and create derivative digital assets such as stablecoins, which are digital assets pegged to a reserve asset such as fiat currency.

In addition, the Injective Network and other smart contract platforms have been used for creating non-fungible tokens (“NFTs”). Unlike digital assets native to smart contract platforms which are fungible and enable the payment of fees for smart contract execution. NFTs allow for digital ownership of assets that convey certain rights to other digital or tokenized real world assets. This new paradigm allows users to own rights to other assets through NFTs, which enable users to trade them with others on the Injective Network. For example, an NFT may convey rights to a digital asset that exists in an online game or a DApp, and users can trade their NFT in the DApp or game, and carry them to other digital experiences, creating an entirely new free-market internet-native economy that can be monetized in the physical world.

Summary of an INJ Transaction

Prior to engaging in INJ transactions directly on the Injective Network, a user generally must first install on its computer or mobile device an Injective Network software program that will allow the user to generate a private and public key pair associated with an INJ address. The Injective Network software program and the INJ address also enable the user to connect to the Injective Network and transfer INJ to, and receive INJ from, other users.

Each Injective Network address, or wallet, is associated with a unique “public key” and “private key” pair. To receive INJ, the INJ recipient must provide its public key to the party initiating the transfer. This activity is analogous to a recipient for a transaction in U.S. dollars providing a routing address in wire instructions to the payor so that cash may be wired to the recipient’s account. The payor approves the transfer to the address provided by the recipient by “signing” a transaction that consists of the recipient’s public key with the private key of the address from where the payor is transferring the INJ. The recipient, however, does not make public or provide to the sender its related private key. Wallets that are used to store cryptographic keys can be “hot” or “cold.” A hot wallet is connected to the internet, and is thus readily available to facilitate trading, but may be more vulnerable to hacking. A cold wallet is a wallet that stores cryptographic keys offline, such as on a computer that has no internet access, a segregated piece of hardware, or a piece of paper.

Neither the recipient nor the sender reveal their private keys in a transaction, because the private key authorizes transfer of the funds in that address to other users. Therefore, if a user loses his or her private key, the user may permanently lose access to the INJ contained in the associated address. Likewise, INJ is irretrievably lost if the private key associated with them is deleted and no backup has been made. When sending INJ, a user’s Injective Network software program must validate the transaction with the associated private key. In addition, since every computation on the Injective Network requires processing power, there is a transaction fee involved with the transfer that is paid by the payor. The resulting digitally validated transaction is sent by the user’s Injective Network software program to the Injective Network validators to allow transaction confirmation.

Injective Network validators record and confirm transactions when they validate and add blocks of information to the Injective Network. When a validator validates transactions, it creates blocks, which includes data relating to (i) newly submitted and accepted transactions and (ii) a reference to the prior block in the Injective Network to which the new block is being added. The validator becomes aware of outstanding, unrecorded transactions through the data packet transmission and distribution discussed above.

Upon the addition of a block of INJ transactions, the Injective Network software program of both the spending party and the receiving party will show confirmation of the transaction on the Injective Network and reflect an adjustment to the INJ balance in each party’s Injective Network public key, completing the INJ transaction. Once a transaction is confirmed on the Injective Network, it is irreversible. Some INJ transactions are conducted “off-blockchain” and are therefore not recorded in the Injective Network.

Some “off-blockchain transactions” involve the transfer of control over, or ownership of, a specific digital wallet holding INJ or the reallocation of ownership of certain INJ in a pooled-ownership digital wallet, such as a digital wallet owned by a digital asset exchange. In contrast to on-blockchain transactions, which are publicly recorded on the Injective Network, information and data regarding off-blockchain transactions are generally not publicly available. Therefore, off-blockchain transactions are not truly INJ transactions in that they do not involve the transfer of transaction data on the Injective Network and do not reflect a movement of INJ between addresses recorded on the Injective Network’s blockchain. For these reasons, off-blockchain transactions are subject to risks as any such transfer of INJ ownership is not protected by the protocol behind the Injective Network or recorded in, and validated through, the blockchain mechanism.

INJ Markets and Exchanges

INJ can be transferred in direct peer-to-peer transactions through the direct sending of INJ over the Injective Network from one INJ address to another. Among end-users, INJ can be used to pay other members of the Injective Network for goods and services under what resembles a barter system. Consumers can also pay merchants and other commercial businesses for goods or services through direct peer-to-peer transactions on the Injective Network or through third-party service providers.

In addition to using INJ to engage in cross-border transactions or payment for goods and services, investors may purchase and sell INJ to speculate as to the price of INJ in the INJ market, or as a long-term investment to diversify their portfolio. The price of INJ within the market is determined, in part, by the supply of and demand for INJ in the global INJ market, market expectations for the adoption of INJ as a store of value or as a viable cross-border payments facilitator, the number of merchants that accept INJ as a form of payment, and the volume of peer-to-peer transactions, among other factors.

INJ spot markets typically permit investors to open accounts with the market and then purchase and sell INJ via websites or through mobile applications. Prices for trades on INJ spot markets are typically reported publicly. An investor opening a trading account on a digital asset trading platform must deposit an accepted government-issued currency into its account with the trading platform, or a previously acquired digital asset, before they can purchase or sell assets on the trading platform. The process of establishing an account with a digital asset trading platform and trading INJ is different from, and should not be confused with, the process of users sending INJ from one INJ address to another INJ address on the Injective Network. This latter process is an activity that occurs on the Injective Network, while the former is an activity that occurs entirely within the order book operated by the digital asset trading platform. The digital asset trading platform typically records the investor’s ownership of INJ in its internal books and records, rather than on the Injective Network. The digital asset trading platform ordinarily does not transfer INJ to the investor on the Injective Network unless the investor makes a request to the exchange to withdraw the INJ in its platform trading account to an off-platform INJ wallet.

Outside of the spot markets, INJ can also be traded over-the-counter (“OTC”). The OTC market is largely institutional in nature, and OTC market participants generally consist of institutional entities, such as firms that offer two-sided liquidity for INJ, investment managers, proprietary trading firms, high-net-worth individuals that trade INJ on a proprietary basis, entities with sizeable INJ holdings, and family offices. The OTC market provides a relatively flexible market in terms of quotes, price, quantity, and other factors, although it tends to involve large blocks of INJ. The OTC market has no formal structure and no open-outcry meeting place. Parties engaging in OTC transactions will agree upon a price—often via phone or email—and then one of the two parties will then initiate the transaction. For example, a seller of INJ could initiate the transaction by sending the INJ to the buyer’s INJ address. The buyer would then wire U.S. dollars to the seller’s bank account. OTC trades are sometimes hedged and eventually settled with concomitant trades on digital asset trading platforms. 

To the extent INJ Counterparties wish to use futures to hedge their exposure, note that while growing in recent years, the market for exchange-traded INJ futures has a limited trading history and operational experience and may be less liquid, more volatile and more vulnerable to economic, market and industry changes than more established futures markets. The liquidity of the market will depend on, among other things, the adoption of INJ and commercial and speculative interest in the market. Shareholders in the Trust will not benefit from the protections afforded to investors in INJ futures contracts on regulated futures markets because, as of the date of this Prospectus, there is no regulated INJ futures market in the United States.

Regulation of INJ and Government Oversight

The Binance Complaint, the SEC’s actions against XRP’s issuer and the issuer of the TerraUSD and LUNA digital assets, as well as seemingly inconsistent views of different district court judges, underscore the continuing uncertainty around which digital assets are securities, and demonstrate that such factors, such as how long a digital asset has been in existence, how widely held it is, how large its market capitalization is and whether it has actual use in commercial transactions, ultimately may have no bearing on whether the SEC or a court will find it to be offered or sold as a security.

If INJ is found by a court or other regulatory body to be offered or sold as a security, the Trust could be considered an unregistered “investment company” under the 1940 Act, which could necessitate the Trust’s liquidation under the terms of the Trust Agreement. Furthermore, the Trust could be considered to be engaged in a distribution (i.e., a public offering) of unregistered securities in violation of Section 5 of the 1933 Act, which could impose significant civil and criminal liability on the Trust. There is no guarantee that a court of regulatory body will agree with the Sponsor’s assessment that INJ is not offered or sold as a security.

To the extent that INJ is deemed to fall within the definition of being offered or sold as a security under U.S. federal securities laws, the Trust and the Sponsor may be subject to additional requirements under the 1940 Act and the Advisers Act. The Sponsor or the Trust may be required to register as an investment adviser under the Advisers Act. Such additional registration may result in extraordinary, recurring and/or non-recurring expenses of the Trust, thereby materially and adversely impacting the Shares. If the Sponsor and/or the Trust determines not to comply with such additional regulatory and registration requirements, the Sponsor may terminate the Trust. Any such termination could result in the liquidation of the Trust’s INJ at a time that is disadvantageous to Shareholders.

Regulation of Digital Assets in General

As digital assets have grown in both popularity and market size, the U.S. Congress and a number of U.S. federal and state agencies (including FinCEN, SEC, CFTC, FINRA, the CFPB, the Department of Justice, the Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the IRS and state financial institution regulators) have been examining the operations of digital asset networks, digital asset users and the digital asset spot markets, with particular focus on the extent to which digital assets can be used to launder the proceeds of illegal activities or fund criminal or terrorist enterprises and the safety and soundness of spot markets or other service-providers that hold digital assets for users. Many of these state and federal agencies have issued consumer advisories regarding the risks posed by digital assets to investors.

Events in years prior, including among others the bankruptcy filings of FTX and its subsidiaries, Three Arrows Capital, Celsius Network, Voyager Digital, Genesis, BlockFi and others, and other developments in the digital asset markets, have resulted in calls for heightened scrutiny and regulation of the digital asset industry, with a specific focus on intermediaries such as digital asset exchanges, platforms, and custodians.

In addition, federal and state agencies, and other countries have issued rules or guidance about the treatment of digital asset transactions or requirements for businesses engaged in digital asset activity.

President Trump’s January 23, 2025 Executive Order, titled “Strengthening American Leadership in Digital Financial Technology”, aimed to reorient the federal government’s approach to digital assets. The Executive Order emphasized the importance of the digital asset industry in innovation and economic development, and outlined policies to support the growth and use of digital assets, blockchain technology and related technologies. President Trump’s order also revoked former President Biden’s March 9, 2022 Executive Order, titled, “Responsible Development of Digital Assets” and the U.S. Treasury Department’s July 2022 “Framework for International Engagement of Digital Assets” and all policies, directives and guidance issued pursuant to those items produced by the previous administration.

In January 2025, the SEC’s acting Chairman Mark T. Uyeda announced the SEC Crypto Task Force. The task force has an objective of developing a comprehensive and clear regulatory framework for digital assets. The task force also seeks to establish a practical and achievable process for registration of digital assets and design clearly defined disclosure requirements and frameworks.

The CFTC may have regulatory jurisdiction over INJ derivatives markets, if these were to develop in the U.S. In addition, if the CFTC determines that INJ is a “commodity” under the CEA and the rules thereunder, it may have jurisdiction to prosecute fraud and market manipulation in the cash, or spot, market for INJ. The CFTC may pursue enforcement actions relating to fraud and market manipulation involving INJ and INJ markets. Beyond instances of fraud or manipulation, the CFTC generally would not oversee cash or spot market exchanges or transactions involving INJ that do not use collateral, leverage, or financing.

Various foreign jurisdictions have, and may continue to, in the near future, adopt laws, regulations or directives that affect the Injective Network, the INJ markets, and their users, particularly INJ spot markets and service providers that fall within such jurisdictions’ regulatory scope. Foreign jurisdictions including Canada, Brazil and Switzerland have also approved exchange-traded INJ products.

The effect of any future regulatory change on the Trust or INJ is impossible to predict, but such change could be substantial and adverse to the Trust and the value of the Shares.

THE TRUST AND INJ PRICES

Overview of the Trust

The Trust is an exchange-traded fund that issues Shares that are expected to trade on the Exchange. The Trust’s investment objective is to track the performance of INJ, as measured by the performance of the Pricing Benchmark, as adjusted for the Trust’s expenses and liabilities, and to reflect rewards from staking a portion of the Trust’s INJ, to the extent the Sponsor in its sole discretion determines that the Trust may do so without undue legal or regulatory risk, such as, without limitation, the risk of jeopardizing the Trust’s ability to qualify as a grantor trust for tax purposes. In seeking to achieve its investment objective, the Trust will hold INJ and the Trust’s administrator will value the Trust’s Shares daily based on the INJ price reported by the Pricing Benchmark. The Trust is sponsored by 21Shares US LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of 21co Holdings Limited. The ultimate parent company of 21co Holdings Limited is FalconX, a leading institutional digital asset prime brokerage.

The Sponsor believes that the Trust will provide a cost-efficient way for Shareholders to implement strategic and tactical asset allocation strategies that use INJ by investing in the Trust’s Shares rather than purchasing, holding and trading INJ directly. The latter alternative would require selecting an INJ spot market and opening an account or arranging a private transaction, establishing a personal computer system capable of transacting directly on the blockchain, and incurring the risk associated with maintaining and protecting a private key that is irrecoverable if lost, among other difficulties. 

Staking

Staking requires that the Trust lock up the staked INJ and become subject to an unbonding period to unstake the staked INJ, meaning that the Trust cannot transfer the staked INJ during the time that the INJ is staked and during which it is being unbonded. As of September 1, 2026, there is a 21 day lockup period to unbond INJ.

Due to the time involved in “exiting” the staking process, there is a risk that the Trust could become unable to timely meet excessive redemption requests in amounts that are greater than the portion of the Trust’s INJ that remains un-staked, leading to temporary delays in settlement and, in extreme scenarios, the temporary unavailability of the Trust’s redemption program. Moreover, any staked INJ which must be un-staked in order to fulfill a redemption (to the extent such redemption cannot be fulfilled utilizing the portion of the Trust’s INJ that has not been staked, or through another mechanism to manage liquidity in connection with Redemption Orders) will be un-staked only after the redemption request is approved by the Trust, the Sponsor executes an un-stake or withdrawal transaction through an INJ Custodian, and such transaction is processed by the Injective Network. The Staking Services Providers will not be allowed to transfer unstaked INJ or Staking Provider Consideration to other addresses on the Injective Network in connection with any such redemption requests.

In addition, depending on the anticipated length of the unbonding period, the staked INJ may be classified as illiquid under the Trust’s liquidity risk management program. In addition, if INJ is determined to be offered or sold as a security under the 1933 Act, it could be subject to significant constraints in terms of any transfer or disposal of such INJ. In such event, the Trust may consider INJ to be an “illiquid security”, which it defines as a security that the Trust reasonably expects cannot be sold or disposed of in current market conditions in seven calendar days or less without the sale or disposition significantly changing the market value of the security.

Rewards for staked INJ may be accrued even before the staked INJ is unbonded. Once accrued, such INJ rewards are considered part of the Trust’s assets, even if unbonding has not occurred. The Sponsor and the Trust will manage liquidity in accordance with the Trust’s liquidity risk policies and procedures and will monitor staking and bonding/unbonding activity closely on a daily basis. For more information on the Trust’s liquidity risk policies and procedures, see “Staking of the Trust’s Assets—Liquidity Risk Policies and Procedures.”

Use of the FTSE Injective Index

The net assets of the Trust and its Shares are valued on a daily basis with reference to the FTSE Injective Index, the Pricing Benchmark, a standardized reference rate published by FTSE International Limited, the Benchmark Provider, that is designed to reflect the performance of INJ in U.S. dollars. The Pricing Benchmark is calculated on weekdays and Sundays between 3:00:15 p.m. and 4:00:00 p.m. ET. The Sponsor believes that the use of the Pricing Benchmark is reflective of a reasonable valuation of the average spot price of INJ. The Sponsor has selected the Pricing Benchmark for its quality and rigor as well as its broad, well-balanced universe, which the Sponsor believes best reflects the market price of INJ. The Trust also uses the Pricing Benchmark to calculate its NAV, which is the aggregate U.S. Dollar value of INJ in the Trust, based on the Pricing Benchmark, less its liabilities and expenses. “NAV per Share” is calculated by dividing NAV by the number of Shares currently outstanding. NAV and NAV per Share are not measures calculated in accordance with GAAP. NAV is not intended to be a substitute for the Trust’s Principal Market NAV calculated in accordance with GAAP, and NAV per Share is not intended to be a substitute for the Trust’s Principal Market NAV per Share calculated in accordance with GAAP.

The Pricing Benchmark is determined as a 15-second volume-weighted average price VWAP of INJ closing prices in USD calculated across Constituent Exchanges over a 60-minute observation window ending at 4:00 p.m. ET. For example, the fix at 4:00 p.m. takes all prices published every 15 seconds in the observation window from 3:00:15 p.m. to 4:00:00 p.m. ET (240 observations). Executed transactions from Constituent Exchanges are used in the calculation; price quotes are not used, and prices are calculated net of any transaction costs. After conversion to USD and prior to the final volume-weighted VWAP calculation, executed trades are filtered to identify and remove outliers. Duplicate trades are first removed. At the exchange level, all executed trades for INJ from the most recent 10-minute window are aggregated, a VWAP is calculated for each Constituent Exchange, and trades from any Constituent Exchange whose VWAP falls outside 1.5 standard deviations of the mean VWAP across all Constituent Exchanges are excluded. At the trade level, any individual trade with a price that falls outside 2.5 standard deviations of the mean price across the then most recent 10-minute window across the Constituent Exchanges is excluded.

Exchanges are eligible for inclusion in the Pricing Benchmark as Constituent Exchanges if they qualify as either Watchlist or Participating Exchanges under the Benchmark Provider’s exchange vetting methodology. Watchlist Exchanges must, among other things: (i) have a domicile that does not restrict capital trading by foreign or international investors; (ii) be managed by companies with easily available and verified biographical information on their executive leadership team; (iii) maintain a minimum average daily reported volume of $5,000,000 USD over the six-month period leading up to each quarterly review; (iv) operate as a centralized spot exchange facilitating spot delivery transactions of underlying digital assets; and (v) provide continuous trade data including asset pair, price, volume and accurate timestamp for each trade. Watchlist Exchanges must also pass comprehensive data science tests during each of the previous two quarters demonstrating that trading follows natural buy and sell patterns and occurs at natural and expected lot levels. Participating Exchanges must satisfy all Watchlist criteria and additionally must: (i) operate within the laws of their domiciled country and hold all relevant licensing and registrations; (ii) differentiate users based on geolocation; (iii) have complied with regulatory authorities for requests for information; enforce KYC and AML controls requiring verification of a user’s name, email address, phone number, government-issued identification and bank account; not appear on any third-party sanctions lists; have no founded accusations of fraud or criminal charges against the exchange or its leadership; have experienced no meaningful security lapse or breach in the last 12 months resulting in loss of client or exchange funds exceeding 1.0% of total holdings; and have experienced no significant downtime, defined as more than 24 cumulative hours in any one quarter.

As of [●], 2026, the Constituent Exchanges included in the Pricing Benchmark were [●], [●] and [●]. As of [●], 2026, [●] made up [●]%, [●] made up [●]% and [●] made up [●]%, with [●] holding the remaining [●] % of the market share by trading volume of the Pricing Benchmark. For the [●] period ending [●], 2026, [●] had a pricing volume of $[●], [●] had a pricing volume of $[●], [●] had a pricing volume of $[●] and [●] had a pricing volume of $[●].

The Constituent Exchanges had an aggregate price volume in the INJ-USD pair during the three-month period from [●] to [●] as shown in the table below:

The table below reflects the market share of each of the Constituent Exchanges included in the Pricing Benchmark using data observed by the Pricing Benchmark through the Constituent Exchanges from [●] to [●]: 

[●]

While each of the Constituent Exchanges is subject to a range of federal and state laws regarding various aspects of their functioning, none of the Constituent Exchanges are currently registered with the SEC as a national securities exchange, broker dealer or clearing agency. Further information regarding the domicile, regulation and legal compliance of the Constituent Exchanges may be found, where available, on the websites for such Constituent Exchanges and public registers for compliance with local regulations, among other places.

An oversight function is implemented by the Benchmark Provider in seeking to ensure that the Pricing Benchmark is administered through codified policies for Pricing Benchmark integrity, which include a conflict of interest policy, a control framework, an accountability framework, and an input data policy. These policies are subject to regular review at least once a year by FTSE, with feedback considered by FTSE’s Governance Board before approval is granted. FTSE is authorized as a “Benchmark Administrator” and regulated in the United Kingdom by the Financial Conduct Authority under the UK Benchmark Regulation.

The Sponsor holds full discretion to change either the Pricing Benchmark or the Benchmark Provider subject to proper notification to Shareholders. Shareholder approval is not required. Adjustments to the Pricing Benchmark could impact the NAV of the Trust. These adjustments may result in variations in the calculated spot price of INJ, thereby affecting the valuation of the Trust’s assets and the Trust’s NAV per Share. Once it has actual knowledge of material changes to the Constituent Exchanges used to calculate the Pricing Benchmark, the Trust will notify the owners of the beneficial interests of Shares in a prospectus supplement or in its periodic reports under the Exchange Act, as applicable, and on the Sponsor’s website.

The selection of exchanges for use in the Pricing Benchmark is based on specified criteria and eligibility standards. However, changes to the Constituent Exchanges may result in an impact on the pricing information reflected in the Pricing Benchmark. The exchanges on which market participants primarily execute transactions for INJ may evolve from time to time, and the Benchmark Provider may make changes to the Constituent Exchanges comprising the Pricing Benchmark from time to time for this or other reasons. To the extent the Trust executes transactions for INJ, the exchanges on which the Trust executes transactions do not impact the Constituent Exchanges comprising the Pricing Benchmark.

The Sponsor may, in its sole discretion, change either the Pricing Benchmark or Benchmark Provider without Shareholder approval. Should such a change take place, the Trust will notify the owners of the beneficial interests of Shares in a prospectus supplement or in its periodic Exchange Act reports, as applicable, and on the Sponsor’s website. Once it has actual knowledge of material changes to the Constituent Exchanges used to calculate the Pricing Benchmark, the Trust will notify the owners of the beneficial interests of Shares in a prospectus supplement or in its periodic Exchange Act reports, as applicable, and on the Sponsor’s website. Any adjustments made to the Pricing Benchmark will be published on the Benchmark Provider’s website at https://www.lseg.com/en/ftse-russell/indices/digital-asset#overview or any successor thereto. None of the information on the Benchmark Provider’s website is incorporated by reference into this Prospectus.

Pricing Benchmark data and the description of the Pricing Benchmark are based on information made publicly available by the Benchmark Provider on its website at https://www.lseg.com/en/ftse-russell/indices/digital-asset#overview. None of the information on the Benchmark Provider’s website is incorporated by reference into this Prospectus.

The Benchmark Provider makes no warranty, express or implied, as to the results to be obtained by any person or entity from the use of the Pricing Benchmark for any purpose. Pricing Benchmark information and any other data calculated and/or disseminated, in whole or part, by the Benchmark Provider is for informational purposes only, not intended for trading purposes, and provided on an “as is” basis. The Benchmark Provider does not warrant that the Pricing Benchmark information will be uninterrupted or error-free, or that defects will be corrected. The Benchmark Provider also does not recommend or make any representation as to possible benefits from any securities or investments, or third-party products or services. Shareholders should undertake their own due diligence regarding investment practices.

The Sponsor has entered into a licensing agreement with the Benchmark Provider, pursuant to which the Trust is entitled to use the Pricing Benchmark as a permitted affiliate of the Sponsor. The Pricing Benchmark currently does not track airdrops involving INJ. Accordingly, the Trust does not participate in airdrops, as further described above in “Risk factors — The inability to recognize the economic benefit of a ‘fork’ or an ‘airdrop’ could adversely impact an investment in the Trust.”

The Benchmark Provider is a company incorporated and registered in England, and its principal offices are located at 10 Paternoster Square, London, EC4M 7LS, United Kingdom. The Benchmark Provider is experienced in calculating and administering digital asset indices. The Benchmark Provider is unaffiliated with the Sponsor.

Irrespective of its obligations towards the Sponsor and the Trust, the Benchmark Provider has no obligation to point out errors in the Pricing Benchmark to third parties including but not limited to investors and/or financial intermediaries of the financial instrument. Publication of the Pricing Benchmark by the Benchmark Provider neither constitutes a recommendation by the Benchmark Provider to invest capital in said financial instrument nor does it in any way represent an assurance or opinion of the Benchmark Provider with regard to any investment in this financial instrument. The Benchmark Provider is not responsible for fulfilling the legal requirements concerning the accuracy and completeness of the financial instrument’s prospectus.

NAV DETERMINATIONS

Calculation of NAV and NAV per Share

The Trust’s NAV will be calculated based on the Trust’s net asset holdings as reconciled to the INJ Custodians’ accounts on a market approach, determined on a daily basis in accordance with the Pricing Benchmark price, as promptly as practicable after 4:00 p.m. ET. In determining the Trust’s NAV, the Administrator values the INJ held by the Trust based on the price set by the Pricing Benchmark as of 4:00 p.m. ET. The Sponsor believes that use of the Pricing Benchmark mitigates against idiosyncratic market risk, as the failure of any individual spot market will not materially impact pricing for the Trust. It also allows the Administrator to calculate the NAV in a manner that significantly deters manipulation.

As discussed, the fact that there are multiple INJ spot markets contributing prices to the NAV makes manipulation more difficult in a well-arbitraged and fractured market, as a malicious actor would need to manipulate multiple spot markets simultaneously to impact the NAV, or dramatically skew the historical distribution of volume between the various exchanges.

The Trust’s NAV per Share is calculated by:

The Administrator calculates the NAV of the Trust once each Exchange trading day. The NAV for a normal trading day will be released as promptly as practicable after 4:00 p.m. ET. Trading during the core trading session on the Exchange typically closes at 4:00 p.m. ET. However, NAVs are not officially struck until later in the day (often by 5:30 p.m. ET and almost always by 8:00 p.m. ET). The pause between 4:00 p.m. ET and 5:30 p.m. ET (or later) provides an opportunity for the Administrator to algorithmically detect, flag, investigate, and correct unusual pricing should it occur. Any such correction could adversely affect the value of the Shares. If the Pricing Benchmark is not available, or if the Sponsor determines in good faith that the Pricing Benchmark does not reflect an accurate INJ price, then the Administrator will determine NAV by reference to the Trust’s principal market. There are no predefined criteria to make a good faith assessment as to which of the rules the Sponsor will apply, and the Sponsor may make this determination in its sole discretion.

In addition, in order to provide updated information relating to the Trust for use by Shareholders and market professionals, [●] will calculate and disseminate throughout the core trading session on each trading day an updated intraday indicative value (“IIV”). The IIV will be calculated by using the prior day’s closing NAV as a base and updating that value during the trading day based off of more recent INJ pricing information to reflect any changes in the value of the Trust’s underlying assets and, therefore, the Trust’s NAV.

The Trust is subject to the risk that the Benchmark Provider may calculate the Pricing Benchmark in a manner that ultimately inaccurately reflects the price of INJ. To the extent that the NAV, Principal Market NAV, the Pricing Benchmark, the Administrator’s or the Sponsor’s other valuation methodology are incorrectly calculated, neither the Sponsor, the Administrator, the Benchmark Provider nor the Trustee will be liable for any error and such misreporting of valuation data could adversely affect the value of the Shares and investors could suffer a substantial loss on their investment in the Trust. Moreover, the terms of the Trust Agreement do not prohibit the Sponsor from changing the Pricing Benchmark or other valuation method used to calculate the NAV and Principal Market NAV of the Trust. Any such change in the Pricing Benchmark or other valuation method could affect the value of the Shares and investors could suffer a substantial loss on their investment in the Trust.

