tm2626975-1_s1 - none

Table of Contents

As filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 6, 2026

Registration No. 333-[ ]

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

FORM S-1

REGISTRATION STATEMENT
UNDER
THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933

WINKLEVOSS ZCASH ETF
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Delaware

(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization)

[ ]

(I.R.S. Employer
Identification Number)

c/o Winklevoss Asset Services, LLC
Cameron Winklevoss
301 N. Market Street, Suite 1463
Wilmington, DE 19801
(646) 751-4444

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

Copy to:
Morrison C. Warren, Esq.,
James Audette, Esq.,
Chapman and Cutler LLP
320 South Canal Street
Chicago, IL 60606
(312) 845-3484

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, please check the following box and list the Securities Act 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, check the following box and list the Securities Act 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, check the following box and list the Securities Act 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,” “smaller reporting company,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

Large accelerated filer	☐	Accelerated filer	☐
Non-accelerated filer	☒	Smaller reporting company	☒
		Emerging growth company	☒

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. ☐

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 Commission, acting pursuant to said Section 8(a), may determine.

Table of Contents

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 October 6, 2026

PROSPECTUS

Winklevoss Zcash ETF

The Winklevoss Zcash ETF (the “Trust”) is an exchange-traded product that issues shares of beneficial interest (the “Shares”) that trade on the Nasdaq Stock Market, LLC (the “Exchange”). The Trust’s purpose is to hold “ZEC”, which are digital assets that are created and transmitted through the operations of the peer-to-peer Zcash Network, a decentralized network of computers that operates on cryptographic protocols. The Trust’s investment objective is to seek to provide exposure to the price of ZEC held by the Trust, less the expenses of the Trust’s operations and other liabilities. In seeking to achieve its investment objective, the Trust will hold ZEC and establish its net asset value (“NAV”) on each business day by reference to the [ ] (the “Pricing Benchmark”). The Pricing Benchmark is calculated and published by [ ] (the “Benchmark Provider”) based on a [60-minute time-weighted average price] of the [ ] (the “Underlying Index”), which is an aggregation of executed trade flow of major ZEC trading platforms (“Constituent Platforms”). Winklevoss Asset Services, LLC (the “Sponsor”) is the sponsor of the Trust, CSC Delaware Trust Company (the “Trustee”) is the trustee of the Trust. [ ] is the transfer agent of the Trust (in such capacity, the “Transfer Agent”) and the administrator of the Trust (in such capacity, the “Administrator”). [ ], an affiliate of the Transfer Agent and Administrator, is the cash custodian of the Trust (the “Cash Custodian”). Gemini Trust Company, LLC, an affiliate of the Sponsor, is the custodian (the “Custodian”) for the Trust and will hold all of the Trust’s ZEC on the Trust’s behalf. The Trust has entered into an agreement with Cypherpunk Technologies Inc. (“Cypherpunk”) pursuant to which Cypherpunk will serve as the Trust’s “Zcash Ecosystem Partner.” Under the agreement, the Zcash Ecosystem Partner will provide certain services relating to the Zcash Network and ecosystem, which may include assistance with coinholder polling and voting, guidance in connection with protocol and technical developments, and other related advisory services concerning Zcash matters.

The Trust is an exchange-traded product. When the Trust sells or redeems its Shares, it will do so in blocks of [ ] Shares (a “Basket”) based on the quantity of ZEC attributable to each Share of the Trust (net of accrued but unpaid expenses and liabilities). For a subscription for Shares, the subscription shall be in the amount of cash needed to purchase the amount of ZEC represented by the Basket being created, as calculated by the Administrator (as defined below). For a redemption of Shares, the Sponsor shall arrange for the ZEC represented by the Basket to be sold and the cash proceeds distributed. Financial firms that are authorized to purchase or redeem Shares with the Trust (known as “Authorized Participants”) will deliver, or facilitate the delivery of, ZEC or cash to the Trust’s account with the Custodian (in the case of ZEC) or Cash Custodian (in the case of cash) in exchange for Shares when they purchase Shares, and the Trust will deliver ZEC or cash to such Authorized Participants when they redeem Shares with the Trust. Shares initially comprising the same Basket but offered by the Authorized Participant or an Authorized Participant’s designee (an “Authorized Participant Designee”) to the public at different times may have different offering prices, which 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. Owners of the beneficial interests of Shares (“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 per Share net asset value of the Trust.

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 “WINK.”

The Trust is offering an indeterminate number of Shares. The offering of an indeterminate amount of the Trust’s Shares is registered with the 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. The Trust is not a fund 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 funds registered under the 1940 Act. The Sponsor is not an “Investment Adviser” (as defined in Section 202(a)(11) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended (the “Advisers Act”)), and therefore the Sponsor’s provision of services to the Trust will not be governed by the Advisers Act and 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. Shareholders in the Trust will not benefit from the protections afforded to investors in ZEC futures contracts on regulated futures markets. The Trust’s Shares are neither interests in nor obligations of the Sponsor or the Trustee.

On [ ], 2026, [ ] (the “Seed Capital Investor”) purchased [ ] Shares at a per-Share price of $[ ] (the “Seed Shares”). Total proceeds to the Trust from the sale of the Seed Shares were $[ ]. The Trust will purchase $[ ] in ZEC with the proceeds of the Seed Shares. The Seed Capital Investor will act as a statutory underwriter in connection with the Seed Shares. As of the date of this Prospectus, these [ ] Shares represent all of the outstanding Shares. See “Seed Capital Investor” for additional information.

The price of the Seed Shares was determined as described herein and such Shares could be sold at different prices if sold by the Seed Capital Investor at different times.

Winklevoss Capital Fund, LLC, through one or more of its affiliates, has indicated an interest in purchasing an aggregate of up to $100 million of Shares in this offering from Authorized Participants or in the marketplace through broker-dealers. However, because indications of interest are not binding agreements or commitments to purchase, these potential purchasers could determine to purchase more, fewer or no Shares.

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 ZEC. 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 20.

THE SHARES OF THE TRUST ARE NEITHER INTERESTS IN NOR OBLIGATIONS OF THE SPONSOR, THE TRUSTEE, THE ADMINISTRATOR, THE TRANSFER AGENT, THE MARKETING AGENT, THE CUSTODIAN OR ANY OF THEIR RESPECTIVE AFFILIATES. THE SHARES ARE NOT INSURED OR GUARANTEED BY THE FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION OR ANY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY.

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 OF 2012 AND, AS SUCH, MAY ELECT TO COMPLY WITH CERTAIN REDUCED REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.

The date of this Prospectus is , 2026

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

	Page
STATEMENT REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS		iii
PROSPECTUS SUMMARY		1
ZEC, ZEC MARKET AND REGULATION OF ZEC		11
RISK FACTORS		20
THE TRUST AND ZEC PRICES		66
CALCULATION OF NAV		69
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE TRUST		71
THE TRUST’S SERVICE PROVIDERS		74
CUSTODY OF THE TRUST’S ASSETS		77
TRANSFER OF SHARES		80
SEED CAPITAL INVESTOR		80
PLAN OF DISTRIBUTION		81
CREATION AND REDEMPTION OF SHARES		82
USE OF PROCEEDS		88
OWNERSHIP OR BENEFICIAL INTEREST IN THE TRUST		88
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST		88
DUTIES OF THE SPONSOR		90
LIABILITY AND INDEMNIFICATION		91
PROVISIONS OF LAW		94
BOOKS AND RECORDS		94
STATEMENTS, FILINGS, AND REPORTS TO SHAREHOLDERS		95
FISCAL YEAR		95
GOVERNING LAW; CONSENT TO DELAWARE JURISDICTION		95
LEGAL MATTERS		96
EXPERTS		96
MATERIAL CONTRACTS		96
UNITED STATES FEDERAL INCOME TAX CONSEQUENCES		100
PURCHASES BY EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS		104
INFORMATION YOU SHOULD KNOW		105
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY		105
WHERE YOU CAN FIND MORE INFORMATION		105
PRIVACY POLICY		105
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM		107

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.

Table of Contents

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,” “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 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. Moreover, neither the Trust, the Sponsor, nor any other person assumes responsibility for the accuracy and completeness of any of these forward-looking statements. Investors are therefore cautioned against placing undue reliance on forward-looking statements.

iii

Table of Contents

PROSPECTUS SUMMARY

This is only a summary of the Prospectus and, while it contains material information about the Trust and its Shares, it does not contain or summarize all of the information about the Trust and the Shares contained in this Prospectus that is material and/or which may be important to you. You should read this entire Prospectus before making an investment decision about the Shares.

Overview of the Trust

The Winklevoss Zcash ETF (the “Trust”) is an exchange-traded product that issues shares of beneficial interest (the “Shares”) that seeks to list and trade on the Nasdaq Stock Market, LLC (the “Exchange”). The Trust’s purpose is to hold “ZEC”, which are digital assets that are created and transmitted through the operations of the peer-to-peer Zcash Network, a decentralized network of computers that operates on cryptographic protocols. The Trust’s investment objective is to seek to provide exposure to the price of ZEC held by the Trust, less the expenses of the Trust’s operations and other liabilities. The Trust is a passive investment vehicle that does not seek to generate returns beyond tracking the price of ZEC. In seeking to achieve its investment objective, the Trust will hold ZEC and establish its net asset value (“NAV”) on each business day by reference to the [ ] (the “Pricing Benchmark”). The Pricing Benchmark is calculated by [ ] (the “Benchmark Provider”) based on a [60-minute time-weighted average price] of the [ ] (the “Underlying Index”), which is an aggregation of executed trade flow of major ZEC trading platforms (“Constituent Platforms”). [ ], a [ ] corporation (the “Benchmark Provider”), publishes the Pricing Benchmark. The Trust is sponsored by Winklevoss Asset Services, LLC (the “Sponsor”), a Delaware limited liability company formed on October 1, 2026. The Sponsor is wholly-owned by Winklevoss Asset Services Holdings, LLC. Under the Delaware Limited Liability Company Act and the governing documents of the Sponsor, Winklevoss Asset Services Holdings, LLC, the sole member of the Sponsor, is not responsible for the debts, obligations and liabilities of the Sponsor solely by reason of being the sole member of the Sponsor.

The Trust intends to provide direct exposure to the price of ZEC held by the Trust with Gemini Trust Company, LLC (the “Custodian”), an affiliate of the Trust’s Sponsor. The Custodian is chartered as a New York State-chartered limited liability company that provides custody services for digital assets. The Custodian operates under the direct supervision and regulatory authority of the New York State Department of Financial Services (“NYSDFS”). The Custodian is a fiduciary and must meet the capitalization, compliance, anti-money laundering, consumer protection and cyber security requirements as set forth by the NYSDFS. The Custodian is not insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the “FDIC”) but carries insurance provided by private insurance carriers.

ZEC is a digital asset. Like all digital assets, buying, holding and selling ZEC is very different from buying, holding and selling more conventional investments like stocks and bonds. Stocks represent ownership in a company, entitling shareholders to a portion of the company’s profits. Bonds are debt instruments issued by corporations or governments, where the bondholder is a creditor to the issuer that is generally entitled to a stream of income payments. Ownership of stocks and bonds is typically recorded through a centralized system managed by brokers, custodians or clearinghouses. Ownership of ZEC does not entitle its holders to any portion of a company’s profits or any stream of income payments. ZEC is a decentralized digital asset and ownership of it is reflected on a decentralized ledger.

The Trust provides investors with the opportunity to access the market for ZEC through a traditional brokerage account without the potential barriers to entry or risks involved with acquiring and holding ZEC directly. The Trust will not use derivatives that could subject the Trust to additional counterparty and credit risks. The Sponsor believes that the design of the Trust will enable certain investors to more effectively and efficiently implement strategic and tactical asset allocation strategies that use ZEC by investing in the Shares rather than purchasing, holding and trading ZEC directly.

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 to elect a successor Sponsor upon the resignation of the Sponsor or as otherwise required by laws of the state of Delaware, Shareholders will have no voting rights under the Trust Agreement (as defined below).

The Trust, the Sponsor and the Trust’s service providers will not loan or pledge the Trust’s assets, nor will the Trust’s assets serve as collateral for any loan or similar arrangement.

Table of Contents

The Trust will not utilize leverage, derivatives or any similar arrangements in seeking to meet its investment objective.

Overview of ZEC, the Zcash Blockchain and the Zcash Network

Zcash, an alternative software implementation of Bitcoin, was created in 2016 by a group of scientists, cryptographers, and engineers. Although Zcash is similar to Bitcoin, there are several key differences between the Zcash Network and the Bitcoin Network. The fundamental difference between Bitcoin and Zcash is that Zcash offers selective privacy-preserving features. Zcash accomplishes this privacy preservation by using novel cryptographic protocols called Zero-Knowledge Succinct Non-Interactive Argument of Knowledge (“zk-SNARKs”) to protect both the amount and the sender and recipient of the transaction. Transactions employing zk-SNARKs are referred to as “shielded” transactions and are distinct from “unshielded” transactions, which are publicly viewable on the Zcash Network and can be used to selectively disclose information as needed for regulatory compliance. Zcash’s shielded pool (known as “z-addresses”) is also believed to provide enhanced resistance to certain potential quantum computing attacks that could be used to derive the user’s private key by running Shor’s algorithm on a quantum computer, as it does not expose a user’s public key. By contrast, Bitcoin and Zcash’s unshielded pool (known as “t-addresses”) does expose a user’s public key. However, the zk-SNARK system itself relies on certain key generation mechanisms that may also be susceptible to quantum computing attacks, and the privacy-preserving features of the Zcash Network make it susceptible to certain unique vulnerabilities not present in transparent blockchains like the Bitcoin Network, resulting in a distinct overall risk profile for the Zcash Network. See “Risk Factors — The cryptography used to enhance the privacy of transactions on the Zcash Network is new and could ultimately fail, or could be used to facilitate illicit activities, and businesses that facilitate transactions in ZEC could be at increased risk of criminal or civil lawsuits, or of having services cut off, which could negatively affect the price of ZEC and the value of the Shares.”

Zcash has a current block size of approximately 2MB compared to maximum block size of approximately 4MB on the Bitcoin Network. Zcash blocks are generated every [75 seconds (approximately 1.25 minutes)], which is approximately 8 times faster than Bitcoin’s block production. Due to a similar monetary supply curve to Bitcoin, Zcash halvings also take place approximately every four years. Zcash’s mining difficulty is lower than Bitcoin’s, making it easier to mine blocks and earn rewards. Additionally, Zcash and Bitcoin both have a maximum supply of 21 million coins. As of [ ], 2026, Zcash had a circulating supply of [ ] million ZEC which was less than Bitcoin’s circulating supply of approximately [ ] million Bitcoin. As of [ ], 2026, the 24-hour trading volume of Zcash and Bitcoin were approximately $[ ] million and $[ ] billion, respectively. As of [ ], 2026, the aggregate market value of Zcash was $[ ] billion as compared to the $[ ] trillion aggregate value of Bitcoin. As of [ ], 2026, ZEC was the [ ]th largest digital asset by market capitalization as tracked by [website].

[Ownership of ZEC does not confer formal governance rights over the Zcash Network. However, the Zcash community has conducted coin-weighted “coinholder” polls in which holders of shielded ZEC may signal their views on matters such as development funding and protocol upgrades, including 2026 polls relating to the NU7 upgrade in which approximately 2.4 million ZEC participated. Such polls are advisory and are not binding on the Zcash Network. Because participation currently requires holding shielded ZEC in a self-custodied wallet, the Trust does not expect to participate in coinholder polls, and the size of the Trust’s position does not itself enable the Sponsor or the Trust to participate in or otherwise influence the development of the Zcash Network. As a decentralized digital asset network, the Zcash Network consists of several stakeholders, including core developers of ZEC, users, services, businesses, miners and other constituencies, of which the Trust is only one constituent.] For more information on ZEC, the Zcash Network and the Zcash Blockchain, see “ZEC, ZEC Market and Regulation of ZEC” below.

The Trust’s Investment Objective

The Trust’s investment objective is to seek to provide exposure to the price of ZEC held by the Trust, as measured by the Pricing Benchmark, adjusted for the Trust’s expenses and other liabilities. In seeking to achieve its investment objective, the Trust will hold ZEC and will value its Shares daily as of 4:00 p.m. Eastern time (“ET”) using the same methodology used to calculate the Pricing Benchmark. All of the Trust’s ZEC will be held by the Custodian, an affiliate of the Sponsor.

Table of Contents

The [Pricing Benchmark Name]

The U.S. dollar value of a Basket of Shares at 4:00 p.m., New York time, on the trade date of a creation order is equal to the Basket Amount, which is the number of ZEC required to create a Basket of Shares, multiplied by the “Benchmark Price,” which is the price of a ZEC on the Pricing Benchmark as of 4:00 p.m., New York time. The Pricing Benchmark Price is calculated using non-GAAP methodology and is not used in the Trust’s financial statements. See “ZEC, ZEC MARKET AND REGULATION OF ZEC — ZEC Value — The Pricing Benchmark and the Pricing Benchmark Price.”

Summary of Risk Factors

An investment in the Trust involves risks described in the section below entitled “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this Prospectus. Some of these risks are summarized below.

•

Extreme volatility of trading prices that many digital assets, including ZEC, have experienced in recent periods and may continue to experience, 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 medium-to-long term value of the Shares is subject to a number of factors relating to the capabilities and development of blockchain technologies and to the fundamental investment characteristics of digital assets;

•

The value of the Shares is dependent on the acceptance of digital assets, such as ZEC, which represent a new and rapidly evolving industry;

•

Digital assets may have concentrated ownership and large sales or distributions by holders of such digital assets could have an adverse effect on the market price of such digital assets;

•

A temporary or permanent “fork” or a “clone” could adversely affect the value of the Shares;

•

Recent developments in the digital asset economy have led to extreme volatility and disruption in digital asset markets, a loss of confidence in participants of the digital asset ecosystem, significant negative publicity surrounding digital assets broadly and market-wide declines in liquidity;

•

The largely unregulated nature and lack of transparency surrounding the operations of digital asset trading platforms may adversely affect the value of digital assets and, consequently, the value of the Shares;

•

Digital asset trading platforms may be exposed to front-running and wash-trading;

•

The value of the Shares relates directly to the value of ZEC held by the Trust, the value of which may be highly volatile and subject to fluctuations;

•

The Underlying Index has a limited history and a failure of the Benchmark Price could adversely affect the value of the Shares;

•

Competition from the emergence or growth of other digital assets could have a negative impact on the price of ZEC and adversely affect the value of the Shares;

•

Shareholders may suffer a loss on their investment if the Shares trade above or below the Trust’s NAV per Share;

•

A determination that ZEC or any other digital asset is a “security” may adversely affect the value of ZEC and the value of the Shares, and result in potentially extraordinary, nonrecurring expenses to, or termination of, the Trust;

•

Regulatory changes or actions by the U.S. Congress or any U.S. federal or state agencies may affect the value of the Shares or restrict the use of ZEC, mining activity or the operation of the Zcash Network or the digital asset markets in a manner that adversely affects the value of the Shares;

•

Changes in the policies of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) could adversely impact the value of the Shares;

•

Regulatory changes or other events in foreign jurisdictions may affect the value of the Shares or restrict the use of one or more digital assets, mining activity or the operation of their networks or the digital asset trading platform market in a manner that adversely affects the value of the Shares;

Table of Contents

•

An Authorized Participant, the Trust or the Sponsor could be subject to regulation as a money service business or money transmitter, which could result in extraordinary expenses to the Authorized Participant, the Trust or the Sponsor and also result in decreased liquidity for the Shares;

•

Regulatory changes or interpretations could obligate the Trust or the Sponsor to register and comply with new regulations, resulting in potentially extraordinary, nonrecurring expenses to the Trust;

•

The Trust may be required to disclose information, including information relating to investors, to regulators;

•

Conflicts of interest may arise among the Sponsor or its affiliates, including the Custodian, and the Trust;

•

The Sponsor’s services may be discontinued, which could be detrimental to the Trust;

•

If the Custodian resigns or is removed by the Sponsor, or otherwise, without replacement, it could trigger early termination of the Trust; and

•

The Trust relies on third-party service providers to perform certain functions essential to the affairs of the Trust and the replacement of such service providers could pose a challenge to the safekeeping of the Trust’s ZEC and to the operations of the Trust.

Risks Associated with the Pricing Benchmark

The failure of the Pricing Benchmark methodology to measure the actual price of ZEC could have an adverse effect on the Trust and on the value of an investment in the Trust. In addition, the value of ZEC as calculated by the Pricing Benchmark methodology may differ from the price of ZEC calculated by other methodologies and the price of ZEC on any single spot market.

Risks Associated with Investing in the Trust

Shareholders may choose to use the Trust as a means of investing indirectly in ZEC. As noted, there are significant risks and hazards inherent in the ZEC market that may cause the price of ZEC to fluctuate widely. Shareholders considering a purchase of Shares of the Trust should carefully consider what percentage of their total assets should be exposed to the ZEC market, and should fully understand, be willing to assume, and have the financial resources necessary to withstand, the risks involved in the Trust’s investment strategy, and be in a position to bear the potential loss of their entire investment in the Trust. Because the price of ZEC, and thus the value of the Shares, may be extremely volatile, Shareholders will need to monitor their investment frequently.

There is no assurance that the Trust will generate a profit for investors. In addition, an actual or perceived breach of the Trust’s accounts with the Custodian 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. Any investment made in the Trust may result in a total loss of the investment.

The Trust’s net return will not match the performance of the Pricing Benchmark because the Trust incurs operating expenses and other fees and liabilities. Moreover, the net asset value (“NAV”) of the Trust may deviate from the market price of its Shares for a number of reasons, including price volatility, trading activity, normal trading hours for the Trust, the calculation methodology of the NAV, and/or the closing of ZEC trading platforms due to fraud, failure, security breaches or otherwise.

Shareholders of the Trust should not expect to receive the economic benefit of any “fork” of the Zcash Blockchain or asset “air dropped” to holders of ZEC. [The Sponsor will cause the Trust to irrevocably abandon any digital asset resulting from a fork in the Zcash Blockchain (other than what the Sponsor determines to be ZEC) or any air drop.] If the Trust were to change this policy, the Trust would need to seek and obtain certain regulatory approvals, including an amendment to the Trust’s registration statement of which this Prospectus is a part and approval of an application by the Exchange to amend its listing rules.

Table of Contents

Pricing Information Available on the Exchange and Other Sources

The current market price per Share (symbol: “WINK”) will be published continuously as trades occur throughout each trading day on the consolidated tape by market data vendors.

The Indicative Trust Value (the “ITV”) per Share will be published by the Exchange once every 15 seconds throughout each trading day on the consolidated tape by market data vendors.

The website for the Trust, [website], or any successor thereto, which will be publicly accessible at no charge, will contain the following information: (a) the prior business day’s NAV; (b) the prior business day’s official closing price; (c) calculation of the premium or discount of such Exchange’s official closing price against such NAV; (d) data in chart form displaying the frequency distribution of discounts and premiums of the Exchange’s official closing price against the NAV, within appropriate ranges for each of the four previous calendar quarters (or for the life of the Trust, if shorter); (e) the Prospectus; and (f) other applicable quantitative information. The Trust will also disseminate the Trust’s holdings on a daily basis on the Trust’s website. The NAV for the Trust will be calculated by the Administrator once a day and will be disseminated daily to all market participants at the same time. Quotation and last sale information regarding the Shares will be disseminated through the facilities of the consolidated tape.

Any adjustments made to the Pricing Benchmark will be published on the Benchmark Provider’s website at [website].

The intra-day levels and closing levels of the Pricing Benchmark are published by the Benchmark Provider, and the closing NAV is published by the Administrator (as defined below).

The Shares are not issued, sponsored, endorsed, sold or promoted by the Exchange, and the Exchange makes no representation regarding the advisability of investing in the Shares.

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. Index 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 securities and investment practices.

For more information on the Pricing Benchmark and the Benchmark Provider, see “ZEC, ZEC MARKET AND REGULATION OF ZEC — ZEC, the Zcash Blockchain and the Zcash Network — The Pricing Benchmark and the Pricing Benchmark Price” below.

The Trust’s Legal Structure

The Trust is a Delaware statutory trust, formed on October 6, 2026, pursuant to the Delaware Statutory Trust Act. The Trust continuously issues common shares representing fractional undivided beneficial interest in and ownership of the Trust that may be purchased and sold on the Exchange. The Trust will operate pursuant to a Trust Agreement, as amended and/or restated from time to time (the “Trust Agreement”). CSC Delaware Trust Company, a Delaware trust company, is the trustee of the Trust (the “Trustee”). The Trust is managed and controlled by the Sponsor. The Sponsor is a limited liability company formed in the state of Delaware on October 1, 2026.

The Trust’s Service Providers

The Sponsor

The Sponsor, Winklevoss Asset Services, LLC, 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’s principal address is 301 N. Market Street, Suite 1463, Wilmington, DE 19801. The Sponsor is generally responsible for the administration of the Trust under the provisions of the Trust

Table of Contents

Agreement. This includes (i) selecting and monitoring the Trust’s service providers and from time to time engaging additional, successor or replacement service providers and (ii) upon dissolution of the Trust, distributing the Trust’s remaining ZEC or the cash proceeds of the sale of the Trust’s remaining ZEC to the owners of record of the Shares. The Sponsor has agreed to pay all normal operating expenses except for Extraordinary Expenses (defined below) out of the Sponsor’s unified fee.

The Zcash Ecosystem Partner

The Trust has entered into an agreement with Cypherpunk Technologies Inc. (“Cypherpunk”) pursuant to which Cypherpunk will serve as the Trust’s “Zcash Ecosystem Partner.” Under the agreement, the Zcash Ecosystem Partner will provide certain services relating to the Zcash Network and ecosystem, which may include assistance with coinholder polling and voting, guidance in connection with protocol and technical developments, and other related advisory services concerning Zcash matters.

The Trustee

The Trustee, CSC Delaware Trust Company, a Delaware trust company, acts as the trustee of the Trust in accordance with the Trust Agreement and as required by the Delaware Statutory Trust Act to create a Delaware statutory trust.

The Administrator

[ ] serves as the Trust’s administrator (the “Administrator”). The Administrator’s principal address is [address]. Under the Administration Agreement, the Administrator provides necessary administrative, tax and accounting services and financial reporting for the maintenance and operations of the Trust, including valuing the Trust’s ZEC and calculating the NAV per Share of the Trust and the NAV of the Trust and supplying pricing information to the Sponsor for the relevant website. In addition, the Administrator makes available the office space, equipment, personnel and facilities required to provide such services.

The Transfer Agent

[ ] serves as the transfer agent for the Trust (in such capacity, the “Transfer Agent”). The Transfer Agent: (1) facilitates the issuance and redemption of Shares of the Trust; (2) responds to correspondence by Shareholders and others relating to its duties; (3) maintains Shareholder accounts; and (4) makes periodic reports to the Trust. The Trust’s Transfer Agent will facilitate the settlement of Shares in response to the placement of creation orders and redemption orders from financial firms that are authorized to purchase or redeem Shares with the Trust (“Authorized Participants”).

The Custodian

Gemini Trust Company, LLC, an affiliate of the Sponsor, serves as the Trust’s Custodian.

Under the Custodial Services Agreement, the Custodian is responsible for safekeeping all of the Trust’s ZEC. The Custodian was selected by the Sponsor.

The Sponsor is responsible for opening accounts with the Custodian that will hold the Trust’s ZEC (the “ZEC Accounts”), as well as facilitating the transfer or sale of ZEC required for the operation of the Trust.

The Cash Custodian

[ ], an [affiliate of the Administrator and Transfer Agent], serves as the cash custodian for the Trust (the “Cash Custodian”). The Cash Custodian is responsible for safekeeping all cash and other non-ZEC assets of the Trust.

The Marketing Agent

[ ] is the marketing agent of the Trust (the “Marketing Agent”) and is responsible for reviewing and approving the marketing materials, including the Trust’s website, prepared by the Sponsor for compliance with applicable SEC and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (“FINRA”) advertising laws, rules, and

Table of Contents

regulations pursuant to a marketing agreement with the Trust. The Marketing Agent is a broker-dealer registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “1934 Act”) and a member of FINRA. With the assistance of the Marketing Agent, 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.

Index Services

[ ], a [ ] corporation (the “Benchmark Provider”), publishes the Pricing Benchmark and is responsible for oversight of the Pricing Benchmark.

ZEC Trading Counterparties

The Trust buys and sells ZEC through ZEC trading counterparties selected by the Sponsor. The Trust does not currently intend to engage a prime broker or other liquidity provider providing similar services. As of [ ], 2026, the Trust has entered into an agreement with each of [ ] to serve as a ZEC trading counterparty to the Trust. Each of these ZEC trading counterparties is, and any other trading counterparty the Trust places orders with in the future will be, subject to U.S. federal and/or state licensing requirements or similar laws in non-U.S. jurisdictions and maintains practices and policies designed to comply with anti-money laundering (“AML”) and know-your-customer (“KYC”) regulations or similar laws in non-U.S. jurisdictions.

The Trust’s Fees and Expenses

The Trust will pay the Sponsor an annual unified fee of 0.25% of the Trust’s ZEC Holdings (the “Sponsor Fee”). The Trust’s “ZEC Holdings” is the quantity of the Trust’s ZEC plus any cash or other assets held by the Trust represented in ZEC as calculated using the Pricing Benchmark Price, less its liabilities (which include estimated accrued but unpaid fees and expenses) represented in ZEC as calculated using the Pricing Benchmark Price. The Sponsor Fee is paid by the Trust to the Sponsor as compensation for services performed under the Trust Agreement. The Administrator will calculate the Sponsor Fee in respect of each day by reference to the prior day’s ZEC Holdings. Except for periods during which all or a portion of the Sponsor Fee is being waived, the Sponsor Fee will accrue daily in ZEC and be payable monthly in ZEC or cash. To the extent there are any on-chain transaction fees incurred in connection with the transfers of ZEC to pay the Sponsor Fee, the Sponsor, and not the Trust, shall bear such fees. The Sponsor may, at its sole discretion and from time to time, waive all or a portion of the Sponsor Fee for stated periods of time. The Sponsor is under no obligation to waive any portion of its fees and any such waiver shall create no obligation to waive any such fees during any period not covered by the waiver.

As partial consideration for its receipt of the Sponsor Fee, the Sponsor is obligated under the Trust Agreement to assume and pay all fees and other expenses incurred by the Trust in the ordinary course of its affairs, excluding taxes, but including: (i) the fees of the Trust’s third-party service providers, including, but not limited to, the Marketing Agent, the Administrator, the Custodian, the Transfer Agent, the Cash Custodian, the Benchmark Provider, and the Trustee, (ii) the fees and expenses related to the listing, quotation or trading of the Shares on the Exchange (including customary legal, marketing and audit fees and expenses), (iii) legal fees and expenses incurred in the ordinary course, (iv) audit fees, (v) regulatory fees, including, if applicable, any fees relating to the registration of the Trust and Shares, including any ongoing filings related to the offering of Shares, under the 1933 Act or the 1934 Act, (vi) printing and mailing costs, (vii) costs of maintaining the Trust’s website and (viii) applicable license fees (each, a “Sponsor-paid Expense” and collectively, the “Sponsor-paid Expenses”), provided that any expense that qualifies as an Extraordinary Expense (as defined below) will not be deemed to be a Sponsor-paid Expense. There is no cap on the amount of Sponsor-paid Expenses. The Sponsor has also assumed all fees and expenses related to the organization and offering of the Trust and the Shares.

The Trust may incur certain extraordinary, nonrecurring expenses that are not Sponsor-paid Expenses, including, but not limited to, brokerage and transaction costs associated with the sale or transfer of ZEC, 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, the Trust’s assets, or the interests of Shareholders, any indemnification of the Custodian or other agents, service providers or counterparties of the

Table of Contents

Trust, and extraordinary legal fees and expenses, including any legal fees and expenses incurred in connection with litigation, regulatory enforcement or investigation matters (collectively, “Extraordinary Expenses”). To the extent on-chain transaction fees are incurred in connection with transfers or sales of ZEC to pay Extraordinary Expenses, the Trust will bear such fees, but to the extent there are any on-chain transaction fees incurred in connection with the transfers of ZEC to pay the Sponsor Fee or any Sponsor-paid Expenses, the Sponsor, and not the Trust, shall bear such fees.

To the extent it does not have cash readily available, the Sponsor will cause the transfer or sale of ZEC in such quantity as may be necessary to permit the payment of Trust expenses and liabilities not assumed by the Sponsor or for payment of cash redemption proceeds to Authorized Participants. The Trust will seek to transfer or sell ZEC at such times and in the smallest amounts required to permit such payments as they become due. With respect to transfers or sales necessary to pay Trust expenses and liabilities that are denominated other than in ZEC, the amount of ZEC transferred or sold may vary from time to time depending on the actual sales price of ZEC relative to the Trust’s expenses and liabilities (e.g., if the price of ZEC falls, the amount of ZEC needed to be transferred or sold to pay an expense or liability denominated in U.S. dollars will increase). To the extent the Trust must buy or sell ZEC, the Trust may do so through a third-party digital asset broker or dealer, [including affiliates of the Sponsor and the Custodian]. The Sponsor will select third-party brokers or dealers that it believes have implemented adequate AML, KYC and other legal compliance policies and procedures.

Under the terms of each Authorized Participant Agreement, the Authorized Participants will be responsible for any brokerage or transaction costs associated with the sale or transfer of ZEC incurred in connection with the fulfillment of a creation or redemption order.

Custody of the Trust’s Assets

The Trust’s Custodian will keep custody of all of the Trust’s ZEC and will safeguard the private keys associated with the Trust’s ZEC. The Custodial Services Agreement requires the Custodian to hold the Trust’s ZEC in its ZEC Account in cold storage, unless required to facilitate withdrawals as a temporary measure. The Custodian will use segregated cold storage ZEC addresses for the Trust’s ZEC Account, which are separate from the ZEC addresses that the Custodian uses for its other customers and which are directly verifiable via the Zcash Blockchain. [In addition to the ZEC Account, the Custodian maintains for the Trust a separate account (the “Clearing Account”) that the Trust uses in connection with clearing and settlement services provided by the Custodian (the “Clearing Services”) pursuant to a clearing agreement between the Trust and the Custodian (the “Clearing Agreement”) to facilitate purchases and sales of ZEC in connection with creations and redemptions of Baskets and transfers of ZEC to pay the Sponsor Fee or Extraordinary Expenses. ZEC temporarily held in the Clearing Account may be held in omnibus hot storage wallets.]

[While the Custodian maintains records of the Trust’s ZEC balance in its Clearing Account, the actual ZEC relating to the Trust’s Clearing Account is held in omnibus wallets by the Custodian, meaning that ZEC owned by multiple customers is held in the same wallet and at the same address on the Zcash Blockchain. The Trust’s Clearing Account balance therefore represents an omnibus claim on the Custodian’s ZEC held in such wallets, and the Trust does not have an identifiable claim to specific ZEC. The Sponsor has no control over, and the Custodian does not disclose to the Sponsor, the amount of ZEC that the Custodian holds in connection with the Trust’s Clearing Account in omnibus hot wallets, as compared to omnibus cold wallets.]

The Custodian has adopted the following security policies and practices with respect to digital assets held in cold storage: hardware security modules (“HSMs”) are used to generate, store and manage cold storage private keys; multi-signature technology is used to provide both security against attacks and tolerance for losing access to a key or facility, eliminating single points of failure; all HSMs are stored offline in air-gapped environments within a diverse network of guarded, monitored and access-controlled facilities that are geographically distributed; multiple levels of physical security and monitoring controls are implemented to safeguard HSMs within storage facilities; and all fund transfers require the coordinated actions of multiple employees.

The Sponsor has evaluated the Custodian’s policies, procedures, and controls for safekeeping, exclusively possessing, and controlling the Trust’s ZEC holdings and believes these are designed consistent with accepted industry practices to protect against theft, loss, and unauthorized and accidental use of the private keys,

Table of Contents

though the Sponsor does not control the Custodian’s operations or implementation of such policies, procedures and controls and there can be no assurance that they will actually work as designed or prove to be successful in safeguarding the Trust’s assets against all possible sources of theft, loss or damage. Although the Custodian carries insurance, the Custodian’s insurance does not cover any loss in value of ZEC and only covers losses caused by certain events such as fraud or theft and, in such covered events, it is unlikely the insurance would cover the full amount of any losses incurred by the Trust. The insurance maintained by the Custodian is shared among all of the Custodian’s customers, is not specific to the Trust, and may not be available or sufficient to protect the Trust from all possible losses or sources of losses. The Trust is not a named beneficiary under the Custodian’s insurance policies.

The Trust generally does not intend to hold cash or cash equivalents except for cash received from Authorized Participants in connection with a creation transaction or cash held by the Trust pending distribution to Authorized Participants in a redemption transaction or payment of Trust expenses. The Trust has entered into a custodian agreement (the “Cash Custody Agreement”) with the Cash Custodian under which the Cash Custodian acts as custodian of the Trust’s cash. The Trust is obligated to convert any cash contributed to ZEC as soon as practicable, except to the extent necessary for a redemption transaction or to pay expenses.

The Trust may change the custodial arrangements described in this Prospectus at any time without notice to Shareholders. To the extent a change in custodial arrangements is deemed material by the Sponsor, 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.

The Shares

The Trust will issue Shares, which represent fractional undivided beneficial interests in and ownership of the Trust. Shares issued by the Trust will be registered in a book entry system and held in the name of Cede & Co. at the facilities of the Depository Trust Company (“DTC”), and one or more global certificates issued by the Trust to DTC will evidence the Shares. Shareholders may hold their Shares through DTC if they are direct participants in DTC (“DTC Participants”) or indirectly through entities (such as broker-dealers) that are DTC Participants.

Net Asset Value

Net Asset Value means the total assets of the Trust including, but not limited to, all ZEC and cash less total liabilities of the Trust.

The Administrator determines the NAV of the Trust on each day that the Exchange is open for regular trading, as promptly as practical after 4:00 p.m. ET. The NAV of the Trust is the aggregate value of the Trust’s assets less its accrued but unpaid liabilities (which include accrued expenses). In determining the Trust’s NAV, the Administrator values the ZEC held by the Trust based on the price set by the Pricing Benchmark as of 4:00 p.m. ET. The Administrator also determines the NAV per Share. For purposes of the Trust’s financial statements, the Trust will utilize a pricing source that is consistent with U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (“GAAP”), as of the financial statement measurement date, which may result in valuations that differ from the Trust’s daily NAV calculations. The Sponsor will determine in its sole discretion the valuation sources and policies used to prepare the Trust’s financial statements in accordance with GAAP.

Plan of Distribution

Table of Contents

Further, Authorized Participants will not directly or indirectly purchase, hold, deliver, or receive ZEC as part of the creation or redemption process or otherwise direct the Trust or a third party with respect to purchasing, holding, delivering, or receiving ZEC as part of the creation or redemption process. Shares initially comprising the same Basket but offered by the Authorized Participants to the public at different times may have different offering prices, which 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 may do so at a premium or discount relative to the NAV of the Shares of the Trust.

Federal Income Tax Considerations

It is expected that an owner of Shares will be treated, for U.S. federal income tax purposes, as if they owned a proportionate share of the assets of the Trust. A shareholder will accordingly include in the computation of their taxable income their proportionate share of the income and expenses realized by the Trust. Each sale or other disposition of ZEC by the Trust (including, under current Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) guidance, the use of ZEC to pay expenses of the Trust) will give rise to gain or loss and will therefore constitute a taxable event for some or all of the Shareholders. See “United States Federal Income Tax Consequences — Taxation of U.S. Shareholders.”

Use of Proceeds

Proceeds received by the Trust from the issuance of Baskets consist of either ZEC or cash. Deposits of ZEC are held by the Custodian on behalf of the Trust until (i) transferred out or sold in connection with redemptions of Baskets or (ii) transferred or sold by the Sponsor to pay fees due to the Sponsor or Trust expenses and liabilities not assumed by the Sponsor. Deposits of cash are held by the Cash Custodian on behalf of the Trust until (i) transferred in connection with the purchase of ZEC, (ii) delivered out in connection with redemptions of Baskets or (iii) transferred to pay fees due to the Sponsor and Trust expenses and liabilities not assumed by the Sponsor.

Emerging Growth Company

The Trust is an “emerging growth company” as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012 (the “JOBS Act”). For as long as the Trust is an emerging growth company, unlike other public companies, it will not be required to, among other things: (i) provide an auditor’s attestation report on management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its system of internal control over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002; or (ii) comply with any new audit rules adopted by the PCAOB after April 5, 2012, unless the SEC determines otherwise.

The Trust will cease to be an “emerging growth company” upon the earliest of (i) its having $1.235 billion or more in annual revenues, (ii) at least $700 million in market value of Shares being held by non-affiliates, (iii) its issuing more than $1.0 billion of non-convertible debt over a three-year period or (iv) the last day of the fiscal year following the fifth anniversary of its initial public offering.

In addition, Section 107 of the JOBS Act also provides that an emerging growth company can take advantage of the extended transition period provided in Section 7(a)(2)(B) of the Securities Act of 1933 (the “1933 Act”) for complying with new or revised accounting standards. In other words, an emerging growth company can delay the adoption of certain accounting standards until those standards would otherwise apply to private companies. The Trust intends to take advantage of the benefits of the extended transition period.

Table of Contents

ZEC, ZEC MARKET AND REGULATION OF ZEC

This section of the Prospectus provides a more detailed description of ZEC, including: information about the historical development of ZEC; how a person holds ZEC; how to use ZEC in transactions; how to trade ZEC; the spot markets where ZEC can be bought, held and sold; and the ZEC OTC market.

ZEC, the Zcash Blockchain and the Zcash Network

Zcash, or ZEC, is a digital asset that is created and transmitted through the mining process of the peer-to-peer Zcash Network, a decentralized network of computers that operates on cryptographic protocols. No single entity owns or operates the Zcash Network, the infrastructure of which is collectively maintained by a decentralized user base. The Zcash Network allows people to exchange tokens of value, called ZEC, which are recorded on a public transaction ledger known as a blockchain.

The Zcash Network is decentralized in that it does not require governmental authorities, financial institution intermediaries or others, including Electric Coin Company (f/k/a the Zcash Company) (“ECC”) and Zcash Open Development Lab (“ZODL”), to create, transmit or determine the value of ZEC. Rather, ZEC is created and allocated by the Zcash Network protocol through a “mining” process. Although development companies like ECC and ZODL do not control the Zcash Network, they monitor the development of the Zcash Network and offer updates to the ZEC protocol which the public may choose to implement or ignore. ECC and ZODL do not sell, exchange, transmit or retain custody of ZEC for consumers or the public at large. The value of ZEC is determined by the supply of and demand for ZEC on the Digital Asset Markets or in private end-user-to-end-user transactions.

Similar to Bitcoin, ZEC can be used to pay for goods and services or can be converted to fiat currencies, such as the U.S. dollar, at rates determined on digital asset trading platforms or in individual end-user-to-end-user transactions under a barter system. Additionally, ZEC is used to pay for transaction fees to miners for verifying transactions on the Zcash Network.

The value of ZEC is determined by the supply of and demand for ZEC on the digital asset markets or in private end-user-to-end-user transactions.

Similar to the Bitcoin Network, the Zcash Network operates on a proof-of-work model. New ZEC are created and rewarded to the miners of a block in the Zcash Blockchain for verifying transactions. The Zcash Blockchain is effectively a decentralized database that includes all blocks that have been solved by miners and it is updated to include new blocks as they are solved. Each ZEC transaction is broadcast to the Zcash Network and, when included in a block, recorded in the Zcash Blockchain. As each new block records outstanding ZEC transactions, and outstanding transactions are settled and validated through such recording, the Zcash Blockchain represents a complete, transparent and unbroken history of all transactions of the Zcash Network. For further details, see “Creation of New ZEC” below.

The Zcash Network is one of a number of projects intended to enhance blockchain technology. The Zcash Network’s primary enhancement of the blockchain was to add additional layers of privacy to traditional blockchain infrastructure so that users can make transactions that selectively discloses details related to those transactions. ZEC accomplishes this privacy preservation by using zk-SNARKs to protect both the amount and the sender and recipient of the transaction. The result is a private transaction known as a “shielded” transaction. Zcash’s shielded pools are also believed to provide enhanced resistance to certain potential quantum computing attacks, as they do not expose a user’s public key that could be used to derive the user’s private key by running Shor’s algorithm on a quantum computer. By contrast, Bitcoin and Zcash’s unshielded pool exposes a user’s public key. However, the zk-SNARK system itself relies on certain key generation mechanisms that may also be susceptible to quantum computing attacks, resulting in a distinct overall quantum-risk profile for the Zcash Network.

From the inception of the Zcash Network through [ ], 2026, approximately 45% of Zcash transactions have been unshielded, 45% involved one party utilizing a shielded address, and 10% involved both parties utilizing a shielded address. On October 29, 2018, a Zcash Network upgrade called “Sapling” was activated. The purpose of Sapling was to improve the performance and functionality of shielded transactions to increase mobile, exchange and vendor adoption of shielded transactions and thus the Zcash Network’s overall privacy. The Sapling upgrade also removed a potential vulnerability, inadvertently created during the creation of Zcash,

Table of Contents

which allowed those charged with creating “shielded pools,” a term used to refer to groups of addresses capable of utilizing privacy-preserving features, to mint new ZEC without being detected. Additionally, on May 31, 2022, the ECC announced the activation of the NU5 upgrade. This upgrade implements Halo, a type of cryptography technology invented by ECC, to remove the need for complex generation ceremonies and is intended to further the development of zero-knowledge proof cryptography. Additionally, in late May 2026, a security researcher at Shielded Labs identified a soundness vulnerability in the zero-knowledge proof circuit of one of the shielded pools, called Orchard, that had existed since Orchard’s launch in 2022 and could have been exploited to create counterfeit ZEC within the Orchard pool. The vulnerability was remediated through a coordinated emergency network upgrade in early June 2026, and Zcash developers have stated that there is no evidence that the vulnerability was exploited; however, due to the privacy-preserving nature of shielded pool transactions, there is no cryptographic method to determine conclusively whether the vulnerability was exploited prior to remediation. Following the disclosure of the vulnerability, the market price of ZEC declined by approximately [50]%, although it has since substantially recovered. On July 28, 2026, Zcash developers activated an additional network upgrade, called “Ironwood” (NU6.3), which restricted the Orchard pool so that it can no longer accept new deposits or internal transfers and introduced a new shielded pool. ZEC may exit Orchard only through a “turnstile” mechanism that caps total withdrawals at the amount verifiably deposited, which is intended to prevent any counterfeit ZEC that may exist within Orchard from being removed. Migration from Orchard to Ironwood is not automatic, and as of [July 30], 2026, approximately [3.29] million ZEC remained in the Orchard pool. [If counterfeit ZEC were created, holders whose ZEC remains in Orchard may be unable to withdraw all of their ZEC.]

Zcash is a derivative of Bitcoin that was created on October 28, 2016 by a team of scientists, advisers, and engineers of ECC. Rather than being a fork of the Bitcoin Network, in which Bitcoin owners would receive a proportionate number of ZEC tokens following the fork, Zcash is what is referred to as a “clone,” in which the codebase of Bitcoin was copied in order to produce the protocols underlying the Zcash Network, with the principal difference between the networks being the privacy-preserving features of Zcash created by the founders of Zcash. Because Zcash was a “clone” and not a fork, holders of Bitcoin did not receive any ZEC as part of the clone. Since its founding, ECC aimed to enhance the uses of ZEC and researched the development of the scalability and usability of the network. In this role, ECC historically supported the development of ZEC by, among other things, reviewing and implementing upgrades that become part of the main implementation of ZEC. On January 7, 2026, former ECC Chief Executive Officer Josh Swihart stated on social media that on the previous day, “the entire ECC team left after being constructively discharged.” In or about January 2026, Mr. Swihart and the former ECC engineering and product team formed a new entity, the ZODL, which has since continued the development of core Zcash software and protocol upgrades previously undertaken by ECC. ECC continues to exist as an entity overseen by its nonprofit board, but the personnel who historically performed core development work now do so through ZODL. Like ECC, ZODL does not control the Zcash Network, and any updates it offers to the ZEC protocol may be implemented or ignored by the public. This is analogous to the Bitcoin Network, in which a group of core developers, known as Bitcoin Core, have ultimate control over reviewing and implementing upgrades into Bitcoin Core, the most commonly used Bitcoin client.

Although Zcash is thus very similar to Bitcoin, there are several key differences between the Zcash Network and the Bitcoin Network. These differences include a block generation time of [75 seconds (approximately 1.25 minutes)] for ZEC, as compared to 10 minutes for Bitcoin. Like Bitcoin, Zcash has a cap on the number of coins that will be created of 21 million. However, although all ZEC is mined, the Zcash code is designed such that, of the 21 million ZEC to be mined, 2.1 million ZEC were automatically allocated to the founders, employees and advisers of ECC, as well as to certain investors in ECC. This allocation is called the “Founders’ Reward.” To effect this, the Zcash code provides that for the first four years of ZEC’s existence, 80% of newly created ZEC went to miners, while 20% of newly created ZEC was allocated to the Founders’ Reward. After the first four years, the Founders’ Reward would be fully paid, and 100% of newly created ZEC would go to miners. The result was that 10% of ZEC’s fully diluted supply was automatically distributed to holders who themselves were not responsible for its mining.