The IIV disseminated during the Exchange core trading session hours should not be viewed as an actual real time update of the NAV, because NAV per Share is calculated only once at the end of each trading day based upon the relevant end of day values of the Trust’s investments. The IIV will be disseminated on a per Share basis every 15 seconds during regular Exchange core trading session hours of 9:30 a.m. ET to 4:00 p.m. ET. [●] will disseminate the IIV value through the facilities of CTA/CQ High Speed Lines. In addition, the IIV will be available through on-line information services such as Bloomberg and Reuters. The IIV may differ from the NAV due to the differences in the time window of trades used to calculate each price (the NAV uses a sixty-minute window, whereas the IIV draws prices from the last trade on each exchange in an effort to produce a relevant, real-time price). The Sponsor does not believe this will cause confusion in the marketplace, as Authorized Participants are the only Shareholders who interact with the NAV and the Sponsor will communicate its NAV calculation methodology clearly.

Dissemination of the IIV provides additional information that is not otherwise available to the public and is useful to Shareholders and market professionals in connection with the trading of the Trust’s Shares on the Exchange. Shareholders and market professionals will be able throughout the trading day to compare the market price of the Trust and the IIV. If the market price of the Trust’s Shares diverges significantly from the IIV, market professionals will have an incentive to execute arbitrage trades. For example, if the Trust appears to be trading at a discount compared to the IIV, a market professional could buy the Trust’s Shares on the Exchange and sell short futures contracts. Such arbitrage trades can tighten the tracking between the market price of the Trust and the IIV and thus can be beneficial to all market participants. Dissemination of the IIV provides additional information that is not otherwise available to the public and is useful to Shareholders and market professionals in connection with the trading of the Trust’s Shares on the Exchange. Shareholders and market professionals will be able throughout the trading day to compare the market price of the Trust and the IIV. If the market price of the Trust’s Shares diverges significantly from the IIV, market professionals will have an incentive to execute arbitrage trades. For example, if the Trust appears to be trading at a discount compared to the IIV, a market professional could buy the Trust’s Shares on the Exchange and sell short futures contracts. Such arbitrage trades can tighten the tracking between the market price of the Trust and the IIV and thus can be beneficial to all market participants.

The Trust does not expect that price differentials for INJ across exchanges would have a meaningful impact on this arbitrage mechanism. Furthermore, the Trust does not expect that the closure of any single one exchange would meaningfully impact the arbitrage mechanism because Authorized Participants typically source underlying spot INJ liquidity from multiple exchanges. The Trust acknowledges, however, that this arbitrage mechanism could potentially be adversely impacted if halts in the trading of spot INJ were to occur across multiple exchanges, whether due to breaches or otherwise.

The Sponsor reserves the right to adjust the Share price of the Trust in the future to maintain convenient trading ranges for Shareholders. Any adjustments would be accomplished through stock splits or reverse stock splits. Such splits would decrease (in the case of a split) or increase (in the case of a reverse split) the proportionate NAV per Share but would have no effect on the net assets of the Trust or the proportionate voting rights of Shareholders or the value of any Shareholder’s investment.

Calculation of Principal Market NAV and Principal Market NAV per Share

In addition to calculating NAV and NAV per Share, for purposes of the Trust’s financial statements, the Trust determines the Principal Market NAV and Principal Market NAV per Share on each valuation date for such financial statements. The determination of the Principal Market NAV and Principal Market NAV per Share is identical to the calculation of NAV and NAV per Share, respectively, except that the value of INJ is determined using the fair value of INJ based on the price in the INJ market that the Trust considers its “principal market” as of 4:00 p.m. ET on the valuation date, rather than using the Pricing Benchmark.

The Trust has adopted a valuation policy, which provides for the procedure for valuing the Trust’s assets. The policy also sets forth the procedures to determine the principal market (or in the absence of a principal market, the most advantageous market) for purposes of determining the Principal Market NAV and Principal Market NAV per Share in accordance with FASB ASC 820-10, which outlines the application of fair value accounting. Under its valuation policy, the Trust determines its principal market (or in the absence of a principal market the most advantageous market) annually and conducts an analysis at least on a quarterly basis to determine whether there have occurred any changes in INJ markets and its operations that would require a change in the Sponsor’s determination of the Trust’s principal market.

The Trust identifies and determines the INJ principal market (or in the absence of a principal market, the most advantageous market) for GAAP purposes consistent with the application of fair value measurement framework in FASB ASC 820-10. This analysis is performed from the perspective of both the Trust and the INJ Counterparties.

ASC 820-10 determines fair value to be the price that would be received for INJ in a current sale, which assumes an orderly transaction between market participants on the measurement date. ASC 820-10 requires the Trust to assume that INJ is sold in its principal market to market participants or, in the absence of a principal market, the most advantageous market. Market participants are defined as buyers and sellers in the principal or most advantageous market that are independent, knowledgeable and willing and able to transact.

Under ASC 820-10, a principal market is the market with the greatest volume and activity level for the asset or liability. The determination of the principal market will be based on the market with the greatest volume and level of activity that can be accessed.

The Trust receives INJ from INJ Counterparties and may also transact on any “Digital Asset Markets”, which are defined as Exchange Markets, Brokered Markets, Dealer Markets, and Principal-to-Principal Markets, each as defined in ASC 820-10-35-36A.

In determining which of the eligible Digital Asset Markets is the Trust’s principal market, the Trust obtains reliable volume and level of activity information and reviews these criteria in the following order:

First, the Trust reviews a list of Digital Asset Markets and scopes in the markets that the Trust reasonably believes are operating in compliance with applicable laws and regulations and those that are accessible to the Trust and the Authorized Participants.

Second, the Trust sorts the remaining Digital Asset Markets from high to low based on volume and level of activity of INJ traded on each Digital Asset Market.

Third, the Trust then reviews intra-day pricing fluctuations and the degree of variances in price on Digital Asset Markets to identify any material notable variances that may impact the volume or price information of a particular Digital Asset Market.

Fourth, the Trust then selects a Digital Asset Market as its principal market based on the highest market-based volume, level of activity, and price stability in comparison to the other Digital Asset Markets on the list. Based on information reasonably available to the Trust, Exchange Markets have the greatest volume and level of activity for the asset. The Trust therefore looks to accessible Exchange Markets as opposed to the Brokered Market, Dealer Market and Principal-to-Principal Markets to determine its principal market.

As a result of the analysis, the Trust will select an Exchange Market as the Trust’s principal market. Based on the Trust’s initial assessment, the NAV and NAV per Share will be calculated using the fair value of INJ based on the price provided by this Exchange, as promptly as practicable after 4:00 p.m. ET on the measurement date for GAAP purposes. The Trust anticipates that this Exchange will be normally transacted on by both the Trust and the INJ Counterparties.

The Trust will update its Principal Market analysis periodically and as needed to the extent that events have occurred, or activities have changed in a manner that could change the Sponsor’s determination of the Trust’s principal market.

The Sponsor on behalf of the Trust will determine in its sole discretion the valuation sources and policies used to prepare the Trust’s financial statements in accordance with GAAP.

The cost basis of the investment in INJ recorded by the Trust for financial reporting purposes is the fair value of INJ at the time of transfer. The cost basis recorded by the Trust may differ from proceeds collected by an Authorized Participant from the sale of the corresponding Shares to investors.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE TRUST

The Trust

The Trust is a Delaware statutory trust, formed on March 7, 2025, pursuant to the DSTA. The Trust continuously issues common shares representing fractional undivided beneficial interest in and ownership of the Trust (“Shares”) that may be purchased and sold on the Exchange. The Trust will operate pursuant to the Trust Agreement. CSC Delaware Trust Company, a Delaware trust company, is the Delaware trustee of the Trust. The Trust is managed and controlled by the Sponsor. The Sponsor is a limited liability company formed in the state of Delaware on June 16, 2021.

The number of outstanding Shares is expected to increase and decrease from time to time as a result of the creation and redemption of Baskets. The creation and redemption of Baskets requires the delivery to the Trust or the distribution by the Trust of the amount of cash equivalent to the amount of INJ represented by the NAV of the Baskets being created or redeemed. The total amount of INJ required for the creation of Baskets will be based on the combined net assets represented by the number of Baskets being created or redeemed.

The Trust has no operating history. The Trust and the Sponsor face competition with respect to the creation of competing products, such as exchange-traded products offering exposure to the spot INJ market or other digital assets. There can be no assurance that the Trust will grow to or maintain an economically viable size. There is no guarantee that the Sponsor will maintain a commercial advantage relative to competitors offering similar products. Whether or not the Trust is successful in achieving its intended scale may be impacted by a range of factors, such as the Trust’s timing in entering the market and its fee structure relative to those of competitive products.

The Trust has no fixed termination date.

The Trust’s Fees and Expenses

The Trust will pay the unitary Sponsor Fee of [●]% of the Trust’s NAV. The Sponsor Fee is paid by the Trust to the Sponsor as compensation for services performed under the Trust Agreement.

The Sponsor Fee will accrue daily and will be payable in INJ at least quarterly in arrears. The Administrator will calculate the Sponsor Fee on a daily basis by applying a [●]% annualized rate to the Trust’s NAV, and the amount of INJ payable in respect of each daily accrual shall be determined by reference to the Pricing Benchmark.

The Sponsor has agreed to pay all operating expenses of the Trust (except for litigation expenses, other extraordinary expenses and taxes) out of the Sponsor Fee. Operating expenses assumed by the Sponsor include (i) the Marketing Fee, (ii) fees to the Administrator, if any, (iii) fees to the INJ Custodians, (iv) fees to the Transfer Agent, (v) fees to the Trustee, (vi) the fees and expenses related to any future listing, trading or quotation of the Shares on any listing exchange or quotation system (including legal, marketing and audit fees and expenses), (vii) ordinary course legal fees and expenses but not litigation-related expenses, (viii) audit fees, (ix) regulatory fees, including if applicable any fees relating to the registration of the Shares under the 1933 Act or the Exchange Act, (x) printing and mailing costs, (xi) costs of maintaining the Sponsor’s website and (xii) applicable license fees (each, a “Sponsor-paid Expense” and together, the “Sponsor-paid Expenses”), provided that any expense that qualifies as an Additional Trust Expense will be deemed to be an Additional Trust Expense and not a Sponsor-paid Expense. In the Sponsor’s sole discretion, all or any portion of a Sponsor-paid Expense may be redesignated as an Additional Trust Expense. The Trust will be responsible for INJ-related on-chain transaction fees associated with creation and redemption transactions and transactions with the Prime Broker, and the Sponsor will assume such expenses of the Trust in consideration for the Sponsor Fee. There is currently no predetermined cap on the aggregate amount of Sponsor-paid Expenses. Should the Trust implement a predetermined cap on aggregate Sponsor-paid Expenses, the Trust will notify the owners of the beneficial interests of Shares in a prospectus supplement or in its periodic Exchange Act reports, as applicable, and on the Sponsor’s website.

The Sponsor will not, however, assume certain extraordinary, non-recurring expenses that are not Sponsor-paid Expenses, including, but not limited to, taxes and governmental charges, expenses and costs of any extraordinary services performed by the Sponsor (or any other service provider) on behalf of the Trust to protect the Trust or the interests of Shareholders, any indemnification of the INJ Custodians, Administrator or other agents, service providers or counterparties of the Trust, the fees and expenses related to the initial listing of Shares on the Exchange, and extraordinary legal fees and expenses, including any legal fees and expenses incurred in connection with litigation, regulatory enforcement or investigation matters (collectively, “Additional Trust Expenses”). Of the Sponsor-paid Expenses, ordinary course legal fees and expenses shall be subject to a cap of not in excess of $100,000 per annum. In the Sponsor’s sole discretion, all or any portion of a Sponsor-paid Expense may be redesignated as an Additional Trust Expense, if, among other reasons, the Sponsor determines that a Sponsor-paid Expense is an extraordinary, non-recurring expense of the Trust.

After the payment of the Sponsor Fee to the Sponsor, the Sponsor may elect to convert some or all of the Sponsor Fee into cash by selling this INJ at market prices, in the Sponsor’s sole discretion. Due to the variance in market prices for INJ, the rate at which the Sponsor converts INJ to cash may differ from the rate at which the Sponsor Fee was initially paid in INJ.

The INJ Custodians will assume the transfer fees associated with the transfer of INJ to the Sponsor with respect to the Sponsor Fee, and any further expenses associated with such transfer will be assumed by the Sponsor. The Trust shall not be responsible for any fees and expenses associated with the transfer of INJ to pay the Sponsor Fee and Additional Trust Expenses, including any fees and expenses incurred by the Sponsor to convert INJ received in payment of the Sponsor Fee into cash.

Pursuant to the Trust Agreement, the Sponsor or its delegates will direct the INJ Custodians to transfer INJ from the Trust’s Cold Vault Balance as needed to pay the Sponsor’s Fee and Additional Trust Expenses, if any. The Sponsor or its delegates will endeavor to transfer the smallest amount of INJ needed to pay applicable expenses. The Sponsor, in arranging for payment of Additional Trust Expenses, may in its discretion direct that the Trust’s INJ be exchanged for U.S. Dollars. Under such circumstances, the Trust will not utilize the INJ Custodians to arrange for the sale of the Trust’s INJ to pay the Trust’s expenses and liabilities. Rather, the Sponsor will arrange for the Prime Broker, an affiliate of the Coinbase Custodian, or another third-party digital asset trading platform to exchange the Trust’s INJ for U.S. dollars in such a situation.

Termination of the Trust

The Sponsor will notify Shareholders at least 30 days before the date for termination of the Trust Agreement and the Trust if any of the following occurs:

In respect of termination events that rely on Sponsor determinations to terminate the Trust (e.g., if the SEC determines that the Trust is an investment company under the 1940 Act; the CFTC determines that the Trust is a commodity pool under the CEA; the Trust is determined to be a money transmitter under the regulations promulgated by FinCEN or require a BitLicense under New York law; the Trust fails to qualify for treatment, or ceases to be treated, as a grantor trust for U.S. federal income tax purposes; or, following a resignation by a trustee or custodian, the Sponsor determines that no replacement is acceptable to it), the Sponsor may consider, without limitation, the profitability to the Sponsor and other service providers of the operation of the Trust, any obstacles or costs relating to the operation or regulatory compliance of the Trust relating to the determination’s triggering event, and the ability to market the Trust to investors. To the extent that the Sponsor determines to continue operation of the Trust following a determination’s triggering event, the Trust will be required to alter its operations to comply with the triggering event. In the instance of a determination that the Trust is an investment company, the Trust and Sponsor would have to comply with the regulations and disclosure and reporting requirements applicable to investment companies and investment advisers. In the instance of a determination that the Trust is a commodity pool, the Trust and the Sponsor would have to comply with regulations and disclosure and reporting requirements applicable to commodity pools and commodity pool operators or commodity trading advisers. In the event that the Trust is determined to be a money transmitter, the Trust and the Sponsor will have to comply with applicable federal and state registration and regulatory requirements for money transmitters and/or money service businesses. In the event that the Trust ceases to qualify for treatment as a grantor trust for U.S. federal income tax purposes, the Trust will be required to alter its disclosure and tax reporting procedures and may no longer be able to operate or to rely on pass-through tax treatment. In each such case and in the case of the Sponsor’s determination as to whether a potential successor trustee or custodian is acceptable to it, the Sponsor will not be liable to anyone for its determination of whether to continue or to terminate the Trust.

Upon the dissolution of the Trust, the Sponsor (or in the event there is no Sponsor, such person (the “Liquidating Trustee”) as the majority in interest of the beneficial owners of the Trust may propose and approve) shall take full charge of the property of the Trust. Any Liquidating Trustee so appointed shall have and may exercise, without further authorization or approval of any of the parties hereto, all of the powers conferred upon the Sponsor under the terms of the Trust Agreement, subject to all of the applicable limitations, contractual and otherwise, upon the exercise of such powers, and provided that the Liquidating Trustee shall not have general liability for the acts, omissions, obligations and expenses of the Trust. Thereafter, in accordance with section 3808(e) of the DSTA, the affairs of the Trust shall be wound up and all assets owned by the Trust shall be liquidated as promptly as is consistent with obtaining the fair value thereof, and the proceeds therefrom shall be applied and distributed in the following order of priority: (a) to the expenses of liquidation and termination and to creditors, including registered owners and beneficial owners of the Trust who are creditors, to the extent otherwise permitted by law, in satisfaction of liabilities of the Trust (whether by payment or the making of reasonable provision for payment thereof) other than liabilities for distributions to registered owners of the Trust, and (b) to the beneficial owners of the Trust pro rata in accordance with their respective percentage interests of the property of the Trust. The proceeds of the liquidation of the Trust’s assets will be distributed in cash. The Sponsor, on behalf of the Trust, will sell the Trust’s INJ assets at market prices and will distribute to the Shareholders any amounts of the cash proceeds of the liquidation remaining after the satisfaction of all outstanding liabilities of the Trust and the establishment of reserves for applicable taxes, other governmental charges and contingent or future liabilities as the Sponsor will determine. Shareholders are not entitled to any of the Trust’s underlying INJ holdings upon the dissolution of the Trust.

Upon termination of the Trust, following completion of winding up of its business by the Sponsor, the Trustee, upon written directions of the Sponsor, will cause a certificate of cancellation of the Trust’s Certificate of Trust to be filed in accordance with applicable Delaware law. Upon the termination of the Trust, the Sponsor will be discharged from all obligations under the Trust Agreement except for its certain obligations that survive termination of the Trust Agreement.

Amendments

The Trust Agreement can be amended by the Sponsor in its sole discretion and without the Shareholders’ consent by making an amendment, a Trust Agreement supplemental thereto, or an amended and restated trust agreement. Any such restatement, amendment and/or supplement to the Trust Agreement will be effective on such date as designated by the Sponsor in its sole discretion. However, any amendment to the Trust Agreement that affects the duties, liabilities, rights or protections of the Trustee will require the Trustee’s prior written consent, which it may grant or withhold in its sole discretion. Every Shareholder, at the time any amendment so becomes effective, will be deemed, by continuing to hold any Shares or an interest therein, to consent and agree to such amendment and to be bound by the Trust Agreement as amended thereby. In no event will any amendment impair the right of Authorized Participants to surrender baskets and receive therefor the amount of Trust assets represented thereby (less fees in connection with the surrender of Shares and any applicable taxes or other governmental charges), except in order to comply with mandatory provisions of applicable law. The Trust will notify the owners of the beneficial interests of Shares in a prospectus supplement or in its periodic Exchange Act reports, as applicable, and on the Sponsor’s website.

Litigation and Claims

Within the past five years of the date of this Prospectus, there have been no material administrative, civil or criminal actions against the Sponsor, the Trust or any principal or affiliate of any of them. This includes any actions pending, on appeal, concluded, threatened, or otherwise known to them.

THE TRUST’S SERVICE PROVIDERS

The Sponsor

The Sponsor arranged for the creation of the Trust and is responsible for the ongoing registration of the Shares for their public offering in the United States and the listing of Shares on the Exchange. The Sponsor will not exercise day-to-day oversight over the Trustee, the INJ Custodians, or the Benchmark Provider. The Sponsor will develop a marketing plan for the Trust, will prepare marketing materials regarding the Shares of the Trust, and will exercise the marketing plan of the Trust on an ongoing basis.

The Sponsor is a wholly-owned subsidiary of 21co Holdings Limited. The ultimate parent company of 21co Holdings Limited is FalconX. At present, the respective primary business activities of 21co Holdings Limited and FalconX are, with respect to 21co Holdings Limited, providing exchange traded products and technology services in the digital asset space through its subsidiaries and, with respect to FalconX, providing comprehensive access to global digital asset liquidity and a full range of trading services (including through its affiliates).

21Shares AG (collectively, with its affiliates, the “21Shares Group”), an affiliate of the Sponsor, has considerable experience issuing and operating exchange-traded products that provide exposure to digital assets, operating such exchange-traded products since 2018. The Sponsor utilizes a similar management team that the 21Shares Group has used in issuing and operating these exchange-traded products. As of June 30, 2026, 21Shares Group oversees approximately $4.63 billion in assets under management and 73 digital asset-related exchange-traded products across various jurisdictions. Since June 2021, September 2023, June 2024, June 2024, April 2025, October 2024, January 2025 and July 2025, the Sponsor has served as sponsor to Ark 21Shares Bitcoin ETF, 21Shares Ethereum Staking ETF, 21Shares Solana Staking ETF, 21Shares XRP ETF, 21Shares Dogecoin ETF, 21Shares Polkadot Staking ETF, 21Shares Sui Staking ETF and 21Shares Hyperliquid Staking ETF, respectively. Each of the foregoing are an exchange-traded product registered under the 1933 Act and provide exposure to spot BTC and trades, spot ETH and trades, spot SOL and trades, spot XRP and trades, spot DOGE and trades, spot DOT and trades, spot SUI and trades and spot HYPE and trades, and which trade on national securities exchanges under the symbols “ARKB,” “TETH,” “TSOL,” “TOXR,” “TDOG,” “TDOT,” “TSUI” and “THYP,” respectively. The Sponsor also serves as sponsor to the following entities: (i) 21Shares Ondo Trust, a Delaware statutory trust that filed a registration statement on Form S-1 with the SEC on July 22, 2025; (ii) 21Shares Sei ETF, a Delaware statutory trust that filed a registration statement on Form S-1 with the SEC on August 28, 2025; and (iii) 21Shares Cronos ETF, a Delaware statutory trust that filed a registration statement on Form S-1 with the SEC on March 13, 2026. If any of these products are subsequently declared effective by the SEC, they each expect to become exchange-traded products registered under the 1933 Act that will provide exposure to spot digital assets and will trade on an exchange. Additionally, since May 2026, the Sponsor serves as sub-adviser to seven investment companies registered under the 1940 Act. 

The principal office of the Sponsor is:

21Shares US LLC

158 W. 27th Street

New York, New York 10001

The Trustee

CSC Delaware Trust Company, a Delaware trust company, acts as the trustee of the Trust for the purpose of creating a Delaware statutory trust in accordance with the DSTA. The Trustee is appointed to serve as the trustee of the Trust in the State of Delaware for the sole purpose of satisfying the requirement of Section 3807(a) of the DSTA that the Trust have at least one trustee with a principal place of business in the State of Delaware.

General duty of care of Trustee.

The Trustee is a fiduciary under the Trust Agreement; provided, however, that the fiduciary duties and responsibilities and liabilities of the Trustee are limited by, and are only those specifically set forth in, the Trust Agreement.

Resignation, discharge or removal of Trustee; successor Trustees.

The Trustee may resign at any time by giving at least 30 days’ advance written notice to the Sponsor. The Sponsor may remove the Trustee at any time by giving at least 30 days’ advance written notice to the Trustee. Upon effective resignation or removal, the Trustee will be discharged of its duties and obligations.

If the Trustee resigns or is removed, the Sponsor, acting on behalf of the Shareholders, is required to use reasonable efforts to appoint a successor trustee. Any successor Trustee must satisfy the requirements of Section 3807 of the DSTA. Any resignation or removal of the Trustee and appointment of a successor Trustee cannot become effective until a written acceptance of appointment is delivered by the successor Trustee to the outgoing Trustee and the Sponsor and any fees and expenses due to the outgoing Trustee are paid. Following compliance with the preceding sentence, the successor will become fully vested with the rights, powers, duties and obligations of the outgoing Trustee under the Trust Agreement, with like effect as if originally named as Trustee, and the outgoing Trustee shall be discharged of its duties and obligations herein. If no successor Trustee shall have been appointed and shall have accepted such appointment within forty-five (45) days after the giving of such notice of resignation or removal, the Trustee may petition any court of competent jurisdiction for the appointment of a successor Trustee.

If the Trustee resigns and no successor trustee is appointed within 180 days after the date the Trustee issues its notice of resignation, the Sponsor will terminate and liquidate the Trust and distribute its remaining assets.

The Administrator

Under the Fund Administration and Accounting Agreement, the Administrator provides necessary administrative, tax and accounting services and financial reporting for the maintenance and operations of the Trust, including the determination of NAV, NAV per Share, Principal Market NAV and Principal Market NAV per Share. In addition, the Administrator makes available the office space, equipment, personnel and facilities to provide such services.

The INJ Custodians

The INJ Custodians are responsible for safekeeping all of the INJ owned by the Trust. The INJ Custodians were selected by the Sponsor. The INJ Custodians have responsibility for opening the INJ Accounts holding the Trust’s INJ, as well as facilitating the transfer of INJ required for the operation of the Trust.

The Transfer Agent

The Transfer Agent: (1) facilitates the issuance and redemption of Shares of the Trust; (2) responds to correspondence by Trust Shareholders and others relating to its duties; (3) maintains Shareholder accounts; and (4) makes periodic reports to the Trust.

Pricing Benchmark Services

The Benchmark Provider is responsible for analyzing INJ market data relating to the calculation and maintenance of the Pricing Benchmark.

The Staking Services Providers

The Trust has engaged [●] to serve as a Staking Services Provider to engage in Staking Activities on the Trust’s behalf.

The Marketing Agent

[●] (the “Marketing Agent”) is responsible for reviewing and approving the marketing materials prepared by the Sponsor for compliance with applicable SEC and FINRA advertising laws, rules, and regulations.

CUSTODY OF THE TRUST’S ASSETS

The INJ Custodians will keep custody of the Trust’s INJ. The transfer of INJ to and from INJ Counterparties is directed by the Sponsor. The Sponsor considers the following in determining how it will allocate the Trust’s INJ holdings between the INJ Custodians: (i) asset feature and support, including whether an INJ Custodian supports Staking Activities; (ii) cost optimization for the Trust; and (iii) concentration of the Trust’s INJ holdings amongst INJ Custodians.

The INJ Custodians will keep a substantial portion of the private keys associated with the Trust’s INJ in the Cold Vault Balance, with any remainder of the Vault Balance held as a “Hot Vault Balance.” The Sponsor expects that all of the Trust’s assets and private keys will be held in the cold storage of the INJ Custodians on an ongoing basis, but a portion of the Trust’s assets may be held in hot trading wallets, from time to time, in connection with the settlement of a creation or redemption transaction and in connection with the sale of INJ to pay trust expenses. Similarly secure technology used by the INJ Custodians includes a combination of Multi-Party Computation (“MPC”), Hardware Security Modules (“HSMs”), and Cross-Domain Security (“CDS”) to safeguard digital assets. MPC is a cryptographic framework that ensures private keys are never fully assembled or exposed during the transaction process. Instead, key shares are distributed across secure, isolated environments, reducing single points of compromise and enabling secure, multi-party transaction approvals. HSMs are dedicated, tamper-resistant cryptographic devices used to securely generate, store, and manage key fragments. HSMs enforce role-based access controls and support transaction signing workflows across designated approval parties. CDS is a high-assurance security architecture originally developed for sensitive government environments. It enhances the integrity of cold storage systems by strictly isolating secure processing domains and preventing unauthorized cross-network interactions. These technologies operate alongside cold storage, where private key material remains entirely offline and physically secured in air-gapped environments. This layered approach ensures that private keys are protected.

Cold storage is a safeguarding method with multiple layers of protections and protocols, by which the private key(s) corresponding to the Trust’s INJ is (are) generated and stored in an offline manner. Private keys are generated in offline computers that are not connected to the internet so that they are resistant to being hacked. By contrast, in hot storage, the private keys are held online, where they are more accessible, leading to more efficient transfers, though they are potentially more vulnerable to being hacked. The Trust’s INJ held in the Cold Vault Balance by the INJ Custodians are held in segregated wallets and therefore are not commingled with each such INJ Custodians’ assets or the assets of each such INJ Custodian’s other customers. There is no limit on the size of each cold storage address, and the INJ Custodians will generally keep a substantial portion of the Trust’s INJ in cold storage on an ongoing basis. The Trust’s INJ held in the Cold Vault Balance by the INJ Custodians are held in segregated wallets and therefore are not commingled with the INJ Custodians’ or other customer assets.