In June 2019, in light of the expected expiration of the Founders’ Reward in November 2020, Zooko Wilcox, founder of ECC, expressed his support for a Dev Fund (as defined below) that, like the original Founders’ Reward, would allocate ZEC from “future block rewards for core support functions such as software development, user support, business development, regulatory and government outreach, security auditing

Table of Contents

and monitoring, educational and marketing initiatives and new protocol development.” The Zcash Foundation (the “Foundation”) conducted several rounds of community polling regarding whether and how a Dev Fund should be implemented. On February 14, 2020, the Foundation announced that community consensus and agreement had been reached on a final proposal, named “ZIP 1014,” which included a 20% block reward allocation for four years, split into the following three slices (collectively, the “Dev Fund”):

•

35% (7% of the total mining reward) for ECC;

•

25% (5% of the total mining reward) for the Foundation;

•

40% (8% of the total mining reward) for additional major grants for large-scale long-term projects to be determined by the Foundation, with additional community input and scrutiny.

On November 18, 2020, ZIP 1014 was implemented in an upgrade of the Zcash Network called Canopy. However, the original Founders’ Reward and the Dev Fund established under ZIP 1014 expired in late 2024 and no longer govern current block reward allocations.

Following the expiration of the Dev Fund established under ZIP 1014 at the Zcash Network’s second halving in November 2024, the Zcash Network implemented a revised block reward allocation structure in updates known as “NU6” and “NU6.1.” Under the current structure, 80% of newly created ZEC is allocated to miners, while the remaining 20% is allocated to development-related purposes. Of this 20%, a portion is directed to a community grants program administered by the Foundation, and the remainder is allocated to a protocol-level funding mechanism intended to support future development initiatives, with the use of such funds subject to network-level processes influenced by community and ZEC-holder inputs.

Zcash developers are targeting November 5, 2026 for activation of a network upgrade known as “NU7”. As proposed, NU7 would reduce the target block time from 75 seconds to 25 seconds, while reducing the block reward per block and extending the halving interval so that the rate of ZEC issuance over time and the approximately four-year halving schedule remain largely unchanged. NU7 would also disable legacy version 4 transactions and introduce a “Network Sustainability Mechanism,” under which approximately 60% of transaction fees would be temporarily removed from circulation and reintroduced through block rewards beginning in February 2031. NU7 is not expected to introduce new transaction formats or to require significant wallet changes, although full nodes, indexers and block explorers may require updates. There can be no assurance that NU7 will be activated on the anticipated timeline, or at all, or that it will operate as intended.

Overview of the Zcash Network’s Operations

In order to own, transfer or use ZEC directly on the Zcash Network, as opposed to through an intermediary, such as a custodian, a person generally must have internet access to connect to the Zcash Network. ZEC transactions may be made directly between end-users without the need for a third-party intermediary. To prevent the possibility of double-spending ZEC, a user must notify the Zcash Network of the transaction by broadcasting certain transaction data to its network peers. The Zcash Network provides confirmation against double-spending by memorializing transactions in the Zcash Blockchain, in the case of public transactions, or through zero-knowledge proofs (i.e., zk-SNARKs) in the case of private transactions. This memorialization and verification against double-spending is accomplished through the Zcash Network mining process, which adds “blocks” of data, including certain transaction information, to the Zcash Blockchain. Although the Zcash Network is publicly accessible, it does not, by design, have the same level of transparency as the Bitcoin blockchain.

Brief Description of ZEC Transfers

There are two types of transactions that can occur on the Zcash Network: (1) unshielded transactions, which are very similar to the transactions that take place on other blockchains, such as the Bitcoin Network and the Ethereum Network and (2) shielded transactions.

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

Table of Contents

Each Zcash Network address, or wallet, is associated with a unique “public key” and “private key” pair. To receive ZEC, the ZEC 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 with the private key associated with the address from which the ZEC is being transferred. The recipient, however, does not make public or provide to the sender its related private key.

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 ZEC contained in the associated address. Likewise, ZEC is irretrievably lost if the private key associated with them is deleted and no backup has been made. When sending ZEC, a user’s Zcash Network software program must validate the transaction with the associated private key. The resulting digitally validated transaction is sent by the user’s Zcash Network software program to the Zcash Network to allow transaction confirmation.

Shielded transactions utilize a scientific breakthrough in the field of cryptography known as “zero-knowledge proofs.” Zero-knowledge proofs allow users to prove knowledge of some facts about hidden information without revealing that information by encrypting certain aspects of the transaction. Ordinarily, if a blockchain’s transaction data is encrypted, nodes in the blockchain cannot determine whether senders really held the tokens they sent, whether they previously sent it to someone else or whether they never had it in the first place. The encrypted data becomes unverifiable by network nodes.

With ZEC, a particular type of zero-knowledge proof called zk-SNARKs solves this problem. In a ZEC shielded transaction, the sender provides a string of data that makes up the “zero-knowledge proof” and encrypted transaction data, which proves properties of the encrypted data cryptographically, including that the sender could not have generated a specific string unless the sender had ownership over the private key and unless the input and output values were equal. The proof also guarantees creation of a unique nullifier which is used to mark tokens as spent, when they are, in fact spent. In other words, zero-knowledge proofs allow verifiability without compromising confidentiality.

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

Creation of New ZEC

Initial Creation of ZEC

The initial creation of ZEC as part of the first Zcash Network block, or genesis block, was conducted on October 28, 2016. All additional ZEC have been, and will be, created through the mining process. In order to minimize the impact of any unforeseen problems during the launch of the Zcash Network, the amount of ZEC created each time a block was mined started at zero and gradually increased to 12.5 ZEC after 34 days. The slow-start period ended on December 1, 2016.

Mining Process

The Zcash Network is kept running by computers all over the world. In order to incentivize those who incur the computational costs of securing the network by validating transactions, there is a reward that is given to the computer that was able to create the latest block on the chain. As of [ ], 2026, every [75 seconds (approximately 1.25 minutes)], on average, a new block is added to the Zcash Blockchain with the latest

Table of Contents

transactions processed by the network. The current total block reward for Zcash is 1.5625 ZEC per block, of which miners receive 80% (1.25 ZEC) plus transaction fees, while the remaining 20% goes to ecosystem and network funding. Due to the nature of the algorithm for block generation, this process (generating a “proof-of-work”) is guaranteed to be random. Over time rewards are expected to be proportionate to the computational power of each machine.

The process by which ZEC is “mined” results in new blocks being added to the Zcash Blockchain and new ZEC tokens being issued to the miners. Computers on the Zcash Network engage in a set of prescribed complex mathematical calculations in order to add a block to the Zcash Blockchain and thereby confirm ZEC transactions included in that block’s data.

To begin mining, a user can download and run Zcash Network mining software. Each block contains the details of some or all of the most recent transactions that are not memorialized in prior blocks, as well as a record of the award of ZEC to the miner who added the new block. Each unique block can be solved and added to the Zcash Blockchain by only one miner. Therefore, all individual miners and mining pools on the Zcash Network are engaged in a competitive process of constantly increasing their computing power to improve their likelihood of solving for new blocks. As more miners join the Zcash Network and its processing power increases, the Zcash Network adjusts the complexity of the block-solving equation to maintain a predetermined pace of adding a new block to the Zcash Blockchain every [75 seconds (approximately 1.25 minutes)]. A miner’s proposed block is added to the Zcash Blockchain once a majority of the nodes on the Zcash Network confirms the miner’s work. Miners that are successful in adding a block to the Zcash Blockchain are automatically awarded ZEC for their effort and may also receive transaction fees paid by transferors whose transactions are recorded in the block. This reward system is the method by which new ZEC enter into circulation to the public.

Limits on ZEC Supply

The Zcash Network is structured to allow a maximum of 21 million ZEC to be created, which are mined over time with the creation of each new block. During the first four years of ZEC’s existence, 80% of newly created ZEC was distributed to miners, while 20% of newly created ZEC was allocated to the founders, employees and advisers of ECC, as well as to certain investors in ECC. This allocation is called the “Founders’ Reward.” Every four years, the rate of ZEC being created will halve, just as it does for Bitcoin. The end result is that there will ultimately be 21 million ZEC in existence, and 10% of it, or 2.1 million, will have been distributed to the Founders’ Reward. In November 2020, an upgrade of the Zcash Network (which coincided with Zcash’s first halving) established a four-year “Dev Fund” that redirected 20% of the block subsidy to development-related purposes through the next halving in November 2024. Following the expiration of the Dev Fund at the Zcash Network’s second halving in November 2024, the Zcash Network adopted a revised block reward allocation structure. Under the current structure, 80% of newly created ZEC is allocated to miners, while the remaining 20% is allocated to development-related purposes. Of this 20%, a portion is directed to a community grants program administered by the Foundation, and the remainder is allocated to a protocol-level funding mechanism intended to support future development initiatives, with the use of such funds subject to network-level processes influenced by community and ZEC-holder inputs.

As of [ ], 2026, approximately [ ] million ZEC were outstanding, and estimates of when the 21 million ZEC limitation will be reached range from at or near the year [2035].

Modifications to the ZEC Protocol

Although the Zcash Network is an open-source project, historically ECC has supported the development of ZEC. ECC continues to exist as an entity overseen by its nonprofit board, but the personnel who historically performed core development work now do so through ZODL. Core development of the Zcash Network is now undertaken by multiple teams, including ZODL, the Zcash Foundation (which maintains the Zebra full node software that is replacing the legacy zcashd node software), Shielded Labs, Project Tachyon and Valar Group. These teams are able to propose and release updates and other changes to the Zcash Network’s source code, which take effect only if adopted by users and miners.

For example, the first network upgrade, called “Overwinter”, was implemented on June 26, 2018. The purpose of Overwinter was to make initial upgrades on which future upgrades could be built. The next upgrade, called

Table of Contents

“Sapling”, was implemented on October 29, 2018. The purpose of Sapling was to improve the performance and functionality of shielded transactions to increase mobile, exchange and vendor adoption of shielded transactions and thus the Zcash Network’s overall privacy. The next upgrade, called “Blossom”, was implemented in December 2019. The purpose of Blossom was to increase the frequency of blocks, which were previously mined approximately once every 2.5 minutes, to increase the network’s speed and usability. “Canopy” implemented on November 18, 2020 established a development fund along with 5 other minor Zcash Improvement Proposals. “NU5”, which occurred May 31, 2022, was intended to further the development of zero-knowledge proof cryptography and bolster the Zcash Network’s privacy enhancing features. Subsequent upgrades implemented in 2024 and 2025, referred to as “NU6” and “NU6.1,” respectively, modified certain block reward allocation and funding mechanics following the expiration of the prior Dev Fund, without altering the Zcash Network’s consensus mechanism or core privacy features.

Zcash developers are targeting November 5, 2026 for activation of a network upgrade known as “NU7,” with testnet activation scheduled for October 6, 2026 and a final decision on mainnet activation expected on October 20, 2026. As proposed, NU7 would reduce the target block time from 75 seconds to 25 seconds, while reducing the block reward per block and extending the halving interval so that the rate of ZEC issuance over time and the approximately four-year halving schedule remain largely unchanged. NU7 would also disable legacy version 4 transactions and introduce a “Network Sustainability Mechanism,” under which approximately 60% of transaction fees would be temporarily removed from circulation and reintroduced through block rewards beginning in February 2031. NU7 is not expected to introduce new transaction formats or to require significant wallet changes, although full nodes, indexers and block explorers may require updates. There can be no assurance that NU7 will be activated on the anticipated timeline, or at all, or that it will operate as intended.

On November 19, 2021, the ECC announced its intention to support a shift from Proof-of-Work to Proof-of-Stake consensus mechanisms underlying the Zcash Network. While full details about this change have not been crystallized, this shift would transfer the duties of securing the network from miners to stakers, who dedicate ZEC, rather than specialized hardware, to validate network transactions. It was projected this transition will take approximately three years to implement, though as of [ ], 2026, such a transition had not yet occurred.

The release of updates to the Zcash Network’s source code does not guarantee that the updates will be automatically adopted. Users and miners must accept any changes made to the Zcash source code by downloading the proposed modification of the Zcash Network’s source code. A modification of the Zcash Network’s source code is effective only with respect to the Zcash users and miners that download it. If a modification is accepted by only a percentage of users and miners, a division in the Zcash Network will occur such that one network will run the pre-modification source code and the other network will run the modified source code. Such a division is known as a “fork.” See “Risk Factors — Risk Factors Related to Digital Assets — A temporary or permanent “fork” or a “clone” could adversely affect the value of the Shares.” Consequently, as a practical matter, a modification to the source code becomes part of the Zcash Network only if accepted by participants collectively having most of the processing power on the Zcash Network.

Forms of Attack Against the Zcash Network

All networked systems are vulnerable to various kinds of attacks. As with any computer network, the Zcash Network contains certain flaws. For example, the Zcash Network is currently vulnerable to a “51% attack” where, if a mining pool were to gain control of more than 50% of the hash rate for a digital asset, a malicious actor would be able to gain full control of the network and the ability to manipulate the Zcash Blockchain.

In addition, 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 the transfer of digital assets. Any similar attacks on the Zcash Network that impact the ability to transfer ZEC could have a material adverse effect on the price of ZEC and the value of the Shares. This is not intended as an exhaustive list of all forms of attack against the Zcash Network. For additional information, see “Risk Factors — Risk Factors Related to Digital Assets.”

Because ZEC is a privacy-preserving digital asset, it is also subject to certain types of attacks that may go undetected. For example, on February 5, 2019, the team behind Zcash announced that it discovered a vulnerability in its zk-SNARK implementation on March 1, 2018 that was subsequently patched in connection

Table of Contents

with a network upgrade called “Sapling” in October 2018. The vulnerability was a counterfeiting vulnerability that could have allowed an attacker to exploit a flaw in the original protocol implementation to create extra code elements in the zero-knowledge proof cryptography, which would create fake ZEC on the Zcash Network without being detected. Although the privacy features prevent one from being certain no ZEC were counterfeited, the team behind Zcash found no evidence that counterfeiting occurred prior to the patch and believes the vulnerability has been fully remediated.

Additionally, in late May 2026, a security researcher at Shielded Labs identified a soundness vulnerability in the zero-knowledge proof circuit of one of the shielded pools, called Orchard, that had existed since Orchard’s launch in 2022 and could have been exploited to create counterfeit ZEC within the Orchard pool. The vulnerability was remediated through a coordinated emergency network upgrade in early June 2026, and Zcash developers have stated that there is no evidence that the vulnerability was exploited; however, due to the privacy-preserving nature of shielded pool transactions, there is no cryptographic method to determine conclusively whether the vulnerability was exploited prior to remediation. Following the disclosure of the vulnerability, the market price of ZEC declined by approximately [50]%, although it has since substantially recovered. On July 28, 2026, Zcash developers activated an additional network upgrade, called “Ironwood” (NU6.3), which restricted the Orchard pool so that it can no longer accept new deposits or internal transfers and introduced a new shielded pool. ZEC may exit Orchard only through a “turnstile” mechanism that caps total withdrawals at the amount verifiably deposited, which is intended to prevent any counterfeit ZEC that may exist within Orchard from being removed. Migration from Orchard to Ironwood is not automatic, and as of [July 30], 2026, approximately [3.29] million ZEC remained in the Orchard pool. For additional information see “Overview of the ZEC Industry and Market” and “Risk Factors — Risk Factors Related to Digital Assets — The cryptography used to enhance the privacy of transactions on the Zcash Network is new and could ultimately fail, or could be used to facilitate illicit activities, and businesses that facilitate transactions in ZEC may be at increased risk of criminal or civil lawsuits, or of having services cut off, which could negatively affect the price of ZEC and the value of the Shares.”

Market Participants

Miners

Miners range from ZEC enthusiasts to professional mining operations that design and build dedicated machines and data centers, including mining pools, which are groups of miners that act cohesively and combine their processing power to solve blocks (in the case of proof-of-work) or stake coins (in the case of proof-of-stake). When a pool mines a new block, the pool operator receives the ZEC and, after taking a nominal fee, splits the resulting reward among the pool participants based on the processing power each of them contributed to mine such block. Mining pools provide participants with access to smaller, but steadier and more frequent, ZEC payouts. See “Creation of New ZEC” above.

Investment and Speculative Sector

This sector includes the investment and trading activities of both private and professional investors and speculators. Historically, larger financial services institutions are publicly reported to have limited involvement in investment and trading in digital assets, although the participation landscape is beginning to change. Currently, there is relatively limited use of digital assets in the retail and commercial marketplace in comparison to relatively extensive use by speculators, and a significant portion of demand for digital assets is generated by speculators and investors seeking to profit from the short- or long-term holding of digital assets.

Retail Sector

The retail sector includes users transacting in direct peer-to-peer ZEC transactions through the direct sending of ZEC over the Zcash Network. While the use of Bitcoin to purchase goods and services from commercial or service businesses is developing, ZEC has not yet been accepted in the same manner because ZEC has a slightly different purpose than Bitcoin. ZEC’s primary purpose is its use in privacy-preserving transactions on the Zcash Network. In the year ended December 31, 2025, the Zcash Network facilitated publicly-visible daily transaction values between approximately $5.5 million and approximately $2.9 billion, though by design shielded transactions are not publicly-visible on the Zcash Network and the total value of daily transactions

Table of Contents

was likely much higher. For reference, the Bitcoin Network facilitated daily transaction values between approximately $2.9 billion and $54.5 billion over the same period. If ZEC’s privacy-preserving capabilities are not more widely utilized, it may struggle to compete with other digital assets.

Service Sector

This sector includes companies that provide a variety of services including the buying, selling, payment processing and storing of ZEC. For example, [ ] are some of the largest digital asset trading platforms by volume traded. For storing ZEC, the Custodian for the Trust is a digital asset custodian that provides custodial accounts that store ZEC for users. As the Zcash Network continues to grow in acceptance, it is anticipated that service providers will expand the currently available range of services and that additional parties will enter the service sector for the Zcash Network.

Competition

Thousands of digital assets have been developed since the inception of Bitcoin, which is currently the most developed digital asset because of the length of time it has been in existence, the investment in the infrastructure that supports it, and the network of individuals and entities that are using Bitcoin in transactions. While the Zcash Network has enjoyed some success in its limited history, the aggregate value of outstanding ZEC is smaller than that of Bitcoin and may be eclipsed by the more rapid development of other digital assets. In particular, XMR, DASH and ROSE are three privacy-enabling digital assets that are direct competitors to ZEC. Usage by any other digital asset network of these features could cause them to gain greater or more rapid acceptance than the Zcash Network.

Some industry groups have also created private, permissioned blockchains. For example, J.P. Morgan has developed a platform called Kinexys (formerly known as Onyx), which is described as a blockchain-based platform designed for use by the financial services industry.

Regulation of Zcash and Government Oversight

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 Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”), the Department of Justice, the Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the IRS, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Federal Reserve and state financial institution and securities regulators) have been examining the operations of digital asset networks, digital asset users and the digital asset exchange 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 exchanges or other service-providers that hold or custody digital assets for users. Many of these state and federal agencies have issued consumer advisories regarding the risks posed by digital assets to investors. 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. Department of Treasury’s July 7, 2022 “Framework for International Engagement of Digital Assets” and all policies, directives and guidance issued pursuant to those items produced by the previous administration.

On January 21, 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 crypto assets. Following the task force announcement, on January 23, 2025, President Trump executed the Strengthening American Leadership in Digital Financial Technology Executive Order. It is currently unknown how the actions or recommendations of the task force and this Executive Order or future governmental actions may impact the status of ZEC or any other digital asset as a “security” or how ZEC or the Trust would be treated under any new or revised regulatory framework.

Table of Contents

In addition, the previous chair of the SEC has stated that the SEC has authority under existing laws to regulate the digital asset sector, and the SEC, U.S. state securities regulators and several foreign governments have issued warnings and instituted legal proceedings in which they argue that certain digital assets may be classified as securities and that both those digital assets and any related initial coin offerings are subject to securities regulations. The outcomes of these proceedings, as well as ongoing and future regulatory actions may alter, perhaps to a materially adverse extent, the nature of an investment in the Shares or the ability of the Trust to continue to operate. Additionally, U.S. state and federal as well as foreign regulators and legislatures have taken action against virtual currency businesses or enacted restrictive regimes in response to adverse publicity arising from hacks, consumer harm, or criminal activity stemming from virtual currency activity.

The CFTC has regulatory jurisdiction over the ZEC futures markets. In addition, because the CFTC has determined that ZEC is a “commodity” under the CEA and the rules thereunder, it has jurisdiction to prosecute fraud and manipulation in the cash, or spot, market for ZEC. Beyond instances of fraud or manipulation, the CFTC generally does not oversee cash or spot market exchanges or transactions involving ZEC that do not use collateral, leverage, or financing.

Various foreign jurisdictions have adopted, and may continue to, in the near future, adopt laws, regulations or directives that affect the Zcash Network, the Zcash Markets, and their users, particularly ZEC spot markets and service providers that fall within such jurisdictions’ regulatory scope. Several foreign jurisdictions have developed varying levels of regulatory frameworks surrounding exchange-traded digital asset products. There remains significant uncertainty regarding foreign governments’ future actions with respect to the regulation of digital assets and digital asset trading platforms. Such laws, regulations or directives may conflict with those of the United States and may negatively impact the acceptance of ZEC by users, merchants and service providers outside the United States and may therefore impede the growth or sustainability of the Zcash ecosystem in the United States and globally, or otherwise negatively affect the value of ZEC held by the Trust.

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

Table of Contents

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.

Risk Factors Related to Digital Assets

The trading prices of many digital assets, including ZEC, have experienced extreme volatility in recent periods and may continue to do so. Extreme volatility in the future, including declines in the trading prices of ZEC, 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 ZEC, have experienced extreme volatility throughout their existence, including in recent periods, and may continue to do so. For instance, following significant increases throughout the majority of 2020, digital asset prices, including ZEC, experienced significant volatility throughout 2021 and 2022. This volatility became extreme in November 2022 when FTX Trading Ltd. (“FTX”), then a major digital asset trading platform, halted customer withdrawals. Additionally, on October 10, 2025, it was reported that a sharp decline in digital asset market prices triggered the liquidation of approximately $20 billion in leveraged positions across the digital asset industry. Any similar halting of withdrawals or liquidations across leveraged positions in the digital asset industry in the future could further impact trading prices. See “— Recent developments in the digital asset economy have led to extreme volatility and disruption in digital asset markets, a loss of confidence in participants of the digital asset ecosystem, significant negative publicity surrounding digital assets broadly and market-wide declines in liquidity.” Digital asset prices, including ZEC, have continued to fluctuate widely through the date of this Prospectus.

Extreme volatility in the future, including declines in the trading prices of ZEC, could have a material adverse effect on the value of the Shares and the Shares could lose all or substantially all of their value. Furthermore, negative perception, a lack of stability and standardized regulation in the digital asset economy may reduce confidence in the digital asset economy and may result in greater volatility in the price of ZEC and other digital assets, including a depreciation in 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 ZEC. For additional information that quantifies the volatility of ZEC prices and the value of the Shares.

Furthermore, changes in U.S. political leadership and economic policies may create uncertainty that materially affects the price of ZEC and the Trust’s Shares. For example, on March 6, 2025, President Trump signed an Executive Order to establish a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve and a United States Digital Asset Stockpile. Pursuant to this Executive Order, the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve will be capitalized with Bitcoin owned by the U.S. Department of the Treasury that was forfeited as part of criminal or civil asset forfeiture proceedings, and the Secretaries of Treasury and Commerce are authorized to develop budget-neutral strategies for acquiring additional Bitcoin, provided that those strategies impose no incremental costs on American taxpayers. Conversely, the Digital Asset Stockpile will consist of all digital assets other than Bitcoin owned by the U.S. Department of the Treasury that were forfeited in criminal or civil asset forfeiture proceedings, but the U.S. government will not acquire additional assets for the U.S. Digital Asset Stockpile beyond those obtained through such proceedings. The anticipation of a U.S. government-funded strategic cryptocurrency reserve had motivated large-scale purchases of certain digital assets in the expectation of the U.S. government acquiring such digital assets to fund such reserve, and the market price of such digital assets decreased significantly as a result of the ultimate content of the Executive Order. Any similar action or omission by the U.S. federal administration or other government authorities with respect to ZEC or other digital assets may negatively and significantly impact the price of ZEC and the Trust’s Shares.

Digital assets such as ZEC were only introduced within the past two decades, and the medium-to-long term value of the Shares is subject to a number of factors relating to the capabilities and development of blockchain technologies and to the fundamental investment characteristics of digital assets.

Table of Contents

technologies, such as the recency of their development, their dependence on the internet and other technologies, their dependence on the role played by users, developers and miners and the potential for malicious activity. For example, the realization of one or more of the following risks could materially adversely affect the value of the Shares:

•

Digital asset networks and related protocols are in the early stages of development. Given the recency of the development of digital asset networks and related protocols, digital assets and the underlying digital asset networks and related protocols may not function as intended and parties may be unwilling to use digital assets, which would dampen the growth, if any, of digital asset networks and related protocols.

•

The loss of access to a private key required to access a digital asset may be irreversible. If a private key is lost and no backup of the private key is accessible, or if the private key is otherwise compromised, the owner would be unable to access the digital asset corresponding to that private key.