Cold storage of private keys may involve keeping such keys on a non-networked computer or electronic device or storing the public key and private keys on a storage device or printed medium and deleting the keys from all computers. The INJ Custodians may receive deposits of INJ but may not send INJ without use of the corresponding private keys. In order to send INJ when the private keys are kept in cold storage, unsigned transactions must be physically transferred to the offline cold storage facility and signed using a software/hardware utility with the corresponding offline keys. At that point, the INJ Custodians can upload the fully signed transaction to an online network and transfer the INJ. Such private keys are stored in cold storage facilities within the United States and Europe, exact locations of which are not disclosed for security reasons. A limited number of employees at the INJ Custodians are involved in private key management operations, and the INJ Custodians have represented that no single individual of any INJ Custodian has access to full private keys.

The INJ Custodians’ internal audit teams perform periodic internal audits over custody operations, and the INJ Custodians have represented that SOC attestations covering private key management controls are also performed on the INJ Custodians by external providers.

The INJ Custodians maintain commercial crime insurance policies, which are intended to cover the loss of client assets held in cold storage, including from employee collusion or fraud, physical loss including theft, damage of key material, security breaches or hacks, and fraudulent transfers. The insurance policies maintained by each INJ Custodian is shared among all of such INJ Custodian’s customers, and is not specific to the Trust or to customers holding INJ with any such INJ Custodian, and collectively may not be available or sufficient to protect the Trust from all possible losses or sources of losses.

INJ held in the Trust’s accounts with the INJ Custodians are the property of the Trust. The Trust, the Sponsor and the service providers will not loan or pledge the Trust’s assets, including staked assets, nor will the Trust’s assets, including staked assets, serve as collateral for any loan or similar arrangement, other than in connection with the Post-Trade Financing Agreement. The Trust will not utilize leverage, derivatives or any similar arrangements in seeking to meet its investment objective.

In the event of a fork, the Custodial Services Agreements provide that the INJ Custodians may temporarily suspend services, and may, in their sole discretion, determine whether or not to support (or cease supporting) either branch of the forked protocol entirely, provided that the INJ Custodians shall use commercially reasonable efforts to avoid ceasing to support both branches of such forked protocol and will support, at a minimum, the original digital asset. The Custodial Services Agreements provide that, other than as set forth therein, and provided that the INJ Custodians shall make commercially reasonable efforts to assist the Trust to retrieve and/or obtain any assets related to a fork, airdrop or similar event the INJ Custodians shall have no liability, obligation or responsibility whatsoever arising out of or relating to the operation of the underlying software protocols relating to the Injective Network or an unsupported branch of a forked protocol and, accordingly, the Trust acknowledges and assumes the risk of the same. The Custodial Services Agreements further provide that, unless specifically communicated by an INJ Custodian or its affiliates through written public statements on such Custodian’s website, the INJ Custodians do not support airdrops, metacoins, colored coins, side chains, or other derivative, enhanced or forked protocols, tokens or coins, which supplement or interact with INJ.

Under the Trust Agreement, the Sponsor has the right, in its sole discretion, to determine what action to take in connection with the Trust’s entitlement to or ownership of Incidental Rights or any IR Digital Assets, and the Trust may take any lawful action necessary or desirable in connection with the Trust’s ownership of Incidental Rights, including the acquisition of IR Digital Assets, as determined by the Sponsor in the Sponsor’s sole discretion, unless such action would adversely affect the status of the Trust as a grantor trust for U.S. federal income tax purposes or otherwise be prohibited by the Trust Agreement. With respect to any fork, airdrop or similar event, the Sponsor will cause the Trust to irrevocably abandon the Incidental Rights or IR Digital Assets. In the event the Trust seeks to change this position, an application would need to be filed with the SEC by the Exchange seeking approval to amend its listing rules. 

Furthermore, under the Custodial Services Agreements, the INJ Custodians’ liability is limited. With respect to the Coinbase Custodial Services Agreement, the Coinbase Custodian’s liability is as follows, among others: (i) the Coinbase Custodian’s aggregate liability with respect to any breach of its obligations under the Coinbase Custodial Services Agreement shall not exceed the aggregate amount of fees paid by the Trust to the Coinbase Custodian in respect of the services relating to custody, trade execution, lending or post-trade credit (if applicable), and other services (collectively, the “Prime Broker Services”) in the 12 months prior to the event giving rise to such liability; (ii) the Coinbase Custodian’s aggregate liability under the Coinbase Custodial Services Agreement shall not exceed the greater of (A) the aggregate fees paid by the Trust to the Coinbase Custodian in respect of the custodial services in the 12 months prior to the event giving rise to the Coinbase Custodian’s liability, and (B) the value of the supported INJ on deposit in the Trust’s custodial account(s) giving rise to the Coinbase Custodian’s liability at the time of the event giving rise to the Coinbase Custodian’s liability; (iii) the Coinbase Custodian’s aggregate liability in respect of each cold storage address shall not exceed $100 million; (iv) in respect of any incidental, indirect, special, punitive, consequential or similar losses, the Coinbase Custodian is not liable, even if the Coinbase Custodian has been advised of or knew of or should have known of the possibility thereof; and (v) in no event shall the Coinbase Custodian or its affiliates have any liability to the Trust or any third party with respect to any breach of its obligations under the Coinbase Custodial Services Agreement, express or implied, which does not result solely from its gross negligence, fraud or willful misconduct. Coinbase Custodian is not liable for delays, suspension of operations, failure in performance, or interruption of service which result directly or indirectly from any cause or condition beyond the reasonable control of the Coinbase Custodian. In the event of potential losses incurred by the Trust as a result of the Coinbase Custodian losing control of the Trust’s INJ or failing to properly execute instructions on behalf of the Trust, the Coinbase Custodian’s liability with respect to the Trust will be subject to certain limitations which may allow it to avoid liability for potential losses or may be insufficient to cover the value of such potential losses, even if the Coinbase Custodian directly caused such losses. Furthermore, the insurance maintained by the Coinbase Custodian may be insufficient to cover its liabilities to the Trust.

With respect to the BitGo Custodial Services Agreement, the BitGo Custodian and its affiliates, including their officers, directors, agents, and employees, are not liable for any lost profits, special, incidental, indirect, intangible, or consequential damages resulting from authorized or unauthorized use of the Trust or Sponsor’s site or services. This includes damages arising from any contract, tort, negligence, strict liability, or other legal grounds, even if the BitGo Custodian was previously advised of, knew, or should have known about the possibility of such damages. However, this exclusion of liability does not extend to cases of the BitGo Custodian’s fraud, willful misconduct, or gross negligence. In situations of gross negligence, the BitGo Custodian’s liability is specifically limited to the value of the digital assets or fiat currency that were affected by the negligence. Additionally, the total liability of the BitGo Custodian for direct damages is capped at the fees paid or payable to them under the BitGo Custodial Services Agreement during the twelve-month period immediately preceding the first incident that caused the liability.

The INJ Custodians are not liable for delays, suspension of operations, failure in performance, or interruption of service which result directly or indirectly from any cause or condition beyond the reasonable control of the INJ Custodians. Under the Custodial Services Agreements, except in the case of their gross negligence, fraud, or willful misconduct, or breach of the BitGo Custodial Services Agreement in the case of the BitGo Custodian, the INJ Custodians shall not have any liability for any damage or interruptions caused by any computer viruses, spyware, scareware, Trojan horses, worms or other malware that may affect the Trust’s computer or other equipment, or any phishing, spoofing or other attack.

The INJ Custodians may terminate the Custodial Services Agreements for any reason upon providing the applicable notice to the Trust, or immediately for Cause (as defined in the applicable Custodial Services Agreement), including, among others, if the Trust: materially breaches the Prime Broker Agreement and such breach remains uncured, or if the Trust undergoes a bankruptcy event.

The Trust’s Transfer Agent will facilitate the settlement of Shares in response to the placement of creation orders and redemption orders from Authorized Participants. The Trust generally does not intend to hold cash. However, there may be situations where the Trust will unexpectedly hold cash on a temporary basis, including in connection with the settlement of creation and redemption transactions. The Trust’s cash will be held at its account at the Cash Custodian, pursuant to the Cash Custody Agreement.

The Sponsor may, in its sole discretion, add or terminate INJ custodians at any time. The Sponsor may, in its sole discretion, change the INJ Custodians for the Trust’s INJ holdings, but it will have no obligation whatsoever to do so or to seek any particular terms for the Trust from other such INJ custodians. Should the Sponsor choose to add or terminate an INJ Custodian, the Trust will notify Shareholders in a prospectus supplement and/or a current report on Form 8-K or in its annual or quarterly reports, and, in any case, within four business days of such termination or addition.

STAKING OF THE TRUST’S ASSETS

The Trust’s staking model aims to maximize the portion of the Trust’s INJ available for staking while controlling for liquidity and redemption risks. The model determines an optimal Utilization Rate by balancing expected yield against potential costs (including borrowing costs during redemptions, assuming we have access to suitable credit).

The Staking Services Providers will exercise no discretion as to the amount of the Trust’s INJ to be staked or the timing of the Staking Activities. While the Trust may stake a maximum of 100% of its INJ holdings, the amount of INJ that remains unstaked is determined based on the Trust’s Utilization Rate analysis, and accordingly may vary from time to time. Based on Utilization Rate analysis applied to historical data, the Sponsor generally intends to stake between 40% and 60% of the INJ the Trust holds, although the amount of INJ that is staked may be lesser or greater from time to time. The precise percentage to be staked will be based on the estimated liquidity needs of the Trust and other factors, as determined by the Sponsor. In determining how to stake the INJ held by the Trust, and how much INJ to stake, the Trust’s model operates on the following key parameters:

The Sponsor intends to make available on its website the current percentage of the Trust’s INJ being staked on a daily basis. None of the information on the Sponsor’s website is incorporated by reference into this Prospectus.

The rewards owed or paid to the Staking Services Providers reduce the amount of INJ rewards that are generated from the Trust’s Staking Activities that are available in the assets of the Trust. Each Staking Services Provider that generates staking rewards will be entitled to Staking Provider Consideration. Staking Provider Consideration will be paid directly to the Staking Services Providers from the staking rewards. The Sponsor, Staking Services Provider and INJ Custodians are expected to receive an aggregate of [●]% of the staking rewards, with the remainder being retained by the Trust. The Trust will distribute its staking rewards directly to Shareholders.

The Trust intends to pay cash distributions at least quarterly to Shareholders to distribute staking rewards earned by the Trust. Quarterly distributions are intended to represent all staking rewards accrued during the quarter. These rewards accrue in INJ, and at quarter-end, the Trust intends to sell an equivalent amount of INJ to fund the cash dividend distribution. The Trust expects to fund the distribution solely from liquid (unbonded) INJ held by the Trust. The amount of any distribution, if any, will depend on the staking rewards actually earned by the Trust during each quarter and cannot be predicted with certainty. The amount of staking rewards earned will vary based on factors including, but not limited to, the amount of INJ held by the Trust, the percentage of the Trust’s INJ that is staked, network staking participation rates, protocol reward rates on the Injective Network, and network conditions. Accordingly, there can be no assurance as to the amount of distributions that will be paid in any quarter, and it is possible that no cash distributions will be paid in a given quarter if insufficient staking rewards are earned.

The Sponsor has entered into the Staking Services Agreement with [●]. Pursuant to the Staking Services Agreement, [●] will provide the Sponsor with certain services, including engaging in staking in a manner reasonably intended to generate rewards and provide reports to the Trust showing the calculation of any rewards payable by the Injective Network.

The Staking Services Agreement with [●] has an initial term of [●]. The Trust may, from time to time, and at any time, engage additional staking providers besides [●]. The percentage of rewards to be paid to each such staking provider may vary and may be more or less than the amount paid by us to [●]. Staking rewards on the Trust’s INJ accrue every epoch. The Staking Services Provider manually claims accrued rewards on the Trust’s behalf each day and redelegates them to the applicable validator to generate further staking rewards. Regardless of whether such rewards have been claimed or redelegated as of a given time, any staking rewards that have accrued to the Trust on or before the calculation of the Trust’s end-of-day NAV will be reflected as assets of the Trust, irrespective of whether the underlying staked INJ has been unbonded at such time.

Liquidity Risk Policies and Procedures

The Trust balances earning staking rewards with maintaining liquidity to meet redemptions. To do so, the Sponsor sets a target range for the portion of assets staked (“Utilization Rate” or “UR”), which is based on factors including lock-up periods, historical and stressed redemption activity, Trust size, projected staking yields, staking provider reliability, secondary market liquidity, and broader market conditions. The Trust’s target UR range is determined by analyzing a broad set of factors, including:

Staked assets may be considered restricted during their unbonding period, while unstaked assets remain, and are considered, liquid. We monitor these factors daily under both normal and stressed market conditions. If redemption activity pushes the staked portion above our target range, we will initiate un-staking to bring the Trust back within its liquidity parameters.

The Trust has written liquidity risk policies and procedures reasonably designed to address the redemption risks specified in the generic listing standards. In accordance with the generic listing standards, those liquidity policies address:

The Trust is permitted to hold only the underlying INJ, but to the extent the Sponsor in its sole discretion determines that the Trust may do so without undue legal or regulatory risk, such as, without limitation, the risk of jeopardizing the Trust’s ability to qualify as a grantor trust for tax purposes, the Trust may enter into cash borrowing arrangements and other funding sources.

PRIME BROKER

Pursuant to the Prime Broker Agreement, a portion of the Trust’s INJ holdings and cash holdings from time to time may be held with the Prime Broker, an affiliate of the Coinbase Custodian, in the Trading Balance, in connection with the creation and redemption of Shares via cash transactions or to pay for Trust Expenses not assumed by the Sponsor in consideration for the Sponsor Fee. The amount of INJ that may be held in the Trading Balance will be limited to the amount necessary to process a given creation or redemption transaction, as applicable, or to pay for Trust Expenses not assumed by the Sponsor in consideration for the Sponsor Fee.

The Sponsor may, in its sole discretion, add or terminate prime brokers at any time. The Sponsor may, in its sole discretion, change the prime broker for the Trust, but it will have no obligation whatsoever to do so or to seek any particular terms for the Trust from other such prime brokers.

These periodic holdings held in the Trading Balance with the Prime Broker represent an omnibus claim on the Prime Broker’s INJ held on behalf of clients; these holdings exist across a combination of omnibus hot wallets, omnibus cold wallets or in accounts in the Prime Broker’s name on a trading venue (including third-party venues and the Prime Broker’s own execution venue) where the Prime Broker executes orders to buy and sell INJ on behalf of clients (each such venue, a “Connected Trading Venue”). The Prime Broker is not required to hold any of the INJ in the Trust’s Trading Balance in cold storage or to hold any such INJ in segregation, and neither the Trust nor the Sponsor can control the method by which the Prime Broker holds the INJ credited to the Trust’s Trading Balance. Within the Trust’s Trading Balance, the Prime Broker Agreement provides that the Trust does not have an identifiable claim to any particular INJ (and cash). Instead, the Trust’s Trading Balance represents an entitlement to a pro rata share of the INJ (and cash) the Prime Broker holds on behalf of customers who hold similar entitlements against the Prime Broker. In this way, the Trust’s Trading Balance represents an omnibus claim on the Prime Broker’s INJ (and cash) held on behalf of the Prime Broker’s customers.

Within such omnibus hot and cold wallets and accounts, the Prime Broker has represented to the Sponsor that it keeps the majority of assets in cold wallets, to promote security, while the balance of assets are kept in hot wallets to facilitate rapid withdrawals. However, the Sponsor has no control over, and for security reasons the Prime Broker does not disclose to the Sponsor, the percentage of INJ that the Prime Broker holds for customers holding similar entitlements as the Trust which are kept in omnibus cold wallets, as compared to omnibus hot wallets or omnibus accounts in the Prime Broker’s name on a trading venue. The Prime Broker has represented to the Sponsor that the percentage of assets maintained in cold versus hot storage is determined by ongoing risk analysis and market dynamics, in which the Prime Broker attempts to balance anticipated liquidity needs for its customers as a class against the anticipated greater security of cold storage.

The Prime Broker is not required by the Prime Broker Agreement to hold any of the INJ in the Trust’s Trading Balance in cold storage or to hold any such INJ in segregation, and neither the Trust nor the Sponsor can control the method by which the Prime Broker holds the INJ credited to the Trust’s Trading Balance.

To the extent the Trust sells INJ through the Prime Broker, the Trust’s orders will be executed at Connected Trading Venues that have been approved in accordance with the Prime Broker’s due diligence and risk assessment process. The Prime Broker has represented that its due diligence on Connected Trading Venues includes reviews conducted by the legal, compliance, security, privacy and finance and credit-risk teams. The Connected Trading Venues, which are subject to change from time to time, currently include [●], [●], [●], and [●], as well as [●], additional non-bank market makers (“NBMMs”). The Prime Broker has represented to the Trust that it is unable to name the NBMMs due to confidentiality restrictions.

Pursuant to the Prime Broker Agreement, the Trust may engage in purchases or sales of INJ by placing orders with the Prime Broker. The Prime Broker will route orders placed by the Sponsor through the Prime Broker’s execution platform (the “Trading Platform”) to a Connected Trading Venue where the order will be executed. Each order placed by the Sponsor will be sent, processed and settled at each Connected Trading Venue to which it is routed. The Prime Broker Agreement provides that the Prime Broker is subject to certain conflicts of interest, including: (i) the Trust’s orders may be routed to the Prime Broker’s own execution venue where the Trust’s orders may be executed against other customers of the Prime Broker or with Coinbase acting as principal, (ii) the beneficial identity of the counterparty purchaser or seller with respect to the Trust’s orders may be unknown and therefore may inadvertently be another client of the Prime Broker, (iii) the Prime Broker does not engage in front-running, but is aware of the Trust’s orders or imminent orders and may execute a trade for its own inventory (or the account of an affiliate) while in possession of that knowledge and (iv) the Prime Broker may act in a principal capacity with respect to certain orders. As a result of these and other conflicts, when acting as principal, the Prime Broker may have an incentive to favor its own interests and the interests of its affiliates over the Trust’s interests, which may adversely impact the value of an investment in the Shares.

Subject to the foregoing, and to certain policies and procedures that the Prime Broker Agreement requires the Prime Broker to have in place to mitigate conflicts of interest when executing the Trust’s orders, the Prime Broker Agreement provides that the Prime Broker shall have no liability, obligation, or responsibility whatsoever for the selection or performance of any Connected Trading Venue, and that other Connected Trading Venues and/or trading venues not used by Coinbase may offer better prices and/or lower costs than the Connected Trading Venue used to execute the Trust’s orders.

Once the Sponsor, on behalf of the Trust, places an order to purchase or sell INJ on the Trading Platform in connection with the creation or redemption of Shares via a cash transaction, the associated INJ or cash used to fund or fill the order, if any, will be placed on hold and will generally not be eligible for other use or withdrawal from the Trust’s Trading Balance. The Trust’s Vault Balance may be used directly to fund orders. With each Connected Trading Venue, the Prime Broker shall establish an account in the Prime Broker’s name, or in its name for the benefit of clients, to trade on behalf of its clients, including the Trust, and the Trust will not, by virtue of the Trading Balance the Trust maintains with the Prime Broker, have a direct legal relationship, or account with, any Connected Trading Venue.

The Prime Broker may terminate the Prime Broker Agreement in its entirety for any reason and without Cause by providing at least ninety (90) days’ prior written notice to the Trust. The Trust may terminate the Prime Broker Agreement in its entirety for any reason and without Cause by providing at least 30 (thirty) days’ prior written notice to the Prime Broker; provided, however, the Trust’s termination of the Prime Broker Agreement shall not be effective until the Trust has fully satisfied its obligations the Prime Broker Agreement.

The Prime Broker and the Coinbase Custodian may, in their sole discretion, suspend, restrict or terminate the Trust’s prime broker services, including by suspending, restricting or closing any account of the Trust covered under the Prime Broker Agreement for Cause, at any time and with prior notice to the Trust.

For purposes of the Prime Broker Agreement, “Cause” shall mean: (i) the Trust (a) fails to make a payment when due or (b) materially breaches any provision of this Prime Broker Agreement and such breach is not cured within one (1) Business Day after notice of such breach is given to Trust in the case of a payment-related breach or is not cured within ten (10) Business Days after notice of such breach is given to Trust in the case of a non-payment related breach; (ii) the Trust takes any action to dissolve or liquidate, in whole or part; (iii) the Trust becomes insolvent, makes an assignment for the benefit of creditors, becomes subject to direct control of a trustee, receiver or similar authority; (iv) the Trust becomes subject to any bankruptcy or insolvency proceeding under any applicable laws, rules and regulations, such termination being effective immediately upon any declaration of bankruptcy; (v) termination is required pursuant to a court order or binding order of a government authority; (vi) the Trust’s account with the Prime Broker is subject to any pending litigation, investigation or government proceeding that is reasonably likely to affect the legality, validity or enforceability against it of the Prime Broker Agreement or its ability to perform its obligations under the Prime Broker Agreement; or (vii) the Prime Broker reasonably suspects Trust of attempting to circumvent the Prime Broker’s controls or uses the Prime Broker’s services in a manner the Prime Broker otherwise deems inappropriate or potentially harmful to itself or third parties, and Trust fails to provide the Prime Broker written evidence reasonably acceptable to the Prime Broker of Trust’s non-circumvention of such controls within three (3) Business Days following written notice from the Prime Broker.

The Trust may terminate this Prime Broker Agreement upon prior notice to the Prime Broker upon an event which constitutes “Coinbase Cause.” “Coinbase Cause” means (i) the Prime Broker takes any action to dissolve or liquidate, in whole or part; (ii) the Prime Broker becomes insolvent, makes an assignment for the benefit of creditors, becomes subject to direct control of a trustee, receiver or similar authority; (iii) the Prime Broker becomes subject to any bankruptcy or insolvency proceeding under any applicable laws, rules and regulations, such termination being effective immediately upon any declaration of bankruptcy; or (iv) termination is required pursuant to a court order or binding order of a government authority.

A decision by the Prime Broker or the Coinbase Custodian to take certain actions, including suspending, restricting or terminating the Trust’s accounts covered under the Prime Broker Agreement, may be based on confidential criteria that are essential to the Prime Broker’s risk management and security practices and the Trust acknowledges that the Prime Broker and the Coinbase Custodian are under no obligation to disclose the details of their risk management and security practices to the Trust. The parent company of the Coinbase Custodian and the Prime Broker, Coinbase Global maintains a commercial crime insurance policy, which is intended to cover the loss of client assets held by Coinbase Global and all of its subsidiaries, including the Coinbase Custodian and the Prime Broker (collectively, Coinbase Global and its subsidiaries are referred to as the “Coinbase Insureds”). This policy covers the loss of client assets held by the Coinbase Custodian and the Prime Broker, including from employee collusion or fraud, physical loss including theft, damage of key material, security breaches or hacks and fraudulent transfers. The insurance maintained by the Coinbase Insureds is shared among all of their customers, is not specific to the Trust or to customers holding INJ with the Coinbase Custodian or the Prime Broker and may not be available or sufficient to protect the Trust from all possible losses or sources of losses

Under the Prime Broker Agreement, the Prime Broker’s liability is limited as follows, among others: (i) the Prime Broker’s aggregate liability shall not exceed the aggregate fees paid by the Trust to the Prime Broker in respect of the Prime Broker Services in the 12 months prior to the event giving rise to the Prime Broker’s liability; and (ii) in respect of any incidental, indirect, special, punitive, consequential or similar losses, the Prime Broker is not liable, even if the Prime Broker has been advised of or knew of or should have known of the possibility thereof. In general, with limited exceptions, the Prime Broker is not liable under the Prime Broker Agreement unless in the event of its gross negligence, fraud, or willful misconduct. The Prime Broker is not liable for delays, suspension of operations, failure in performance, or interruption of service which result directly or indirectly from any cause or condition beyond the reasonable control of the Prime Broker. These and the other limitations on the Prime Broker’s liability may allow it to avoid liability for potential losses or may be insufficient to cover the value of such potential losses, even if the Prime Broker directly caused such losses.

In connection with the Prime Broker Agreement, the Trust has entered into a Post-Trade Financing Agreement (the “Post-Trade Financing Agreement”) with Coinbase Credit, Inc. (the “Lender”), pursuant to which the Trust may borrow INJ or cash as trade credit (“Trade Credit”) from the Lender on a short-term basis to avoid having to pre-fund the Trust’s Trading Balance. This allows the Trust to buy or sell INJ through an INJ Counterparty in an amount that exceeds the cash or INJ credited to the Trust’s Trading Balance at the INJ Counterparty at the time such order is submitted to the INJ Counterparty, which is expected to facilitate the Trust’s ability to process cash creations and redemptions and pay the Sponsor Fee and any other Trust expenses not assumed by the Sponsor, to the extent applicable, in a timely manner by seeking to lock in the INJ price on the trade date for creations and redemptions or the payment date for payment of the Sponsor’s Fee or any other Trust Expenses not assumed by the Sponsor, rather than waiting for the funds associated with the creation to be transferred by the Cash Custodian to the INJ Counterparty prior to purchasing the INJ or for the INJ held in the Vault Balance to be transferred to a Trading Balance prior to selling the INJ.

In connection with a purchase order, the Trust may first borrow cash from the Lender using the Post-Trade Financing Agreement, and then purchase INJ. In connection with a redemption order, the Trust may first borrow INJ from the Lender using the Post-Trade Financing Agreement, and then sell this INJ.

The Sponsor does not generally intend to fund the Trading Balance at the Prime Broker with sufficient cash or INJ in connection with creation and redemption transactions or to pay fees and expenses, and instead the Sponsor regularly expects to utilize the Post-Trade Financing Agreement in connection with such creation and redemption transactions or for such fees and expenses. The purpose of borrowing the INJ or cash used in connection with cash creation and redemption or to pay these fees and expenses from the Lender is to lock in the INJ price on the trade date or the payment date, as applicable, rather than waiting for the funds associated with the creation to be transferred by the Cash Custodian to an INJ Counterparty prior to purchasing the INJ or for the INJ held in the Vault Balance to be transferred to a Trading Balance prior to selling the INJ (a process which may take up to twenty four hours, or longer if the Injective Network is experiencing delays in transaction confirmation, or if there are other delays). In the event Trade Credits are unavailable from the Lender or become exhausted, the Sponsor would require an Authorized Participant to deliver cash on the trade date so that a purchase order can be settled in a timely manner.

Because the Trust’s Trading Balance may not be funded with cash on trade date for the purchase of INJ associated with the purchase order, the Trust may borrow Trade Credits in the form of cash from the Lender pursuant to the Post-Trade Financing Agreement or may require an Authorized Participant to deliver the required cash for the purchase order on trade date. The extension of Trade Credits on trade date allows the Trust to purchase INJ through an INJ Counterparty on trade date, with such INJ being deposited in the Trust’s Trading Balance. For settlement of a redemption, the Trust delivers Shares to an Authorized Participant in exchange for cash received from such Authorized Participant. To the extent Trade Credits were utilized, the Trust uses the cash to repay the Trade Credits borrowed from the Lender. Any Financing Fees owed to the Lender is deemed part of trade execution costs and embedded in the trade price for each transaction, and therefore is the cash-denominated responsibility of the Authorized Participants. To the extent this position changes and Financing Fees owed to the Lender would be a responsibility of the Trust, such expenses could impact the net assets of the Trust over time by increasing the operational expenses of the Trust.

The Trust is currently not aware of the maximum amount of Trade Credit, but such maximum amount of Trade Credit may exist at some point in the future.

The Lender is only required to extend Trade Credits up to an authorized amount (the “Authorized Amount”) for use on the Prime Broker’s Trading Platform. Once the Lender has approved the Trust to receive Trade Credits up to the Authorized Amount, the Trust may place orders up to amounts up to the then-current amount available to the Trust to place orders (the “Available Balance”). The “Authorized Amount” will be an amount to be determined, on a daily basis, based on the Lender’s sole discretion considering factors including, but not limited to, availability of financing and credit due diligence of the Trust. The Lender is only required to extend Trade Credits to the Trust to the extent such INJ or cash is actually available to the Lender. For example, if the Lender is unable to itself borrow INJ to lend to the Trust as a Trade Credit, or there is a material market disruption (as determined by the Lender in good faith and in its sole discretion), the Lender is not obligated to extend Trade Credits to the Trust. The Lender is under no obligation to continue to provide Trade Credits for certain specific fiat currencies and/or digital assets, and Lender may impose black-out periods during which Trade Credits for currencies or digital assets may be unavailable.

To the extent that Trade Credits are not available, (1) there may be delays in the selling of INJ, (2) Trust assets may be in held the Trading Balance for a longer duration than if Trade Credits were available, and (3) the execution price associated with such trades may deviate significantly from the Pricing Benchmark price used to determine the Trust’s NAV. To the extent that the execution price for sales of INJ deviates significantly from the Pricing Benchmark price used to determine the NAV of the Trust, the remaining Shareholders may be negatively impacted. If Trade Credits are unavailable to the Trust, the Trust must pre-fund its Trading Balance with cash and/or INJ in order to sell INJ through the Prime Broker.

The Trust generally must repay Trade Credits by 6:00 p.m. ET (the “Settlement Deadline”) on the Business Day immediately following the day the Trade Credit was extended by the Lender to the Trust (or, if such day is not a Business Day, on the next Business Day). Pursuant to the Post-Trade Financing Agreement, the Trust has granted a security interest in, lien on and right of set off against all of the Trust’s right, title and interest, the Trust’s Trading Balance and Vault Balance established pursuant to the Prime Broker Agreement and Custodial Services Agreements, in order to secure the repayment by the Trust of the Trade Credits and Financing Fees to the Lender. The Trust and Lender may terminate the Post-Trade Financing Agreement immediately upon giving the other party written notice. Upon such notice of termination, the Coinbase Custodian and the Prime Broker have agreed to comply with instructions and entitlement orders from the Lender with respect to the disposition of the assets in the Trust’s Trading Balance without further consent by the Trust. If the Trust fails to repay the Trade Credits to the Lender on time and in full, the Lender shall have the right to instruct the Prime Broker (and Prime Broker agrees to comply with such instruction) to transfer the Trust’s assets from the Trust’s Trading Balance to the Lender to repay the Trade Credit debt owed by the Trust to the Lender and/or liquidate or cancel outstanding orders.

Other than in connection with the Post-Trade Financing Agreement, (1) the Trust, the Sponsor and the service providers will not loan or pledge the Trust’s assets, including staked assets, nor will the Trust’s assets, including staked assets, serve as collateral for any loan or similar arrangement, other than in connection with the Post-Trade Financing Agreement; and (2) the Trust will not utilize leverage, derivatives or any similar arrangements in seeking to meet its investment objective.

Interest rates on Trade Credits (“Financing Fees”) will be an amount to be determined, on a daily basis, based on the Lender’s sole discretion considering factors including, but not limited to, availability of financing, market prices, and credit due diligence of the Trust.

FORM OF SHARES

Registered Form

Shares are issued in registered form in accordance with the Trust Agreement. The Transfer Agent has been appointed registrar and transfer agent for the purpose of transferring Shares in certificated form. The Transfer Agent keeps a record of all Shareholders and holders of the Shares in certified form in the registry (“Register”). The Sponsor recognizes transfers of Shares in certificated form only if done in accordance with the Trust Agreement. The beneficial interests in such Shares are held in book-entry form through participants and/or accountholders in DTC.

Book Entry

Individual certificates are not issued for the Shares. Instead, Shares are represented by one or more global certificates, which are deposited by the Administrator with DTC and registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee for DTC. The global certificates evidence all of the Shares outstanding at any time. Shareholders are limited to (1) participants in DTC such as banks, brokers, dealers and trust companies (“DTC Participants”), (2) those who maintain, either directly or indirectly, a custodial relationship with a DTC Participant (“Indirect Participants”), and (3) those who hold interests in the Shares through DTC Participants or Indirect Participants, in each case who satisfy the requirements for transfers of Shares. DTC Participants acting on behalf of Shareholders holding Shares through such participants’ accounts in DTC will follow the delivery practice applicable to securities eligible for DTC’s Same-Day Funds Settlement System. Shares are credited to DTC Participants’ securities accounts following confirmation of receipt of payment.

DTC

DTC is a limited purpose trust company organized under the laws of the State of New York and is a member of the Federal Reserve System, a “clearing corporation” within the meaning of the New York Uniform Commercial Code and a “clearing agency” registered pursuant to the provisions of Section 17A of the Exchange Act. DTC holds securities for DTC Participants and facilitates the clearance and settlement of transactions between DTC Participants through electronic book-entry changes in accounts of DTC Participants.

TRANSFER OF SHARES

The Shares are only transferable through the book-entry system of DTC. Shareholders who are not DTC Participants may transfer their Shares through DTC by instructing the DTC Participant holding their Shares (or by instructing the Indirect Participant or other entity through which their Shares are held) to transfer the Shares. Transfers are made in accordance with standard securities industry practice.

Transfers of interests in Shares with DTC are made in accordance with the usual rules and operating procedures of DTC and the nature of the transfer. DTC has established procedures to facilitate transfers among the participants and/or accountholders of DTC. Because DTC can only act on behalf of DTC Participants, who in turn act on behalf of Indirect Participants, the ability of a person or entity having an interest in a global certificate to pledge such interest to persons or entities that do not participate in DTC, or otherwise take actions in respect of such interest, may be affected by the lack of a certificate or other definitive document representing such interest.

DTC will take any action permitted to be taken by a Shareholder (including, without limitation, the presentation of a global certificate for exchange) only at the direction of one or more DTC Participants in whose account with DTC interests in global certificates are credited and only in respect of such portion of the aggregate principal amount of the global certificate as to which such DTC Participant or Participants has or have given such direction.

AUDIT SEED/INITIAL SEED CREATION INVESTOR

The Sponsor served as the Audit Seed Investor to the Trust. On [●], the Sponsor, in its capacity as Audit Seed Investor, subject to conditions, purchased Initial Seed Shares comprising 2 Shares at a per-Share price of $50.00. Total proceeds to the Trust from the sale of the Initial Seed Shares were $100. Delivery of the Initial Seed Shares was made [●]. The Initial Seed Shares were redeemed for cash on or about [●].

21Shares US LLC (in such capacity, the “Initial Seed Creation Investor”) is expected to purchase initial seed creation baskets comprising [●] Shares (the “Seed Creation Baskets”) at a price of $[●] per Share. The total proceeds to the Trust from the sale of the Seed Creation Baskets are expected to be approximately $[●]. Such proceeds are expected to be used by the Trust to purchase INJ at or immediately prior to the listing of the Shares on the Exchange. In this capacity, the Initial Seed Creation Investor will act as a statutory underwriter in connection with this purchase. The INJ acquired in connection with the Seed Creation Baskets will be held by the INJ Custodians. The actual price of the Shares comprising the Seed Creation Baskets will be determined as of the effective date of the registration statement of which this Prospectus forms a part as described in this Prospectus, and such Shares could be sold at different prices if sold by the Initial Seed Creation Investor at different times. It is anticipated that the Initial Seed Creation Investor may redeem its Shares or sell its Shares to a third party following the initial listing of Shares on the Exchange. The Initial Seed Creation Investor may sell some or all of its Shares pursuant to the registration statement of which this Prospectus forms a part (in such capacity, the “Selling Shareholder”), which Shares will have been registered to permit the resale from time to time after purchase. The Trust will not receive any of the proceeds from the resale or redemption by the Selling Shareholder of these Shares. The Sponsor will not receive from the Trust or any of its affiliates any fee or other compensation in connection with the resale of these Shares.

PLAN OF DISTRIBUTION

Buying and Selling Shares

Most investors buy and sell Shares of the Trust in secondary market transactions through brokers. Shares are expected to trade on the Exchange under the ticker symbol “TINJ.” Shares are expected to be bought and sold throughout the trading day like other publicly traded securities. When buying or selling Shares through a broker, most investors will incur customary brokerage commissions and charges. Shareholders are encouraged to review the terms of their brokerage account for details on applicable charges.

Authorized Participants

The offering of the Trust’s Shares is a best-efforts offering. The Trust continuously offers Baskets consisting of 10,000 Shares to Authorized Participants. Authorized Participants pay a transaction fee for each order they place to create or redeem one or more Baskets.

The offering of Baskets is being made in compliance with Rule 2310 of the FINRA Rules. Accordingly, Authorized Participants will not make any sales to any account over which they have discretionary authority without the prior written approval of a purchaser of Shares.

The per share price of Shares offered in Baskets on any subsequent day will be the total NAV of the Trust calculated shortly after the close of the Exchange on that day divided by the number of issued and outstanding Shares of the Trust. An Authorized Participant is not required to sell any specific number or dollar amount of Shares.

By executing an Authorized Participant Agreement, an Authorized Participant becomes part of the group of parties eligible to purchase Baskets from, and put Baskets for redemption to, the Trust. The Authorized Participant Agreements may provide for in-kind Basket creations and redemptions. An Authorized Participant is under no obligation to create or redeem Baskets or to offer to the public Shares of any Baskets it does create.

Because new Shares can be created and issued on an ongoing basis, at any point during the life of the Trust, a “distribution,” as such term is used in the 1933 Act, will be occurring. Authorized Participants, other broker-dealers and other persons are cautioned that some of their activities may result in their being deemed participants in a distribution in a manner that would render them statutory underwriters and subject them to the prospectus-delivery and liability provisions of the 1933 Act. Any purchaser who purchases Shares with a view towards distribution of such Shares may be deemed to be a statutory underwriter. In addition, an Authorized Participant, other broker-dealer firm or its client will be deemed a statutory underwriter if it purchases a Basket from the Trust, breaks the Basket down into the constituent Shares and sells the Shares to its customers; or if it chooses to couple the creation of a supply of new Shares with an active selling effort involving solicitation of secondary market demand for the Shares. In contrast, Authorized Participants may engage in secondary market or other transactions in Shares that would not be deemed “underwriting.” For example, an Authorized Participant may act in the capacity of a broker or dealer with respect to Shares that were previously distributed by other Authorized Participants. A determination of whether a particular market participant is an underwriter must take into account all the facts and circumstances pertaining to the activities of the broker-dealer or its client in the particular case, and the examples mentioned above should not be considered a complete description of all the activities that would lead to designation as an underwriter and subject them to the prospectus-delivery and liability provisions of the 1933 Act.

Dealers who are neither Authorized Participants nor “underwriters” but are nonetheless participating in a distribution (as contrasted to ordinary secondary trading transactions), and thus dealing with Shares that are part of an “unsold allotment” within the meaning of Section 4(a)(3)(C) of the 1933 Act, would be unable to take advantage of the prospectus-delivery exemption provided by Section 4(a)(3) of the 1933 Act.

While the Authorized Participants may be indemnified by the Sponsor, they will not be entitled to receive a discount or commission from the Trust or the Sponsor for their purchases of Baskets.

The Authorized Participant Agreements may be terminated at any time by any party upon thirty days prior written notice to the other parties unless earlier terminated: (i) upon the respective Authorized Participant ceasing to be a participant of DTC (in which case such Authorized Participant Agreement will terminate automatically) (ii) upon notice to such Authorized Participant by the Sponsor in the event of a breach by such Authorized Participant of the applicable Authorized Participant Agreement or the procedures described or incorporated therein; (iii) at such time as the applicable Trust is terminated; or (iv) by such Authorized Participant at any time upon prior written notice in the event of a breach by the Transfer Agent of the applicable Trust or the Sponsor of any provision of the applicable Authorized Participant Agreement, upon the insolvency or bankruptcy of any of them or of the applicable Trust.

In connection with each order by an Authorized Participant to create or redeem one or more Baskets, unless waived by the Sponsor, the Authorized Participant shall pay a transaction fee to the Sponsor. If an Authorized Participant (i) cancels a cash order before the cut-off time; (ii) delays or accepts the substitution of cash for an in-kind order in accordance with the procedure provided in the applicable Authorized Participant Agreement; or (iii) in connection with a redemption order, fails to deliver the required cash or digital assets, as applicable, resulting in cancellation of the order, in each case the Authorized Participant shall reimburse the Sponsor for its reasonable costs.

The Sponsor has agreed to indemnify the Authorized Participants from losses arising out of untrue statements in the registration statement or Prospectus (except those based on information furnished by the Authorized Participant), breaches by the Sponsor, failure to perform obligations, or failure to comply with applicable laws. The Authorized Participant agrees to indemnify the Sponsor, Transfer Agent, and Trust from losses arising out of untrue statements based on information furnished by the Authorized Participant, misrepresentations about the Shares inconsistent with the Prospectus, breaches by the Authorized Participant, failure to complete accepted orders, or failure to comply with applicable laws. Neither party’s indemnity protects against liability arising from willful misfeasance, bad faith, or gross negligence.

The Authorized Participant Agreements provide that in the absence of gross negligence, bad faith, or willful misconduct, no party will be liable for losses arising out of mistakes in data, interruptions in communications, or acts by third-party facilitators. In addition, no party will be liable for special, indirect, or consequential damages, and no party will be liable for acts or omissions of DTC, National Securities Clearing Corporation, or other securities depositories.

The Authorized Participant Agreements are governed by the laws of the State of New York, and each party irrevocably consents to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of New York courts and waives any right to trial by jury.

Initial Seed Creation Investor; Selling Shareholder

The Sponsor or its affiliates, or a fund or unit investment trust for which the Sponsor or an affiliate of the Sponsor serves as sponsor or investment advisor, may purchase Shares of the Trust through a broker-dealer or other investors, including in secondary market transactions, and because the Sponsor and its affiliates may be deemed affiliates of the Trust, the Shares are being registered to permit the resale of these Shares by affiliates of the Trust from time to time after any such purchase. The Trust will not receive any of the proceeds from the resale or redemption of such Shares.

21Shares US LLC (in such capacity, the “Initial Seed Creation Investor”) is expected to purchase initial seed creation baskets comprising [●] Shares (the “Seed Creation Baskets”) at a price of $[●] per Share. The proceeds from such sale are anticipated to be approximately $[●]. Such proceeds are expected to be used by the Trust to purchase INJ at or immediately prior to the listing of the Shares on the Exchange. In this capacity, the Initial Seed Creation Investor will act as a statutory underwriter in connection with this purchase. The Sponsor will transact with an INJ Counterparty to acquire INJ on behalf of the Trust in exchange for cash provided by the Initial Seed Creation Investor in its capacity as Initial Seed Creation Investor. Any INJ acquired in connection with the Seed Creation Baskets will be held by the INJ Custodians. The actual price of the Shares comprising the Seed Creation Baskets will be determined as of the effective date of the registration statement of which this Prospectus forms a part as described in this Prospectus, and such Shares could be sold at different prices if sold by the Initial Seed Creation Investor at different times. It is anticipated that the Initial Seed Creation Investor may redeem its Shares or sell its Shares to a third party following the initial listing of Shares on the Exchange.

The Initial Seed Creation Investor may sell some or all of the Shares pursuant to the registration statement of which this Prospectus forms a part (in such capacity, the “Selling Shareholder”), which Shares will have been registered to permit the resale from time to time after purchase. The Shares offered by the Selling Shareholder were acquired by the Selling Shareholder as described in the registration statement and could be sold at different times and at different offering prices. The Trust will not receive any of the proceeds from the resale or redemption by the Selling Shareholder of these Shares. The Sponsor will not receive from the Trust or any of its affiliates any fee or other compensation in connection with the resale of these Shares.

A Selling Shareholder may sell Shares owned by the Selling Shareholder directly or through broker-dealers, in accordance with applicable law, on any national securities exchange on which the Shares may be listed or quoted at the time of sale, through trading systems, in the OTC market or in transactions other than on these exchanges or systems at fixed prices, at prevailing market prices at the time of the sale, at varying prices determined at the time of sale, or at negotiated prices. These sales may be effected through brokerage transactions, privately negotiated trades, block sales, entry into options or other derivatives transactions or through any other means authorized by applicable law. A Selling Shareholder may redeem Shares held in Basket size through an Authorized Participant. See “Conflicts of Interest.”

Lock-Up Period

We have agreed to sell to Voltedge, on or immediately before the date upon which the registration statement of which this Prospectus forms a part is declared effective, a number of Shares in an amount equal to $30,000,000 in INJ (the “Voltedge Closing”). For a period of one year following the Voltedge Closing (the “Lock-Up Period”), Voltedge has agreed that it shall not, without the prior written consent of the Sponsor, sell, transfer, assign, pledge, hypothecate or otherwise dispose of any of the Shares it holds, nor will Voltedge seek to have the Trust or the Sponsor redeem the Shares during the Lock-Up Period. Following expiration of the Lock-Up Period, Voltedge may, to the extent permitted by applicable laws, be permitted to redeem Shares in accordance with the Trust Agreement.

CREATION AND REDEMPTION OF SHARES

The Trust creates and redeems Shares from time to time, but only in one or more Baskets. Baskets are only made in exchange for delivery to the Trust or the distribution by the Trust of, in the event of an in-kind transaction, the amount of INJ represented by the Baskets being created or redeemed, or in the event of a cash transaction, the amount of cash equivalent to the amount of INJ represented by the Baskets being created or redeemed, the amount of which is based on the quantity of INJ attributable to each Share of the Trust (net of accrued but unpaid Sponsor Fees and any accrued but unpaid extraordinary expenses or liabilities) being created or redeemed determined as promptly as practicable after 4:00 p.m. ET on the day the order to create or redeem Baskets is properly received. For in-kind purchases, Authorized Participants will deliver, or arrange for the delivery by such Authorized Participant’s designee, of INJ to the Trust’s account with an INJ Custodian in exchange for Shares. For in-kind redemptions, when Authorized Participants redeem Shares with the Trust, the Trust, through the INJ Custodians, will deliver INJ to such Authorized Participants or its designee in exchange for their Shares.

Authorized Participants are the only persons that may place orders to create and redeem Baskets. Authorized Participants must be (1) registered broker-dealers or other securities market participants, such as banks and other financial institutions, which are not required to register as broker-dealers to engage in securities transactions described below, and (2) DTC Participants. On May 15, 2025, the staff of the SEC’s Division of Trading and Markets stated that broker-dealers are permitted to facilitate in-kind creations and redemptions in connection with spot digital asset exchange-traded products. As part of the same set of Frequently Asked Questions (“FAQs”) clarifying its views on broker-dealers’ digital asset activities, the staff noted, among other things, that (i) SEC Rule 15c3-3 applies only to those digital assets that were securities, and (ii) broker-dealers are permitted to facilitate in-kind creations and redemptions in connection with spot digital asset exchange-traded products. To become an Authorized Participant, a person must enter into an Authorized Participant Agreement with the Sponsor. The Authorized Participant Agreements provide the procedures for the creation and redemption of Baskets and for the delivery of the INJ required for such creations and redemptions. The Authorized Participant Agreements may provide for in-kind Basket creations and redemptions. The Authorized Participant Agreements and the related procedures attached thereto may be amended by the Trust, without the consent of any Shareholder or Authorized Participant. Authorized Participants pay the Transfer Agent a fee for each order they place to create or redeem one or more Baskets. The transaction fee may be reduced, increased or otherwise changed by the Sponsor.

Generally speaking, INJ Counterparties deliver INJ related to an Authorized Participant’s purchase order to the Trust’s Cold Vault Balance. Authorized Participants and INJ Counterparties are not required to maintain an account with the INJ Custodians.

Creations and redemptions of Shares may result in certain slippage being incurred as a result of, for example, trading fees, spreads, or commissions. Any slippage so incurred will be the responsibility of an Authorized Participant, as a cash liability, and not of the Trust or Sponsor.

Each Authorized Participant will be required to be registered as a broker-dealer under the Exchange Act and a member in good standing with FINRA, or exempt from being or otherwise not required to be licensed as a broker-dealer or a member of FINRA, and will be qualified to act as a broker or dealer in the states or other jurisdictions where the nature of its business so requires. Certain Authorized Participants may also be regulated under federal and state banking laws and regulations. Each Authorized Participant has its own set of rules and procedures, internal controls and information barriers as it determines is appropriate in light of its own regulatory regime.

The Sponsor performs extensive due diligence as a part of its INJ Counterparty selection and onboarding process. As part of this process the Sponsor assesses INJ Counterparty candidates against various criteria, including those relating to candidates’ (1) financial standing, (2) reputation, (3) settlement history with the Sponsor and (4) regulatory oversight. No affiliates of the Trust or the Sponsor are expected to serve as an INJ Counterparty.

Creations and redemptions will generally be “on-chain” transactions reflected in the Trust’s Cold Vault Balance. Under certain circumstances, these transactions may be “off-chain” transactions that are represented in the books and records of the Prime Broker. Off-chain transactions have several benefits, including instant execution, lower transaction fees, and increased privacy. Off-chain transactions may be utilized for smaller, frequent transactions where speed and cost efficiency are more important.

The Trust will be responsible for INJ-related on-chain transaction fees associated with creation and redemption transactions and transactions with the Prime Broker, and that the Sponsor will assume such expenses of the Trust in consideration for the Sponsor Fee. The Authorized Participants are responsible for only cash liabilities relating to creation and redemption costs, such as trading fees and slippage.

Authorized Participants will place orders through the Transfer Agent. The Transfer Agent will coordinate with the INJ Custodians in order to facilitate settlement of the Shares and INJ as described in more detail in the “Creation Procedures and Redemption Procedures” sections below.

The following description of the procedures for the creation and redemption of Baskets is only a summary and a Shareholder should refer to the relevant provisions of the Trust Agreement and the forms of Authorized Participant Agreements for more detail. The Trust Agreement and forms of Authorized Participant Agreements are filed as exhibits to the registration statement of which this Prospectus forms a part, one of which provides for in-kind creations and redemptions.

Creation Procedures

On any Business Day, an Authorized Participant may place an order with the Transfer Agent via the order taking portal to create one or more Baskets via a cash or in-kind transaction.

Purchase orders must be placed by 12:00 p.m. ET, or another time determined by the Sponsor. The day on which an order is received by the Transfer Agent is considered the purchase order date.

Upon the Sponsor’s approval, a creation request by an Authorized Participant will produce an affirmation confirming the acceptance of the order by the Sponsor. Upon publication of the Trust’s NAV, the Sponsor, Transfer Agent and Authorized Participant will receive a confirmation receipt including trade details such as trade date, settlement date, direction of trade, number of Shares, INJ entitlement and the applicable Authorized Participant details. On the settlement date, the Sponsor and Authorized Participant will settle entirely in cash.

Prior to the delivery of Baskets for a purchase order, an Authorized Participant must also have wired to the Transfer Agent the nonrefundable transaction fee due for the creation order. Authorized Participants may not withdraw a creation request. By placing a cash creation order, an Authorized Participant agrees to facilitate the deposit of cash with the Cash Custodian. By placing an in-kind creation order, an Authorized Participant agrees to facilitate the deposit directly of INJ, or through its designee, with the INJ Custodians.

To effectuate a cash creation order, an Authorized Participant will be required to prefund with cash the Trust’s purchase of INJ in an amount determined by the Sponsor. An Authorized Participant will be required to transfer the cash deposit amount associated with such creation order to the Trust’s account with the Cash Custodian. The Sponsor, on behalf of the Trust, will instruct an INJ Counterparty to purchase the amount of INJ equivalent in value to the cash deposit amount associated with the creation order, with such purchase transaction prearranged to be executed, in the Sponsor’s reasonable efforts, at the Pricing Benchmark price used to calculate the Trust’s NAV, taking into account any spread, commissions, or other trading costs on the applicable Creation Order Date. The resulting INJ will be deposited in the Trust’s accounts with the INJ Custodians. Any slippage incurred (including, but not limited to, any trading fees, spreads, or commissions), on a cash equivalent basis, will be the responsibility of an Authorized Participant and not of the Trust or Sponsor.

To the extent the execution price of the INJ acquired by an INJ Counterparty at settlement is less than the cash deposit amount, such cash difference will be remitted to an Authorized Participant. To the extent the execution price of the INJ acquired by the INJ Counterparty exceeds the cash deposit amount, such cash difference will be the responsibility of the applicable Authorized Participant and not the Trust or Sponsor.

No Shares will be issued unless and until the Sponsor and Transfer Agent have confirmed that any outstanding INJ or cash (as applicable) due from an Authorized Participant has been settled with the Trust. Disruption of services at the Prime Broker or at the Trust’s INJ Custodians or Cash Custodian would have the potential to delay settlement of the INJ related to Share creations. To the extent an INJ Counterparty is not able to deliver INJ associated with a cash purchase order as of a specified time on the settlement date, the Sponsor or Transfer Agent will cancel such purchase order. To the extent that INJ transfers from the Trust’s Trading Balance to the Trust’s Vault are delayed due to congestion or other issues with the Injective Network, such INJ will not be held in cold storage until such transfers can occur.

For an in-kind creation, following an Authorized Participant’s purchase order, the Trust’s accounts with the INJ Custodians must be credited with the required INJ by the end of the Business Day following the purchase order date, or in the case of cash deposits, the Trust’s Cash Custodian account must be credited with the required cash by the end of the Business Day following the purchase order date, as applicable. Under most circumstances, the INJ associated with a Creation Basket Deposit will be deposited with an INJ Custodian in the Trust’s Cold Vault Balance, although in some circumstances, INJ may be deposited outside of cold storage. For example, although the INJ Custodians will keep a substantial portion of the private keys associated with the Trust’s INJ in the Cold Vault Balance, a portion of the Trust’s assets may be held in hot trading wallets, from time to time, in connection with the settlement of a creation or redemption transaction and in connection with the sale of INJ to pay trust expenses. Upon receipt of the INJ deposit amount in the Trust’s accounts with the INJ Custodians, or the cash deposit amount in the Trust’s Cash Custodian account, the INJ Custodians or the Cash Custodian, as applicable, will notify the Transfer Agent, the applicable Authorized Participant, and the Sponsor that the INJ or cash has been deposited. Upon confirmation by the Sponsor and Transfer Agent that any outstanding INJ or cash due from such Authorized Participant has been settled with the Trust, the Transfer Agent will then direct DTC to credit the number of Shares created to the applicable DTC account of such Authorized Participant.

The Authorized Participants understand and agree that in the event Creation Basket Deposits are not deposited to the Trust by the time specified above and in compliance with the applicable procedures, and any outstanding cash or INJ due from the Authorized Participants have not been settled with the Trust, then the applicable Purchase Order will be canceled by the Sponsor. In the event an Authorized Participant, or its designee, has not deposited the INJ to the Trust by the applicable time on the settlement date of the in-kind creation order, the Authorized Participant will be given one of the following options by the Trust to (i) delay settlement of the order to enable delivery of INJ at a later date or (ii) accept that the Trust will execute an INJ transaction required for the creation and the Authorized Participant will deliver the U.S. dollars required for this purchase. The Authorized Participants are responsible for the dollar cost of the difference between the INJ price utilized in calculating NAV per Share on the trade date and the price at which the Trust acquires the INJ to the extent the price realized in buying the INJ is higher than the INJ price utilized in the NAV. To the extent the price realized in buying the INJ is lower than the price utilized in the NAV, the Authorized Participant shall get to keep the dollar impact of any such difference. For a cash redemption order, an Authorized Participant will deliver Shares to the Trust and will receive cash for the Shares delivered. For an in-kind redemption order, an Authorized Participant will deliver Shares to the Trust and will receive INJ or will have its designee receive INJ for the Shares delivered.