•

Digital asset networks and related protocols are dependent upon the internet. A disruption of the internet or a digital asset network or related protocol, such as the Zcash Network, would affect the ability to transfer digital assets, including ZEC, and, consequently, their value.

•

The acceptance of software patches or upgrades to a digital asset network by a significant, but not overwhelming, percentage of the users and miners in a digital asset network, such as the Zcash Network, could result in a “fork” in such network’s blockchain, resulting in the operation of multiple separate blockchain networks.

•

Digital asset mining operations 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. Additionally, miners may be forced to cease operations during an electricity shortage or power outage.

•

Many digital asset networks face significant scaling challenges and are being upgraded with various features to increase the speed and throughput of digital asset transactions. These attempts to increase the volume of transactions may not be effective.

•

The open-source structure of many digital asset network protocols, such as the protocol for the Zcash Network, means that developers and other contributors are generally not directly compensated for their contributions in maintaining and developing such protocols. As a result, the developers and other contributors of a particular digital asset may lack a financial incentive to maintain or develop the network or may lack the resources to adequately address emerging issues. Alternatively, some developers may be funded by companies whose interests are at odds with other participants in a particular digital asset network. A failure to properly monitor and upgrade the protocol of the Zcash Network could damage that network.

•

Moreover, in the past, flaws in the source code for digital asset networks and related protocols 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 the Zcash Network 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. Quantum computing technology is an emerging phenomenon which, because it is still developing, makes it difficult to predict its ultimate effect on the future value of Zcash and other digital assets. However, if quantum computing technology is able to advance and significantly increase its capacity relative to the capacity of today’s leading quantum computers, it could potentially undermine the viability of many of the cryptographic algorithms used across the world’s information technology infrastructure, including the cryptographic algorithms used for digital assets like Zcash. If quantum computing is able to advance in that way, there is a risk that quantum computing could materially reduce the security assumptions underlying Zcash’s protocol and result in the cryptography underlying the Zcash Network becoming ineffective. If such is realized, it could compromise the security of the Zcash Network or allow a malicious actor to compromise the wallets holding Zcash owned by the Trust or others on the Zcash Network, which would result in losses to Shareholders. For example, if sufficiently powerful quantum computers are developed, they could use known quantum algorithms to derive private keys from publicly available public keys, potentially

Table of Contents

allowing malicious actors to forge transaction signatures and misappropriate Zcash. There is no guarantee that new quantum-proof architectures will be built and appropriate transitions will be implemented across the network at scale in a timely manner; any such changes could require the achievement of broad consensus within the Zcash Network community and may result in a fork (or multiple forks), and there can be no assurance that such consensus would be achieved or the changes implemented successfully. In such a scenario, the Zcash Network may not be able to transition to quantum-resistant cryptography in a timely or effective manner. In any of these circumstances, a malicious actor may be able to take the Trust’s ZEC, which would adversely affect the value of the Shares. Moreover, functionality of the Zcash Network may be negatively affected by such an exploit such that it is no longer attractive to users, thereby dampening demand for ZEC. Even if another digital asset other than ZEC were affected by similar circumstances, any reduction in confidence in the source code or cryptography underlying digital asset networks and related protocols generally could negatively affect the demand for digital assets and therefore adversely affect the value of the Shares. In any of these circumstances, a malicious actor may be able to take the Trust’s ZEC, which would adversely affect the value of the Shares. Moreover, functionality of the Zcash Network may be negatively affected by such an exploit such that it is no longer attractive to users, thereby dampening demand for ZEC. Even if another digital asset other than ZEC were affected by similar circumstances, any reduction in confidence in the source code or cryptography underlying digital asset networks and related protocols generally could negatively affect the demand for digital assets and therefore adversely affect the value of the Shares.

Moreover, because digital assets, including ZEC, have existed for a short period of time and are continuing to be developed, there may be additional risks to digital asset networks and related protocols that are impossible to predict as of the date of this Prospectus.

Digital assets represent a relatively new and rapidly evolving industry, and the value of the Shares depends on the acceptance of ZEC.

The first digital asset, Bitcoin, was launched in 2009. ZEC launched in 2016. In general, digital asset networks, including the Zcash Network and related protocols represent a new and rapidly evolving industry that is subject to a variety of factors that are difficult to evaluate. For example, the realization of one or more of the following risks could materially adversely affect the value of the Shares:

•

ZEC is only selectively accepted as a means of payment by retail and commercial outlets, and use of ZEC by consumers remains limited. Banks and other established financial institutions, whether voluntarily or in response to regulatory feedback, may refuse to process funds for ZEC transactions; process wire transfers to or from digital asset trading platforms, ZEC-related companies or service providers; or maintain accounts for persons or entities transacting in ZEC. As a result, the prices of ZEC are largely determined by speculators and miners, thus contributing to price volatility that makes retailers less likely to accept ZEC in the future. While the use of other digital assets, such as Bitcoin, to purchase goods and services from commercial or service businesses is developing, ZEC has not yet been accepted in the same manner because it has a slightly different purpose than Bitcoin.

•

Similarly, banks may not provide banking services, or may cut off banking services, to businesses that provide digital asset-related services or that accept digital assets as payment, which could dampen liquidity in the market and damage the public perception of digital assets generally or any one digital asset in particular, such as ZEC, and their or its utility as a payment system, which could decrease the price of digital assets generally or individually.

•

The prices of digital assets may be determined on a relatively small number of digital asset trading platforms by a relatively small number of market participants, many of whom are speculators or those intimately involved with the issuance of such digital assets, such as miners or developers, which could contribute to price volatility that makes retailers less likely to accept digital assets in the future.

•

Certain privacy-preserving features have been or are expected to be introduced to a number of digital asset networks. As the Zcash Network utilizes shielded transactions, any trading platforms or businesses that facilitate transactions in ZEC may be at an increased risk of criminal or civil lawsuits or of having banking services cut off if there is a concern that these features interfere with the performance of anti-money laundering duties and economic sanctions checks. Zcash developers continue to modify

Table of Contents

the Zcash Network’s privacy-preserving features, including through the introduction of the Ironwood shielded pool in July 2026, and future changes may heighten these risks.

•

Users, developers and miners may switch to or adopt certain digital asset networks or protocols at the expense of their engagement with other digital asset networks and protocols, which may negatively impact those networks and protocols, including the Zcash Network.

Beginning in the fourth quarter of 2021 and continuing throughout 2022 and through 2023, digital asset prices began falling precipitously. This has led to volatility and disruption in the digital asset markets and financial difficulties for several prominent industry participants, including digital asset trading platforms, hedge funds and lending platforms. For example, in the first half of 2022, digital asset lenders Celsius Network LLC and Voyager Digital Ltd. and digital asset hedge fund Three Arrows Capital each declared bankruptcy, and the stablecoin TerraUSD collapsed. These events caused a loss of confidence in participants in the digital asset ecosystem, negative publicity surrounding digital assets more broadly and market-wide declines in digital asset trading prices and liquidity.

Thereafter, in November 2022, FTX, the third largest digital asset trading platform by volume at the time, halted customer withdrawals amid rumors of the company’s liquidity issues and likely insolvency. Shortly thereafter, FTX’s CEO resigned and FTX and numerous affiliates of FTX filed for bankruptcy. The U.S. Department of Justice subsequently brought criminal charges, including charges of fraud, violations of federal securities laws, money laundering, and campaign finance offenses, against FTX’s former CEO and others. In November 2023, FTX’s former CEO was convicted of fraud and money laundering. Similar charges related to violations of anti-money laundering laws were brought in November 2023 against Binance and its former CEO.

In addition, several other entities in the digital asset industry filed for bankruptcy following FTX’s bankruptcy filing, such as BlockFi Inc. and Genesis Global Capital, LLC.

These events have also led to a substantial increase in regulatory and enforcement scrutiny of the industry as a whole and of Digital Asset Trading Platforms in particular, including from the Department of Justice, the SEC, the CFTC, the White House and Congress. For example, in June 2023, the SEC brought charges against Binance (the “Binance Complaint”) and Coinbase (the “Coinbase Complaint”), alleging that they solicited U.S. investors to buy, sell, and trade “crypto asset securities” through their unregistered trading platforms and operated unregistered securities exchanges, brokerages and clearing agencies. Binance subsequently announced that it would be suspending USD deposits and withdrawals on Binance and that it plans to delist its USD trading pairs. In addition, in November 2023, the SEC brought similar charges against Kraken (the “Kraken Complaint”), alleging that it operated as an unregistered securities exchange, brokerage and clearing agency. The Binance Complaint, the Coinbase Complaint and the Kraken Complaint have led, and may in the future lead, to further volatility in digital asset prices. Between February 2025 and May 2025, the SEC entered into court-approved joint stipulations to dismiss each of the Binance Complaint, Coinbase Complaint and the Kraken Complaint. The SEC has terminated its investigation or enforcement action into many other digital asset market participants including the Zcash Foundation in January 2026.

In January 2025, the SEC launched a crypto task force dedicated to developing a comprehensive and clear regulatory framework for digital assets led by Commissioner Hester Peirce. Subsequently, Commissioner Peirce announced a list of specific priorities to further that initiative, which included pursuing final rules related to a digital asset’s security status, a revised path to registered offerings and listings for digital asset-based investment vehicles, and clarity regarding digital asset custody, lending and staking.

Digital asset markets have also been negatively impacted by the failure of entities perceived to be integral to the digital asset ecosystem. For example, in March 2023, state banking regulators placed Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank into Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) receiverships. Also, in March 2023, Silvergate Bank announced plans to wind down and liquidate its operations. Because these banks were perceived to be the banks most open to providing services for the digital asset ecosystem in the United

Table of Contents

States, their failures may impact the willingness of banks (based on regulatory pressure or otherwise) to provide banking services to digital asset market participants. In addition, because these banks were perceived to be the banks most open to providing services for the digital asset ecosystem, their failure has caused a number of companies that provide digital asset-related services to be unable to find banks that are willing to provide them with such banking services. The inability to access banking services could negatively impact digital asset market participants and therefore the value of digital assets, including ZEC, and thus the Shares. In addition, although these events did not have an impact directly on the Trust or the Sponsor when these bank failures occurred, it is possible that a future closing of a bank with which the Trust or the Sponsor has a financial relationship could subject the Trust or the Sponsor to adverse conditions and pose challenges in finding an alternative suitable bank to provide the Trust or the Sponsor with bank accounts and banking services.

Events such as these that impact the wider digital asset ecosystem are continuing to develop and change at a rapid pace and it is not possible to predict at this time all of the risks that they may pose to the Sponsor, the Trust, their affiliates and/or the Trust’s third-party service providers, or on the digital asset industry as a whole

Continued disruption and instability in the digital asset markets as these events develop, including further declines in the trading prices and liquidity of ZEC, could have a material adverse effect on the value of the Shares and the Shares could lose all or substantially all of their value.

Digital asset networks face significant 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, permissionless blockchains generally face a tradeoff between security and scalability. One means through which digital asset networks that utilize public, permissionless blockchains achieve security is decentralization, meaning that no intermediary is responsible for securing and maintaining these systems. For example, a greater degree of decentralization of a public, permissionless blockchain generally means a given digital asset network is less susceptible to manipulation or capture. In practice, this typically means that every single node on a given digital asset network is responsible for securing the system by processing every transaction and maintaining a copy of the entire state of the network. As a result, a digital asset network that utilizes a public, permissionless blockchain may be limited in the number of transactions it can process by the computing capabilities of each single fully participating node. Many developers are actively researching and testing scalability solutions for public blockchains that do not necessarily result in lower levels of security or decentralization, such as off-chain payment channels and Layer 2 networks. Off-chain payment channels would allow parties to transact without requiring the full processing power of a blockchain. Layer 2 networks can increase the scalability of a blockchain by allowing users to transact on a second blockchain deployed on top of a “Layer 1” network.

As of [ ], 2026, the Zcash Network was capable of handling approximately [5] transactions per second, or approximately [40]% of the daily transaction volume of the Bitcoin Network. In an effort to increase the volume of transactions that can be processed on a given digital asset network, many digital asset networks are being upgraded with various features to increase the speed and throughput of digital asset transactions.

As corresponding increases in throughput lag behind growth in the use of digital asset networks, average transaction fees and settlement times may increase considerably. For example, the Bitcoin Network has been, at times, at capacity, which has led to increased transaction fees. Since January 1, 2023, Bitcoin average daily transaction fees have ranged from $0.31 per transaction on December 7, 2025, to as high as $124.17 per transaction, on April 20, 2024. As of [ ], 2026, Bitcoin average daily transaction fees stood at $[ ] per transaction. Since January 1, 2023, Zcash Network average daily transaction fees have ranged from $0.001 per transaction on February 26, 2023, to as high as $29.15 per transaction, on September 14, 2025. As of [ ], 2026, Zcash Network average daily transaction fees stood at $[ ] per transaction. Notwithstanding the increase in throughput on the Zcash Network as compared to the Bitcoin Network, settlement speeds on the Zcash Network have remained relatively constant since December 2019, when a network upgrade halved the target block interval to [75 seconds (approximately 1.25 minutes)], although they can vary depending on the size of the number of pending transactions waiting to be included in a block. Increased transaction fees and decreased settlement speeds could preclude certain uses for ZEC (e.g., micropayments), and could reduce demand for, and the price of ZEC, which could adversely impact the value of the Shares.

Table of Contents

There is no guarantee that any of the mechanisms in place or being explored for increasing the scale of settlement or throughput of Zcash Network transactions will be effective, or how long these mechanisms will take to become effective, which could adversely impact the value of the Shares.

Digital asset networks are developed by a diverse set of contributors and the perception that certain high-profile contributors will no longer contribute to the network could have an adverse effect on the market price of the related digital asset.

Digital asset networks and related protocols are often developed by a diverse set of contributors, but are also often developed by identifiable and high-profile contributors. The perception that certain high-profile contributors may no longer contribute to the applicable digital asset network or protocol may have an adverse effect on the market price of any related digital assets. For example, in June 2017, an unfounded rumor circulated that Ethereum protocol developer Vitalik Buterin had died. Following the rumor, the price of Ether decreased approximately 20% before recovering after Buterin himself dispelled the rumor. Some have speculated that the rumor led to the decrease in the price of Ether. In the event a high-profile contributor to the Zcash Network is perceived as no longer contributing to the Zcash Network due to death, retirement, withdrawal, incapacity, or otherwise, whether or not such perception is valid, it could negatively affect the price of ZEC, which could adversely impact the value of the Shares.

Digital assets may have concentrated ownership and large sales or distributions by holders of such digital assets could have an adverse effect on the market price of such digital assets.

As of [ ], 2026, the 100 largest unshielded ZEC wallets held approximately [ ]% of the ZEC in circulation. Moreover, it is possible that other persons or entities control multiple wallets that collectively hold a significant amount of ZEC, 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. Furthermore, because of Zcash’s privacy-preserving features, it is possible that some persons or entities have accumulated large positions of ZEC using shielded transactions, which would not be reflected in available token concentration data, and therefore ownership of ZEC may be more concentrated than is currently known. 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 ZEC.

It may be illegal now, or in the future, to acquire, own, hold, sell or use digital assets in one or more countries.

Countries such as China, India and Russia have previously taken regulatory action to prohibit certain activities relating to digital assets and may take additional steps to prohibit or otherwise limit the use of digital assets in the future. In addition, countries may impose new or existing regulatory regimes on digital assets that are inconsistent with their intended operation. The imposition of such regulatory regimes on digital assets may have wide ranging implications on the offer, sale, trading, clearing and use of such assets, which may impede their continued adoption. Such regulatory regimes may adversely affect an investment in the Shares.

For example, in the United States, the SEC has been active in asserting its jurisdiction over digital assets. Specifically, the SEC and its staff have taken the position that certain digital assets fall within the definition of a security under the U.S. federal securities laws, beginning with the June 2017 Report of Investigation that concluded that “DAO Tokens” were investment contracts, because they were issued with the purpose of raising funds for investing in digital assets. More recently, the bankruptcy filings of FTX, the third largest digital asset trading platform by volume at the time of its filing, and other bankruptcy filings of crypto companies throughout calendar year 2022 have increased the regulatory scrutiny of the digital asset industry. On June 5, 2023, the SEC charged each of Coinbase and Binance with operating its digital asset trading platform as an unregistered national securities exchange, broker and clearing agency, asserting that certain assets supported on each trading platform are securities. Furthermore, in August 2022, OFAC banned all U.S. citizens from using Tornado Cash, a digital asset protocol designed to obfuscate blockchain transactions, by adding certain Ethereum wallet addresses associated with the protocol to its Specially Designated Nationals list.

In addition, Congress continues to consider potential legislation designed to comprehensively regulate the digital asset industry in the U.S. If enacted, such new legislation could dramatically restructure the regulatory

Table of Contents

framework within which digital assets may be offered, sold, traded, cleared and used in the U.S. Such a restructuring could affect the viability of digital assets in the U.S. and accordingly adversely affect an investment in the Shares.

Changes in the governance of a digital asset network or protocol may not receive sufficient support from users and miners, which may negatively affect that digital asset network’s or protocol’s ability to grow and respond to challenges.

The governance of some digital asset networks and protocols, such as the Zcash Network, is generally by voluntary consensus and open competition. For such networks and protocols, there may be a lack of consensus or clarity on that network’s or protocol’s governance, which may stymie such network’s or protocol’s utility, adaptability and ability to grow and face challenges.

The foregoing notwithstanding, the underlying software for some digital asset networks and protocols, such as the Zcash Network, is informally or formally managed or developed by a group of core developers that propose amendments to the relevant network’s or protocol’s source code. Core developers’ roles may evolve over time, generally based on self-determined participation. If a significant majority of users and miners were to adopt amendments to the Zcash Network based on the proposals of such core developers, the Zcash Network would be subject to new source code that may adversely affect the value of ZEC.

As a result of the foregoing, it may be difficult to find solutions or marshal sufficient effort to overcome any future problems, especially long-term problems, on digital asset networks.

Risks Associated with ZEC, the Zcash Blockchain and the Zcash Network

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

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

•

An increase in the global ZEC supply that is publicly available for trading;

•

Manipulative trading activity on digital asset trading platforms, which, in many cases, are largely unregulated;

•

The adoption of ZEC as a medium of exchange, store-of-value or other consumptive asset and the maintenance and development of the open-source software protocol of the Zcash Network;

•

Forks in the Zcash Network;

•

Investors’ expectations with respect to interest rates, the rates of inflation of fiat currencies or ZEC, and digital asset trading platform rates;

•

Consumer preferences and perceptions of ZEC specifically and digital assets generally;

•

Fiat currency withdrawal and deposit policies on digital asset trading platforms;

•

The liquidity of digital asset markets and any increase or decrease in trading volume on digital asset markets;

•

Investment and trading activities of large investors that invest directly or indirectly in ZEC;

•

A “short squeeze” resulting from speculation on the price of ZEC, if aggregate short exposure exceeds the number of Shares available for purchase;

•

An active derivatives market for ZEC or for digital assets generally;

•

A determination that ZEC is a security or changes in ZEC’s status under the federal securities laws;

•

Monetary policies of governments, trade restrictions, currency devaluations and revaluations and regulatory measures or enforcement actions, if any, that restrict the use of ZEC as a form of payment or the purchase of ZEC on the digital asset markets;

Table of Contents

•

Global or regional political, economic or financial conditions, events and situations, such as the novel coronavirus outbreak;

•

Fees associated with processing a ZEC transaction and the speed at which ZEC transactions are settled on the Zcash Network;

•

Interruptions in service from or closures or failures of major digital asset trading platforms;

•

Decreased confidence in digital asset trading platforms due to the largely unregulated nature and lack of transparency surrounding the operations of digital asset trading platforms;

•

Increased competition from other forms of digital assets or payment services; and

•

The Trust’s own acquisitions or dispositions of ZEC, since there is no limit on the amount of ZEC that the Trust may acquire.

In addition, there is no assurance that ZEC will maintain its value in the long or intermediate term. In the event that the price of ZEC declines, the Sponsor expects the value of the Shares to decline proportionately.

The price of ZEC 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 ZEC has resulted, and may continue to result, in speculation regarding future appreciation in the price of ZEC, inflating and making the price of ZEC more volatile. As a result, ZEC 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.

The loss or destruction of a private key required to access ZEC may be irreversible. The Custodian’s loss of access to a private key associated with the Trust’s ZEC could adversely affect an investment in the Shares.

Transfers of ZEC among users are accomplished via ZEC transactions (i.e., sending ZEC from one user to another). The creation of a ZEC transaction requires the use of a unique numerical code known as a “private key.” In the absence of the correct private key corresponding to a holder’s particular ZEC, the ZEC is inaccessible. The custody of the Trust’s ZEC is handled by the Custodian, and the transfer of ZEC to and from Authorized Participants is directed by the Sponsor. The Sponsor has evaluated the procedures and internal controls of the Trust’s Custodian to safeguard the Trust’s ZEC holdings. If the Custodian’s internal procedures and controls are inadequate to safeguard the Trust’s ZEC holdings, and the Trust’s private key(s) is(are) lost, destroyed or otherwise compromised and no backup of the private key(s) is(are) accessible, the Trust will be unable to access its ZEC, which could adversely affect an investment in the Shares. In addition, if the Trust’s private key(s) is(are) misappropriated and the Trust’s ZEC holdings are stolen, the Trust could lose some or all of its ZEC holdings, which could adversely impact an investment in the Shares.

Competition from the emergence or growth of other digital assets could have a negative impact on the price of ZEC and adversely affect the value of the Shares.

As of [ ], 2026, ZEC was the [15th] largest digital asset by market capitalization as tracked by CoinMarketCap.com. As of [ ], 2026, the alternative digital assets tracked by CoinMarketCap.com, had a total market capitalization of approximately $[ ] billion (including the approximately $[ ] million market cap of ZEC), as calculated using market prices and total available supply of each digital asset, excluding stablecoins and tokens pegged to other assets. ZEC faces competition from a wide range of digital assets. For example, XMR, DASH, and ROSE are all focused on enhancing privacy. Many consortiums and financial institutions are also researching and investing resources into private or permissioned blockchain platforms rather than open platforms like the Zcash Network. In addition, ZEC is currently supported by fewer trading platforms than more established digital assets, such as Bitcoin and Ether, which could impact its liquidity. Competition from the emergence or growth of alternative digital assets could have a negative impact on the demand for, and price of, ZEC and thereby adversely affect the value of the Shares. Moreover, the growth of tokenized assets and other on-chain financial products that offer yield, stability, or regulatory clarity

Table of Contents

may also divert capital and user engagement away from the Zcash Network, which could negatively impact Zcash’s market demand and the value of the Shares.

Investors may also invest in ZEC through means other than the Shares, including through direct investments in ZEC and other potential financial vehicles, possibly including securities backed by or linked to ZEC and digital asset financial vehicles similar to the Trust. Market and financial conditions, and other conditions beyond the Sponsor’s control, may make it more attractive to invest in other financial vehicles or to invest in ZEC directly, which could limit the market for, and reduce the liquidity of, the Shares. In addition, to the extent digital asset financial vehicles other than the Trust tracking the price of ZEC are formed and represent a significant proportion of the demand for ZEC, large purchases or redemptions of the securities of these digital asset financial vehicles, or private funds holding ZEC, could negatively affect the Benchmark Price, the NAV, the NAV per Share, the value of the Shares, the Principal Market NAV and the Principal Market NAV per Share. Moreover, any reduced demand for Shares of the Trust may cause the Shares of the Trust to trade at a discount to the NAV per Share.

Competition from central bank digital currencies (“CBDCs”) and emerging payments initiatives involving financial institutions could adversely affect the price of ZEC and other digital assets.

Central banks in various countries have introduced digital forms of legal tender (“CBDCs”). 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. Central banks representing at least 130 countries 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 replace, ZEC and other cryptocurrencies as a medium of exchange or store of value. Central banks and other governmental entities have also announced cooperative initiatives and consortia with private sector entities, with the goal of leveraging blockchain and other technology to reduce friction in cross-border and interbank payments and settlement, and commercial banks and other financial institutions have also recently announced a number of initiatives of their own to incorporate new technologies, including blockchain and similar technologies, into their payments and settlement activities, which could compete with, or reduce the demand for, ZEC. As a result of any of the foregoing factors, the price of ZEC could decrease, which could adversely affect an investment in the Trust.

Prices of ZEC may be affected due to stablecoins (including Tether and USDC), 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 market for ZEC and other digital assets. 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 the value of a referenced asset, normally a fiat currency, such as the U.S. dollar. Although the prices of stablecoins are intended to be stable compared to their referenced asset, in many cases their prices fluctuate, sometimes significantly. This volatility has in the past impacted the prices of certain digital assets, and has at times caused certain stablecoins to lose their “peg” to the underlying fiat currency. Stablecoins are a relatively new phenomenon, and it is impossible to know all of the risks that they could pose to participants in the digital asset markets. 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 digital assets, raising their prices. Regulators have also charged stablecoin issuers with violations of law or otherwise required certain stablecoin issuers to cease certain operations. For example, on February 17, 2021, the New York Attorney General entered into an agreement with Tether’s operators, requiring them to cease any further trading activity with New York persons and pay $18.5 million in penalties for false and misleading statements made regarding the assets backing Tether. On October 15, 2021, the CFTC announced a settlement with Tether’s operators in which they agreed to pay $42.5 million in fines to settle charges that, among others, Tether’s claims that it maintained sufficient U.S. dollar reserves to back every Tether stablecoin in circulation with the “equivalent amount of corresponding fiat currency” held by Tether were untrue.

USDC is a reserve-backed stablecoin issued by Circle Internet Financial that is commonly used as a method of payment in digital asset markets, including the ZEC market. The issuer of USDC uses the Circle Reserve Fund to hold cash, U.S. Treasury bills, notes and other obligations issued or guaranteed as to principal and

Table of Contents

interest by the U.S. Department of the Treasury, and repurchase agreements secured by such obligations or cash, which serve as reserves backing USDC stablecoins. While USDC is designed to maintain a stable value at 1 U.S. dollar at all times, on March 10, 2023, the value of USDC fell below $1.00 (and remained below for multiple days) after Circle Internet Financial disclosed that $3.3 billion of the USDC reserves were held at Silicon Valley Bank, which had entered FDIC receivership earlier that day. Popular 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 or lead to outsized redemption requests, 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 ZEC. Because a large portion of the digital asset market still depends on stablecoins such as Tether and USDC, there is a risk that a disorderly de-pegging or a run on Tether or USDC could lead to dramatic market volatility in, and/or materially and adversely affect the prices of, digital assets more broadly.

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 that support stablecoins, could impact individuals’ willingness to trade on trading venues that rely on stablecoins and could impact the price of ZEC, and in turn, an investment in the Shares.

In addition, recent federal legislation establishing a regulatory framework for fully reserved payment stablecoins, such as the GENIUS Act, may increase the adoption of regulated stablecoins as digital payment instruments, which could reduce the use of Zcash for transactional purposes and thereby adversely affect the price of Zcash and the value of the Shares.

If the digital asset rewards for mining blocks and transaction fees for recording transactions on the Zcash Network are not sufficiently high to incentivize miners, or if certain jurisdictions continue to limit or otherwise regulate mining activities, miners may cease expending processing power or demand high transaction fees, which could negatively impact the value of ZEC and the value of the Shares.

If the digital asset rewards for mining blocks or the transaction fees for recording transactions on the Zcash Network are not sufficiently high to incentivize miners, or if certain jurisdictions continue to limit or otherwise regulate mining activities, miners may cease expending processing power to mine blocks and the security of the Zcash Blockchain could be compromised. For example, the realization of one or more of the following risks could materially adversely affect the value of the Shares:

•

Over the past several years, digital asset mining operations have evolved from individual users mining with computer processors, graphics processing units and first-generation application specific integrated circuit machines to “professionalized” mining operations using proprietary hardware or sophisticated machines. If the profit margins of digital asset mining operations are not sufficiently high, including due to an increase in electricity costs, digital asset miners are more likely to immediately sell digital assets earned by mining, resulting in an increase in liquid supply of that digital asset, which would generally tend to reduce that digital asset’s market price.

•

A reduction in the processing power expended by miners on the Zcash Network could increase the likelihood of a malicious actor or botnet obtaining control on the Zcash Network. See “— If a malicious actor or botnet obtains control of more than 50% of the processing power on the Zcash Network, or otherwise obtains control over the Zcash Network through its influence over core developers or otherwise, such actor or botnet could manipulate the Blockchain to adversely affect the value of the Shares or the ability of the Trust to operate.”

•

Miners have historically accepted relatively low transaction confirmation fees on most digital asset networks. If miners demand higher transaction fees for recording transactions in the Zcash Blockchain or a software upgrade automatically charges fees for all transactions on the Zcash Network, the cost of using ZEC may increase and the marketplace may be reluctant to accept ZEC as a means of payment. Miners may demand higher transaction fees for a variety of reasons, including to compensate for reductions in the reward received for validating a block as a result of 20% of each block reward being allocated to development-related purposes rather than to miners, the halving of ZEC creation

Table of Contents

approximately every four years in accordance with ZEC’s protocol, or the proposed Network Sustainability Mechanism, which would temporarily remove a portion of transaction fees from circulation.

•

Alternatively, miners could collude in an anti-competitive manner to reject low transaction fees on the Zcash Network and force users to pay higher fees, thus reducing the attractiveness of the Zcash Network. Higher transaction fees resulting from collusion or otherwise may adversely affect the attractiveness of the Zcash Network, the value of ZEC and the value of the Shares.

•

To the extent that any miners cease to record transactions that do not include the payment of a transaction fee in mined blocks or do not record a transaction because the transaction fee is too low, such transactions will not be recorded on the Zcash Blockchain until a block is mined by a miner who does not require the payment of transaction fees or is willing to accept a lower fee. Any widespread delays in the recording of transactions could result in a loss of confidence in the digital asset network.

•

If the Zcash Network is used to facilitate illicit activities or evade sanctions, businesses that facilitate transactions in ZEC could be at increased risk of criminal or civil lawsuits, or of having services cut off, which could negatively affect the price of ZEC and the value of the Shares.

Digital asset networks have in the past been, and may continue to be, used to facilitate illicit activities. If the Zcash Network is used to facilitate illicit activities or evade sanctions, businesses that facilitate transactions in ZEC could be at increased risk of potential criminal or civil lawsuits, or of having banking or other services cut off, and ZEC could be removed from digital asset trading platforms as a result of these concerns. Other service providers of such businesses may also cut off services if there is a concern that the Zcash Network is being used to facilitate crime. Any of the aforementioned occurrences could increase regulatory scrutiny of the Zcash Network and/or adversely affect the price of ZEC, the attractiveness of the Zcash Network and an investment in the Shares of the Trust.

The Trust and the Sponsor, acting on behalf of the Trust, directly interact with parties that are themselves subject to AML program requirements under the Bank Secrecy Act or similar laws.

The Authorized Participants are registered broker-dealers or financial institutions exempt from broker-dealer registration and therefore are subject to AML and countering the financing of terrorism obligations under the Bank Secrecy Act as administered by FinCEN and further overseen by the SEC and FINRA. In accordance with its regulatory obligations, the Authorized Participants conduct customer due diligence.

When the Trust and the Sponsor, acting on behalf of the Trust, buy, sell or deliver, as applicable, ZEC, they transact directly with financial institution counterparties that are subject to U.S. federal and/or state licensing requirements or similar laws in non-U.S. jurisdictions and maintain practices and policies designed to comply with AML and KYC regulations or similar laws in non-U.S. jurisdictions.

If the Sponsor, the Trust, or an Authorized Participant were nevertheless to transact with such a sanctioned entity, the Sponsor, the Trust, and such Authorized Participant would be at increased risk of potential criminal or civil lawsuits.

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

The Zcash Network operates using open-source protocols, meaning that any user can download the software, modify it and then propose that the users and miners of ZEC adopt the modification. When a modification is introduced and a substantial majority of users’ and miners’ consent to the modification, the change is implemented and the network remains uninterrupted. However, if less than a substantial majority of users and miners’ 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 Zcash Network,

Table of Contents

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 the Zcash Network running in parallel, yet lacking interchangeability. For example, in August 2017, Bitcoin “forked” into Bitcoin and a new digital asset, Bitcoin Cash, as a result of a several-year dispute over how to increase the rate of transactions that the Bitcoin Network can process. Some users of the original network may harbor ill will toward the new network, and vice versa. These users may attempt to negatively impact the use or adoption of the new network. A fork may also occur as a result of an unintentional or unanticipated software flaw in the various versions of otherwise compatible software that users run. Such a fork could lead to users and miners abandoning the digital asset with the flawed software. It is possible, however, that a substantial number of users and miners could adopt an incompatible version of the digital asset while resisting community-led efforts to merge the two chains. This could result in a permanent fork.

Forks may also occur as a digital asset network community’s response to a significant security breach. For example, in July 2016, Ethereum “forked” into Ethereum and a new digital asset, Ethereum Classic, as a result of the Ethereum network community’s response to a significant security breach. In June 2016, an anonymous hacker exploited a smart contract running on the Ethereum network to syphon approximately $60 million of Ether held by The DAO, a distributed 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 miners abandoning the digital asset with the flawed software. It is possible, however, that a substantial number of users and miners could adopt an incompatible version of the digital asset while resisting community-led efforts to merge the two chains. This could result in a permanent fork, as in the case of Ethereum and Ethereum Classic.

In addition, many developers have previously initiated hard forks in the Bitcoin blockchain to launch new digital assets, such as Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin Gold, Bitcoin Silver and Bitcoin Diamond, as well as the Bitcoin Cash blockchain to launch a new digital asset, Bitcoin Satoshi’s Vision. To the extent such digital assets compete with ZEC, such competition could impact demand for ZEC and could adversely impact the value of the Shares.

Furthermore, a hard fork can lead to new security concerns. For example, when the Ethereum and Ethereum Classic networks, two other digital asset networks, split in July 2016, replay attacks, in which transactions from one network were rebroadcast to nefarious effect on the other network, plagued Ethereum 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 mining power remaining on one network or migrating instead to the new forked network. After a hard fork, it may become easier for an individual miner or mining pool’s hashing power to exceed 50% of the processing power of a digital asset network that retained or attracted less mining power, thereby making digital asset networks that rely on proof-of-work more susceptible to attack.

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 ZEC 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

Table of Contents

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 Zcash 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, on November 15, 2020, certain Bitcoin Cash developers enacted a proposed update to the Bitcoin Cash Network requiring 8% of mined tokens to be redistributed to the developer pool, causing a hard fork, and created a network with a token labeled BCHA. For the days following the fork, the price of BCH fluctuated from $246.15 on November 15, 2020 to $256.55 on November 20, 2020. A clone may also adversely affect the price of ZEC at the time of announcement or adoption. 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. For the days 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. A clone may also adversely affect the price of ZEC at the time of announcement or adoption.

A future fork in or clone of the Zcash Network could adversely affect the value of the Shares or the ability of the Trust to operate.

In the event of a hard fork of the Zcash Network, the Sponsor will, if permitted by the terms of the Trust Agreement, use its discretion to determine which network should be considered the appropriate network for the Trust’s purposes, and in doing so may adversely affect the value of the Shares.

In the event of a hard fork of the Zcash Network, the Sponsor will, as permitted by the terms of the Trust Agreement, use its discretion to determine, in good faith, which digital asset network, among a group of incompatible forks of the Zcash Network, is generally accepted as the Zcash Network and should therefore be considered the appropriate digital asset 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 ZEC, users, services, businesses, miners and other constituencies, as well as the actual continued acceptance of, mining power on, and community engagement with, the Zcash Network. There is no guarantee that the Sponsor will choose the digital asset network or digital asset that is ultimately the most valuable fork, and the Sponsor’s decision may adversely affect the value of the Shares as a result. The Sponsor may also disagree with shareholders, security vendors and the Benchmark Provider on what is generally accepted as ZEC and should therefore be considered “ZEC” for the Trust’s purposes, which may also adversely affect the value of the Shares as a result.

In the event of a hard fork of the Zcash Blockchain, the Custodian’s operations may be interrupted or subject to additional security risks that could disrupt the Trust’s ability to process creations and redemptions of Shares or otherwise threaten the security of the Trust’s ZEC holdings.

In the event of a hard fork of the Zcash Blockchain, the Custodian may temporarily halt the ability of customers (including the Trust) to deposit, withdraw or transfer ZEC on the Custodian’s platform. Such a delay may be intended to permit the Custodian to assess the resulting versions of the Zcash Blockchain, to determine how best to securely “split” the ZEC from the forked asset, and to prevent malicious users from conducting “replay attacks” (i.e., broadcasting transactions on both versions of the forked networks to put the Custodian’s assets at risk). As a result, the Trust is likely to suspend creations and redemptions during a period in which the Custodian’s operations are halted.

In addition, any losses experienced by the Custodian due to a hard fork, including due to replay attacks or technological errors in assessing the fork, could have a materially adverse impact on an investment in the Shares.

Shareholders may not receive the benefits of any forks or “airdrops.”

In addition to forks, a digital asset, including ZEC, may become subject to a similar occurrence known as an “airdrop.” In an airdrop, the promotors of a new digital asset announce to holders of another digital asset that such holders will be entitled to claim a certain amount of the new digital asset for free, based on the fact that

Table of Contents

they hold such other digital asset. Such airdrops are not uncommon on the Zcash Blockchain. Airdrops may be conducted by sending a token to the holders of set amounts of ZEC or to particular public addresses on the Zcash Blockchain. Airdrops may involve a user being entitled to claim tokens on a decentralized application, second-layer network or entirely separate digital asset network. A user entitled to receive airdrops may be required to take little or significant actions in order to receive such airdropped tokens. Shareholders may not receive the benefits of any forks; the Trust may not choose, or be able, to participate in an airdrop; and the timing of receiving any benefits from a fork, airdrop or similar event is uncertain.

A right to receive any such benefit of a fork or airdrop is referred to as an “Incidental Right” and any digital asset acquired through an Incidental Right is known as an “IR Assets.” Pursuant to the Trust Agreement, the Trust has explicitly disclaimed all Incidental Rights and IR Assets. Such assets are not considered assets of the Trust at any point in time and will not be taken into account for purposes of determining the Trust’s NAV and the NAV per Share.

Pursuant to the Trust Agreement, to the extent that the Trust involuntarily receives such assets in a Trust wallet, it will, as soon as practicable and, if possible, immediately, distribute such assets to the Sponsor. Once such assets have been acquired, the Sponsor may take any lawful action necessary or desirable in connection with its acquisition thereof. In the event that the Sponsor decides to sell the Incidental Right(s) and/or IR Asset(s), it will seek to do so for cash. This may be a sale of the Incidental Right(s) and/or IR Asset(s) directly in exchange for cash, or in exchange for another digital asset that may subsequently be exchanged for cash. The Sponsor would then contribute that cash back to the Trust, which in turn would distribute the cash to the Depository Trust Company (“DTC”) to be distributed to Shareholders in proportion to the number of Shares owned.

Although the Sponsor intends, if possible, to arrange for the sale of any Incidental Right(s) and/or IR Asset(s) it receives from the Trust and subsequently contribute such cash proceeds back to the Trust, it is under no obligation to do so. There are likely to be operational, tax, securities law, regulatory, legal and practical issues that significantly limit, or prevent entirely, the Sponsor’s ability to realize a benefit from any such Incidental Right(s) and/or IR Asset(s). The Sponsor may choose to evaluate any such fork, airdrop or similar occurrence on a case-by-case basis in consultation with its legal advisers, tax consultants and custodian. In determining whether to attempt to acquire and/or retain any Incidental Right(s) and/or IR Asset(s), the Sponsor expects to take into consideration whatever factors it deems relevant in its discretion, including, without limitation:

•

the availability of a safe and practical way to take custody of the Incidental Right or IR Asset;

•

the cost or operational burden of taking possession and/or maintaining ownership of the Incidental Right or IR Asset and whether such cost or burden exceeds the benefits of owning such Incidental Rights or IR Asset or the proceeds that would be realized from a sale thereof;

•

whether there are any legal or regulatory restrictions on or risks or consequences arising from, or tax implications with respect to, the acceptance, retention, ownership, sale, transfer, abandonment, distribution or disposal or disposition of the Incidental Right or IR Asset, regardless of whether there is a safe and practical way to take custody of and secure such Incidental Right or IR Asset;

•

the existence of a suitable market into which the Incidental Right or IR Asset may be sold; and

•

whether claiming, owning, selling, or otherwise taking any action in respect of Incidental Right or IR Asset may create legal or regulatory risks, liability, or burdens of any kind for the Sponsor (including, without limitation, if such Incidental Right or IR Asset is, or may be, a security under federal securities laws or a commodity interest under the Commodity Exchange Act).

The Sponsor is under no obligation to realize any economic benefit from any Incidental Right(s) and/or IR Asset(s) it receives from the Trust. The Sponsor may instead determine, in its sole discretion, to abandon such Incidental Rights or IR Assets permanently and irrevocably for no consideration. Before the Trust claims any Incidental Right(s) and/or IR Asset(s) resulting from a fork or airdrop on the Zcash Blockchain (other than ZEC), the Trust would need to seek and obtain certain regulatory approvals, including an amendment to the Trust’s registration statement of which this Prospectus is a part and approval of an application by the Exchange to amend its listing rules.

Table of Contents

If a malicious actor or botnet obtains control of more than 50% of the processing power on the Zcash Network, or otherwise obtains control over the Zcash Network through its influence over core developers or otherwise, such actor or botnet could manipulate the Zcash Blockchain to adversely affect the value of the Shares or the ability of the Trust to operate.

If a malicious actor or botnet (a volunteer or hacked collection of computers controlled by networked software coordinating the actions of the computers) obtains a majority of the processing power on the Zcash Network, it may be able to alter the Zcash Blockchain on which transactions in ZEC rely by constructing fraudulent blocks or preventing certain transactions from completing in a timely manner, or at all. The malicious actor or botnet could also control, exclude or modify the ordering of transactions. Although the malicious actor or botnet may not be able to generate new digital assets or transactions using such control, it may be able to “double-spend” its own digital assets (i.e., spend the same tokens in more than one transaction) and prevent the confirmation of other users’ transactions for so long as it maintained control. To the extent that such malicious actor or botnet did not yield its control of the processing power on the Zcash Network or the ZEC community did not reject the fraudulent blocks as malicious, reversing any changes made to the Zcash Blockchain may not be possible. Further, a malicious actor or botnet could create a flood of transactions in order to slow down the Zcash Network.

Moreover, because of the Zcash Network’s privacy-preserving features, it is possible that certain pools have exceeded in the past, or may exceed now or in Zcash’s future, the 50% threshold on the Zcash Network. As of [ ], 2026, there are no known reports of malicious activity on, or control of, the Zcash Network, and while historically there have been mining pools that reportedly exceeded the 50% hashrate threshold, no mining pools on the Zcash Network are currently believed to have exceeded the threshold. Further, because of Zcash’s privacy-preserving features, it is possible that certain mining pools have exceeded in the past, or may exceed now or in the future, the 50% threshold on the Zcash Network. The possible crossing of the 50% threshold indicates a greater risk that a single mining pool or small group of mining pools, for example, could exert authority over the validation of ZEC transactions, and this risk is heightened if over 50% of the processing power on the network falls within the jurisdiction of a single governmental authority. If network participants, including the core developers and the administrators of mining pools, do not act to ensure greater decentralization of ZEC mining processing power, the feasibility of a malicious actor obtaining control of the processing power on the Zcash Network will increase, which may adversely affect the value of the Shares.

Furthermore, on June 2, 2018, the Horizen network, another zk-SNARKs-based protocol, was the target of a double-spend attack by an unknown actor that gained more than 50% of the processing power of the Horizen network. The attack was the result of delayed submission of blocks to the Horizen network. Any similar attacks on the Zcash Network could negatively impact the value of ZEC and the value of the Shares.

A malicious actor may also obtain control over the Zcash Network through its influence over core developers by gaining direct control over a core developer or an otherwise influential programmer. The less that the ZEC ecosystem grows, the greater the possibility that a malicious actor may be able to maliciously influence the Zcash Network in this manner will remain heightened.

Any name change and any associated rebranding initiative by the core developers of ZEC may not be favorably received by the digital asset community, which could negatively impact the value of ZEC 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.” Impact of any name change and any associated rebranding initiative on the Zcash Network or ZEC cannot be predicted. 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 ZEC and the value of the Shares.

Table of Contents

The cryptography used to enhance the privacy of transactions on the Zcash Network is new and could ultimately fail, or could be used to facilitate illicit activities, and businesses that facilitate transactions in ZEC could be at increased risk of criminal or civil lawsuits, or of having services cut off, which could negatively affect the price of ZEC and the value of the Shares.

The Zcash Network uses zk-SNARKs, which provide additional layers of confidentiality to transactions on the Zcash Network by protecting the amount and the recipient in ZEC transactions. This cryptography is new and could ultimately fail, resulting in less privacy than believed or no privacy at all, and could adversely affect one’s ability to complete transactions on any such digital asset network or otherwise adversely interfere with the integrity of the relevant blockchain. Digital asset networks have in the past been, and may continue to be, used to facilitate illicit activities. Because ZEC is a privacy-preserving digital asset, it is also subject to certain types of attacks that may go undetected. For example, on February 5, 2019, the team behind Zcash announced that it discovered a vulnerability in its zk-SNARK implementation on March 1, 2018 that was subsequently patched in connection with a network upgrade called “Sapling” in October 2018. More recently, in late May 2026, a security researcher at Shielded Labs identified a soundness vulnerability in the zero-knowledge proof circuit of one of the shielded pools, called Orchard, that had existed since Orchard’s launch in 2022 and could have been exploited to create counterfeit ZEC within the Orchard pool. The vulnerability was remediated through a coordinated emergency network upgrade in early June 2026, and Zcash developers have stated that there is no evidence that the vulnerability was exploited; however, due to the privacy-preserving nature of shielded pool transactions, there is no cryptographic method to determine conclusively whether the vulnerability was exploited prior to remediation. Following the disclosure of the vulnerability, the market price of ZEC declined by approximately [50]%, although it has since substantially recovered. On July 28, 2026, Zcash developers activated an additional network upgrade, called “Ironwood” (NU6.3), intended to restore the ability to verify the integrity of the ZEC supply and mitigate the risk of similar vulnerabilities. Ironwood restricted the Orchard pool so that it can no longer accept new deposits or internal transfers and introduced a new shielded pool, permitting ZEC to exit Orchard only through a “turnstile” mechanism that caps total withdrawals at the amount verifiably deposited, which is intended to prevent any counterfeit ZEC that may exist within Orchard from being removed. Migration from Orchard to Ironwood is not automatic, and a substantial amount of ZEC remained in the Orchard pool following Ironwood’s activation. [If counterfeit ZEC were created, holders whose ZEC remains in Orchard may be unable to withdraw all of their ZEC.] In addition, Zcash developers disclosed and remediated several other vulnerabilities in Zcash node software in March and April 2026.

Moreover, law enforcement agencies and other market participants have often relied on the transparency of blockchains to facilitate investigations and comply with laws, such as anti-money laundering and economic sanctions laws. Because of the privacy-enhancing features of the Zcash Network, law enforcement agencies and other market participants may have less visibility into transaction-level data, which may encourage bad actors to misuse the Zcash Network for such illicit purposes. As a result, businesses that facilitate transactions in ZEC may be at increased risk of potential criminal or civil lawsuits, or of having banking or other services cut off if there is a concern that these features interfere with the performance of anti-money laundering duties and economic sanctions checks. Since 2019, ZEC, along with several other privacy tokens including Monero, Dash, and Horizen have been delisted from multiple exchanges, including Coinbase UK, Bittrex, and OKX. In another example, in June 2023 Binance announced it would delist Zcash as well as other privacy coins including Monero, Dash, and Horizen in France, Spain, Italy and Poland, though retracted that announcement later that month, and in January 2024 announced that it would extend the “monitoring tag” to multiple privacy coins including ZEC, indicating those tokens are “at risk” of being delisted from the exchange globally. Although these digital asset trading platforms did not disclose the reasons for such delisting, and some digital asset trading platforms subsequently relisted ZEC, it is believed that they were the result of the privacy-enhancing features of the digital assets, and there is a risk that other digital asset trading platforms may remove ZEC from their platforms as a result of these concerns. Other service providers of such businesses may also cut off services if there is a concern that the Zcash Network is being used to facilitate crime. Any of the aforementioned occurrences could increase regulatory scrutiny of the Zcash Network and/or adversely affect the price of ZEC, the attractiveness of the Zcash Network and an investment in the Shares of the Trust.

When the Trust and the Sponsor, acting on behalf of the Trust, sell or deliver, as applicable, ZEC, they generally do not transact directly with counterparties other than the Authorized Participant, a liquidity provider or other similarly eligible financial institutions that are subject to federal and state licensing requirements and

Table of Contents

maintain practices and policies designed to comply with AML and KYC regulations. When an Authorized Participant or a liquidity provider sources ZEC in connection with the creation of the Shares or facilitates transactions in ZEC at the direction of the Trust or the Sponsor, it directly faces its counterparty and, in all instances, the Authorized Participant or the liquidity provider, as applicable, follow policies and procedures designed to ensure that it knows the identity of its counterparty. The Authorized Participant is a registered broker-dealer and therefore subject to AML and countering the financing of terrorism obligations under the Bank Secrecy Act as administered by FinCEN and further overseen by the SEC and FINRA.

In accordance with its regulatory obligations, the Authorized Participant, or a liquidity provider, conducts customer due diligence and enhanced due diligence on its counterparties, which enables it to determine each counterparty’s AML and other risks and assign an appropriate risk rating.