None of the Sponsor, the Trust, the Marketing Agent, or the Transfer Agent shall be liable to the Authorized Participants if an INJ Counterparty fails to deliver INJ or cash, respectively, representing the Creation Basket Deposit for such Authorized Participant’s Purchase Order to the Trust’s accounts with the INJ Custodians or with the Cash Custodian, as applicable, unless such failure is due to an act or omission of the Sponsor or Trust.

INJ held in the Trust’s accounts with the INJ Custodians are the property of the Trust. The Trust, the Sponsor and the service providers will not loan or pledge the Trust’s assets, including staked assets, nor will the Trust’s assets, including staked assets, serve as collateral for any loan or similar arrangement, other than in connection with the Post-Trade Financing Agreement.

Determination of Required Deposits

For a creation, the total amount of INJ (for in-kind creations), or cash (for cash creations), required to create each Basket is the amount of INJ or its cash equivalent that is in the same proportion to the total assets of the Trust, net of accrued expenses and other liabilities, as the number of Shares being created bears to the total number of Shares outstanding on the date the order is properly received, plus a cash buffer determined by the Sponsor.

The Creation Basket Deposit changes from day to day. On each day that the Exchange is open for regular trading, the Administrator adjusts the quantity of INJ represented by the Creation Basket Deposit as appropriate to reflect accrued expenses and any loss of INJ that may occur. The computation is made by the Administrator as promptly as practicable after 4:00 p.m. ET. Each night, the Sponsor will publish the amount of INJ that is represented by each Creation Basket Deposit.

Delivery of Required Deposits

An Authorized Participant who places a purchase order must follow the procedures outlined in the “Creation Procedures” section of this Prospectus. When a creation occurs, after the INJ Custodians receive the required INJ (for in-kind creations) or the Cash Custodian receives the required cash (for cash creations), the Sponsor will notify the Transfer Agent that the INJ or cash, as applicable, has been received, and the Transfer Agent and Sponsor will then determine whether any outstanding cash or INJ due from the Authorized Participant has been settled with the Trust, and the Transfer Agent will direct DTC to credit the number of Shares ordered to the Authorized Participant’s DTC account on the Business Day following the purchase order date.

Rejection of Purchase Orders

The Sponsor or its designee has the absolute right, but does not have any obligation, to reject any purchase order or Creation Basket Deposit if the Sponsor determines that:

None of the Sponsor, the Transfer Agent nor the INJ Custodians will be liable for the rejection of any purchase order or Creation Basket Deposit.

The Marketing Agent shall notify the applicable Authorized Participant of a rejection or revocation of any Purchase Order. The Marketing Agent is under no duty, however, to give notification of any specific defects or irregularities in the delivery of the Creation Basket Deposit nor shall the Marketing Agent or the Trust incur any liability for the failure to give any such notification. The Trust and the Marketing Agent may not revoke a previously accepted Purchase Order.

Redemption Procedures

On any Business Day, an Authorized Participant may place an order with the Transfer Agent via the order taking portal to redeem one or more Baskets. For purposes of processing redemption orders, a “Business Day” means any day other than a day when either the Exchange or the New York Stock Exchange are closed for regular trading.

Sell orders must be placed by 12:00 p.m. ET, or another time as determined by the Sponsor. The day on which an order is received by the Transfer Agent is considered the sell order date.

Upon the Sponsor’s approval, a redemption request by an Authorized Participant will produce an affirmation confirming the acceptance of the order by the Sponsor. Upon publication of the Trust’s NAV, the Sponsor, Transfer Agent and Authorized Participant will receive a confirmation receipt including trade details such as trade date, settlement date, direction of trade, number of Shares, INJ entitlement and Authorized Participant details. On the settlement date, the Sponsor and Authorized Participant will settle entirely in cash in the case of a cash redemption and in INJ in the case of an in-kind redemption.

To effectuate a redemption order via a cash transaction, an Authorized Participant will be required to prefund a cash amount determined by the Sponsor to the Trust’s account with the Transfer Agent no later than 2:00 pm ET on the sell order date or at another time as determined by the Sponsor. Because the Shares associated with the redemption order may not be available at the time that an Authorized Participant places the redemption order, the Sponsor may require cash to be pre-funded to cover related trading costs. The Shares associated with the redemption order are due to be delivered to the Trust’s DTC account on the settlement date. Upon receipt of the required cash indicated in the redemption order, the Sponsor, on behalf of the Trust, will instruct an INJ Counterparty to convert INJ into cash by effectuating an INJ sale executed, in the Sponsor’s reasonable efforts, at the Pricing Benchmark price used to calculate the Trust’s NAV, and deposit the cash proceeds of such sale in the Trust’s account with the Cash Custodian for settlement with the applicable Authorized Participant (taking into account any spread, commission, or other trading costs).

The redemption distribution due from the Trust is delivered to an INJ Counterparty on the Redemption Distribution Date (which is the next Business Day after the redemption order is received) if the Trust’s DTC account has been credited with the Baskets to be redeemed. Once the Sponsor determines that the Shares have been received in the Trust’s DTC account, the Sponsor authorizes the INJ Custodians to transfer the redemption INJ amount from the Trust’s accounts with the INJ Custodians to the INJ Counterparty for conversion to cash to be distributed to an Authorized Participant upon settlement. To the extent the Shares associated with the redemption order are not received in the Trust’s DTC account on the settlement date, the redemption order will be canceled.

Upon receipt of the redemption distribution of INJ by an INJ Counterparty, the INJ Counterparty, as a counterparty to the Trust, shall convert the INJ associated with the redemption order to cash for settlement with the Trust. Under most circumstances, this transfer of INJ will be made from the Trust’s Cold Vault Balance with the INJ Custodians, although in some circumstances, INJ may be transferred from outside of cold storage.

To effectuate a redemption order via an in-kind transaction, the Trust, through an INJ Custodian, will deliver INJ to an Authorized Participant or its designee in exchange for Shares.

INJ held in the Trust’s accounts with the INJ Custodians are the property of the Trust. The Trust, the Sponsor and the service providers will not loan or pledge the Trust’s assets, including staked assets, nor will the Trust’s assets, including staked assets, serve as collateral for any loan or similar arrangement, other than in connection with the Post-Trade Financing Agreement.

Determination of Redemption Distribution

The redemption distribution for cash redemptions from the Trust consists of a transfer to an INJ Counterparty of an amount of INJ equal to the NAV of the Trust multiplied by the number of Shares to be redeemed under the redemption order, with such amount of INJ to be converted by the Trust to cash for settlement with the redeeming Authorized Participant. The redemption distribution for in-kind redemptions from the Trust consists of a transfer to the Authorized Participant or its designee of an amount of INJ equal to the NAV of the Trust multiplied by the number of Shares to be redeemed under the redemption order,

Delivery of Redemption Distribution

In the case of a cash redemption, the Trust, through the Cash Custodian, will deliver cash to an Authorized Participant when they redeem Shares with the Trust. This distribution of cash will be delivered to such Authorized Participant on the Business Day following the Redemption Order Date if, by 2:00 p.m. ET on such Business Day (or another time as determined by Sponsor), the Trust’s DTC account has been credited with the Baskets to be redeemed. If the Trust’s DTC account has not been credited with all of the Baskets to be redeemed by such time, the redemption distribution will also be delayed. In the case of an in-kind redemption, the Trust will deliver INJ to the Authorized Participants (or their designee) when they redeem Shares with the Trust. This distribution of INJ will be delivered to such Authorized Participant (or its designee) on the Business Day following the Redemption Order Date if, by 2:00 p.m. ET on such Business Day (or another time as determined by Sponsor), the Trust’s DTC account has been credited with the Baskets to be redeemed by such time. If the Trust’s DTC account has not been credited with all of the Baskets to be redeemed by such time, the redemption distribution will also be delayed.

Suspension or Rejection of Redemption Orders

The Sponsor may, in its discretion, suspend the right of redemption, or postpone the redemption settlement date, (1) for any period during which the Exchange is closed other than customary weekend or holiday closings, or trading on the Exchange is suspended or restricted, (2) for any period during which an emergency exists as a result of which delivery, disposal or evaluation of INJ is not reasonably practicable, or (3) for such other period as the Sponsor determines to be necessary for the protection of the Shareholders. For example, the Sponsor may determine that it is necessary to suspend redemptions to allow for the orderly liquidation of the Trust’s assets. If the Sponsor has difficulty liquidating the Trust’s positions, e.g., because of a market disruption event, it may be appropriate to suspend redemptions until such time as such circumstances are rectified. None of the Sponsor, the person authorized to take redemption orders in the manner provided in the Authorized Participant Agreements, or the INJ Custodians will be liable to any person or in any way for any loss or damages that may result from any such suspension or postponement.

Redemption orders must be made in whole Baskets. The Sponsor acting by itself or through the person authorized to take redemption orders in the manner provided in the Authorized Participant Agreements may, in its sole discretion, reject any redemption order (1) the Sponsor determines not to be in proper form, (2) the fulfillment of which its counsel advises may be illegal under applicable laws and regulations, or (3) if circumstances outside the control of the Sponsor, the person authorized to take redemption orders in the manner provided in the Authorized Participant Agreements or the INJ Custodians make it for all practical purposes not feasible for the Shares to be delivered under the redemption order. The Sponsor may also reject a redemption order if the number of Shares being redeemed would reduce the remaining outstanding Shares to 10,000 Shares (i.e., 1 Basket) or less.

The Marketing Agent shall notify the applicable Authorized Participant of a rejection or suspension of any redemption order. The Marketing Agent is under no duty, however, to give notification of any specific defects or irregularities nor shall the Marketing Agent or the Trust incur any liability for the failure to give any such notification. The Trust and the Marketing Agent may not revoke a previously accepted redemption order.

Creation and Redemption Transaction Fee

To compensate the Transfer Agent for expenses incurred in connection with the creation and redemption of Baskets, an Authorized Participant is required to pay a transaction fee to the Transfer Agent to create or redeem Baskets, which does not vary in accordance with the number of Baskets in such order. The transaction fee may be reduced, increased or otherwise changed by the Sponsor. The Sponsor will notify DTC of any change in the transaction fee and will not implement any increase in the fee for the redemption of Baskets until thirty (30) days after the date of notice.

Tax Responsibility

Authorized Participants are responsible for any transfer tax, sales or use tax, stamp tax, recording tax, value added tax or similar tax or governmental charge applicable to the creation or redemption of Baskets, regardless of whether or not such tax or charge is imposed directly on the Authorized Participants, and each agree, individually, to indemnify the Sponsor and the Trust if they are required by law to pay any such tax, together with any applicable penalties, additions to tax and interest thereon.

Secondary Market Transactions

As noted, the Trust will create and redeem Shares from time to time, but only in one or more Baskets. The creation and redemption of Baskets are only made in exchange for delivery to the Trust or the distribution by the Trust of the amount of cash equivalent to the amount of INJ represented by the number of Shares included in the Baskets being created or redeemed, as determined on the day the order to create or redeem Baskets is properly received.

As discussed above, Authorized Participants are the only persons that may place orders to create and redeem Baskets. Authorized Participants must be registered broker-dealers or other securities market participants, such as banks and other financial institutions, which are not required to register as broker-dealers to engage in securities transactions. An Authorized Participant is under no obligation to create or redeem Baskets, and an Authorized Participant is under no obligation to offer to the public Shares of any Baskets it does create.

Authorized Participants that do offer to the public Shares from the Baskets they create will do so at per-Share offering prices that are expected to reflect, among other factors, the trading price of the Shares on the Exchange, the NAV of the Trust at the time such Authorized Participant purchased the Baskets, the NAV of the Shares at the time of the offer of the Shares to the public, the supply of and demand for Shares at the time of sale, and the liquidity of INJ or other portfolio investments. Baskets are generally redeemed when the price per Share is at a discount to the NAV per Share. Shares initially comprising the same Basket but offered by Authorized Participants to the public at different times may have different offering prices. An order for one or more Baskets may be placed by an Authorized Participant on behalf of multiple clients. Authorized Participants who make deposits with the Trust in exchange for Baskets receive no fees, commissions or other forms of compensation or inducement of any kind from the Trust or the Sponsor and no such person has any obligation or responsibility to the Sponsor or the Trust to effect any sale or resale of Shares.

Shares are expected to trade in the secondary market on the Exchange. Shares may trade in the secondary market at prices that are lower or higher relative to their NAV per Share. The amount of the discount or premium in the trading price relative to the NAV per Share may be influenced by various factors, including the number of Shareholders who seek to purchase or sell Shares in the secondary market and the liquidity of INJ.

USE OF PROCEEDS

Proceeds received by the Trust from the issuance of Baskets consist of INJ. Such deposits are held by the INJ Custodians on behalf of the Trust until (i) delivered out in connection with redemptions of Baskets or (ii) transferred or sold by the INJ Custodians to pay fees due to the Sponsor and to pay the Trust’s expenses and liabilities not assumed by the Sponsor.

OWNERSHIP OF BENEFICIAL INTEREST IN THE TRUST

The beneficial interest in the Trust is divided into Shares. Each Share of the Trust represents an equal beneficial interest in the net assets of the Trust, and each holder of Shares is entitled to receive such holder’s pro rata share of distributions of income and capital gains, if any. The Trust anticipates that, on or about the date the registration statement of which this Prospectus forms a part of is declared effective by the SEC, pursuant to a subscription agreement entered into as of September 3, 2025, between the Trust and Voltedge, the Trust will issue to Voltedge baskets comprising [●] Shares for an aggregate purchase price in an amount equivalent to $30,000,000 in INJ, as determined based on the 30-day average price of INJ to USD, with the last such period being the business day prior to the date such Shares are delivered to Voltedge, using the price data from the Pricing Benchmark. The Shares to be issued pursuant to the Voltedge Subscription Agreement are subject to certain lock-up restrictions, which are described in further detail above. See “Plan of Distribution – Initial Seed Creation Investor; Selling Shareholder – Lock-Up Period.”

All Shares are fully paid and non-assessable. No Share will have any priority or preference over any other Share of the Trust. All distributions, if any, will be made ratably among all Shareholders from the assets of the Trust according to the number of Shares held of record by such Shareholders on the record date for any distribution or on the date of termination of the Trust, as the case may be. Except as otherwise provided by the Sponsor, Shareholders will have no preemptive or other right to subscribe to any additional Shares or other securities issued by the Trust.

The Sponsor will have full power and authority, in its sole discretion, without seeking the approval of the Trustee or the Shareholders (a) to establish and designate and to change in any manner and to fix such preferences, voting powers, rights, duties and privileges of the Trust as the Sponsor may from time to time determine, (b) to authorize the division of the beneficial interest in the Trust into an unlimited amount of Shares, with or without par value, as the Sponsor will determine, (c) to authorize the issuance of Shares without limitation as to number (including fractional Shares), to such persons and for such amount of consideration, subject to any restriction set forth in the Trust Agreement, if any, at such time or times and on such terms as the Sponsor may deem appropriate, (d) to authorize the division or combination of the Shares into a greater or lesser number without thereby materially changing the proportionate beneficial interest of the Shares in the assets held, and (e) to take such other action with respect to the Shares as the Sponsor may deem desirable. The ownership of Shares will be recorded on the books of the Trust or a transfer or similar agent for the Trust. No certificates certifying the ownership of Shares will be issued except as the Sponsor may otherwise determine from time to time. The Sponsor may make such rules as it considers appropriate for the issuance of share certificates, transfer of Shares and similar matters. The record books of the Trust as kept by the Trust, or any transfer or similar agent, as the case may be, will be conclusive as to the identity of the Shareholders and as to the number of Shares held from time to time by each.

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

There are present and potential future conflicts of interest inherent in the Trust’s structure and operation you should consider before you purchase Shares. The Sponsor will use this notice of conflicts as a defense against any claim or other proceeding made. If the Sponsor is not able to resolve these conflicts of interest adequately, it may impact the Trust’s ability to achieve its investment objective.

The officers, directors and employees of the Sponsor do not devote their time exclusively to the Trust. These persons are directors, officers or employees of other entities which may compete with the Trust for their services. They could have a conflict between their responsibilities to the Trust and to those other entities.

The Sponsor has the authority to manage the investments and operations of the Trust, and this may allow The Sponsor to act in a way that furthers its own interests which may create a conflict with shareholders’ best interests. Shareholders have very limited voting rights, which limits their ability to influence matters such as amendment of the Trust Agreement, change in the Trust’s basic investment policy, dissolution of the Trust, or the sale or distribution of the Trust’s assets.

The Sponsor serves as the sponsor to the Trust. The Sponsor may have a conflict to the extent that its trading decisions for the Trust may be influenced by the effect they would have on other funds its affiliates may manage. In addition, the Sponsor may be required to indemnify its officers, directors and key employees with respect to their activities on behalf of other funds, if the need for indemnification arises. This potential indemnification could cause the Sponsor’s assets to decrease. If the Sponsor’s other sources of income are not sufficient to compensate for the indemnification, it could cease operations, which could in turn result in Trust losses and/or termination of the Trust.

The Sponsor has an affiliate, 21Shares AG, that issues various exchange traded products providing exposure to certain digital assets in non-U.S. jurisdictions, including a product offering exposure to INJ that trades on the Euronext exchange. Further, the Sponsor may have a conflict with respect to any future transactions that may be entered into with either the Sponsor’s ultimate parent company, FalconX, a leading institutional digital asset prime brokerage, or with any of the other affiliates of FalconX. In addition, the Sponsor’s affiliate(s) may take management fees in-kind in INJ, and as such, may engage in trading of the underlying asset across affiliates. The Sponsor has adopted and implemented policies and procedures that are reasonably designed to ensure compliance with applicable law, including a Code of Ethics providing guidance on conflicts of interest (collectively, the “Policies”). As of the effectiveness of the registration statement of which this Prospectus forms part of, the Sponsor’s Policies are in place and require that the Sponsor eliminate, mitigate, or otherwise disclose conflicts of interest. Additionally, the Sponsor has adopted policies and procedures requiring that certain applicable personnel pre-clear personal trading activity in which INJ is the referenced asset. The Sponsor has also implemented an Information Barrier Policy restricting certain applicable personnel from obtaining sensitive information. The Sponsor believes that these controls are reasonably designed to mitigate the risk of conflicts of interest and other impermissible activity.

Furthermore, the Sponsor or its affiliates may participate in transactions related to INJ, either for their own account or for the account of a client. Such transactions may not serve to benefit the shareholders of the Trust and may have a positive or negative effect on the value of the INJ held by the Trust and, consequently, on the market value of INJ. In addition, the Sponsor or its affiliates may act in other capacities with regard to other investment products offered by either party.

The Sponsor or its affiliates may continue to issue derivative instruments relating to INJ. The Sponsor’s affiliate(s) may offer investment products that offer short exposure to INJ and may offer other products that offer long exposure to INJ, either of which may take market share from the Trust or affect the value of INJ or an investment in the Trust. Introduction of such competing products may affect the market value of INJ and an investment in the Trust. The Sponsor and its affiliated companies may also receive non-public information relating to INJ and neither the Sponsor nor any of its affiliates will undertake to make this information available to investors in the Trust.

The Sponsor and its employees and affiliates may engage in long or short transactions in INJ in their personal accounts (subject to certain internal employee trading policies and procedures), and in doing so may take positions opposite to those held by the Trust or may compete with the Trust for positions in the marketplace.

Records of trading by these parties will not be available for inspection by shareholders. Because these parties may trade INJ for their own accounts at the same time as the Trust, prospective shareholders should be aware that such persons may take positions in INJ which are opposite, or ahead of, the positions taken for the Trust. There can be no assurance that any of the foregoing will not have an adverse effect on the performance of the Trust.

If the Sponsor acquires knowledge of a potential transaction or arrangement that may be an opportunity for the Trust, it will have no duty to offer such opportunity to the Trust. The Sponsor will not be liable to the Trust or the Shareholders for breach of any fiduciary or other duty if Sponsor pursues such opportunity or directs it to another person or does not communicate such opportunity to the Trust. Neither the Trust nor any Shareholder will have any rights or obligations by virtue of the Trust Agreement, the trust relationship created thereby, or this Prospectus in such business ventures or the income or profits derived from such business ventures. The pursuit of such business ventures, even if competitive with the activities of the Trust, will not be deemed wrongful or improper.

From time to time, a portion of the Trust’s INJ holdings and cash holdings may be held with the Prime Broker, an affiliate of the Coinbase Custodian, in the Trading Balance, in connection with the creation and redemption of Shares via cash transactions or to pay for Trust Expenses not assumed by the Sponsor in consideration for the Sponsor Fee. For a discussion on the potential conflicts of interest associated with such an arrangement, see “Prime Broker.”

Resolution of Conflicts Procedures

The Trust Agreement provides that (i) whenever a conflict of interest exists or arises between the Sponsor or any of its Affiliates, on the one hand, and the Trust, any shareholder or any other person, on the other hand; or (ii) whenever the Trust Agreement or any other agreement contemplated by the Trust Agreement provides that the Sponsor shall act in a manner that is, or provides terms that are, fair and reasonable to the Trust, any shareholder or any other person, the Sponsor shall resolve such conflict of interest, take such action or provide such terms, considering in each case the relative interest of each party (including its own interest) to such conflict, agreement, transaction or situation and the benefits and burdens relating to such interests, any customary or accepted industry practices, and any applicable generally accepted accounting practices or principles. In the absence of bad faith by the Sponsor, the resolution, action or terms so made, taken or provided by the Sponsor shall not constitute a breach of the Trust Agreement or any other agreement contemplated herein or of any duty or obligation of the Sponsor at law or in equity or otherwise.

DUTIES OF THE SPONSOR

The general fiduciary duties which would otherwise be imposed on the Sponsor (which would make its operation of the Trust as described herein impracticable due to the strict prohibition imposed by such duties on, for example, conflicts of interest on behalf of a fiduciary in its dealings with its beneficiaries), will be replaced entirely by the terms of the Trust Agreement (to which terms all Shareholders, by subscribing to the Shares, are deemed to consent).

Additionally, under the Trust Agreement, the Sponsor will have the following obligations as a sponsor of the Trust:

To the extent that at law (common or statutory) or in equity, the Sponsor has duties (including fiduciary duties) and liabilities relating thereto to the Trust, the Shareholders or to any other person, the Sponsor will not be liable to the Trust, the Shareholders or to any other person for its good faith reliance on the provisions of the Trust Agreement or this Prospectus unless such reliance constitutes gross negligence, bad faith, or willful misconduct on the part of the Sponsor.

LIABILITY AND INDEMNIFICATION

The Trustee

As further discussed in the Trust Agreement, the Trustee will not be liable for the acts or omissions of the Sponsor, nor will the Trustee be liable for supervising or monitoring the performance and the duties and obligations of the Sponsor or the Trust under the Trust Agreement. The Trustee will not be personally liable under any circumstances, except for its own willful misconduct, bad faith or gross negligence. In particular, but not by way of limitation:

The Trustee or any officer, affiliate, director, employee, or agent of the Trustee (each, an “Indemnified Person”) will be entitled to indemnification from the Sponsor or the Trust, to the fullest extent permitted by law, from and against any and all losses, claims, taxes, damages, reasonable expenses, and liabilities (including liabilities under State or federal securities laws) of any kind and nature whatsoever (collectively, “Expenses”), to the extent that such Expenses arise out of or are imposed upon or asserted against such Indemnified Persons with respect to the creation, operation or termination of the Trust, the execution, delivery or performance of the Trust Agreement or the transactions contemplated in the Trust Agreement; provided, however, that the Sponsor and the Trust will not be required to indemnify any Indemnified Person for any Expenses that are a result of the willful misconduct, bad faith or gross negligence of such Indemnified Person.

The obligations of the Sponsor and the Trust to indemnify the Indemnified Persons will survive the termination of the Trust Agreement.

The Sponsor

The Sponsor will not be under any liability to the Trust, the Trustee or any Shareholder for any action taken or for refraining from the taking of any action in good faith pursuant to the Trust Agreement, or for errors in judgment or for depreciation or loss incurred by reason of the sale of any INJ or other assets held in trust hereunder; provided, however, that this provision will not protect the Sponsor against any liability to which it would otherwise be subject by reason of its own gross negligence, bad faith, or willful misconduct. The Sponsor may rely in good faith on any paper, order, notice, list, affidavit, receipt, evaluation, opinion, endorsement, assignment, draft or any other document of any kind prima facie properly executed and submitted to it by the Trustee, the Trustee’s counsel or by any other Person for any matters arising hereunder. The Sponsor will in no event be deemed to have assumed or incurred any liability, duty, or obligation to any Shareholder or to the Trustee other than as expressly provided for herein. The Trust will not incur the cost of that portion of any insurance which insures any party against any liability, the indemnification of which is herein prohibited.

In addition, as described in the Trust Agreement, (i) whenever a conflict of interest exists or arises between the Sponsor or any of its affiliates, on the one hand, and the Trust, on the other hand; or (ii) whenever the Trust Agreement or any other agreement contemplated herein or therein provides that the Sponsor will act in a manner that is, or provides terms that are, fair and reasonable to the Trust, the Sponsor will resolve such conflict of interest, take such action or provide such terms, considering in each case the relative interest of each party (including its own interest) to such conflict, agreement, transaction or situation and the benefits and burdens relating to such interests, and any applicable generally accepted accounting practices or principles. In the absence of bad faith by the Sponsor, the resolution, action or terms so made, taken or provided by the Sponsor will not constitute a breach of the Trust Agreement or any other agreement contemplated herein or of any duty or obligation of the Sponsor at law or in equity or otherwise.

The Sponsor and its shareholders, members, directors, officers, employees, affiliates and subsidiaries (each a “Sponsor Indemnified Party”) will be indemnified by the Trust against any losses, judgments, liabilities, expenses and amounts paid in settlement of any claims arising out of or in connection with the performance of its obligations under the Trust Agreement or any actions taken in accordance with the provisions of the Trust Agreement, provided that (i) the Sponsor was acting on behalf of, or performing services for, the Trust and has determined, in good faith, that such course of conduct was in the best interests of the Trust and such liability or loss was not the result of fraud, gross negligence, bad faith, willful misconduct, or a material breach of the Trust Agreement on the part of the Sponsor and (ii) any such indemnification will be recoverable only from the Trust Estate. Any amounts payable to a Sponsor Indemnified Party under the Trust Agreement may be payable in advance or will be secured by a lien on the Trust. The Sponsor will not be under any obligation to appear in, prosecute or defend any legal action that in its opinion may involve it in any expense or liability; provided, however, that the Sponsor may, in its discretion, undertake any action that it may deem necessary or desirable in respect of the Trust Agreement and the rights and duties of the parties hereto and the interests of the Shareholders and, in such event, the legal expenses and costs of any such action will be expenses and costs of the Trust and the Sponsor will be entitled to be reimbursed therefor by the Trust. The obligations of the Trust to indemnify the Sponsor Indemnified Parties will survive the termination of the Trust Agreement.

The INJ Custodians

The INJ Custodians have limited liability, impairing the ability of the Trust to recover losses relating to its INJ and any recovery may be limited, even in the event of fraud. In addition, the INJ Custodians may not be liable for any delay in performance of any of their custodial obligations by reason of any cause beyond their reasonable control, including force majeure events, war or terrorism, and may not be liable for any system failure or third-party penetration of its systems. As a result, the recourse of the Trust to the INJ Custodians may be limited.

PROVISIONS OF LAW

According to applicable law, indemnification of the Sponsor is payable only if the Sponsor determined, in good faith, that the act, omission or conduct that gave rise to the claim for indemnification was in the best interest of the Trust and the act, omission or activity that was the basis for such loss, liability, damage, cost or expense was not the result of negligence or misconduct and such liability or loss was not the result of negligence or misconduct by the Sponsor, and such indemnification or agreement to hold harmless is recoverable only out of the assets of the Trust.

Provisions of Federal and State Securities Laws

This offering is made pursuant to federal and state securities laws. The SEC and state securities agencies take the position that indemnification of the Sponsor that arises out of an alleged violation of such laws is prohibited unless certain conditions are met.

These conditions require that no indemnification of the Sponsor or any underwriter for the Trust may be made in respect of any losses, liabilities or expenses arising from or out of an alleged violation of federal or state securities laws unless: (i) there has been a successful adjudication on the merits of each count involving alleged securities law violations as to the party seeking indemnification and the court approves the indemnification; (ii) such claim has been dismissed with prejudice on the merits by a court of competent jurisdiction as to the party seeking indemnification; or (iii) a court of competent jurisdiction approves a settlement of the claims against the party seeking indemnification and finds that indemnification of the settlement and related costs should be made, provided that, before seeking such approval, the Sponsor or other indemnitee must apprise the court of the position held by regulatory agencies against such indemnification. These agencies are the SEC and the securities administrator of the State or States in which the plaintiffs claim they were offered or sold Shares. 

MANAGEMENT; VOTING BY SHAREHOLDERS

Each Share represents a fractional undivided beneficial interest in the net assets of the Trust. Upon redemption of the Shares, the applicable Authorized Participant shall be paid solely out of the funds and property of the Trust. All Shares are transferable, fully paid and non-assessable. The assets of the Trust consist primarily of INJ held by the INJ Custodians on behalf of the Trust.

The Shareholders of the Trust take no part in the management or control, and have no voice in, the Trust’s operations or business. Except in limited circumstances, Shareholders will have no voting rights under the Trust Agreement. Shareholders do not have the rights enjoyed by investors in certain other vehicles and may be adversely affected by a lack of statutory rights and by limited voting and distribution rights. In certain circumstances, Shareholders may vote to appoint a successor Sponsor following the voluntary withdrawal of the Sponsor, or to continue the Trust in certain instances of dissolution of the Trust. Shareholders shall otherwise have no voting rights with respect to the Trust.

Shares do not represent a traditional investment and are not similar to shares of a corporation operating a business enterprise with management and a board of directors. All Shares are of the same class with equal rights and privileges. By acquiring Shares, you are not acquiring the right to elect directors, to receive dividends, to vote on certain matters regarding the issuer of your Shares or to take other actions normally associated with the ownership of Shares. The Shares do not entitle their holders to any conversion or pre-emptive rights or any redemption rights.

The Sponsor will generally have the right to amend the Trust Agreement as it applies to the Trust provided that the Shareholders have the right to vote only if expressly required under Delaware or federal law or rules or regulations of the Exchange, or if submitted to the Shareholders by the Sponsor in its sole discretion.

The Trust does not have any directors, officers or employees. The creation and operation of the Trust has been arranged by the Sponsor. The following persons, in their capacities as executive officers of the Sponsor, a Delaware limited liability company, perform certain functions with respect to the Trust that, if the Trust had directors or executive officers, would typically be performed by them. Non-executive officers of the Sponsor will not perform policy or decision-making functions for the Trust.

Russell Barlow is CEO of the Sponsor, Duncan Moir is President of the Sponsor, Edel Bashir is Chief Operating Officer of the Sponsor and Andres Valencia is the Sponsor’s Executive Vice President of Investment Management.

Mr. Russell Barlow, 52, has been the Chief Executive Officer of the Sponsor since March 1, 2025, contributing more than 25 years of expertise in regulated asset management. Previously, Russell was the Global Head of Multi Asset and Alternative Investment Solutions and Global Head of Alternative Investment Solutions at abrdn plc, a global investment company (“abrdn”). Over the course of his career, he has designed, launched and managed a wide range of investment products. Additionally, Russell has held a position as a Non-Executive Director at Archax, the UK’s first FCA-regulated digital asset exchange.

Mr. Duncan Moir, 41, has been the President of the Sponsor since March 1, 2025, with deep expertise in digital asset and blockchain strategy. Previously, Duncan was a Senior Investment Manager at abrdn. He is an independent board member of Hedera Hashgraph LLC and House of Doge Inc. (Nasdaq: HODO), and an advisor to Web3 companies. A University of Strathclyde graduate with a BA (Hons) in Economics, he is also a CFA and CAIA charterholder.

Ms. Edel Bashir, 47, has been the Chief Operating Officer of the Sponsor since March 1, 2025, with over 20 years of experience in asset management. Previously, Edel was the COO of Multi Asset and Alternative Investment Solutions, COO of Alternatives and a Senior Investment Manager at abrdn. Her expertise includes operation strategy, portfolio management, and hedge fund research. A graduate of University of College Cork, Ireland with a BSc in Finance, she has held senior roles across Bermuda, Dublin and Boston.

Mr. Andres Valencia, 38, is the Executive Vice President of Investment Management at the Sponsor and a member of the Executive Committee. Before Andres joined in June 2021, he was a VP of Operations at JPMorgan as part of the Beta Strategies Group and helped launch and build the company’s ETF business. Andres has over ten years of experience managing ETFs. Andres started his career in Asset Servicing at Bank of New York Mellon covering commodity and currency ETFs.

BOOKS AND RECORDS

The Trust keeps its books of record and account at the office of the Administrator, or such office, including of an administrative agent, as it may subsequently designate upon notice. The books and records are open to inspection by any person who establishes to the Trust’s satisfaction that such person is a Shareholder upon reasonable advance notice at all reasonable times during usual business hours of the Trust.

The Trust will also keep a copy of the Trust Agreement on file in the Sponsor’s office which will be available for inspection by any Shareholder at all times during its usual business hours upon reasonable advance notice.

STATEMENTS, FILINGS, AND REPORTS TO SHAREHOLDERS

After the end of each fiscal year, the Sponsor will cause to be prepared an annual report for the Trust containing audited financial statements. The annual report will be in such form and contain such information as will be required by applicable laws, rules and regulations and may contain such additional information which the Sponsor determines shall be included. The annual report will be filed with the SEC and the Exchange and will be distributed to such persons and in such manner, as is required by applicable laws, rules and regulations.

The Sponsor is responsible for the registration and qualification of the Shares under the federal securities laws. The Sponsor will also prepare, or cause to be prepared, and file any periodic reports or updates required under the Exchange Act. The Administrator will assist and support the Sponsor in the preparation of such reports.

The Administrator will make such elections, file such tax returns, and prepare, disseminate and file such tax reports, as it is advised to by its counsel or accountants or as required from time to time by any applicable statute, rule or regulation.

FISCAL YEAR

The fiscal year of the Trust ends June 30 of each year. The Sponsor may select an alternate fiscal year.

GOVERNING LAW; CONSENT TO DELAWARE JURISDICTION

The rights of the Sponsor, the Trust, DTC (as registered owner of the Trust’s global certificate for Shares) and the Shareholders are governed by the laws of the State of Delaware. The Sponsor, the Trust and DTC and, by accepting Shares, each DTC Participant and each Shareholder, consent to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of the State of Delaware and any federal courts located in Delaware. Such consent is not required for any person to assert a claim of Delaware jurisdiction over the Sponsor or the Trust.

However, pursuant to the Trust Agreement, this shall not apply to causes of actions for violations of U.S. federal or state securities laws. Section 22 of the 1933 Act creates concurrent jurisdiction for federal and state courts over all suits brought to enforce any duty or liability created by the 1933 Act or the rules and regulations thereunder. Investors cannot waive compliance with the federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder.  

LEGAL MATTERS

Dechert LLP has advised the Sponsor in connection with the Shares being offered. Dechert LLP advises the Sponsor with respect to its responsibilities as sponsor of, and with respect to matters relating to, the Trust. Certain opinions of counsel are filed as exhibits to the registration statement of which this Prospectus forms a part.

EXPERTS

The financial statements of the Trust as of, and for the period ended [●], is included herein in reliance on the report of [●], an independent registered public accounting firm, given on the authority of said firm as experts in auditing and accounting.

OTHER MATERIAL CONTRACTS

The Authorized Participant Agreements

The Trust has entered into authorized participant agreements (the “Authorized Participant Agreements”) with the Authorized Participants under which the Authorized Participants may create or redeem Shares through the Transfer Agent in aggregations of a specified number of Shares called “Creation Baskets” or “Redemption Baskets”. Authorized Participants are the only persons that may place orders to create and redeem Baskets.

The Authorized Participant Agreement provides the procedures for the creation and redemption of Baskets and for the delivery of the INJ required for such creations and redemptions. By executing an Authorized Participant Agreement, an Authorized Participant becomes part of the group of parties eligible to purchase Baskets from, and put Baskets for redemption to, the Trust. The Authorized Participant Agreement may provide for in-kind Basket creations and redemptions. An Authorized Participant is under no obligation to create or redeem Baskets or to offer to the public Shares of any Baskets it does create. The Authorized Participant Agreement and the related procedures attached thereto may be amended by the Trust, without the consent of any Shareholder or Authorized Participant.

The Authorized Participant Agreement may be terminated at any time by any party upon thirty days prior written notice to the other parties unless earlier terminated: (i) upon the Authorized Participant ceasing to be a participant of DTC (in which case the Authorized Participant Agreement will terminate automatically) (ii) upon notice to the Authorized Participant by the Sponsor in the event of a breach by the Authorized Participant of the Authorized Participant Agreement or the procedures described or incorporated therein; (iii) at such time as the applicable Trust is terminated; or (iv) by the Authorized Participant at any time upon prior written notice in the event of a breach by the Transfer Agent of the applicable Trust or the Sponsor of any provision of the Authorized Participant Agreement, upon the insolvency or bankruptcy of any of them or of the applicable Trust.

In connection with each order by an Authorized Participant to create or redeem one or more Baskets, unless waived by the Sponsor, the Authorized Participant shall pay a transaction fee to the Sponsor. If the Authorized Participant i) cancels a cash order before the cut-off time; ii) delays or accepts the substitution of cash for an in-kind order in accordance with the procedure provided in the Authorized Participant Agreement; or iii) in connection with a redemption order, fails to deliver the required cash or digital assets, as applicable, resulting in cancellation of the order, in each case the Authorized Participant shall reimburse the Sponsor for its reasonable costs.

The Sponsor agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the Authorized Participant and its partners, stockholders, members, directors, officers, employees, affiliates, agents and any person who controls such persons, from and against any loss, damage, expense, liability or claim (each a “Sponsor Indemnified Person”) (including reasonable attorney fees and the reasonable cost of investigation) which the Authorized Participant or any such person may incur, insofar as such loss, damage, expense, liability or claim is based upon (i) any untrue statement of a material fact contained in the registration statement or in a prospectus; (ii) any untrue statement of a material fact or breach by Sponsor of any covenant, representation or warranty contained in the Authorized Participant Agreement; (iii) the failure by the Sponsor, a Trust or their respective agents to perform when and as required, any agreement, obligation, duty or covenant contained in the Authorized Participant Agreement or in the prospectus; (iv) any material breach by the Sponsor of any provision of the Authorized Participant Agreement that relates to the Sponsor; (v) actions of such Sponsor Indemnified Person in reasonable reliance upon any instructions or representations made by the Sponsor or the applicable Trust in accordance with the Authorized Participant Agreement or Exhibit B thereto; or (vi) the failure by the Sponsor, a Trust or their respective agents to comply with applicable laws and the rules and regulations of any governmental entity or any self-regulatory organization to the extent the foregoing relates to transactions in and activities with respect to Baskets. In no case is the indemnity in favor of the Sponsor Indemnified Persons to be (A) deemed to protect such persons against any liability to the Sponsor or the applicable Trust to which the Authorized Participant would otherwise be subject by reason of willful misfeasance, bad faith or gross negligence in the performance of its duties or by reason of its reckless disregard of its obligations and duties under the Authorized Participant Agreement or (B) intended to cover any loss of cash or digital assets by any third party facilitator used by an Authorized Participant in connection with purchase orders and redemption orders as set forth in Exhibit B thereto.

Each Authorized Participant agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless each of the applicable Trust, the Transfer Agent, the Sponsor and its partners, stockholders, members, directors, officers, employees and any person who controls the Sponsor (each, an “AP Indemnified Person”), from and against any loss, damage, expense, liability or claim (including reasonable attorney fees and the reasonable cost of investigation) which the AP Indemnified Person may incur (i) in connection with any untrue statement of a material fact contained in information furnished by such Authorized Participant to the Sponsor for use in the registration statement or in a prospectus; (ii) that is based upon any omission to state a material fact in connection with such information required to be stated in such registration statement or such prospectus; (iii)(A) any representation by such Authorized Participant, its employees or its agents or other representatives about the Shares, any AP Indemnified Party or the applicable Trust that is not consistent with the applicable Trust’s then-current prospectus and (B) any untrue statement or of a material fact contained in any research reports, marketing material and sales literature to the extent that such statement relates to the Shares or any AP Indemnified Party, unless, in either case of clauses (iii)(A) and (iii)(B), such representation was made or included by such Authorized Participant at the written direction of the Sponsor, the applicable Trust or a service provider to the applicable Trust (but such Authorized Participant shall not be required to indemnify and hold harmless an AP Indemnified Party for any losses to the extent caused by the gross negligence, fraud or willful malfeasance of an AP Indemnified Party, or violation of law or of the procedures by any other authorized participant or its agent or customers); (iv) any material breach by such Authorized Participant of any provisions of the applicable Authorized Participant Agreement that relates to such Authorized Participant, including its representations, warranties and covenants; (v) any material failure on the part of such Authorized Participant to perform any of its obligations set forth in the applicable Authorized Participant Agreement; or (vii) any failure by such Authorized Participant to comply with applicable laws and the rules and regulations of any governmental entity or any self-regulatory organization to the extent the foregoing relates to such Authorized Participant’s transactions in, and activities with respect to, the Shares under the applicable Authorized Participant Agreement. The Authorized Participants will also indemnify each AP Indemnified Person from and against any reasonable loss, damage, expense, liability or claim (including the reasonable cost of investigation) which such AP Indemnified Person may incur as a result of or in connection with any actions of an AP Indemnified Person in accordance with any instructions reasonably believed by an AP Indemnified Party to be genuine and have been given by an Authorized Participant except in the case of any loss, damage, expense, liability or claim resulting from the gross negligence or willful misconduct of an AP Indemnified Person. In no case is the indemnity of an Authorized Participant in favor of each AP Indemnified Person to be deemed to protect the AP Indemnified Person and such persons against any liability to the Authorized Participant to which the AP Indemnified Person would otherwise be subject by reason of willful misfeasance, bad faith or gross negligence in the performance of its duties or by reason of its reckless disregard of its obligations and duties under the applicable Authorized Participant Agreement.

The Authorized Participant Agreements are governed by the laws of the state of New York.

Cash Custody Agreement

The Trust has entered into a cash custody agreement (“Cash Custody Agreement”) with The Bank of New York Mellon under which The Bank of New York Mellon acts as custodian of the Trust’s cash (in such capacity, the “Cash Custodian”). The Cash Custodian has agreed to provide its services under the Cash Custody Agreement until terminated in accordance with the provisions of the Cash Custody Agreement. Either the Cash Custodian or the Trust may terminate the Cash Custody Agreement with respect to one or more series of the Trust by giving written notice to the counterparty as set forth in the Cash Custody Agreement.

The fees of the Cash Custodian are paid by the Trust. In addition, the Trust shall reimburse the Cash Custodian for any out-of-pocket and incidental expenses incurred by the Cash Custodian in connection with the Cash Custody Agreement.

The Cash Custodian shall exercise the standard of care and diligence that a professional custodian would observe in these affairs taking into account the prevailing rules, practices, procedures and circumstances in the relevant market (“Standard of Care”). Except as otherwise expressly provided in the Cash Custody Agreement, the Cash Custodian’s liability arising out of or relating to the Cash Custody Agreement shall be limited solely to those direct damages that are caused by the Cash Custodian’s failure to perform its obligations under the Cash Custody Agreement in accordance with the Standard of Care. The Trust agrees to indemnify the Cash Custodian and hold the Cash Custodian harmless from and against all losses, costs, expenses, damages and liabilities (including reasonable counsel fees and expenses) incurred by the Cash Custodian arising out of or relating to the Cash Custodian’s performance under the Cash Custody Agreement, except to the extent resulting from the Cash Custodian’s failure to perform its obligations under the Cash Custody Agreement in accordance with the Standard of Care.

The Cash Custody Agreement is governed by the laws of the state of New York.

Fund Administration and Accounting Agreement

Under the Fund Administration and Accounting Agreement, the Administrator has agreed to provide its services for an initial term of three years with an automatic renewal of successive one-year terms unless earlier terminated pursuant to the Fund Administration and Accounting Agreement. In addition, the Administrator may terminate its services for certain material breaches of the Fund Administration and Accounting Agreement.

Pursuant to the Fund Administration and Accounting Agreement, the Administrator is generally responsible for the day-to-day administration of the Trust. The responsibilities of the Administrator include (i) establishing appropriate expense accruals and compute expense ratios, maintaining expense files and coordinating the payment of Trust approved invoices; (ii) calculating Trust approved income and per share amounts required for periodic distributions to be made by the Trust; (iii) calculating total return information; (iv) coordinating the Trust’s annual audit; (v) supplying various normal and customary portfolio and Trust statistical data as requested on an ongoing basis; and (vi) preparing financial statements for the Trust.

The responsibilities of the Administrator also include providing various valuation and computation accounting services for the Trust, including (i) maintaining certain financial books and records for the Trust, including creations and redemptions books and records, and Trust accounting records; (ii) computing the Trust’s NAV; (iii) obtaining quotes from pricing services as directed and approved by the Sponsor, or if such quotes are unavailable, then obtaining such prices from the Sponsor, and in either case, calculating the market value of the Trust’s assets in accordance with the Trust’s valuation policies or guidelines; and (iv) transmitting or making available a copy of the daily portfolio valuation to the Sponsor.

The responsibilities of the Administrator also include providing financial reporting services for the Trust, including (i) preparing financial statements for the Trust; (ii) preparing periodic shareholder reports for the Trust; and (iii) preparing, circulating and maintaining the Trust’s financial reporting production calendar.

The responsibilities of the Administrator also include providing tax services for the Trust, including preparing annual grantor trust tax reporting statements for the Trust’s review and approval.

In addition, the Administrator shall provide, at its expense, office space, facilities, equipment and personnel required to provide such services. The Administrator’s principal address is 240 Greenwich Street, New York, New York 10286.

The fees of the Administrator are paid by the Trust. In addition, the Trust shall reimburse the Administrator for reasonable and documented out-of-pocket expenses as are incurred by the Administrator in performing its duties under the Fund Administration and Accounting Agreement.

The Administrator shall exercise the standard of care and diligence that a professional service provider would observe in the provision of the services rendered pursuant to this Agreement. Except as otherwise provided in the Fund Administration and Accounting Agreement, the Administrator and any affiliate of the Administrator shall not be liable for any costs, expenses, losses, charges, damages, liabilities or claims, including reasonable and documented attorney’s and accountants’ fees (collectively, “Losses”) incurred by or asserted against the Trust, except those Losses arising out of the Administrator’s own gross negligence, bad faith or willful misconduct. In addition, the Administrator shall not be liable for any Losses for delays caused by circumstances beyond the reasonable control of the Administrator or any agent of the Administrator and which adversely affect the performance by the Administrator of its obligations and duties under the Fund Administration and Accounting Agreement or by any other agent of the Administrator. Upon the occurrence of any such delay or failure, the Administrator shall use commercially reasonable efforts to resume performance as soon as practicable under the circumstances.

The Trust will indemnify the Administrator and any affiliate of the Administrator (“Indemnitees”), and the Indemnitees will incur no liability for its reliance upon (i) any law, act, regulation or interpretation of the same even though the same may thereafter have been altered, changed, amended or repealed, (ii) the Trust’s offering materials or documents (excluding information provided by the Administrator), (iii) any instructions or (iv) any written opinion of legal counsel for the Trust or the Administrator, or arising out of transactions or other activities of the Trust which occurred prior to the commencement of the Fund Administration and Accounting Agreement; provided however, that the Trust shall not indemnify any Indemnitee for any losses arising out of the Indemnitees’ own bad faith, gross negligence or willful misconduct in the performance of the Fund Administration and Accounting Agreement.

Transfer Agency and Services Agreement

Pursuant to the Transfer Agency and Services Agreement, the Transfer Agent is generally responsible for the day-to-day administration of the Trust. The responsibilities of the Transfer Agent include: (i) performing and facilitating the performance of purchases and redemption of Creation Baskets; (ii) preparing and transmitting by means of DTC’s book entry system payments for dividends and distributions on or with respect to the Shares, if any, declared by the Trust; (iii) maintaining the record of the name and address of the Shareholder and the number of Shares issued by the Trust and held by the Shareholder; and (iv) recording the issuance of Shares of the Trust and maintain a record of the total number of Shares of the Trust which are outstanding and authorized, based upon data provided to it by the Trust.

The Transfer Agency and Services Agreement will have a three-year initial term and will automatically be renewed for successive one-year periods, unless terminated pursuant to the terms of the agreement.

Custodial Services Agreement

The Coinbase Custodian and the BitGo Custodian serve as the INJ Custodians for the Trust and hold all of the Trust’s INJ on the Trust’s behalf. The INJ Custodians keep custody of all of the Trust’s INJ. The INJ Custodians keep a substantial portion of the private keys associated with the Trust’s INJ in “cold storage” or similarly secure technology.

Cold storage is a safeguarding method with multiple layers of protections and protocols, by which the private key(s) corresponding to the Trust’s INJ is (are) generated and stored in an offline manner. Private keys are generated in offline computers that are not connected to the internet so that they are resistant to being hacked. By contrast, in hot storage, the private keys are held online, where they are more accessible, leading to more efficient transfers, though they are potentially more vulnerable to being hacked. While the INJ Custodians will generally keep a substantial portion of the Trust’s INJ in cold storage on an ongoing basis, it is possible that, from time to time, portions of the Trust’s INJ will be held outside of cold storage temporarily in the Trading Balance maintained by the Prime Broker as part of the trade facilitation, as well as otherwise in connection with creations and redemptions as well as to pay Trust Expenses. The Trust’s INJ held in the Cold Vault Balance by the INJ Custodians are held in segregated wallets and therefore are not commingled with the INJ Custodians’ or other customer assets.

Cold storage of private keys may involve keeping such keys on a non-networked computer or electronic device or storing the public key and private keys on a storage device or printed medium and deleting the keys from all computers. The INJ Custodians may receive deposits of INJ but may not send INJ without use of the corresponding private keys. In order to send INJ when the private keys are kept in cold storage, unsigned transactions must be physically transferred to the offline cold storage facility and signed using a software/hardware utility with the corresponding offline keys. At that point, the INJ Custodians can upload the fully signed transaction to an online network and transfer the INJ. Such private keys are stored in cold storage facilities within the United States and Europe, exact locations of which are not disclosed for security reasons. A limited number of employees at the INJ Custodians are involved in private key management operations, and the INJ Custodians have represented that no single individual has access to their respective full private keys.

The INJ Custodians’ internal audit teams perform periodic internal audits over custody operations, and the INJ Custodians have represented that SOC attestations covering private key management controls are also performed on the INJ Custodians by external providers.

The INJ Custodians maintain commercial crime insurance policies, which are intended to cover the loss of client assets held in cold storage, including from employee collusion or fraud, physical loss including theft, damage of key material, security breaches or hacks, and fraudulent transfers. The insurance maintained by the INJ Custodians are shared among all of the INJ Custodians’ respective customers, is not specific to the Trust or to customers holding INJ with the INJ Custodians, and may not be available or sufficient to protect the Trust from all possible losses or sources of losses.

INJ held in the Trust’s accounts with the INJ Custodians is the property of the Trust. The Trust, the Sponsor and the service providers will not loan or pledge the Trust’s assets, including staked assets, nor will the Trust’s assets, including staked assets, serve as collateral for any loan or similar arrangement, other than in connection with the Post-Trade Financing Agreement. The Trust will not utilize leverage, derivatives or any similar arrangements in seeking to meet its investment objective.

In the event of a fork, the Custodial Services Agreements provide that the INJ Custodians may temporarily suspend services, and may, in their sole discretion, determine whether or not to support (or cease supporting) either branch of the forked protocol entirely, provided that the INJ Custodians shall use commercially reasonable efforts to avoid ceasing to support both branches of such forked protocol and will support, at a minimum, the original digital asset. The Custodial Services Agreements provide that, other than as set forth therein, and provided that the INJ Custodians shall make commercially reasonable efforts to assist the Trust to retrieve and/or obtain any assets related to an airdrop or similar event, the INJ Custodians shall have no liability, obligation or responsibility whatsoever arising out of or relating to the operation of the underlying software protocols relating to the INJ Network or an unsupported branch of a forked protocol and, accordingly, the Trust acknowledges and assumes the risk of the same. The Custodial Services Agreements provide that, unless specifically communicated by the INJ Custodians and their affiliates through written public statements on their respective websites, the INJ Custodians do not support airdrops, metacoins, colored coins, side chains, or other derivative, enhanced or forked protocols, tokens or coins, which supplement or interact with INJ.

Under the Trust Agreement, the Sponsor has the right, in its sole discretion, to determine what action to take in connection with the Trust’s entitlement to or ownership of Incidental Rights or any IR Digital Assets, and the Trust may take any lawful action necessary or desirable in connection with the Trust’s ownership of Incidental Rights, including the acquisition of IR Digital Assets, as determined by the Sponsor in the Sponsor’s sole discretion, unless such action would adversely affect the status of the Trust as a grantor trust for U.S. federal income tax purposes or otherwise be prohibited by the Trust Agreement. With respect to any fork, airdrop or similar event, the Sponsor will cause the Trust to irrevocably abandon the Incidental Rights or IR Digital Assets. In the event the Trust seeks to change this position, an application would need to be filed with the SEC by the Exchange seeking approval to amend its listing rules.

Under the Custodial Services Agreements, the INJ Custodians’ liability is limited. With respect to the BitGo Custodial Services Agreement, the BitGo Custodian and its affiliates, including their officers, directors, agents, and employees, are not liable for any lost profits, special, incidental, indirect, intangible, or consequential damages resulting from authorized or unauthorized use of the Trust or Sponsor’s site or services. This includes damages arising from any contract, tort, negligence, strict liability, or other legal grounds, even if the BitGo Custodian was previously advised of, knew, or should have known about the possibility of such damages. However, this exclusion of liability does not extend to cases of the BitGo Custodian’s fraud, willful misconduct, or gross negligence. In situations of gross negligence, the BitGo Custodian’s liability is specifically limited to the value of the digital assets or fiat currency that were affected by the negligence. Additionally, the total liability of the BitGo Custodian for direct damages is capped at the fees paid or payable to them under the BitGo Custodial Services Agreement during the twelve-month period immediately preceding the first incident that caused the liability.