As part of its counterparty onboarding process, each of the Authorized Participant and a liquidity provider uses third-party services to screen prospective counterparties against various watch lists, including the Specially Designated Nationals List of the Treasury Department Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”) and countries and territories identified as non-cooperative by the Financial Action Task Force. If the Sponsor, the Trust, the Authorized Participant or a liquidity provider were nevertheless to transact with such a sanctioned entity, the Sponsor, the Trust, the Authorized Participant and a liquidity provider would be at increased risk of potential criminal or civil lawsuits.

Digital asset trading platforms may be exposed to security breaches.

The nature of the assets held at ZEC trading platforms makes them appealing targets for hackers and a number of ZEC trading platforms have been victims of cybercrimes. Over the past several years, some digital asset trading platforms have been closed due to security breaches. In many of these instances, the customers of such digital asset trading platforms were not compensated or made whole for the partial or complete losses of their account balances in such digital asset trading platforms. While, generally speaking, smaller digital asset trading platforms are less likely to have the infrastructure and capitalization that make larger digital asset trading platforms more stable, larger digital asset trading platforms 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 trading platforms could be subject to abrupt failure with consequences both for users of digital asset trading platforms and for 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 bitcoins worth around $78 million were stolen from Bitfinex, a large digital asset exchange. The value of bitcoin and other digital assets immediately decreased by more than 10% following reports of the theft at Bitfinex. In July 2017, 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 December 2017, Yapian, the operator of Seoul-based cryptocurrency 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 January 2018, the Japanese digital asset trading platform, Coincheck was hacked, resulting in losses of approximately $535 million, and in February 2018, the Italian digital asset trading platform Bitgrail was hacked, resulting in approximately $170 million in losses. In May 2019, one of the world’s largest digital asset trading platforms, Binance, was hacked, resulting in losses of approximately $40 million.

Digital asset trading platforms 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 manipulation in the ZEC market generally, including, among others, (1) “wash trading”; (2) persons with a dominant position in ZEC manipulating ZEC pricing;

Table of Contents

(3) hacking of the Zcash Blockchain and trading platforms; (4) malicious control of the Zcash Blockchain; (5) trading based on material, nonpublic information (for example, plans of market participants to significantly increase or decrease their holdings in ZEC, new sources of demand for ZEC, etc.) or based on the dissemination of false and misleading information; (6) manipulative activity involving purported “stablecoins”; and (7) fraud and manipulation at ZEC trading platforms.

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

In 2019, there were reports claiming that 80.95% of bitcoin trading volume on digital asset trading platforms 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 trading platforms by volume at the time, halted customer withdrawals amid rumors of the company’s liquidity issues and likely insolvency, which were subsequently corroborated by its CEO. Shortly thereafter, FTX’s CEO resigned and FTX and many of its affiliates filed for bankruptcy in the United States, while other affiliates have entered insolvency, liquidation, or similar proceedings around the globe, following which the U.S. Department of Justice brought criminal fraud and other charges, and the SEC and CFTC brought civil securities and commodities fraud charges, against certain of FTX’s and its affiliates’ senior executives, including its former CEO. Around the same time, there were reports that approximately $300 million to $600 million of digital assets were removed from FTX. 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 digital asset trading platform’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 ZEC, may adversely impact pricing trends in ZEC markets broadly, as well as an investment in Shares of the Trust.

Digital asset trading platforms may be exposed to wash trading.

Digital asset trading platforms 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 a trading platform’s 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 trading platforms on which to list their tokens. 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 on digital asset trading platforms, and any other fraudulent or manipulative acts and practices, could adversely affect the value of ZEC and/or negatively affect the market perception of ZEC.

Table of Contents

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

Digital asset trading platforms may be exposed to front-running.

Digital asset trading platforms 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 trading platforms. 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 tokens at a low price and later sell them at a higher price while simultaneously exiting the position. To the extent that front-running occurs, it may result in investor frustrations and concerns as to the price integrity of digital asset trading platforms and digital assets more generally.

Momentum pricing.

The market price of ZEC is not based on any kind of claim, nor is it 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 price of ZEC 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, ZEC 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 ZEC and, in turn, an investment in the Trust.

The price of ZEC 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 ZEC has previously resulted, and may continue to result, in speculation regarding future appreciation or depreciation in the price of ZEC, 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 price of ZEC will fall to a fraction of its current value, or even to zero. ZEC 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.

Irrevocable nature of blockchain-recorded transactions.

ZEC transactions recorded on the Zcash Blockchain 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 Zcash Blockchain’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 ZEC or a theft of ZEC generally will not be reversible, and the Trust may not be capable of seeking compensation for any such transfer or theft. It is possible that, through computer or human error, or through theft or criminal action, the Trust’s ZEC could be transferred from custody accounts in incorrect quantities or to unauthorized third parties. To the extent that the Trust is unable to seek a corrective transaction with such third party or is incapable of identifying the third party that has received the Trust’s ZEC through error or theft, the Trust will be unable to revert or otherwise recover incorrectly transferred ZEC. To the extent that the Trust is unable to seek redress for such error or theft, such loss could adversely affect the value of the Shares.

A disruption of the internet may affect Zcash Blockchain operations, which may adversely affect the ZEC industry and an investment in the Trust.

The Zcash Blockchain relies on the internet. A significant disruption of internet connectivity could disrupt the Zcash Blockchain’s functionality until such disruption is resolved. A disruption in the internet could

Table of Contents

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.

Digital assets are also susceptible to border gateway protocol hijacking (“BGP hijacking”). Such an attack can be a very effective way for an attacker to intercept traffic en route to a legitimate destination. BGP hijacking impacts the way different nodes and miners are connected to one another to isolate portions of them from the remainder of the network, which could lead to a risk of the network allowing double-spending and other security issues. If BGP hijacking occurs on the Zcash Blockchain, participants may lose faith in the security of ZEC, which could affect ZEC’s value and consequently the value of the Shares.

Any internet failures or internet connectivity-related attacks that impact the ability to transfer ZEC could have a material adverse effect on the price of ZEC and the value of an investment in the Shares.

As a result of the foregoing, it may be difficult to find solutions or marshal sufficient effort to overcome any future problems, especially long-term problems, on digital asset networks.

Decentralized governance of the Zcash Blockchain could have a negative impact on the performance of the Trust.

Governance of decentralized networks, such as the Zcash Blockchain, is achieved through voluntary consensus and open competition. In other words, the Zcash Blockchain has no central decision-making body or clear manner in which participants can come to an agreement other than through overwhelming consensus. The lack of clarity on governance may adversely affect ZEC’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. To the extent lack of clarity in corporate governance of the Zcash Blockchain leads to ineffective decision-making that slows development and growth, the value of the Shares may be adversely affected.

Flaws in source code.

In the past, flaws in the source code for digital asset networks and related protocols 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 ZEC 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 ZEC, which would adversely affect the value of the Shares. Moreover, functionality of the Zcash Network may be negatively affected by such an exploit such that it is no longer attractive to users, thereby dampening demand for ZEC. Even if another digital asset other than ZEC were affected by similar circumstances, any reduction in confidence in the source code or cryptography underlying digital asset networks and related protocols generally could negatively affect the demand for digital assets and therefore adversely affect the value of the Shares.

Table of Contents

Congestion or delay in the Zcash Network may delay purchases or sales of ZEC by the Trust.

Increased transaction volume could result in delays in the recording of transactions due to congestion in the Zcash Network. Moreover, unforeseen system failures, disruptions in operations, or poor connectivity may also result in delays in the recording of transactions on the Zcash Network. Any delay in the Zcash Network could affect an Authorized Participant’s ability to buy or sell ZEC at an advantageous price resulting in decreased confidence in ZEC. 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, ZEC and the value of the Trust would be adversely affected.

Risks Associated with Investing in the Trust

Investment-Related Risks.

Investing in ZEC and, consequently, the Trust, is speculative. The price of ZEC is volatile, and market movements of ZEC are difficult to predict. Supply and demand changes rapidly and are 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 may not always correspond to the market price of ZEC.

The NAV of the Trust will change as fluctuations occur in the market price of the Trust’s ZEC 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 ZEC.

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 ZEC per share.

Different from directly owning ZEC.

The performance of the Trust will not reflect the specific return an investor would realize if the investor actually held or purchased ZEC directly. The differences in performance may be due to factors such as fees, transaction costs, and index tracking risk. Investors will also forgo certain rights conferred by owning ZEC directly, such as the right to claim air drops. See “Risks Associated with ZEC, the Zcash Blockchain and the Zcash Network — Shareholders may not receive the benefits of any forks or ‘airdrops.’”

Index tracking risk.

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, differences in the timing of the addition or removal of Constituent Platforms underlying the Pricing Benchmark or the cost to the Trust of complying with various new or existing regulatory requirements.

Liquidity risk.

The Trust’s and the Authorized Participants’ ability to buy or sell ZEC may be adversely affected by limited trading volume, lack of a market maker, or legal restrictions. It is also possible that a ZEC spot market or governmental authority may suspend or restrict trading in ZEC 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 ZEC or other issues affecting counterparties. ZEC is a

Table of Contents

new asset with a very limited trading history. Therefore, the markets for ZEC may be less liquid and more volatile than other markets for more established products.

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

The value of the Shares may be influenced by a variety of factors unrelated to the price of ZEC and the ZEC 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:

•

Unanticipated problems or issues with respect to the mechanics of the Trust’s operations and the trading of the Shares may arise, in particular due to the fact that the mechanisms and procedures governing the creation and offering of the Shares and storage of ZEC have been developed specifically for this product;

•

The Trust could experience difficulties in operating and maintaining its technical infrastructure, including in connection with expansions or updates to such infrastructure, which are likely to be complex and could lead to unanticipated delays, unforeseen expenses and security vulnerabilities;

•

The Trust could experience unforeseen issues relating to the performance and effectiveness of the security procedures used to protect the Trust’s account with the Custodian, or the security procedures may not protect against all errors, software flaws or other vulnerabilities in the Trust’s technical infrastructure, which could result in theft, loss or damage of its assets; or

•

Service providers may decide to terminate their relationships with the Trust due to concerns that the introduction of privacy enhancing features to the Zcash Network may increase the potential for ZEC to be used to facilitate crime, exposing such service providers to potential reputational harm.

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

Authorized Participants’, or its Authorized Participant Designee’s, buying and selling activity associated with the creation and redemption of Baskets may adversely affect an investment in the Shares.

Authorized Participants may take long or short positions in ZEC for hedging or other purposes and in some cases those positions may be substantial relative to the ZEC market as a whole. Authorized Participants’, or an Authorized Participant Designee’s, purchase of ZEC in connection with Basket creation orders may cause the price of ZEC to increase, which will result in higher prices for the Shares. Increases in the ZEC prices may also occur as a result of ZEC purchases by other market participants who attempt to benefit from an increase in the market price of ZEC when baskets are created. The market price of ZEC may therefore decline immediately after Baskets are created.

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

In addition to the effect that purchases and sales of ZEC by Authorized Participants, or their Authorized Participant Designee, may have on the price of ZEC, sales and purchases of ZEC by similar investment vehicles (if developed) could impact the price of ZEC. If the price of ZEC declines, the trading price of the Shares will generally also decline.

The inability of Authorized Participants and market makers to hedge their ZEC 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 purchase and redemption orders. To the extent Authorized Participants and market makers are unable to hedge their exposure due to market conditions (e.g., insufficient ZEC liquidity in the market, inability to locate an appropriate hedge counterparty, extreme volatility in the price of ZEC, wide spreads between prices quoted on different ZEC trading platforms, the closing of ZEC trading platforms due to fraud, failures, security breaches or otherwise etc.), such conditions may make it difficult to purchase or redeem Baskets or cause them to not create or redeem Baskets. In addition, the hedging mechanisms employed by Authorized

Table of Contents

Participants and market makers to hedge their exposure to ZEC 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

Arbitrage transactions intended to keep the price of Shares closely linked to the price of ZEC 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 Shares (which depend on timely transfers of ZEC to and by the Custodian) encounter any unanticipated difficulties due to, for example, the price volatility of ZEC, the insolvency, business failure or interruption, default, failure to perform, security breach, or other problems affecting the Custodian, the closing of ZEC trading platforms due to fraud, failures, security breaches or otherwise, or network outages or congestion, spikes in transaction fees demanded by miners, or other problems or disruptions affecting the Zcash 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 ZEC may not take the risk that, as a result of those difficulties, they may not be able to realize the profit they expect.

Alternatively, in the case of a network outage or other problems affecting the Zcash Network, the processing of transactions on the Zcash Blockchain may be disrupted, which in turn may prevent ZEC Trading Counterparties from depositing or withdrawing ZEC from their custody accounts, 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 ZEC and may fall or otherwise diverge from NAV. Furthermore, in the event that the market for ZEC should become relatively illiquid and thereby materially restrict opportunities for arbitraging by delivering ZEC in return for Baskets, the price of Shares may diverge from the price of ZEC.

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

To the extent Authorized Participants effectuate creations and redemptions for cash, there may be delays in trade execution due to potential operational issues arising from implementing a cash creation and redemption model, which involves more complex operational steps (and therefore execution risk) than in-kind creation and redemption models. 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 Participant is responsible for the dollar cost of such difference in prices, Authorized Participants could default on their obligations to the Trust, or such potential risks and costs could lead 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 ZEC, 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 ZEC, 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 to buy Shares at a price higher than the value of the underlying ZEC held by the Trust or sell Shares at a price lower than the value of the underlying ZEC held by the Trust, causing Shareholders to suffer losses.

The Authorized Participants serve in such capacity for several competing exchange-traded ZEC products, which could adversely affect the Trust’s operations and the secondary market for the Shares.

Only an Authorized Participant may engage in creation or redemption transactions directly with the Trust. Some or all of the Trust’s Authorized Participants are expected to serve as authorized participants or market makers for one or more exchange-traded ZEC products that compete with the Trust. This may make it more difficult to engage or retain Authorized Participants for the Trust. Furthermore, because there is no obligation on the part of the Authorized Participants to engage in creation and redemption or market making activities

Table of Contents

with respect to the Trust’s Shares, decisions by the Authorized Participants to not engage with the Trust or its Shares may result in a decline in the liquidity of the Shares and the price of the Shares may fluctuate independently of the price of Trust’s ZEC (i.e., at a greater premium or discount to the Trust’s NAV).

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. Multiple thefts of ZEC and other digital assets from other holders have occurred in the past. Because of the pseudonymous nature of the Zcash Blockchain, thefts can be difficult to trace, which may make ZEC a particularly attractive target for theft. Cyber security 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 Marketing Agent, the Administrator, or the Custodian) 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 cyber-security breaches of those technological or information systems. The Sponsor believes that the Trust’s ZEC held in the Trust’s accounts with the Custodian will be an appealing target to hackers or malware distributors seeking to destroy, damage or steal the Trust’s ZEC or private keys and will only become more appealing as the Trust’s assets grow. While the Trust, the Sponsor and the Custodian have implemented procedures to identify and or stop new security threats and expect to adapt to technological changes in the digital asset industry, to the extent such efforts are unsuccessful the Trust’s ZEC may be subject to theft, loss, destruction or other attack.

Additionally, access to the Trust’s ZEC could be restricted by natural events (such as an earthquake or flood) or human actions (such as a terrorist attack). The Sponsor has evaluated the security procedures in place for safeguarding the Trust’s ZEC. 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.

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 Custodian, or otherwise, and, as a result, an unauthorized party may obtain access to the Trust’s account with the Custodian, the private keys (and therefore ZEC) or other data of the Trust. Additionally, outside parties may attempt to fraudulently induce employees of the Sponsor, the Custodian, 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 Custodian may be unable to anticipate these techniques or implement adequate preventative measures.

An actual or perceived breach of the Trust’s accounts with the Custodian 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 and the Trust’s service providers have established business continuity plans and systems that they respectively believe 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, see “Liability and Indemnification” and “Material Contracts” below.

If the Trust’s holdings of ZEC are lost, stolen or destroyed under circumstances rendering a party liable to the Trust, the responsible party may not have the financial resources 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

Table of Contents

claim of the Trust. Similarly, as noted below, the Trust’s Custodian has limited liability to the Trust, which could adversely affect the Trust’s ability to seek recovery from them, even when the Custodian’s actions or failure to act are the cause of the Trust’s loss.

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 ZEC. If an uninsured loss occurs or a loss exceeds policy limits, the Trust could lose all of its assets.

The Trust’s risk management processes and policies may prove to not be adequate to prevent any loss of the Trust’s ZEC.

Custody of digital assets presents inherent and unique risks relating to access loss, theft and means of recourse in such scenarios. The Sponsor is continuing to monitor and evaluate the Trust’s risk management processes and policies and believes that the current risk management processes and procedures are reasonably designed and effective. The Trust does not normally interact with any digital asset trading platforms, and the Trust’s ZEC is held in a cold storage wallet with the Custodian, an affiliate of the Sponsor and a New York State-chartered limited liability company, pursuant to an express custodial relationship. The Sponsor believes that the security procedures that the Sponsor and the Custodian utilize, such as hardware redundancy, segregation and offline data storage (i.e., the maintenance of data on computers and/or storage media that is not directly connected to or accessible from the internet and/or networked with other computers, also known as “cold storage”) protocols are reasonably designed to safeguard the Trust’s ZEC from theft, loss, destruction or other issues relating to hackers and technological attack. Despite the number of security procedures that the Sponsor and Custodian employ, it is impossible to guarantee the prevention of any loss due to a security breach, software defect, act of God, pandemic or riot that may be borne by the Trust. Notwithstanding the above, the Sponsor and the Custodian are responsible for their own gross negligence, willful misconduct or bad faith. In the event that the Trust’s risk management processes and policies prove to not be adequate to prevent any loss of the Trust’s ZEC and such loss is not covered by insurance or is otherwise recoverable, the value of the Shares will decrease as a result and investors would experience a decrease in the value of their investment.

The Trust’s Custodian could become insolvent or become subject to a receivership or bankruptcy proceeding, which may result in a loss of or delay in access to Trust assets.

If the Custodian becomes insolvent or subject to a receivership or bankruptcy proceeding, the Trust’s operations may be adversely affected, and there is a risk that the insolvency, receivership or bankruptcy of the Custodian 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.

The Trust’s assets will be held in one or more accounts maintained for the Trust by the Custodian. The Custodian is an affiliate of the Sponsor and a New York State-chartered limited liability company that operates under the direct supervision and regulatory authority of the NYSDFS.

The Custodial Services Agreement provides that the parties treat the Trust’s ZEC credited to the Trust as financial assets under Article 8 of the New York Uniform Commercial Code (“Article 8”), in addition to stating that the Custodian will serve as a securities intermediary with respect to such assets. Further, the Custodian has agreed to hold Trust assets for the benefit of the Trust as the entitlement holder and such assets will not be commingled with the Custodian’s proprietary assets. While other types of assets held in a similarly-segregated manner have been deemed not to be part of the asset custodian’s bankruptcy estate under various regulatory regimes, bankruptcy courts have not yet fully addressed the appropriate treatment of custodial holdings of digital assets and any such determination may be highly fact-specific.

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 or receivership proceeding of an entity such as the Custodian, in the event of an insolvency, receivership or bankruptcy proceeding with respect to the Custodian, there is a risk that the Trust’s assets may be considered the property of the bankruptcy estate of the Custodian, and that customers of the Custodian — including the Trust — may be at risk of being treated as general unsecured creditors of the Custodian and subject to the risk of total loss or markdowns on value of such assets. Moreover, even if the Trust’s assets ultimately are not treated as part of the Custodian’s bankruptcy estate, the automatic stay could apply until the bankruptcy court made such a determination, and the limited

Table of Contents

precedent and fact-dependent nature of the determination could delay or preclude the return of such assets to the Trust. Further, the bankruptcy court may permit the Custodian to retain possession or custody of their customers’ assets until any claims the estate may have against the customers (including the Trust) are resolved.

An actual or perceived business failure or interruption, default, failure to perform security breach or other problems affecting the Custodian 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 change the custodial arrangements described in this Prospectus at any time without notice to Shareholders.

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

The Cash Custodian is necessary to facilitate the creation and redemption of Baskets (in exchange for cash subscriptions by Authorized Participants, or in exchange for redemptions of Shares by Authorized Participants), and other cash movements, including in connection with the purchase of ZEC by the Sponsor to effectuate subscriptions for cash and the selling of ZEC to effect redemptions for cash and, to the extent applicable, other Trust expenses, and in extraordinary circumstances, to effect the liquidation of the Trust’s ZEC. The Trust relies on the Cash Custodian to hold any cash related to the purchase or sale of ZEC. To the extent that the Trust or Sponsor face difficulty establishing or maintaining banking relationships, the loss of the Trust’s banking partners, including the Cash Custodian, or the imposition of operational restrictions by these banking partners and the inability of the Trust to utilize other financial institutions may result in a disruption of creation and redemption activity of the Trust, or cause other operational disruptions or adverse effects for the Trust. In the future, it is possible that the Trust could be unable to establish accounts at new banking partners, or that the banks with which the Trust is able to establish relationships may not be as large or well-capitalized or subject to the same degree of prudential supervision as the existing providers.

The Trust could also suffer losses in the event that a bank in which the Trust holds customer cash, including the Cash Custodian, fails, becomes insolvent, enters receivership, is taken over by regulators, enters financial distress, or otherwise suffers adverse effects to its financial condition or operational status. Recently, some banks have experienced financial distress. If the Cash Custodian were to experience financial distress or its financial condition is otherwise affected, the Cash Custodian’s ability to provide services to the Trust could be affected. Moreover, the future failure of the Cash Custodian or other bank at which the Trust maintains cash could result in losses to the Trust, to the extent the balances are not covered by deposit insurance. As a result, the Trust could suffer losses.

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

Unlike other funds that may invest in diversified assets, the Trust’s investment strategy is concentrated in a single asset within a single asset class. This concentration maximizes the degree of the Trust’s exposure to a variety of market risks associated with ZEC and digital assets. By concentrating its investment strategy solely in ZEC, any losses suffered as a result of a decrease in the price of ZEC 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.

Table of Contents

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) Authorized Participants’ ability to purchase and sell ZEC in an efficient manner to effectuate creation and redemption orders; (2) transaction fees associated with the Zcash Network; (3) the ZEC 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 ZEC trades, resulting in the inability of Authorized Participants to execute intended portfolio transactions; and (6) accounting standards.

The amount of ZEC represented by the Shares will decline over time.

Each outstanding Share represents a fractional, undivided interest in the ZEC held by the Trust. The Trust does not generate any income and transfers ZEC to pay for the Sponsor Fee and other liabilities. Therefore, the amount of ZEC represented by each Share will gradually decline over time. Assuming a constant ZEC price, the trading price of the Shares is expected to gradually decline relative to the price of ZEC as the amount of ZEC represented by the Shares gradually declines.

Shareholders should be aware that the gradual decline in the amount of ZEC 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 ZEC.

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

The Trust and the Sponsor face competition with respect to the creation of competing products. The Sponsor’s competitors may have greater financial, technical and human resources than the Sponsor. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be effective competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. In addition, the timing of the Trust in reaching the market and the fee structure of the Trust relative to similar products may have a detrimental effect on the scale and sustainability of the Trust. The Sponsor’s competitors may be able to launch similar products to the Trust before the launch of the Trust due to, for example, the satisfaction of all regulatory requirements required to launch before the Trust is able to do so. Accordingly, the Sponsor’s competitors may commercialize a product involving ZEC more rapidly or effectively than the Sponsor is able to, which could adversely affect the Sponsor’s competitive position, the likelihood that the Trust will achieve initial market acceptance and the Sponsor’s ability to generate meaningful revenues from the Trust (i.e., revenues that would commercially justify the Sponsor continuing to devote time and resources to the operation of the Trust), which in turn could cause the Sponsor to dissolve and terminate the Trust.

In addition, to the extent that the Trust incurs transaction expenses in connection with the creation and redemption process, litigation expenses, indemnification obligations under the Trust’s service provider agreements and other Extraordinary Expenses that are not Sponsor-paid Expenses, such expenses will be borne by the Trust. To the extent that the Trust fails to attract a sufficiently large amount of investors, the effect of such expenses on the value of the Shares may be significantly greater than would be the case if the Trust had attracted more assets.

The Sponsor may need to find and appoint replacement custodians quickly, which could pose a challenge to the safekeeping of the Trust’s ZEC.

The Sponsor could decide to replace the Custodian as the custodian of the Trust’s ZEC, or the Custodian may cease providing the custodial services necessary for the Trust’s normal operations. For example, the Trust’s custodian may become insolvent and enter bankruptcy or receivership proceedings, or discontinue business operations with little or no warning to the Sponsor or the Trust. Transferring maintenance responsibilities of the Trust’s account with the Custodian to another party will likely be complex and could subject the Trust’s ZEC 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.

Table of Contents

The Sponsor may not be able to find a party willing to serve as custodian under the same terms as the current Custodial Services Agreements. To the extent that Sponsor is not able to find a suitable party willing to serve as custodian, the Sponsor may be required to terminate the Trust and liquidate the Trust’s ZEC.

Limited recourse.