With respect to the Coinbase Custodial Services Agreement, the Coinbase Custodian’s liability is as follows, among others: (i) the Coinbase Custodian’s aggregate liability with respect to any breach of its obligations under the Coinbase Custodial Services Agreement shall not exceed the aggregate amount of fees paid by the Trust to the Coinbase Custodian in respect of the Prime Broker Services in the 12 months prior to the event giving rise to such liability; (ii) the Coinbase Custodian’s aggregate liability under the Coinbase Custodial Services Agreement shall not exceed the greater of (A) the aggregate fees paid by the Trust to the Coinbase Custodian in respect of the custodial services in the 12 months prior to the event giving rise to the Coinbase Custodian’s liability, and (B) the value of the supported INJ on deposit in the Trust’s custodial account(s) giving rise to the Coinbase Custodian’s liability at the time of the event giving rise to the Coinbase Custodian’s liability; (iii) the Coinbase Custodian’s aggregate liability in respect of each cold storage address shall not exceed $100 million; (iv) in respect of any incidental, indirect, special, punitive, consequential or similar losses, the Coinbase Custodian is not liable, even if the Coinbase Custodian has been advised of or knew of or should have known of the possibility thereof; and (v) in no event shall the Coinbase Custodian or its affiliates have any liability to the Trust or any third party with respect to any breach of its obligations under the Coinbase Custodial Services Agreement, express or implied, which does not result solely from its gross negligence, fraud or willful misconduct. Coinbase Custodian is not liable for delays, suspension of operations, failure in performance, or interruption of service which result directly or indirectly from any cause or condition beyond the reasonable control of the Coinbase Custodian. In the event of potential losses incurred by the Trust as a result of the Coinbase Custodian losing control of the Trust’s INJ or failing to properly execute instructions on behalf of the Trust, the Coinbase Custodian’s liability with respect to the Trust will be subject to certain limitations which may allow it to avoid liability for potential losses or may be insufficient to cover the value of such potential losses, even if the Coinbase Custodian directly caused such losses. Furthermore, the insurance maintained by the Coinbase Custodian may be insufficient to cover its liabilities to the Trust.

The INJ Custodians are not liable for delays, suspension of operations, failure in performance, or interruption of service which result directly or indirectly from any cause or condition beyond the reasonable control of the INJ Custodians. Under the Custodial Services Agreements, except in the case of their gross negligence, fraud, or willful misconduct, or breach of the BitGo Custodial Services Agreement in the case of the BitGo Custodian, the INJ Custodians shall not have any liability for any damage or interruptions caused by any computer viruses, spyware, scareware, Trojan horses, worms or other malware that may affect the Trust’s computer or other equipment, or any phishing, spoofing or other attack.

The Coinbase Custodian may terminate the Coinbase Custodial Services Agreement for any reason upon providing the applicable notice to the Trust, or immediately for Cause (as defined in the Coinbase Custodial Services Agreement) including, among others, if the Trust materially breaches the Prime Broker Agreement and such breach remains uncured, or undergoes a bankruptcy event.

The Trust’s Transfer Agent will facilitate the settlement of Shares in response to the placement of creation orders and redemption orders from Authorized Participants. The Trust generally does not intend to hold cash or cash equivalents. However, there may be situations where the Trust will unexpectedly hold cash on a temporary basis, including in connection with the settlement of creation and redemption transactions. The Trust’s cash will be held at its account at the Cash Custodian, pursuant to the Cash Custody Agreement.

The Sponsor may, in its sole discretion, add or terminate INJ custodians at any time. The Sponsor may, in its sole discretion, change the INJ Custodians for the Trust’s INJ holdings, but it will have no obligation whatsoever to do so or to seek any particular terms for the Trust from other such INJ custodians. Should the Sponsor choose to terminate an INJ Custodian, the Trust will notify Shareholders in a prospectus supplement and/or a current report on Form 8-K or in its annual or quarterly reports.

Marketing Agent Agreement

Pursuant to the Marketing Agent Agreement, the Marketing Agent is generally responsible for the day-to-day administration of the Trust. The responsibilities of the Marketing Agent include (i) at the request of the Trust, assisting the Trust with facilitating Authorized Participant Agreements between and among Authorized Participants, the Trust, and the applicable Transfer Agent, for the creation and redemption of Creation Baskets of the Trust; (ii) maintaining copies of confirmations of Creation Basket creation and redemption order acceptances and producing such copies upon reasonable request from the Trust or Sponsor; (iii) making available copies of the Prospectus to Authorized Participants who have purchased Creation Baskets in accordance with the Authorized Participant Agreements; (iv) maintaining telephonic, facsimile and/or access to direct computer communications links with the Transfer Agent; (v) reviewing and approving, prior to use, certain Trust marketing materials submitted by the Trust for review (“Marketing Materials”) for compliance with applicable SEC and FINRA advertising rules, and filing all such Marketing Materials required to be filed with FINRA; (vi) ensuring that all direct requests by Authorized Participants for Prospectuses are fulfilled; and (vii) working with the Transfer Agent to review and approve orders placed by Authorized Participants and transmitted to the Transfer Agent.

The Trust shall indemnify, defend and hold the Marketing Agent, its affiliates and each of their respective members, managers, directors, officers, employees, representatives and any person who controls or previously controlled the Marketing Agent within the meaning of Section 15 of the 1933 Act (collectively, the “Marketing Agent Indemnitees”), free and harmless from and against any and all losses, claims, demands, liabilities, damages and expenses (including the costs of investigating or defending any alleged losses, claims, demands, liabilities, damages or expenses and any reasonable counsel fees incurred in connection therewith) (collectively, “Losses”) that any Marketing Agent Indemnitee may incur arising out of or relating to (i) the Trust’s breach of any of its obligations, representations, warranties or covenants contained in the Marketing Agent Agreement; (ii) the Trust’s failure to comply in all material respects with any applicable laws, rules or regulations; or (iii) any claim that the Prospectus, sales literature and advertising materials or other information filed or made public by the Trust (as from time to time amended) includes or included an untrue statement of a material fact or omits or omitted to state a material fact required to be stated therein or necessary in order to make the statements therein not misleading provided, however, that the Trust’s obligation to indemnify any of the Marketing Agent Indemnitees shall not be deemed to cover any Losses arising out of any untrue statement or alleged untrue statement or omission or alleged omission made in the Prospectus or any such advertising materials or sales literature or other information filed or made public by the Trust in reliance upon and in conformity with information provided by the Marketing Agent to the Trust, in writing, for use in such Prospectus or any such advertising materials or sales literature.

Benchmark Licensing Agreement 

The Pricing Benchmark was introduced on [●], 2026. The Benchmark Provider is the administrator of the Pricing Benchmark. The Pricing Benchmark is calculated on weekdays and Sundays.

The Sponsor believes that the use of the Pricing Benchmark is reflective of a reasonable valuation of the average spot price of INJ. The Sponsor has selected the Pricing Benchmark for its quality and rigor as well as its broad, well-balanced universe, which the Sponsor believes best reflects the market price of INJ.

The Pricing Benchmark is determined as a 15-second volume-weighted average price (“VWAP”) of INJ closing prices in USD calculated across Constituent Exchanges over a 60-minute observation window ending at 4:00 p.m. ET. For example, the fix at 4:00 p.m. takes all prices published every 15 seconds in the observation window from 3:00:15 p.m. to 4:00:00 p.m. ET (240 observations). Executed transactions from Constituent Exchanges are used in the calculation; price quotes are not used, and prices are calculated net of any transaction costs. After conversion to USD and prior to the final volume-weighted VWAP calculation, executed trades are filtered to identify and remove outliers. Duplicate trades are first removed. At the exchange level, all executed trades for INJ from the most recent 10-minute window are aggregated, a VWAP is calculated for each Constituent Exchange, and trades from any Constituent Exchange whose VWAP falls outside 1.5 standard deviations of the mean VWAP across all Constituent Exchanges are excluded. At the trade level, any individual trade with a price that falls outside 2.5 standard deviations of the mean price across the then most recent 10-minute window across the Constituent Exchanges is excluded. By employing the foregoing steps, the Pricing Benchmark thereby seeks to be a price reflection for INJ in U.S. dollars.

The selection of exchanges for use in the Pricing Benchmark is based on specified criteria and eligibility standards. However, changes to the Constituent Exchanges may result in an impact on the pricing information reflected in the Pricing Benchmark. The exchanges on which market participants primarily execute transactions for INJ may evolve from time to time, and the Benchmark Provider may make changes to the Constituent Exchanges comprising the Pricing Benchmark from time to time for this or other reasons. To the extent the Trust executes transactions for INJ, the exchanges on which the Trust executes transactions do not impact the Constituent Exchanges comprising the Pricing Benchmark.

The Sponsor may, in its sole discretion, change either the Pricing Benchmark or Benchmark Provider without Shareholder approval. Should such a change take place, the Trust will notify the owners of the beneficial interests of Shares in a prospectus supplement or in its periodic Exchange Act reports, as applicable, and on the Sponsor’s website. Once it has actual knowledge of material changes to the Constituent Exchanges used to calculate the Pricing Benchmark, the Trust will notify the owners of the beneficial interests of Shares in a prospectus supplement or in its periodic Exchange Act reports, as applicable, and on the Sponsor’s website. Any adjustments made to the Pricing Benchmark will be published on the Benchmark Provider’s website at https://www.lseg.com/en/ftse-russell/indices/digital-asset#overview or any successor thereto. None of the information on the Benchmark Provider’s website is incorporated by reference into this Prospectus.

An oversight function is implemented by the Benchmark Provider in seeking to ensure that the Pricing Benchmark is administered through codified policies for Pricing Benchmark integrity, which include a conflict of interest policy, a control framework, an accountability framework, and an input data policy. These policies are subject to regular review at least once a year by FTSE, with feedback considered by FTSE’s Governance Board before approval is granted. FTSE is authorized as a “Benchmark Administrator” and regulated in the United Kingdom by the Financial Conduct Authority under the UK Benchmark Regulation.

Pricing Benchmark data and the description of the Pricing Benchmark are based on information made publicly available by the Benchmark Provider on its website at https://www.lseg.com/en/ftse-russell/indices/digital-asset#overview. None of the information on the Benchmark Provider’s website is incorporated by reference into this Prospectus.

The Benchmark Provider makes no warranty, express or implied, as to the results to be obtained by any person or entity from the use of the Pricing Benchmark for any purpose. Pricing Benchmark information and any other data calculated and/or disseminated, in whole or part, by the Benchmark Provider is for informational purposes only, not intended for trading purposes, and provided on an “as is” basis. The Benchmark Provider does not warrant that the Pricing Benchmark information will be uninterrupted or error-free, or that defects will be corrected. The Benchmark Provider also does not recommend or make any representation as to possible benefits from any securities or investments, or third-party products or services. Shareholders should undertake their own due diligence regarding investment practices.

Any adjustments made to the Pricing Benchmark will be published on the Benchmark Provider’s website at https://www.lseg.com/en/ftse-russell/indices/digital-asset#overview or any successor thereto. None of the information on the Benchmark Provider’s website is incorporated by reference into this Prospectus.

The Sponsor has entered into a licensing agreement, pursuant to which the Trust is entitled to use the Pricing Benchmark as a permitted affiliate of the Sponsor. The Pricing Benchmark does not currently track airdrops involving INJ. Accordingly the Trust does not participate in airdrops, as further described below in “Risk factors — The inability to recognize the economic benefit of a “fork” or an “airdrop” could adversely impact an investment in the Trust.”  

Staking Services Agreement

[To be provided by amendment.]

UNITED STATES FEDERAL INCOME TAX CONSEQUENCES

The following discussion describes the material U.S. federal income tax consequences associated with the purchase, ownership and disposition of Shares by a U.S. Shareholder, and certain U.S. federal income consequences that may apply to an investment in Shares by a Non-U.S. Shareholder. The discussion represents, insofar as it describes conclusions as to U.S. federal income tax law and subject to the limitations and qualifications described below, the opinion of Dechert LLP. The opinion of Dechert LLP, however, is not binding on the United States Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS”) or on the courts, and does not preclude the IRS from taking a contrary position. The discussion below is based on the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), Treasury Regulations promulgated thereunder and judicial and administrative interpretations of the Code, all as in effect on the date of this Prospectus and all of which are subject to change either prospectively or retroactively. The tax treatment of Shareholders may vary depending upon their own particular circumstances. Except where noted, this discussion only deals with Shares held as capital assets (generally, property held for investment), and does not address special situations, including those of banks, financial institutions, insurance companies, regulated investment companies, real estate investment trusts, dealers in securities, currencies, or commodities, tax-exempt organizations, tax-exempt or tax-advantaged retirement plans or accounts, traders using a mark-to-market method of accounting, entities that are partnerships for U.S. federal income tax purposes, persons holding Shares as a position in a “hedging,” “straddle,” “conversion,” “constructive sale” or other integrated transaction for U.S. federal income tax purposes, persons whose “functional currency” is not the U.S. dollar, persons required for U.S. federal income tax purposes to accelerate the recognition of any item of gross income with respect to the Shares as a result of such income being recognized on an applicable financial statement, or persons subject to the federal alternative minimum tax. Moreover, the discussion below does not address the effect of any state, local or foreign tax law consequences that may apply to an investment in Shares. Purchasers of Shares are urged to consult their own tax advisers with respect to all federal, state, local and foreign tax law considerations potentially applicable to their investment in Shares.

For purposes of this discussion, a “U.S. Shareholder” is a Shareholder that is:

If a partnership or other entity or arrangement treated as a partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes holds Shares, the tax treatment of a partner generally depends upon the status of the partner and the activities of the partnership. If you are a partner of a partnership holding Shares, the discussion below may not be applicable and we urge you to consult your own tax adviser for the U.S. federal income tax implications of the purchase, ownership and disposition of such Shares.

Taxation of the Trust

The Sponsor and the Trustee will treat the Trust as a “grantor trust” for U.S. federal income tax purposes.

As a grantor trust, the Trust can undertake only certain types of activities.  For example, generally, the Trust cannot vary its investment portfolio to take advantage of market fluctuations.  The Trust may receive income from investment activities that do not require such decision-making.  If staking is treated for U.S. federal income tax purposes as a passive ministerial and administrative activity, it should be permissible for the Trust. To that end, on November 10, 2025, the U.S. Treasury Department and the IRS issued a revenue procedure that provided a safe harbor for trusts that otherwise qualify as investment trusts and as grantor trusts to stake their digital assets without jeopardizing their tax status as investment trusts and grantor trusts for U.S. federal income tax purposes. The revenue procedure provides specific requirements that must be satisfied by a Trust in order to be eligible to rely on the safe harbor.

In the opinion of Dechert LLP, although not free from doubt, the Trust should be classified as a “grantor trust” for U.S. federal income tax purposes (and the following discussion assumes such classification). The Trust intends to operate so that it will qualify to be treated for U.S. federal income tax purposes as a grantor trust.

Because the treatment of staking in a grantor trust, including interpretation of the requirements under the safe harbor, is still developing, there remains a risk of adverse regulatory or legal determinations that could affect the tax treatment of the Trust as a grantor trust or affect the Trust’s operations. The opinion of Dechert LLP is based on various assumptions and representations relating to the Trust’s organization, operation, assets, activities, and income, including that all such assumptions representations on which the opinion is based and all other factual information set forth in the relevant documents, records, and instruments are true and correct, that all actions described in this offering are completed in a timely fashion and that the Trust will at all times operate in accordance with the method of operation described in the Trust’s organizational documents and this offering.

The opinion of Dechert LLP is not binding on the IRS or any court. Accordingly, there can be no assurance that the IRS will agree with the conclusions herein and it is possible that the IRS or another tax authority could assert a position contrary to one or all of those conclusions and that a court could sustain that contrary position. Neither the Sponsor nor the Trustee will request a ruling from the IRS with respect to the classification of the Trust for U.S. federal income tax purposes or with respect to any other matter. If the IRS were to assert successfully that the Trust is not classified as a “grantor trust,” the Trust would likely be classified as a partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes, which may affect the timing and other tax consequences to the Shareholders. Under such circumstances, the Trust might be classified as a publicly traded partnership that would be taxable as a corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes, in which case the Trust would be taxed in the same manner as a corporation on its taxable income and distributions to Shareholders out of the earnings and profits of the Trust would be taxed to Shareholders as ordinary dividend income. However, due to the uncertain treatment of digital assets for U.S. federal income tax purposes, there can be no assurance in this regard. Except as otherwise indicated, the remainder of this discussion assumes that the Trust is classified as a grantor trust for U.S. federal income tax purposes.

Taxation of U.S. Shareholders

Each Shareholder will be treated, for U.S. federal income tax purposes, as if it directly owned a pro rata share of the underlying assets held in the Trust. A Shareholder also will be treated as if it directly received its respective pro rata share of the Trust’s income, if any (including staking income, as applicable), and as if it directly incurred its respective pro rata share of the Trust’s expenses. In the case of a Shareholder that acquires Shares as part of the creation of a Basket, the delivery of INJ to the Trust in exchange for a pro rata share of the underlying INJ represented by the Shares will not be a taxable event to the Shareholder, and the Shareholder’s tax basis and holding period for the Shareholder’s pro rata share of the INJ held in the Trust will be the same as its tax basis and holding period for the INJ delivered in exchange therefor. For purposes of this discussion, and unless stated otherwise, it is assumed that all of a Shareholder’s Shares are acquired on the same date and at the same price per Share. Shareholders that hold multiple lots of Shares, or that are contemplating acquiring multiple lots of Shares, should consult their own tax advisers as to the determination of the tax basis and holding period for the underlying INJ related to such Shares.

Current IRS guidance on the treatment of digital assets classifies INJ as “property” that is not currency for U.S. federal income tax purposes and clarifies that INJ can be held as a capital asset, but it does not address several other aspects of the U.S. federal income tax treatment of INJ. Because INJ is a new technological innovation, the U.S. federal income tax treatment of INJ or transactions relating to investments in INJ may evolve and change from that discussed below, possibly with retroactive effect. In this regard, the IRS has indicated that it has made it a priority to issue additional guidance related to the taxation of digital asset transactions, such as transactions involving INJ. In addition, the IRS and U.S. Treasury Department have issued final regulations regarding the tax information reporting obligations for certain digital asset transactions. While the U.S. federal government has started to issue such additional guidance, whether any future guidance will adversely affect the U.S. federal income tax treatment of an investment in INJ or in transactions relating to investments in INJ is unknown. Moreover, future developments that may arise with respect to digital assets may increase the uncertainty with respect to the treatment of digital assets for U.S. federal income tax purposes.

The Trust will use INJ to pay certain expenses of the Trust, which under current IRS guidance will be treated as a sale of such INJ. Although the Trust generally does not intend to sell INJ, it may do so in connection with cash redemption transactions, or if necessary to pay certain expenses that must be paid in cash. If the Trust sells INJ (for example to generate cash to pay fees or expenses) or is treated as selling INJ (for example by using INJ to pay fees or expenses) for purposes other than funding a cash redemption, a Shareholder will recognize gain or loss in an amount equal to the difference between (a) the Shareholder’s pro rata share of the amount realized by the Trust upon the sale and (b) the Shareholder’s tax basis for its pro rata share of the INJ that was sold. A Shareholder’s tax basis for its share of any INJ sold by the Trust will generally be a pro rata portion of the Shareholder’s total tax basis for its share of all of the INJ held in the Trust. After any such sale, a Shareholder’s tax basis for its pro rata share of the INJ remaining in the Trust should be equal to its tax basis for its share of the total amount of the INJ held in the Trust immediately prior to the sale less the portion of such basis allocable to its share of the INJ that was sold or treated as sold.

Upon a Shareholder’s sale of some or all of its Shares (other than a redemption), the Shareholder will be treated as having sold the pro rata share of the INJ held in the Trust at the time of the sale that is attributable to the Shares sold. Accordingly, the Shareholder generally will recognize gain or loss on the sale in an amount equal to the difference between (a) the amount realized pursuant to the sale of the Shares, and (b) the Shareholder’s tax basis for the pro rata share of the INJ held in the Trust at the time of sale that is attributable to the Shares sold, as determined in the manner described in the preceding paragraph. Based on current IRS guidance, such gain or loss (as well as any gain or loss realized by a Shareholder on account of the Trust selling INJ) will generally be long-term capital gain or loss if the Shareholder has a holding period of greater than one year in its pro rata share of the INJ that was sold and otherwise will be short-term capital gain or loss.

The Trust’s sales of INJ to fund cash redemptions are expected to result in gains or losses with such gains or losses expected to be treated as incurred by the Shareholder that is being redeemed. These gains or losses generally would equal the difference between the amount realized from the sale of the INJ and the Shareholder’s tax basis for the portion of the Shareholder’s pro rata share of the INJ held in the Trust that is sold to fund the redemption, as determined in the manner described above. A redemption of some or all of a Shareholder’s Shares in exchange for the cash received from such sale is not expected to be treated as a separate taxable event for the Shareholder.

An in-kind redemption of some or all of a Shareholder’s Shares in exchange for the underlying INJ represented by the Shares redeemed generally will not be a taxable event to the Shareholder. The Shareholder’s tax basis for the INJ received in the redemption generally will be the same as the Shareholder’s tax basis for the pro rata share of the INJ held in the Trust immediately prior to the redemption that is attributable to the Shares redeemed. The Shareholder’s holding period for the INJ received generally will include the period during which the Shareholder held the Shares being redeemed. A subsequent sale of the INJ received by the Shareholder generally will be a taxable event.

After any sale or redemption of less than all of a Shareholder’s Shares, the Shareholder’s tax basis for its pro rata share of the INJ held in the Trust immediately after such sale or redemption generally will be equal to its tax basis in its share of the total amount of the INJ held in the Trust immediately prior to the sale or redemption, less the portion of such basis which is taken into account in determining the amount of gain or loss recognized by the Shareholder upon such sale or cash redemption or, in the case of an in-kind redemption, that is treated as the basis of the INJ received by the Shareholder in the redemption.

The Trust intends to disclaim any digital assets created by a fork of the Injective Network. Although in certain circumstances the Sponsor may claim or receive new digital assets created by such a fork and use good faith efforts to make those digital assets (or at the Sponsor’s discretion, the proceeds thereof) available to Shareholders as of the record date of the fork, there can be no assurance that the Sponsor will do so. Therefore, if a fork of the Injective Network results in holders of INJ receiving a new digital asset of value, the Trust and the Shareholders may not participate in that value.

If a hard fork occurs in the Injective Network and the Trust claims the new forked asset, the Trust could hold both the original INJ and the new “forked” asset. Under current IRS guidance, a hard fork resulting in the receipt of new units of a digital asset is a taxable event giving rise to ordinary income equal to the value of the new digital asset. The Trust Agreement will require that, if such a transaction occurs, the Trust will as soon as possible direct an INJ Custodian to distribute the new forked asset in-kind to the Sponsor, as agent for the Shareholders, and the Sponsor will arrange to sell the new forked asset and for the proceeds to be distributed to the Shareholders. Such a sale will give rise to gain or loss, for U.S. federal income tax purposes, if the amount realized on the sale differs from the value of the new forked asset at the time it was received by the Trust. A hard fork may therefore give rise to additional tax liabilities for Shareholders.

While the IRS has not addressed all situations in which airdrops occur, it is clear from the reasoning of current IRS guidance that it generally would treat an airdrop as a taxable event giving rise to ordinary income. If the Trust were to receive the economic benefit of an airdrop, it would have similar tax consequences to those described above for a hard fork. The Trust intends to disclaim any digital assets received in an airdrop offered to holders of INJ. Therefore, if an airdrop results in holders of INJ receiving a new digital asset of value, the Trust and the Shareholders will not participate in that value. If the Trust were to claim or receive the economic benefit of an airdrop, it may give rise to additional tax liabilities for Shareholders.

To the extent the Sponsor determines to stake a portion of the Trust’s INJ, and if the Trust were to receive staking rewards, any such staking rewards received by the Trust is expected to be treated as taxable income and reportable to Shareholders based on the Trust’s interpretation of current IRS guidance. The amounts reported to Shareholders as taxable income related to staking may not correspond in timing or amount to distributions from the Trust. The Trust’s receipt of amounts received in connection with staking could have implications for investors sensitive to unrelated business taxable income. Such investors should consult their own tax advisers as to the tax consequences from these activities.

3.8% Medicare Tax on Net Investment Income

Certain U.S. Shareholders who are individuals are required to pay a 3.8% Medicare tax on the lesser of the excess of their modified adjusted gross income over a threshold amount ($250,000 for married persons filing jointly and $200,000 for single taxpayers) or their “net investment income,” which generally includes capital gains from the disposition of property. This tax is in addition to any capital gains taxes due on such investment income. A similar tax applies to estates and trusts. U.S. Shareholders should consult their own tax advisers regarding the effect, if any, this tax may have on their investment in the Shares.

Brokerage Fees and Trust Expenses

Any brokerage or other transaction fee incurred by a Shareholder in purchasing Shares will be treated as part of the Shareholder’s tax basis in the underlying assets of the Trust. Similarly, any brokerage fee incurred by a Shareholder in selling Shares will reduce the amount realized by the Shareholder with respect to the sale.

Shareholders will be required to recognize the full amount of gain or loss upon a sale or deemed sale of INJ by the Trust (as discussed above), even though some or all of the proceeds of such sale are used by the Trustee to pay Trust expenses. Shareholders may deduct their respective pro rata shares of each expense incurred by the Trust to the same extent as if they directly incurred the expense. However, most trust expenses are expected to result in miscellaneous itemized deductions, and noncorporate taxpayers generally are not allowed any deduction with respect to miscellaneous itemized deductions.

Investment by Certain Retirement Plans

Individual retirement accounts (“IRAs”) and participant-directed accounts under tax-qualified retirement plans are limited in the types of investments they may make under the Code. Potential purchasers of Shares that are IRAs or participant-directed accounts under a Code section 401(a) plan should consult with their own tax advisors as to the tax consequences of a purchase of Shares. To the extent the Sponsor determines to stake a portion of the Trust’s INJ, the Trust’s receipt of amounts received in connection with staking could have implications for investors sensitive to unrelated business taxable income.

United States Information Reporting and Backup Withholding; Tax Return Reporting for Digital Assets

The Trustee will file certain information returns with the IRS, and provide certain tax-related information to Shareholders, in connection with the Trust. To the extent required by applicable regulations, each Shareholder will be provided with information regarding its allocable portion of the Trust’s annual income, expenses, gains and losses (if any). A U.S. Shareholder may be subject to United States backup withholding tax in certain circumstances unless it provides its taxpayer identification number and complies with certain certification procedures. Non-U.S. Shareholders may have to comply with certification procedures to establish that they are not a United States person, and some Non-U.S. Shareholders may be required to meet certain information reporting or certification requirements imposed by Code requirements popularly referred to as “FATCA” in order to avoid certain information reporting and withholding tax requirements.

The amount of any backup withholding will be allowed as a credit against a Shareholder’s U.S. federal income tax liability and may entitle the Shareholder to a refund, provided that the required information is furnished to the IRS in a timely manner.

Individual U.S. Shareholders will be required to report on their U.S. federal income tax return the receipt, acquisition, sale, or exchange of any financial interest in digital assets, which includes a Shareholder’s interest in INJ held by the Trust.

Taxation for non-U.S. Shareholders and Shareholders in Jurisdictions Other Than the United States

As used herein, the term “non-U.S. Shareholder” means a beneficial owner of a Share for U.S. federal income tax purposes that is not a U.S. Shareholder. The term “non-U.S. Shareholder” does not include (i) a nonresident alien individual who is present in the United States for 183 days or more in a taxable year, (ii) a former U.S. citizen or U.S. resident or an entity that has expatriated from the United States; (iii) a person whose income in respect of Shares is effectively connected with the conduct of a trade or business in the United States; or (iv) an entity that is treated as a partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes. Shareholders described in the preceding sentence should consult their tax advisers regarding the U.S. federal income tax consequences of owning Shares.

The sourcing rules applicable to staking rewards and forks, airdrops or similar occurrences are not clear and are continuing to develop. To the extent the Sponsor determines to stake a portion of the Trust’s INJ, the amounts received in connection with staking could be subject to U.S. withholding at source if such amounts were treated as arising from sources within the United States. Similarly, if the Trust were to receive and retain IR Digital Assets arising from a future fork, airdrop or similar occurrence, the ordinary income resulting from such occurrence may be subject to U.S. withholding at source if it were treated as arising from sources within the United States.