The Custodian has limited liability for any loss, claim, or damage to the Trust, impairing the ability of the Trust to recover losses relating to its ZEC and any recovery may be limited, except to the extent of a final, non-appealable judicial determination that such loss, claim or damage directly resulted from the gross negligence, willful misconduct or fraud of the Custodian. In addition, the Custodian is generally not liable for any loss caused, directly or indirectly, by the failure of the Trust to adhere to the Custodian’s policies and procedures that have been disclosed to the Trust, a force majeure event or certain actions determined by the Custodian to be necessary or advisable to inspect and protect the security of the Trust’s assets. Furthermore, the Custodian is generally not liable for a loss caused, directly or indirectly, by any failure or delay to act by any service provider to the Custodian or any system failure (other than a system failure caused by the gross negligence, willful misconduct or fraud of the Custodian or the Custodian’s affiliates), that prevents the Custodian from fulfilling its obligations.

Under the Trust Agreement, the Trustee and the Sponsor will not be liable for any liability or expense incurred absent fraud, gross negligence, bad faith 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 or index calculation, errors, omissions or interruptions of any index 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 Transfer Agent or the Custodian.

Each of the Sponsor, the Trustee, the Transfer Agent and the Custodian 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, Trustee, Transfer Agent or the Custodian 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 ZEC 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 ZEC. 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 ZEC. 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 ZEC and any threatened action that reduces confidence in long-term viability or the ability of end-users to hold and transfer ZEC 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 ZEC. As a result, an intellectual property rights claim against the Trust could adversely affect the value of the Shares.

Unforeseeable risks.

ZEC 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 ZEC market, including advancements in the underlying technology, changes to ZEC may expose investors in the Trust to additional risks which are impossible to predict.

Table of Contents

The Sponsor’s policies and procedures may not fully mitigate the risk of conflicts of interest.

The Sponsor does not have operating practices that require personnel to pre-clear personal trading activity in which ZEC is the referenced asset. In general, pre-clearance policies prohibit employees and agents from engaging in certain personal trading activity without first obtaining pre-clearance of the transaction from the firm’s chief compliance officer, chief financial officer, or some senior officer with similar responsibilities.

Without implementing pre-clearance requirements, the Sponsor may not be able to fully mitigate the risk of conflicts of interest or avoid the appearance of impropriety in connection with the purchase and sale of ZEC. There is no guarantee that every employee, officer, director, or similar person associated with the Sponsor, or its affiliates will refrain from engaging in insider trading in violation of their duties to the Trust and Sponsor.

This risk is present in traditional financial markets and is not unique to ZEC. If such employees or others affiliated with the Sponsor engage in illegal conduct or conduct which fails to meet applicable regulatory standards, the Sponsor and its affiliates could be the target of civil or criminal fines, penalties, punishments, or other regulatory sanctions or lawsuits or could be the target of an investigation. Any of these outcomes could cause the Trust and Shareholders to suffer harm.

The Sponsor and its affiliates may also participate in transactions related to ZEC, either for their own account (subject to certain internal employee trading operating practices) or for the account of others, such as clients, and such transactions may occur prior to, during, or after the commencement of this offering. 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 ZEC held by the Trust and, consequently, on the market price of ZEC.

[The Sponsor may exercise voting or signaling rights associated with the Trust’s ZEC holdings in its sole discretion, which may adversely affect the value of the Shares.

In limited circumstances, holding ZEC may allow the holder (directly or indirectly through a custodian or other intermediary) to participate in non-binding community polls or other “signaling,” elections, consents or similar processes relating to the Zcash network or ecosystem. In those circumstances, the Sponsor (or its designee) will have the power to respond to such polls or otherwise exercise any available voting or signaling rights in its sole discretion and will not be required to seek input from investors. These limited circumstances may include, among others, participating in non-binding coinholder or community sentiment polls and other signaling processes regarding proposed protocol features and network upgrades (including the scope, timing and parameters of upgrades and related technical proposals), deprecation of legacy transaction types or other changes intended to reduce complexity or improve security, and ecosystem governance, funding-model, treasury-allocation and grants-program design matters.

The Sponsor may choose not to participate in any such process, and any response or vote may be based on factors the Sponsor deems relevant, which may not reflect investor preferences and may be criticized by market participants. The Sponsor may also delegate this authority, in whole or in part, to one or more affiliates or other parties (including custodians or service providers), which could reduce transparency to investors regarding how and why a vote or response was made. Any such action (or inaction) could adversely affect the market perception, functionality or value of ZEC and, as a result, could materially and adversely affect the value of the Trust’s 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, including the Custodian, 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:

•

the Sponsor has no fiduciary duties to, and is allowed to take into account the interests of parties other than, the Trust and its Shareholders in resolving conflicts of interest, provided the Sponsor does not act in bad faith;

Table of Contents

•

the Trust has agreed to indemnify the Sponsor, the Trustee and their respective affiliates pursuant to the Trust Agreement;

•

the Sponsor is responsible for allocating its own limited resources among different clients and potential future business ventures, to each of which it may owe fiduciary duties;

•

the Sponsor and its staff also service affiliates of the Sponsor, including the Custodian, and may also service other digital asset investment vehicles, and their respective clients and cannot devote all of its, or their, respective time or resources to the management of the affairs of the Trust;

•

Gemini Trust Company, LLC, the Custodian of the Trust, is an affiliate of the Sponsor, and as such the Sponsor may be disincentivized from replacing the Custodian as one of the Trust’s service providers, even if the terms offered by, or the performance of, an unaffiliated custodian would be more favorable to the Trust;

•

the Sponsor, its affiliates and their officers and employees are not prohibited from engaging in other businesses or activities, including those that might be in direct competition with the Trust;

•

affiliates of the Sponsor may start to have substantial direct investments in ZEC, or other digital assets or companies in the digital assets ecosystem that they are permitted to manage taking into account their own interests without regard to the interests of the Trust or its Shareholders, and any increases, decreases or other changes in such investments could affect the Pricing Benchmark price and, in turn, the value of the Shares; and

•

the Sponsor decides whether to retain separate counsel, accountants or others to perform services for the Trust.

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

The Custodian is an affiliate of the Sponsor, which may create conflicts of interest and concentrate operational and counterparty risk within a single corporate group.

All of the Trust’s ZEC is held by the Custodian, Gemini Trust Company, LLC, which is an affiliate of the Sponsor. The Custodial Services Agreement was not negotiated at arm’s length, and its terms, including the standard of care, limitations on the Custodian’s liability, indemnification provisions and fees, may be less favorable to the Trust than those that could have been obtained from an unaffiliated custodian. Because the Sponsor is responsible for monitoring the Custodian’s performance and for deciding whether to enforce the Trust’s rights under the Custodial Services Agreement or to remove and replace the Custodian, the Sponsor may have an incentive to refrain from pursuing claims against, or replacing, the Custodian, even when doing so would be in the best interests of the Trust and its Shareholders. In addition, because the Sponsor and the Custodian are part of the same corporate group, events that adversely affect that group, such as financial difficulty, insolvency, regulatory action, litigation, reputational harm, cybersecurity incidents or the loss of key personnel, could affect the Sponsor and the Custodian at the same time, which could disrupt the Trust’s operations, delay creations and redemptions, impair the Trust’s access to its ZEC or require the Trust to transition to a new custodian on short notice. The Custodian and its affiliates also provide custody, trading and other services to other clients, including other holders of ZEC, and may have interests that differ from those of the Trust. See “— The Sponsor may need to find and appoint replacement custodians quickly, which could pose a challenge to the safekeeping of the Trust’s ZEC.”

Risks Associated with the Pricing Benchmark

The Pricing Benchmark has a limited history and a failure of the Pricing Benchmark Price could adversely affect the value of the Shares.

The Pricing Benchmark has a limited history and the Pricing Benchmark Price is a composite reference rate calculated using trading price data from various digital asset trading platforms chosen by the Benchmark Provider. The digital asset trading platforms chosen by the Benchmark Provider have also changed over time. The Benchmark Provider may remove or add digital asset trading platforms to the Pricing Benchmark in the future at its discretion. For more information on the inclusion criteria for digital asset trading platforms in the

Table of Contents

Pricing Benchmark, see “ZEC, ZEC MARKET AND REGULATION OF ZEC — ZEC, the Zcash Blockchain and the Zcash Network — The Pricing Benchmark and the Pricing Benchmark Price.”

Although the Pricing Benchmark is designed to accurately capture the market price of ZEC, third parties may be able to purchase and sell ZEC on public or private markets not included among the digital asset trading platforms of the Pricing Benchmark, and such transactions may take place at prices materially higher or lower than the Pricing Benchmark Price. Moreover, there may be variances in the prices of ZEC on the various digital asset trading platforms, including as a result of differences in fee structures or administrative procedures on different digital asset trading platforms. All digital asset trading platforms that were included in the Pricing Benchmark throughout the period were considered in this analysis. To the extent such prices differ materially from the Pricing Benchmark Price, investors may lose confidence in the Shares’ ability to track the market price of ZEC, which could adversely affect the value of the Shares.

The Pricing Benchmark Price used to calculate the value of the Trust’s ZEC may be volatile, and purchasing activity in the digital asset markets associated with Basket creations may affect the Pricing Benchmark Price and Share trading prices, adversely affecting the value of the Shares.

The price of ZEC on public digital asset trading platforms has a very limited history, and during this history, ZEC prices on the digital asset markets more generally, and on digital asset trading platforms individually, have been volatile and subject to influence by many factors, including operational interruptions. While the Pricing Benchmark is designed to limit exposure to the interruption of individual digital asset trading platforms, the Pricing Benchmark Price, and the price of ZEC generally, remains subject to volatility experienced by digital asset trading platforms, and such volatility could adversely affect the value of the Shares. For example, from [ ] through [ ], the Pricing Benchmark Price ranged from $[ ] to $[ ], with the straight average being $[ ]. In addition, during the year ended [ ], the Pricing Benchmark Price ranged from $[ ] to $[ ]. The Sponsor has not observed a material difference between the Pricing Benchmark Price and average prices from the digital asset trading platforms individually or as a group. The price of ZEC more generally has experienced volatility similar to the Pricing Benchmark Price during these periods. For additional information on movement of the Pricing Benchmark Price and the price of ZEC, see “ZEC, ZEC MARKET AND REGULATION OF ZEC — ZEC, the Zcash Blockchain and the Zcash Network — The Pricing Benchmark and the Pricing Benchmark Price.”

Furthermore, because the number of digital asset trading platforms is limited, the Pricing Benchmark will necessarily be composed of a limited number of digital asset trading platforms. If a digital asset trading platform were subjected to regulatory, volatility or other pricing issues, the Benchmark Provider would have limited ability to remove such digital asset trading platform from the Pricing Benchmark, which could skew the price of ZEC as represented by the Pricing Benchmark. Trading on a limited number of digital asset trading platforms may result in less favorable prices and decreased liquidity of ZEC and, therefore, could have an adverse effect on the value of the Shares.

Purchasing activity associated with acquiring ZEC required for the creation of Baskets may increase the market price of ZEC on the digital asset markets, which will result in higher prices for the Shares. Increases in the market price of ZEC may also occur as a result of the purchasing activity of other market participants. Other market participants may attempt to benefit from an increase in the market price of ZEC that may result from increased purchasing activity of ZEC connected with the issuance of Baskets. Consequently, the market price of ZEC may decline immediately after Baskets are created. Decreases in the market price of ZEC may also occur as a result of sales in Secondary Markets by other market participants. If the Pricing Benchmark Price declines, the value of the Shares will generally also decline.

The Benchmark Provider could experience systems failures or errors.

If the computers or other facilities of the Benchmark Provider, data providers and/or relevant stock exchange malfunction for any reason, calculation and dissemination of the Pricing Benchmark may be delayed. Errors in Underlying Index data, the Pricing Benchmark computations and/or construction may occur from time to time and may not be identified and/or corrected for a period of time or at all, which may have an adverse impact on the Trust and the Shareholders. Any of the foregoing may lead to errors in the Pricing Benchmark, which may lead to a different investment outcome for the Trust and its Shareholders than would have been the case had such events not occurred. The Pricing Benchmark is the reference price for calculating the Trust’s

Table of Contents

NAV. Consequently, losses or costs associated with the Pricing Benchmark’s errors or other risks described above will generally be borne by the Trust and the Shareholders and neither the Sponsor nor its affiliates or agents make any representations or warranties regarding the foregoing.

If the Pricing Benchmark is not available, the Trust’s holdings may be fair valued in accordance with the policy approved by the Sponsor. If the Pricing Benchmark is not available, or if the Sponsor determines, in its sole discretion, that the Pricing Benchmark does not reflect an accurate ZEC price, the Trust’s holdings may be “fair valued” in accordance with the valuation policies approved by the Sponsor. Those valuation policies stipulate that when seeking to fair value ZEC, the Sponsor may apply all available factors the Sponsor deems relevant at the time of the determination, and may be based on analytical values determined by the Sponsor using third-party valuation models. Pursuant thereto, the Sponsor expects to utilize a volume-weighted average price or volume-weighted median price of ZEC provided by a secondary pricing source (“Secondary Source”). If a Secondary Source is not available or the Sponsor in its sole discretion determines the Secondary Sources are unreliable, the price set by the Trust’s principal market as of 4:00 p.m. ET, on the valuation date would be considered for utilization. In the event the principal market price is not available or the Sponsor in its sole discretion determines the principal market valuation is unreliable the Sponsor will use its best judgment to determine a good faith estimate of fair value based upon all available factors. The Sponsor does not anticipate that the need to “fair value” ZEC will be a common occurrence.

To the extent the valuation determined in accordance with the policy approved by the Sponsor differs materially from the actual market price of ZEC, the price of the Shares may no longer track, whether temporarily or over time, the global market price of ZEC, which could adversely affect an investment in the Trust by reducing investors’ confidence in the Shares’ ability to track the global market price of ZEC. To the extent such prices differ materially from the market price for ZEC, investors may lose confidence in the Shares’ ability to track the market price of ZEC, which could adversely affect the value of the Shares. The Sponsor does not anticipate that the need to “fair value” ZEC will be a common occurrence.

The Pricing Benchmark could fail to track the global ZEC price, and a failure of the Pricing Benchmark could adversely affect the value of the Shares.

Although the Pricing Benchmark is intended to accurately capture the market price of ZEC, third parties may be able to purchase and sell ZEC on public or private markets not included among the digital asset trading platforms, and such transactions may take place at prices materially higher or lower than the Pricing Benchmark price. Moreover, there may be variances in the price of ZEC on the various digital asset trading platforms, including as a result of differences in fee structures or administrative procedures on different digital asset trading platforms. While the Pricing Benchmark provides a U.S. dollar-denominated composite for the price of ZEC based on the volume-weighted price of ZEC on certain digital asset trading platforms, at any given time, the prices on each such digital asset trading platform or pricing source may not be equal to the price of ZEC as represented by the Pricing Benchmark. It is possible that the price of ZEC on the digital asset trading platforms could be materially higher or lower than the Pricing Benchmark price. To the extent the Pricing Benchmark price differs materially from the actual prices available on a digital asset trading platform, or from the global market price of ZEC, the price of the Shares may no longer track, whether temporarily or over time, the global market price of ZEC, which could adversely affect an investment in the Trust by reducing investors’ confidence in the Shares’ ability to track the market price of ZEC. To the extent such prices differ materially from the Pricing Benchmark price, investors may lose confidence in the Shares’ ability to track the market price of ZEC, which could adversely affect the value of the Shares.

The Sponsor can discontinue using the Pricing Benchmark and use a different pricing or valuation methodology instead.

Table of Contents

at prices materially higher or lower than the Pricing Benchmark price. The Sponsor, however, is under no obligation whatsoever to make such changes in any circumstance. In the event that the Sponsor intends to establish the Trust’s NAV by reference to an index, benchmark or standard other than the Pricing Benchmark, it will provide Shareholders with notice in a prospectus supplement and/or through a current report on Form 8-K or in the Trust’s annual or quarterly reports.

The Pricing Benchmark price used to calculate the value of the Trust’s ZEC may be volatile, adversely affecting the value of the Shares.

The price of ZEC on public digital asset trading platforms has a limited history, and during this history, ZEC prices on the digital asset markets more generally, and on digital asset trading platforms individually, have been volatile and subject to influence by many factors, including operational interruptions. While the Pricing Benchmark is designed to limit exposure to the interruption of individual digital asset trading platforms, the Pricing Benchmark price, and the price of ZEC generally, remains subject to volatility experienced by digital asset exchanges, and such volatility could adversely affect the value of the Shares.

Furthermore, because the number of liquid and credible digital asset trading platforms is limited, the Pricing Benchmark will necessarily be composed of a limited number of digital asset trading platforms. If a digital asset trading platform were subjected to regulatory, volatility or other pricing issues, the Benchmark Provider would have limited ability to remove such digital asset trading platform from the Pricing Benchmark, which could skew the price of ZEC as represented by the Pricing Benchmark. Trading on a limited number of digital asset trading platforms may result in less favorable prices and decreased liquidity of ZEC and, therefore, could have an adverse effect on the value of the Shares.

The Pricing Benchmark price being used to determine the NAV of the Trust may not be consistent with GAAP. To the extent that the Trust’s financial statements are determined using a different pricing source that is consistent with GAAP, the NAV reported in the Trust’s periodic financial statements may differ, in some cases significantly, from the Trust’s NAV determined using the Pricing Benchmark pricing.

The Trust will determine the NAV of the Trust on each business day based on the price of ZEC as reflected by the Pricing Benchmark. The methodology used to calculate the Pricing Benchmark price to value ZEC in determining the NAV of the Trust may not be deemed consistent with GAAP. To the extent the methodology used to calculate the Pricing Benchmark is deemed inconsistent with GAAP, the Trust will utilize an alternative GAAP-consistent pricing source for purposes of the Trust’s periodic financial statements. Creation and redemption of Baskets, the Sponsor Fee and other expenses borne by the Trust will be determined using the Trust’s NAV determined daily based on the Pricing Benchmark. Such NAV of the Trust determined using the Pricing Benchmark price may differ, in some cases significantly, from the NAV reported in the Trust’s periodic financial statements.

Risks Related to Pricing.

The Trust’s portfolio will be priced, including for purposes of determining the NAV, based upon the Pricing Benchmark. The price of ZEC in U.S. dollars or in other currencies available from other data sources may not be equal to the prices used to calculate the NAV.

The NAV of the Trust will change as fluctuations occur in the market price of the Trust’s ZEC holdings as reflected in the Pricing Benchmark. Shareholders should be aware that the public trading price per Share may be different from the NAV for a number of reasons, including price volatility; trading activity; the closing of ZEC 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 ZEC.

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

In the event that the value of the Trust’s ZEC holdings or ZEC 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.

Table of Contents

Regulatory Risk

Digital asset markets in the United States exist in a state of regulatory uncertainty, and adverse legislative or regulatory developments could significantly harm the value of ZEC or the Shares, such as by banning, restricting or imposing onerous conditions or prohibitions on the use of ZEC, mining activity, digital wallets, the provision of services related to trading and custodying ZEC, the operation of the Zcash Network, or the digital asset markets generally.

There is a lack of consensus regarding the regulation of digital assets, including ZEC, and their markets. As a result of the growth in the size of the digital asset market, as well as the 2022 Events, 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 markets. Many of these state and federal agencies have brought enforcement actions or issued consumer advisories regarding the risks posed by digital assets to investors.

Ongoing and future regulatory actions with respect to digital assets generally or ZEC in particular may alter, perhaps to a materially adverse extent, the nature of an investment in the Shares or the ability of the Trust to continue to operate.

The 2022 Events, 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 crypto 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, may amplify and/or accelerate these trends. On January 3, 2023, the federal banking agencies issued a joint statement on crypto-asset risks to banking organizations following events which exposed vulnerabilities in the crypto-asset sector, including the risk of fraud and scams, legal uncertainties, significant volatility, and contagion risk. Although banking organizations are not prohibited from crypto-asset related activities, the agencies have expressed significant safety and soundness concerns with business models that are concentrated in crypto-asset related activities or have concentrated exposures to the crypto-asset sector.

U.S. federal and state regulators, as well as the White House, have issued reports and releases concerning crypto assets, including ZEC and crypto 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 crypto 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 crypto 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. A divided Congress makes any prediction difficult.

In August 2021, the previous chair of the SEC, stated that he believed investors using digital asset trading platforms are not adequately protected, and that activities on the platforms can implicate the securities laws, commodities laws and banking laws, raising a number of issues related to protecting investors and consumers, guarding against illicit activity, and ensuring financial stability. It is not possible to predict whether the U.S. Congress will grant additional authorities to the SEC or other regulators, what the nature of such additional authorities might be, how they might impact the ability of digital assets markets to function or how any new regulations that may flow from such authorities might impact the value of digital assets generally and ZEC held by the Trust specifically.

Table of Contents

actions or recommendations of the task force and this Executive Order or future governmental actions may impact the status of ZEC or any other digital asset as a “security” or how ZEC or the Trust would be treated under any new or revised regulatory framework.

In May 2025, the staff of the Division of Trading and Markets of the SEC released guidance in the form of frequently asked questions relating to crypto asset activities. The SEC staff’s guidance addressed several key points for broker-dealers acting as Authorized Participants. According to the guidance, broker-dealers may custody non-security crypto assets and may treat crypto asset securities as being held at a permissible “control location” under Exchange Act Rule 15c3-3(c). The guidance also clarified that broker-dealers may conduct non-security crypto asset businesses, including facilitating transactions in crypto asset securities that settle in crypto rather than cash. In addition, broker-dealers may hold crypto assets as proprietary positions for net capital purposes, subject to applicable haircuts and other limitations. Furthermore, the SEC staff indicated that broker-dealers may engage in in-kind creations and redemptions for spot crypto exchange-traded products. However, this guidance is non-binding, and may be modified, superseded, or withdrawn at any time without notice, as emphasized in the guidance. Additionally, there is no guarantee that Authorized Participants will actually transact in-kind at all despite this guidance.

In 2025 and 2026, Congress undertook significant legislative efforts to address the rapidly evolving landscape of digital assets and cryptocurrencies. On July 18, 2025, the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins Act (the “GENIUS Act”) was signed into law, establishing the first comprehensive federal framework for the regulation of payment stablecoins in the United States. In July 2025, the House of Representatives also passed the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act of 2025 (the “CLARITY Act”), a market structure bill for digital assets; however, the CLARITY Act has not been enacted into law.

The CLARITY Act, which was passed by the House of Representatives in July 2025 and reported by the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs in May 2026, failed to advance in the U.S. Senate on September 15, 2026, when the Senate did not invoke cloture on the motion to proceed. Legislation not enacted during the 119th Congress generally must be reintroduced when the 120th Congress convenes in January 2027, and there can be no assurance that the CLARITY Act or any similar market structure legislation will be enacted, or as to the content of any such legislation. As proposed, the CLARITY Act was designed to resolve longstanding regulatory uncertainty regarding the classification and oversight of digital assets. It would establish a framework for distinguishing between digital assets that are securities, commodities, or payment stablecoins, would delineate the respective jurisdictions of the SEC and the CFTC, including granting the CFTC exclusive authority over “digital commodities,” and would introduce criteria for determining when a digital asset is sufficiently decentralized to be treated as a commodity rather than a security.

In addition, as proposed, the CLARITY Act would impose registration requirements and operational standards for digital asset intermediaries, including exchanges, brokers, and dealers, and would mandate consumer protection measures, anti-money laundering (AML) and countering the financing of terrorism (CFT) compliance, and enhanced disclosure obligations. If enacted in its proposed or a modified form, such requirements could affect the trading platforms that make up the [Underlying Index], the Trust’s service providers and the market for ZEC. In particular, it is uncertain how any such legislation, or any regulation adopted by the SEC or the CFTC under existing authority, would treat digital assets with privacy-preserving features such as ZEC’s shielded transactions.

It is not possible to predict whether Congress will grant additional authorities to the SEC or other regulators, what the nature of such additional authorities might be, how they might impact the ability of digital asset markets to function or how any new regulations that may flow from such authorities might impact the value of digital assets generally and ZEC held by the Trust 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. Entities which fail to comply with such regulations are subject to fines, may be required to cease operations, and could have potential criminal liability. For example, in 2015, FinCEN assessed a $700,000 fine against a sponsor of a digital asset for violating several requirements of the Bank Secrecy Act by acting as an MSB and selling the digital asset without registering with FinCEN, and by failing to implement and maintain an adequate anti-money laundering program. In 2017, FinCEN assessed a $110 million fine against BTC-e, a

Table of Contents

now defunct digital asset exchange, for similar violations. The requirement that exchangers that do business in the U.S. register with FinCEN and comply with anti-money laundering regulations may increase the cost of buying and selling ZEC and therefore may adversely affect the price of ZEC and an investment in the Shares.

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

Under regulations from the NYSDFS, 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 NYSDFS and must comply with anti-money laundering, cyber security, consumer protection, and financial and reporting requirements, among others. As an alternative to a BitLicense, a firm can apply for a charter to become a limited purpose trust company under New York law qualified to engage in certain digital asset business activities. 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 ZEC 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.