A non-U.S. Shareholder generally will not be subject to U.S. federal income or withholding tax with respect to the sale or disposition of INJ at the Trust level or on the disposition of Shares.

Prospective purchasers of Shares that are based in or acting out of a jurisdiction other than the United States are advised to consult their own tax advisers as to the tax consequences under the laws of such jurisdiction (or any other jurisdiction other than the United States in which they are subject to taxation) of their purchase, holding, sale and redemption of or any other dealing in Shares and, in particular, as to whether any value added tax, other consumption tax or transfer tax is payable in relation to such purchase, holding, sale, redemption or other dealing.

The foregoing is only a general summary of the material U.S. federal income tax consequences associated with the purchase, ownership and disposition of Shares by a U.S. Shareholder. Each prospective Shareholder should consult the Shareholder’s own tax advisor concerning the U.S. federal, state, local, and non-U.S. tax considerations relevant to an investment in Shares in the Shareholder’s particular tax situation.

PROSPECTIVE SHAREHOLDERS ARE URGED TO CONSULT THEIR LEGAL AND TAX ADVISERS BEFORE DECIDING WHETHER TO INVEST IN THE SHARES OF THE TRUST.

PURCHASES BY EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS

The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) and/or Section 4975 of the Code impose certain requirements on: (i) employee benefit plans and certain other plans and arrangements, including IRAs and annuities, Keogh plans and certain collective investment funds or insurance company general or separate accounts in which such plans or arrangements are invested, that are subject to Title I of ERISA and/or Section 4975 of the Code (collectively, “Plans”); and (ii) persons who are fiduciaries with respect to the investment of assets treated as “plan assets” within the meaning of U.S. Department of Labor (the “DOL”) regulation 29 C.F.R. § 2510.3-101, as modified by Section 3(42) of ERISA, of a Plan. Investments by Plans are subject to the fiduciary requirements and the applicability of prohibited transaction restrictions under ERISA and the Code. It is anticipated that the Shares will constitute “publicly-held offered securities” as defined in the Department of Labor Regulations § 2510.3-101(b)(2). Accordingly, Shares purchased by a Plan, and not the Plan’s interest in the underlying INJ held in the Trust represented by the Shares, should be treated as assets of the Plan, for purposes of applying the “fiduciary responsibility” and “prohibited transaction” rules of ERISA and the Code.

“Governmental plans” within the meaning of Section 3(32) of ERISA, certain “church plans” within the meaning of Section 3(33) of ERISA and “non-U.S. plans” described in Section 4(b)(4) of ERISA, while not subject to the fiduciary responsibility and prohibited transaction provisions of Title I of ERISA or Section 4975 of the Code, may be subject to any federal, state, local, non-U.S. or other law or regulation that is substantially similar to the foregoing provisions of ERISA and the Code. Fiduciaries of any such plans are advised to consult with their counsel prior to an investment in the Shares.

In contemplating an investment of a portion of Plan assets in the Shares, the Plan fiduciary responsible for making such investment should carefully consider, taking into account the facts and circumstances of the Plan, the “Risk Factors” discussed above and whether such investment is consistent with its fiduciary responsibilities. The Plan fiduciary should consider, among other issues, whether: (1) the fiduciary has the authority to make the investment under the appropriate governing plan instrument; (2) the investment would constitute a direct or indirect non-exempt prohibited transaction with a “party in interest” or “disqualified person” within the meaning of ERISA and Section 4975 of the Code respectively; (3) the investment is in accordance with the Plan’s funding objectives; and (4) such investment is appropriate for the Plan under the general fiduciary standards of investment prudence and diversification, taking into account the overall investment policy of the Plan, the composition of the Plan’s investment portfolio and the Plan’s need for sufficient liquidity to pay benefits when due. When evaluating the prudence of an investment in the Shares, the Plan fiduciary should consider the DOL’s regulation on investment duties, which can be found at 29 C.F.R. § 2550.404a-1.

By investing, each Plan shall be deemed to acknowledge and agree that: (a) none of the Sponsor, the Trustee, the INJ Custodians or any of their respective affiliates (the “Transaction Parties”) has through this Prospectus and related materials provided any investment advice within the meaning of Section 3(21) of ERISA to the Plan in connection with the decision to purchase, acquire, hold or dispose of such Shares; and (b) the information provided in this Prospectus and related materials will not make a Transaction Party a fiduciary to the Plan.

It is anticipated that the Shares will constitute “publicly-held offered securities” as defined in Department of Labor Regulations §2510.3-101(b)(2). Accordingly, Shares purchased by a Plan, and not the Plan’s interest in the underlying INJ held in the Trust represented by the Shares, should be treated as assets of the Plan, for purposes of applying the “fiduciary responsibility” and “prohibited transaction” rules of ERISA and the Code.

INFORMATION YOU SHOULD KNOW

This Prospectus contains information you should consider when making an investment decision about the Shares. You should rely only on the information contained in this Prospectus or any applicable prospectus supplement. Neither the Trust nor the Sponsor has authorized any person to provide you with different information and, if anyone provides you with different or inconsistent information, you should not rely on it. This Prospectus is not an offer to sell the Shares in any jurisdiction where the offer or sale of the Shares is not permitted.

The information contained in this Prospectus was obtained from us and other sources we believe to be reliable.

You should disregard anything we said in an earlier document that is inconsistent with what is included in this Prospectus or any applicable prospectus supplement. Where the context requires, when we refer to this “Prospectus,” we are referring to this Prospectus and (if applicable) the relevant prospectus supplement.

You should not assume that the information in this Prospectus or any applicable prospectus supplement is current as of any date other than the date on the front page of this Prospectus or the date on the front page of any applicable prospectus supplement.

We include cross references in this Prospectus to captions in these materials where you can find further related discussions. The table of contents tells you where to find these captions.

SUMMARY OF PROMOTIONAL AND SALES MATERIAL

The Trust expects to use the following sales material it has prepared:

The materials described above are not a part of this Prospectus or the registration statement of which this Prospectus forms a part.

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

The Sponsor owns trademark registrations for the Trust. The Sponsor relies upon these trademarks through which it markets its services and strives to build and maintain brand recognition in the market and among current and potential investors. So long as the Sponsor continues to use these trademarks to identify its services, without challenge from any third party, and properly maintains and renews the trademark registrations under applicable laws, rules and regulations, it will continue to have indefinite protection for these trademarks under current laws, rules and regulations.

The Sponsor also owns trademark registrations for the Sponsor. The Sponsor relies upon these trademarks through which it markets its services and strives to build and maintain brand recognition in the market and among current and potential investors. So long as the Sponsor continues to use these trademarks to identify its services, without challenge from any third party, and properly maintains and renews the trademark registrations under applicable laws, rules and regulations; it will continue to have indefinite protection for these trademarks under current laws, rules and regulations.

WHERE YOU CAN FIND MORE INFORMATION

The Trust has filed a registration statement on Form S-1 with the SEC under the 1933 Act. This Prospectus does not contain all of the information set forth in the registration statement (including the exhibits to the registration statement), parts of which have been omitted in accordance with the rules and regulations of the SEC. For further information about the Trust or the Shares, please refer to the registration statement, which is available online at www.sec.gov.

Information about the Trust and the Shares can also be obtained from the Sponsor’s website, which is www.21shares.com. The Sponsor’s website address is only provided here as a convenience to you and the information contained on or connected to the website is not part of this Prospectus or the registration statement of which this Prospectus is part. The Trust is subject to the informational requirements of the Exchange Act and will file certain reports and other information with the SEC under the Exchange Act.

The reports and other information are available online at www.sec.gov.

PRIVACY POLICY

The Trust and the Sponsor may collect or have access to certain nonpublic personal information about current and former Shareholders. Nonpublic personal information may include information received from Shareholders, such as a Shareholder’s name, social security number and address, as well as information received from brokerage firms about Shareholder holdings and transactions in Shares of the Trust.

The Trust and the Sponsor do not disclose nonpublic personal information except as required by law or as described in their Privacy Policy. In general, the Trust and the Sponsor restrict access to the nonpublic personal information they collect about Shareholders to those of their and their affiliates’ employees and service providers who need access to such information to provide products and services to Shareholders.

The Trust and the Sponsor maintain safeguards that comply with federal law to protect Shareholders’ nonpublic personal information. These safeguards are reasonably designed to (1) ensure the security and confidentiality of Shareholders’ records and information, (2) protect against any anticipated threats or hazards to the security or integrity of Shareholders’ records and information, and (3) protect against unauthorized access to or use of Shareholders’ records or information that could result in substantial harm or inconvenience to any Shareholder.

Third-party service providers with whom the Trust and the Sponsor share nonpublic personal information about Shareholders must agree to follow appropriate standards of security and confidentiality, which includes safeguarding such nonpublic personal information physically, electronically and procedurally.

A copy of the Sponsor’s current Privacy Policy, which is applicable to the Trust, is provided to Shareholders annually and is also available at https://21shares.com/en-us/privacy-policy. The website address is only provided here as a convenience to you and the information contained on or connected to the website is not part of this Prospectus or the registration statement of which this Prospectus is part.

21Shares Injective ETF

Financial Statements

[To be provided by amendment]

21Shares Injective ETF

Table of Contents

APPENDIX A

GLOSSARY OF DEFINED TERMS

In this Prospectus, each of the following terms have the meanings set forth after such term:

“1933 Act”: The Securities Act of 1933, as amended.

“1940 Act”: Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended.

“21Shares Group”: The broader structure of 21Shares AG and its affiliates.

“abrdn”: abrdn plc, a global investment company.

“Additional Trust Expenses”: Certain extraordinary, non-recurring expenses that are not Sponsor-paid Expenses, which the Sponsor does not assume, including, but not limited to, taxes and governmental charges, expenses and costs of any extraordinary services performed by the Sponsor (or any other service provider) on behalf of the Trust to protect the Trust or the interests of Shareholders, any indemnification of the INJ Custodians, Administrator or other agents, service providers or counterparties of the Trust, the fees and expenses related to the initial listing of Shares on the Exchange, and extraordinary legal fees and expenses, including any legal fees and expenses incurred in connection with litigation, regulatory enforcement or investigation matters.

“Administrator”: The Bank of New York Mellon.

“Advisers Act”: The Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended.

“Affiliate” means (i) any Person directly or indirectly owning, controlling or holding with power to vote 10% or more of the outstanding voting securities of such Person, (ii) any Person 10% or more of whose outstanding voting securities are directly or indirectly owned, controlled or held with power to vote by such Person, (iii) any Person, directly or indirectly, controlling, controlled by or under common control of such Person, (iv) any employee, officer, director, member, manager or partner of such Person, or (v) if such Person is an employee, officer, director, member, manager or partner, any Person for which such Person acts in any such capacity.

“AP Indemnified Person”: The Trust, the Transfer Agent, the Sponsor and its partners, stockholders, members, directors, officers, employees and any person who controls the Sponsor.

“Article 8”: Article 8 of the New York Uniform Commercial Code.

“ASC”: Accounting Standards Codification.

“ASC 820-10”: Accounting Standards Codification 820-10, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures

“Authorized Amount”: An amount to be determined, on a daily basis, based on the Lender’s sole discretion considering factors including, but not limited to, availability of financing and credit due diligence of the Trust.

“Authorized Participant”: One that purchases or redeems Baskets from or to the Trust.

“Available Balance”: The then-current amount available to the Trust to place orders.

“Basket”: A block of 10,000 Shares used by the Trust to issue or redeem Shares.

“Benchmark Provider”: FTSE International Limited, also referred to herein as “FTSE.”

“Binance”: Binance Holdings Ltd.

“BitGo Custodian”: BitGo Bank & Trust, N.A.

“BFT Protocol”: a proof-of-stake consensus system based on a protocol that continues operating and reaching consensus correctly even in the presence of malicious or faulty nodes that may behave arbitrarily or send conflicting information to other nodes, where INJ holders delegate their tokens to validators that produce blocks and distribute staking rewards less a commission.

“BitGo Custodial Services Agreement”: The custodial services agreement with the BitGo Custodian.

“BMR”: The UK Benchmarks Regulation.

“BSA”: The U.S. Bank Secrecy Act, as amended.

“Business Day”: Any day other than a day when either the Exchange or the New York Stock Exchange is closed for regular trading.

“Cash Custodian”: The Bank of New York Mellon.

“Cash Custody Agreement”: An agreement entered into with the Trust and the Cash Custodian stating that the Cash Custodian will establish and maintain cash account(s) for the Trust, and, upon instructions from the Sponsor acting on behalf of the Trust, facilitate cash transfers and cash payments from the Trust’s account(s).

“CBDCs”: Central Bank Digital Currencies.

“CDS”: Cross-Domain Security.

“CEA”: Commodity Exchange Act of 1936, as amended.

“CFPB”: The U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

“CFTC”: Commodity Futures Trading Commission, an independent agency with the mandate to regulate commodity futures and options in the United States.

“Code”: Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.

“Coinbase”: Coinbase Custody Trust Company, LLC.

“Coinbase Custodial Services Agreement”: The custodial services agreement with the Coinbase Custodian.

“Coinbase Custodian”: Coinbase Custody Trust Company, LLC.

“Coinbase Global”: Coinbase Global, Inc.

“Coinbase Insureds”: Coinbase Global and its subsidiaries.

“Cold Vault Balance”: The substantial portion of the private keys associated with the Trust’s INJ kept by the INJ Custodians in “cold storage” or similarly secure technology.

“Connected Trading Venue”: Third-party exchanges or other trading venues (including the trading venue operated by the Prime Broker). 

“Constituent Exchanges”: the chosen set of qualifying INJ spot markets used in calculating the Pricing Benchmark.

“Creation Basket Deposit”: The total deposit required to create each Basket.

“Custodial Services Agreements”: The Coinbase Custodial Services Agreement and the BitGo Custodial Services Agreement.

“Custody Rule”: Rule 206(4)-2 under the Advisers Act.

“DApps”: Decentralized applications.

“DeFi”: Decentralized financial services.

“DFPI”: California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation.

“DOL”: U.S. Department of Labor.

“DSTA”: The Delaware Statutory Trust Act.

“DTC”: The Depository Trust Company. DTC will act as the securities depository for the Shares.

“DTC Participant”: An entity that has an account with DTC.

“ERISA”: Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974.

“Exchange”: The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC.

“Exchange Act”: The Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

“Expenses”: Any and all losses, claims, taxes, damages, reasonable expenses, and liabilities (including liabilities under State or federal securities laws) of any kind and nature whatsoever.

“FalconX”: FalconX Holdings Limited.

“FASB”: Financial Accounting Standards Board.

“FDIC”: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

“Financing Fees”: Interest rates on Trade Credits.

“FinCEN”: The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network.

“FINRA”: Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, formerly the National Association of Securities Dealers.

“FIT21”: Financial Innovation and Technology for the 21^st Century Act.

“FTX”: FTX Trading Ltd.

“GAAP”: U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.

“Genesis”: Genesis Global Capital, LLC.

“Goal Bonded Percentage”: The Injective Network’s targeted bonded-stake ratio.

“HSMs”: Hardware Security Modules.

“IIV”: Intraday indicative value.

“Incidental Rights”: Rights to acquire, or otherwise establish dominion and control over, any digital assets or other asset or right, which rights are incident to the Trust’s ownership of INJ and arise without any action of the Trust, or of the Sponsor on behalf of the Trust.

“Indemnified Person”: The Trustee or any officer, affiliate, director, employee, or agent of the Trustee.

“Indirect Participants”: Banks, brokers, dealers and trust companies that clear through or maintain a custodial relationship with a DTC Participant, either directly or indirectly.

“Seed Creation Baskets”: The initial seed creation baskets comprising [●] Shares.

“Initial Seed Creation Investor”: 21Shares US LLC.

“INJ”: A digital asset based on the open-source protocol of the peer-to-peer Injective computer network.

“INJ Account”: An account, opened by one of the INJ Custodians, that holds the Trust’s INJ.

“INJ Counterparty”: Designated third party, who may be an Authorized Participant or an affiliate of an Authorized Participant, or of the Prime Broker or Lender, as applicable, and with whom the Sponsor has entered into an agreement on behalf of the Trust to (i) purchase the amount of INJ equivalent in value to the cash deposit amount associated with the order and (ii) deposit the resulting INJ amount in the Trust’s accounts with the INJ Custodians, resulting in the Transfer Agent crediting the applicable amount of Shares to the applicable Authorized Participant.

“INJ Custodians”: Coinbase Custody Trust Company, LLC, and BitGo Bank & Trust Company, N.A.

“Injective Network”: The open-source, peer-to-peer network, and the system as a whole that is involved in maintaining the ledger of INJ ownership and facilitating the transfer of INJ among parties.

“IRAs”: Individual retirement accounts.

“IRS”: U.S. Internal Revenue Service.

“IR Digital Assets”: Digital asset tokens, or other assets or rights, acquired by the Trust through the exercise (subject to the applicable provisions of the Trust Agreement) of any Incidental Right.

“JOBS Act”: The Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012.

“KYT”: Know-Your-Transaction.

“Lender”: Coinbase Credit, Inc.

“Liquidating Trustee”: Such person as the majority in interest of the beneficial owners of the Trust may propose and approve that shall take full charge of the property of the Trust.

“Marketing Agent”: [●].

“McHenry Bill”: The Clarity for Payment Stablecoins Act of 2023, as introduced by House Finance Committee Chair Patrick McHenry which would make it unlawful for any entity other than a permitted payment stablecoin issuer to issue a payment stablecoin.

“MPC”: Multi-Party Computation.

“NAV”: Net asset value of the Trust.

“NAV per Share”: NAV per Share outstanding.

“NBMMs”: Non-bank market makers.

 “NFTs”: Non-fungible tokens.

“NYDFS”: The New York State Department of Financial Services.

“OFAC”: The Office of Foreign Assets Control of the U.S. Treasury Department.

“OTC”: Over the counter.

“PCAOB”: The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board.

“Plans”: Employee benefit plans and certain other plans and arrangements, including IRAs and annuities, Keogh plans and certain collective investment funds or insurance company general or separate accounts in which such plans or arrangements are invested, that are subject to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 and/or Section 4975 of the Code.

“Policies”: The Sponsor’s policies and procedures that have been implemented and are reasonably designed to ensure compliance with applicable law, including a Code of Ethics providing guidance on conflicts of interest.

“Post-Trade Financing Agreement”: An agreement with Coinbase Credit, Inc. pursuant to which the Trust may borrow INJ or cash as trade credit from the Lender on a short-term basis to avoid having to pre-fund the Trust’s Trading Balance.

“Pricing Benchmark”: The performance of the FTSE Injective Index, as adjusted for the Trust’s expenses and other liabilities, and to reflect rewards from staking a portion of the Trust’s INJ, to the extent the Sponsor in its sole discretion determines that the Trust may do so without undue legal or regulatory risk, such as, without limitation, the risk of jeopardizing the Trust’s ability to qualify as a grantor trust for tax purposes.

“Pricing Benchmark Licensing Agreement”: The licensing agreement by and between the Sponsor and the Benchmark Provider relating to the use of the Pricing Benchmark by the Sponsor and its permitted affiliates.

“Prime Broker Services”: Services performed by the Coinbase Custodian relating to custody, trade execution, lending or post-trade credit (if applicable), and other services.

“Prime Broker”: Coinbase, Inc.

“Principal Market NAV”: Net asset value of the Trust determined on a GAAP basis.

“Principal Market NAV per Share”: Net asset value of the Trust per Share determined on a GAAP basis.

“Redemption Order Date”: The date a redemption order is received in satisfactory form by the Marketing Agent.

“Register”: The record of all Shareholders and holders of the Shares in certificated form kept by the Administrator.

“Relevant Coinbase Entities”: The Prime Broker and its parent, Coinbase Global, Inc. together with Coinbase Inc.

“SEC”: The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

“Selling Shareholder”: The Initial Seed Creation Investor in its capacity as a seller of some or all of the Shares pursuant to the registration statement of which this Prospectus forms a part.

“Settlement Deadline”: The Trust must generally repay Trade Credits by 6:00 PM E.T. on the Business Day immediately following the day the Trade Credit was extended by the Lender to the Trust (or, if such day is not a Business Day, on the next Business Day).

“Shareholders”: Holders of Shares.

“Shares”: Common shares representing fractional undivided beneficial interests in the Trust.

“SIPC”: Securities Investor Protection Corporation.

“SOC”: Systems and Organizational Control.

“Sponsor”: 21Shares US LLC, a Delaware limited liability company.

“Sponsor Fee”: The fees paid by the Trust to the Sponsor as compensation for services performed under the Trust Agreement.

“Sponsor Indemnified Party”: The Sponsor and its shareholders, members, directors, officers, employees, affiliates and subsidiaries.

“Sponsor-paid Expense(s)”: The fees and other expenses incurred by the Trust in the ordinary course of its affairs, which the Sponsor assumes and pays, excluding taxes, but including (i) the Marketing Fee, (ii) fees to the Administrator, if any, (iii) fees to the INJ Custodians, (iv) fees to the Transfer Agent, (v) fees to the Trustee, (vi) the fees and expenses related to any future listing, trading or quotation of the Shares on any listing exchange or quotation system (including legal, marketing and audit fees and expenses), (vii) ordinary course legal fees and expenses but not litigation-related expenses, (viii) audit fees, (ix) regulatory fees, including if applicable any fees relating to the registration of the Shares under the 1933 Act or the Exchange Act, (x) printing and mailing costs; (xi) costs of maintaining the Sponsor’s website and (xii) applicable license fees, provided that any expense that qualifies as an Additional Trust Expense will be deemed to be an Additional Trust Expense and not a Sponsor-paid Expense. In the Sponsor’s sole discretion, all or any portion of a Sponsor-paid Expense may be redesignated as an Additional Trust Expense.

“Standard of Care”: The standard of care and diligence applicable to the Cash Custodian under the Cash Custodian Agreement.

“Staking Activities”: The process by which third parties engaged by the Sponsor stake a portion of the Trust’s INJ.

“Staking Provider Consideration”: The compensation that each Staking Services Provider is entitled, determined as a portion of the staking rewards generated by such Staking Services Provider’s Staking Activities, which, in each case, is generally expected to be [●].

“Staking Services Agreement”: The Staking Services Agreement, as amended, between the Sponsor and [●] where [●] will provide the Sponsor with certain services, including engaging in staking in a manner reasonably intended to generate rewards and provide reports to the Trust showing the calculation of any rewards payable by the Injective Network.

“Staking Services Providers”: The third parties engaged by the Sponsor to engage in Staking Activities.

“SVB”: Silicon Valley Bank.

“TPS”: Transactions per second.

“Trade Credit”: INJ or cash the Trust may borrow from the Lender on a short-term basis to avoid having to pre-fund the Trust’s Trading Balance,

“Trading Balance”: A trading balance maintained by the Prime Broker or an INJ Counterparty where portions of the Trust’s INJ temporarily may be held outside of cold storage, including in circumstances in which it is necessary in connection with creations or redemptions of Baskets or to sell INJ to pay Trust expenses.

“Trading Platform”: The Prime Broker’s execution platform.

“Transaction Parties”: The Sponsor, the Trustee, the INJ Custodians or any of their respective affiliates.

“Transfer Agent”: The Bank of New York Mellon.

“Trust”: 21Shares Injective ETF.

“Trust Agreement”: Amended and Restated Trust Agreement of the Trust.

“Trust Estate”: All of the INJ on deposit in the INJ Accounts, cash on deposit with the Cash Custodian and all other proceeds from the sale of INJ by or on behalf of the Trust, as well as any other rights of the Trust pursuant to any agreements, other than the Trust Agreement, to which the Trust is a party or any portion thereof in any manner consistent with the provisions of the Trust Agreement.

“Trustee”: CSC Delaware Trust Company, a Delaware trust company.

“TVL”: Total value locked.

“U.S. Treasury Department”: U.S. Department of the Treasury.

“UR” or “Utilization Rate”: A target range for the portion of the assets staked, which is set by the Sponsor and which is based on factors including lock-up periods, historical and stressed redemption activity, Trust size, projected staking yields, staking provider reliability, secondary market liquidity, and broader market conditions.

“VMs”: Virtual Machines.

“VWAP”: Volume weighted average price.

“Watchlist Exchanges”: Exchanges that satisfy the Benchmark Provider’s baseline eligibility criteria for potential inclusion as a Constituent Exchange.

“Participating Exchanges”: Watchlist Exchanges that additionally satisfy the Benchmark Provider’s heightened eligibility criteria for inclusion as a Constituent Exchange.

“You”: The owner or holder of Shares.

21Shares Injective ETF

SHARES

PROSPECTUS

[●], 2026

Until 25 calendar days after the date of this Prospectus, all dealers that effect transactions in these securities, 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.

PART II
INFORMATION NOT REQUIRED IN PROSPECTUS

Item 13. Other Expenses of Issuance and Distribution.

The Trust shall not bear any expenses incurred in connection with the issuance and distribution of the securities being registered. These expenses shall be paid by 21Shares US LLC, the sponsor of the Trust. Set forth below is an estimate (except as indicated) of these fees and expenses.

Item 14. Indemnification of Directors and Officers.

The Trust Agreement provides that the Sponsor and its shareholders, members, directors, officers, employees, Affiliates and subsidiaries (each a “Sponsor Indemnified Party”) shall be indemnified by the Trust and held harmless against any loss, liability or expense incurred under the Trust Agreement without gross negligence, bad faith, or willful misconduct on the part of such Sponsor Indemnified Party arising out of or in connection with the performance of its obligations hereunder or any actions taken in accordance with the provisions of the Trust Agreement. Any amounts payable to a Sponsor Indemnified Party under the Trust Agreement may be payable in advance or will be secured by a lien on the Trust. The Sponsor will not be under any obligation to appear in, prosecute or defend any legal action that in its opinion may involve it in any expense or liability; provided, however, that the Sponsor may, in its discretion, undertake any action that it may deem necessary or desirable in respect of the Trust Agreement and the rights and duties of the parties hereto and the interests of the Shareholders and, in such event, the legal expenses and costs of any such action will be expenses and costs of the Trust and the Sponsor will be entitled to be reimbursed therefor by the Trust. The obligations of the Trust to indemnify the Sponsor Indemnified Parties will survive the termination of the Trust Agreement.

Item 15. Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities.

The registrant issued two common shares of beneficial interest to 21 Shares US LLC, the sponsor of the registrant, in [●] for total consideration of $100 in a private placement exempt from registration in reliance on Section 4(a)(2) of the 1933 Act in a transaction by an issuer not involving a public offering.

Item 16. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules.

(a) Exhibits.

(b) Financial Statement Schedules.

Not applicable.

Item 17. Undertakings.

The undersigned registrant hereby undertakes:

Provided, however, that:

Paragraphs (1)(i), (ii), and (iii) of this section do not apply if the registration statement is on Form S-1 and the information required to be included in a post-effective amendment by those paragraphs is contained in reports filed with or furnished to the Commission by the registrant pursuant to section 13 or section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) that are incorporated by reference in the registration statement; and

The undersigned registrant undertakes that in a primary offering of securities of the undersigned registrant pursuant to this registration statement, regardless of the underwriting method used to sell the securities to the purchaser, if the securities are offered or sold to such purchaser by means of any of the following communications, the undersigned registrant will be a seller to the purchaser and will be considered to offer or sell such securities to such purchaser:

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, the registrant has duly caused this registration statement to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized in the City of New York, and the State of New York, on September 18, 2026.

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, this registration statement has been signed by the following persons in the capacities* and on the dates indicated.