Law enforcement agencies have often relied on the transparency of blockchains to facilitate investigations. However, certain privacy-enhancing features have been, or are expected to be, introduced to a number of digital asset networks. If the Zcash Network were to adopt any of these features, these features may provide law enforcement agencies with less visibility into transaction-level data. For example, “privacy pools,” zero knowledge proofs, and other technologies that could enhance privacy have been discussed by participants in the digital asset industry. Europol, the European Union’s law enforcement agency, released a report in October 2017 noting the increased use of privacy-enhancing digital assets like Zcash and Monero in criminal activity on the internet. In August 2022, OFAC banned all U.S. citizens from using Tornado Cash, a digital asset protocol designed to obfuscate blockchain transactions, by adding certain Ethereum wallet addresses associated with the protocol to its Specially Designated Nationals list. On October 19, 2023, FinCEN published a proposed rulemaking to apply the authorities in Section 311 of the USA PATRIOT Act to impose requirements on financial institutions that engage in convertible virtual currency (“CVC”) transactions with CVC mixers. The proposed rule, if adopted, would require covered financial institutions to report to FinCEN any CVC transactions they process that involves CVC mixing within or involving a jurisdiction outside the United States. The term “CVC mixing” covers more than just transactions that involve CVC mixers like Tornado Cash, and seemingly could cover a broader range of conduct involving technologies, services, or methods that have the effect of obfuscating the source, destination, or amount of a CVC transaction, whether or not the obfuscation was intentional. If the rule were to be adopted as proposed and if the Zcash Network were to be deemed to or were to adopt features which come within the rule’s ambit, it could cause covered financial institutions — such as many virtual currency exchanges, or the Trust’s service providers, such as the Cash Custodian — to reduce support for or cease offering services for ZEC or to the Trust, which could impair the utility of ZEC, the value of the Shares and the Trust’s ability to operate in compliance with new laws and regulations.

Future and current regulations by a U.S. or foreign government or quasi-governmental agency could have an adverse effect on an investment in the Trust.

The regulation of ZEC and related products and services continues to evolve, may take many different forms and will, therefore, impact the Zcash Network and ZEC and their usage in a variety of manners. The

Table of Contents

inconsistent and sometimes conflicting regulatory landscape may make it more difficult for ZEC businesses to provide services, which may impede the growth of the ZEC economy and have an adverse effect on consumer adoption of ZEC. There is a possibility of future regulatory change altering, perhaps to a material extent, the nature of an investment in the Shares or the ability of the Trust to continue to operate.

Changes to current regulatory determinations of ZEC’s status under federal or state securities laws, changes to regulations surrounding ZEC futures or related products, or actions by a U.S. or foreign government or quasi-governmental agency exerting regulatory authority over ZEC, the Zcash Network, ZEC trading, or related activities impacting other parts of the digital asset market, may adversely impact ZEC and therefore may have an adverse effect on the value of an investment in the Trust.

The Trust is not a registered investment company and is not subject to the Commodity Exchange Act.

The Trust is not a registered investment company subject to the Investment Company Act. Consequently, Shareholders of the Trust do not have the regulatory protections provided to Shareholders in registered and regulated investment companies, which, for example, require investment companies to have a certain percentage of disinterested directors and regulate the relationship between the investment company and certain of its affiliates. Further, the Trust will not hold or trade in commodity futures contracts regulated by the Commodity Exchange Act, as administered by the CFTC. The Trust will not engage in “retail commodity transactions” — any ZEC transaction entered into on a leveraged, margined or financed basis (as described above). Such transactions are deemed to be commodity futures under the Commodity Exchange Act and subject to CFTC jurisdiction. Furthermore, the Sponsor believes that the Trust is not a commodity pool for purposes of the Commodity Exchange Act. Consequently, Shareholders will not have the regulatory protections provided to Shareholders in Commodity Exchange Act-regulated instruments or commodity pools.

Competing industries may have more influence with policymakers than the digital asset industry, which could lead to the adoption of laws and regulations that are harmful to the digital asset industry.

The digital asset industry is relatively new, although its influence over public policy is increasing, and it does not have the same access to policymakers and lobbying organizations in many jurisdictions compared to industries with which digital assets may be seen to compete, such as banking, payments and consumer finance. Competitors from other, more established industries may have greater access to and influence with governmental officials and regulators and may be successful in persuading these policymakers that digital assets require heightened levels of regulation compared to the regulation of traditional financial services. As a result, new laws and regulations may be proposed and adopted in the United States and elsewhere, or existing laws and regulations may be interpreted in new ways, that disfavor or impose compliance burdens on the digital asset industry or digital asset platforms, which could adversely impact the value of ZEC and therefore the value of the Shares.

Various foreign jurisdictions have, and may continue to adopt laws, regulations or directives that affect the digital asset network, the digital asset markets, and their users, particularly digital asset trading platforms and service providers that fall within such jurisdictions’ regulatory scope. For example, if foreign jurisdictions in addition to China were to ban or otherwise restrict mining activity, including by regulating or limiting manufacturers’ ability to produce or sell semiconductors or hard drives in connection with mining, it would have a material adverse effect on digital asset networks (including the Zcash Network), the Digital Asset Market, and as a result, impact the value of the Shares.

A number of foreign jurisdictions have recently taken regulatory action aimed at digital asset activities. China has made transacting in cryptocurrencies illegal for Chinese citizens in mainland China, and additional restrictions may follow. Both China and South Korea have banned initial coin offerings entirely and regulators in other jurisdictions, including Canada, Singapore and Hong Kong, have opined that initial coin offerings may constitute securities offerings subject to local securities regulations. The United Kingdom’s Financial Conduct Authority published final rules in October 2020 banning the sale of derivatives and exchange-traded

Table of Contents

notes that reference certain types of digital assets, contending that they are “ill-suited” to retail investors citing extreme volatility, valuation challenges and association with financial crime. A new law, the Financial Services and Markets Act 2023 (“FSMA”), received royal assent in June 2023. The FSMA brings digital asset activities within the scope of existing laws governing financial institutions, markets and assets. In addition, the Parliament of the European Union approved the text of the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (“MiCA”) in April 2023, establishing a regulatory framework for digital asset services across the European Union. Certain parts of MiCA became effective as of June 2024 and the remainder applied as of December 2024. MiCA is intended to serve as a comprehensive regulation of digital asset markets and imposes various obligations on digital asset issuers and service providers. The main aims of MiCA are industry regulation, consumer protection, prevention of market abuse and upholding the integrity of digital asset markets.

Foreign laws, regulations or directives may conflict with those of the United States and may negatively impact the acceptance of one or more digital assets by users, merchants and service providers outside the United States and may therefore impede the growth or sustainability of the digital asset economy in the European Union, China, Japan, Russia and the United States and globally, or otherwise negatively affect the value of ZEC. Moreover, other events, such as the interruption in telecommunications or internet services, cyber-related terrorist acts, civil disturbances, war or other catastrophes, could also negatively affect the digital asset economy in one or more jurisdictions. For example, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022 led to volatility in digital asset prices, with an initial steep decline followed by a sharp rebound in prices. The effect of any future regulatory change or other events on the Trust or ZEC is impossible to predict, and such change could be substantial and adverse to the Trust and the value of the Shares.

If regulators or public utilities take actions that restrict or otherwise impact mining activities, there may be a significant decline in such activities, which could adversely affect the Zcash Network and the value of the Shares.

Concerns have been raised about the electricity required to secure and maintain digital asset networks. For example, as of [ ], 2026, over [ ] solutions are performed every second in connection with mining on the Zcash Network. Although measuring the electricity consumed by this process is difficult because these operations are performed by various machines with varying levels of efficiency, the process consumes a significant amount of energy. The operations of the Zcash Network and other digital asset networks may also consume significant amounts of energy. 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.

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. For example, in November 2022, New York imposed a two-year moratorium on new proof-of-work mining permits at fossil fuel plants in the state. A significant reduction in mining activity as a result of such actions could adversely affect the security of the Zcash Network by making it easier for a malicious actor or botnet to manipulate the Blockchain. See “Risk Factors Related to Digital Assets — If a malicious actor or botnet obtains control of more than 50% of the processing power on the Zcash Network, or otherwise obtains control over the Zcash Network through its influence over core developers or otherwise, such actor or botnet could manipulate the Blockchain to adversely affect the value of the Shares or the ability of the Trust to operate.” If regulators or public utilities take action that restricts or otherwise impacts mining activities, such actions could result in decreased security of a digital asset network, including the Zcash Network, and consequently adversely impact the value of the Shares.

If regulators subject an Authorized Participant, the Trust or the Sponsor to regulation as a money service business or money transmitter, this could result in extraordinary expenses to the Authorized Participant, the Trust or the Sponsor and also result in decreased liquidity for 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, such Authorized Participant, the Trust or the Sponsor may be required to comply with FinCEN regulations, including those that would mandate the Authorized Participant, the Trust or the Sponsor to implement anti-money laundering programs, make certain reports to FinCEN and maintain certain records. Similarly, the activities of an Authorized Participant,

Table of Contents

the Trust or the Sponsor may require it to be licensed as a money transmitter or as a digital asset business, such as under the NYSDFS BitLicense regulations or California’s Digital Financial Assets Law.

Such additional regulatory obligations may cause the Authorized Participant, the Trust or the Sponsor to incur extraordinary expenses. If the Authorized Participant, the Trust or the Sponsor decided to seek the required licenses, there is no guarantee that they will timely receive them. An Authorized Participant may instead decide to terminate its role as Authorized Participant of the Trust, or the Sponsor may decide to discontinue and wind up the Trust. An Authorized Participant’s decision to cease acting as such may decrease the liquidity of the Shares, which could adversely affect the value of the Shares, and termination of the Trust in response to the changed regulatory circumstances may be at a time that is disadvantageous to the shareholders.

Additionally, to the extent an Authorized Participant, the Trust or the Sponsor is found to have operated without appropriate state or federal licenses, or registrations, it may be subject to investigation, administrative or court proceedings, and civil or criminal monetary fines and penalties, all of which would harm the reputation of the Trust or the Sponsor, decrease the liquidity, and have a material adverse effect on the price of, the Shares.

Statutory or regulatory changes or interpretations could obligate the Trust or the Sponsor to register and comply with new regulations, resulting in potentially extraordinary, nonrecurring expenses to the Trust.

Current and future legislation, CFTC and SEC rulemaking and other regulatory developments may impact the manner in which ZEC is treated. In particular, ZEC may be classified by the CFTC as a “commodity interest” under the CEA or may be classified by the SEC as a “security” under U.S. federal securities laws. It is also possible that a new Administration and Congress in the United States creates a new classification for digital assets. For example, the current draft of the CLARITY Act would add “digital commodities” to the list of assets that are commodity interests under the CEA. The Sponsor and the Trust cannot be certain as to how future regulatory developments will impact the treatment of ZEC under the law. In the face of such developments, the required registrations and compliance steps may result in extraordinary, nonrecurring expenses to the Trust. If the Sponsor decides to terminate the Trust in response to the changed regulatory circumstances, the Trust may be dissolved or liquidated at a time that is disadvantageous to shareholders.

To the extent that ZEC is deemed to fall within the definition of a “commodity interest” under the CEA, due to the passage of the CLARITY Act or otherwise, 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 adviser 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 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 ZEC at a time that is disadvantageous to shareholders.

To the extent that ZEC is determined to be a security under U.S. federal securities laws, the Trust and the Sponsor may be subject to additional requirements under the Investment Company Act and the Sponsor may be required to register as an investment adviser under the Investment 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 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 ZEC at a time that is disadvantageous to shareholders.

It may be illegal now, or in the future, to acquire, own, hold, sell or use ZEC in one or more countries, and ownership of, holding or trading in the Shares may also be considered illegal and subject to sanction.

Although currently ZEC is not regulated or is lightly regulated in most countries, including the United States, one or more countries such as China, India or Russia may take regulatory actions in the future that severely restricts the right to acquire, own, hold, sell or use ZEC or to exchange ZEC for fiat currency. Such an action may also result in the restriction of ownership, holding or trading in the Shares. Such a restriction could result

Table of Contents

in the termination and liquidation of the Trust at a time that is disadvantageous to Shareholders, or may adversely affect an investment in the Shares.

Due to the largely unregulated nature and lack of transparency surrounding the operations of digital asset trading platforms, they may experience fraud, market manipulation, business failures, security failures or operational problems, which may adversely affect the value of ZEC and, consequently, the value of the Shares.

Digital asset trading platforms are relatively new and, in many ways, are not subject to, or may not comply with, regulation in relevant jurisdictions in a manner similar to other regulated trading platforms, such as national securities exchanges or designated contract markets. While many prominent digital asset trading platforms provide the public with significant information regarding their on-chain activities, ownership structure, management teams, corporate practices, cybersecurity practices and regulatory compliance, many other digital asset trading platforms do not provide this information. Furthermore, while digital asset trading platforms are and may continue to be subject to federal and state licensing requirements in the United States, digital asset trading platforms do not currently appear to be subject to regulation in a similar manner as other regulated trading platforms, such as national securities exchanges or designated contract markets. As a result, the marketplace may lose confidence in digital asset trading platforms, including prominent trading platforms that handle a significant volume of ZEC trading.

Many digital asset trading platforms both in the United States and abroad are unlicensed, not subject to, or not in compliance with, regulation in relevant jurisdictions, or operate without extensive supervision by governmental authorities. In particular, those located outside the United States may be subject to significantly less stringent regulatory and compliance requirements in their local jurisdictions and may take the position that they are not subject to laws and regulations that would apply to a national securities exchange or designated contract market in the United States, or may, as a practical matter, be beyond the ambit of U.S. regulators. As a result, trading activity on or reported by these digital asset trading platforms is generally significantly less regulated than trading activity on or reported by regulated U.S. securities and commodities markets, and may reflect behavior that would be prohibited in regulated U.S. trading venues. For example, in 2022 one report claimed that trading volumes on digital asset trading platforms were inflated by over 70% due to false or non-economic trades, with specific focus on unlicensed trading platforms located outside of the United States. Such reports may indicate that the digital asset trading platform market is significantly smaller than expected and that the U.S. makes up a significantly larger percentage of the digital asset trading platform market than is commonly understood, or that a much larger portion of digital asset market activity takes place on decentralized finance platforms than is commonly understood. Nonetheless, any actual or perceived false trading in the digital asset trading platform market, and any other fraudulent or manipulative acts and practices, could adversely affect the value of ZEC and/or negatively affect the market perception of ZEC, which could in turn adversely impact the value of the Shares.

The SEC has also identified possible sources of fraud and manipulation in the digital asset markets generally, including, among others (1) “wash-trading”; (2) persons with a dominant position in ZEC manipulating ZEC pricing; (3) hacking of the Zcash Network and trading platforms; (4) malicious control of the Zcash Network; (5) trading based on material, non-public information (for example, plans of market participants to significantly increase or decrease their holdings in ZEC, new sources of demand for ZEC) or based on the dissemination of false and misleading information; (6) manipulative activity involving purported “stablecoins,” including Tether; and (7) fraud and manipulation at digital asset markets. The use or presence of such acts and practices in the digital asset markets could, for example, falsely inflate the volume of ZEC present in the digital asset markets or cause distortions in the price of ZEC, among other things that could adversely affect the Trust or cause losses to shareholders. Moreover, 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 markets, or may not exist at all. Many digital asset markets also lack certain safeguards put in place by exchanges for more traditional assets to enhance the stability of trading on the exchanges and prevent “flash crashes,” such as limit-down circuit breakers. As a result, the prices of ZEC on digital asset markets may be subject to larger and/or more frequent sudden declines than assets traded on more traditional exchanges.

In addition, over the past several years, some digital asset trading platforms have been closed, been subject to criminal and civil litigation and have entered into bankruptcy proceedings due to fraud and manipulative

Table of Contents

activity, business failure and/or security breaches. In many of these instances, the customers of such digital asset trading platforms were not compensated or made whole for the partial or complete losses of their account balances in such digital asset trading platforms. In some instances, customers are made whole only in dollar terms as of the digital asset trading platform’s date of failure, rather than on a digital asset basis, meaning customers may still lose out on any price increase in digital assets.

While smaller digital asset trading platforms are less likely to have the infrastructure and capitalization that make larger digital asset trading platforms more stable, larger digital asset trading platforms are more likely to be appealing targets for hackers and malware and their shortcomings or ultimate failures are more likely to have contagion effects on the digital asset ecosystem, including on the price of ZEC, and therefore may be more likely to be targets of regulatory enforcement action. For example, in February 2014, Mt. Gox, the largest digital asset trading platform at the time, halted withdrawals of Bitcoin and subsequently filed for bankruptcy protection in Japan following an exploit that resulted in the loss of several hundred thousand Bitcoin. In the two weeks following the halt of Bitcoin withdrawals from Mt. Gox, the value of one Bitcoin fell on other trading platforms from around $795 to $578. Failure and shortcomings of large digital asset trading platforms have since continued; in January 2015, Bitstamp announced that approximately 19,000 Bitcoin had been stolen from its operational or “hot” wallets, and in August 2016, it was reported that almost 120,000 Bitcoin then worth around $78 million were stolen from Bitfinex. The value of Bitcoin and other digital assets immediately decreased over 10% following reports of the theft at Bitfinex. Regulatory enforcement actions have followed, such as in July 2017, when FinCEN assessed a $110 million fine against BTC-E, a now defunct digital asset trading platform, for facilitating crimes such as drug sales and ransomware attacks. In addition, in December 2017, Yapian, the operator of Seoul-based digital asset trading platform Youbit, suspended digital asset trading and filed for bankruptcy following an exploit that resulted in a loss of 17% of Yapian’s assets. In January 2018, the Japanese digital asset trading platform, Coincheck, was exploited, resulting in losses of approximately $535 million, and in February 2018, the Italian digital asset trading platform, Bitgrail, was exploited, resulting in approximately $170 million in losses. In May 2019, one of the world’s largest digital asset trading platforms, Binance, was exploited, resulting in losses of approximately $40 million. More recently, in November 2022, FTX, another of the world’s largest digital asset trading platforms, filed for bankruptcy protection and subsequently halted customer withdrawals as well as trading on its FTX.US platform. Fraud, security failures and operational problems all played a role in FTX’s issues and downfall. Moreover, digital asset trading platforms have been a subject of enhanced regulatory and enforcement scrutiny, and digital asset markets have experienced continued instability, following the failure of FTX. In particular, in June 2023, the SEC brought the Binance Complaint and Coinbase Complaint, alleging that Binance and Coinbase operated unregistered securities exchanges, brokerages and clearing agencies. In addition, in November 2023, the SEC brought the Kraken Complaint, alleging that Kraken operated as an unregistered securities exchange, brokerage and clearing agency.

Negative perception, a lack of stability and standardized regulation in the digital asset markets and/or the closure or temporary shutdown of digital asset trading platforms due to fraud, business failure, security breaches or government mandated regulation, and associated losses by customers, may reduce confidence in the Zcash Network and result in greater volatility in the prices of ZEC. Furthermore, the closure or temporary shutdown of a digital asset trading platform used in calculating the Pricing Benchmark Price may result in a loss of confidence in the Trust’s ability to determine its NAV on a daily basis. These potential consequences of such a digital asset trading platform’s failure could adversely affect the value of the Shares.

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 and amounts realized in connection with the use of ZEC or the sale of ZEC to pay Trust expenses or facilitate redemption transactions. The Trust does not anticipate making distributions to Shareholders, so any tax liability that a Shareholder incurs as a result of holding Shares will need to be satisfied from some other source of funds. Sales of ZEC to fund cash redemptions are expected to result in gains and losses, with such gains and losses expected to be treated as incurred by the Shareholder that is being redeemed. These gains or losses generally would equal the difference

Table of Contents

between the amount realized from the sale of the ZEC and the Shareholder’s tax basis for the portion of the Shareholder’s pro rata share of the ZEC 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. 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 ZEC and transactions involving ZEC for United States federal income tax purposes may change.

Under current IRS guidance, ZEC is treated as property, not as currency, for U.S. federal income tax purposes and transactions involving payment in ZEC 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 ZEC is exchanged and the taxpayer’s basis in the ZEC. However, because ZEC 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 ZEC or in transactions relating to investments in ZEC may change from that described in this Prospectus, possibly with retroactive effect. Any such change in the U.S. federal income tax treatment of ZEC may have a negative effect on prices of ZEC and may adversely affect the value of the Shares. In this regard, the IRS has indicated that it has made it a priority to issue additional guidance related to the taxation of virtual currency transactions, such as transactions involving ZEC. While it has started to issue such additional guidance, whether any future guidance will adversely affect the U.S. federal income tax treatment of an investment in ZEC or in transactions relating to investments in ZEC is unknown. Moreover, future developments that may arise with respect to digital currencies may increase the uncertainty with respect to the treatment of digital currencies for U.S. federal income tax purposes.

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

Because ZEC is a new technological innovation, the tax treatment of ZEC 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 ZEC for state and local tax purposes may be issued in the future. A state or local government authority’s treatment of ZEC may have negative consequences, including the imposition of a greater tax burden on investors in ZEC or the imposition of a greater cost on the acquisition and disposition of ZEC generally. Any such treatment may have a negative effect on prices of ZEC and may adversely affect the value of the Shares.

A “fork” of the Zcash Blockchain or an airdrop could result in Shareholders incurring a tax liability.

If a fork occurs in the Zcash Blockchain, the Trust Agreement requires that the Sponsor analyze the transaction according to several criteria and promptly determine which digital asset network is generally accepted as the Zcash Blockchain 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 ZEC, users, services, businesses, miners and other constituencies, as well as the actual continued acceptance of, validating power on, and community engagement with, the Zcash Blockchain. The outcome of such determination shall determine which asset is “ZEC” and which is the forked asset, an IR Asset. Pursuant to the Trust Agreement, the Trust has explicitly disclaimed all Incidental Rights and IR Assets, including forked assets. Such assets are not considered assets of the Trust at any point in time. Once it has been determined by the Sponsor which asset is ZEC and which is the forked asset, the Sponsor will, as soon as practicable, and, if possible, immediately, distribute the forked asset to the Sponsor. Once acquired, the Sponsor may take any lawful action necessary or desirable in connection with its acquisition of such asset. In the event that the Sponsor decides to sell the forked asset, it will seek to do so for cash. This may be a sale of the forked asset directly in exchange for cash, or in exchange for another digital asset which may subsequently be exchanged for cash. The Sponsor would then contribute that cash back to the Trust, which in turn would distribute the cash to DTC to be distributed to Shareholders in proportion to the number of Shares owned. The receipt of cash in connection with this distribution may cause Shareholders to incur a U.S. federal, state, local, or foreign tax liability. In addition, the IRS may not accept the Trust’s position that disclaimed Incidental Rights or IR Assets do not

Table of Contents

represent a taxable incident. Any tax liability could adversely impact an investment in the Shares and may require Shareholders to prepare and file tax returns. Any tax liability could adversely impact an investment in the Shares and may require Shareholders to prepare and file tax returns.

Under the IRS guidance on digital assets, hard forks, airdrops and similar occurrences with respect to digital assets will under certain circumstances be treated as taxable events giving rise to ordinary income. In the absence of guidance to the contrary, it is possible that any such income recognized by a U.S. tax-exempt Shareholder would constitute “unrelated business taxable income” (“UBTI”). A tax-exempt Shareholder should consult its tax adviser regarding whether such Shareholder may recognize UBTI as a consequence of an investment in Shares.

Non-U.S. Holders may be subject to U.S. federal withholding tax on income derived from forks, airdrops and similar occurrences.

IRS guidance on digital assets does not address whether income recognized by a non-U.S. person as a result of a fork, airdrop or similar occurrence could be subject to the 30% withholding tax imposed on U.S.-source “fixed or determinable annual or periodical” income. Non-U.S. Shareholders should assume that, in the absence of guidance, a withholding agent (including the Sponsor) is likely to withhold 30% of any such income recognized by a non-U.S. Shareholder in respect of its Shares, including by deducting such withheld amounts from proceeds that such non-U.S. Shareholder would otherwise be entitled to receive in connection with a distribution of cash in connection with the Sponsor’s sale of an IR Right and/or IR Asset and contributing such cash back to the Trust.

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 Federal income tax purposes. A grantor trust is not permitted to change the investment 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 Exchange on which the Shares are listed may halt trading in the Trust’s Shares, which would adversely impact a Shareholder’s ability to sell Shares.

The Trust’s Shares are listed for trading on the Exchange under the market symbol “WINK.” 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 ZEC spot market could result in the absence of active Authorized Participants able to support the trading activity of the Trust.

ZEC is extremely volatile, and concerns exist about the stability, reliability and robustness of many spot markets where ZEC trade. In a highly volatile market, or if one or more spot markets supporting the ZEC

Table of Contents

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.

The Sponsor relies heavily on key personnel.

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.

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, or if the trust experiences excessive withdrawals, 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.

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

The Trust may, in its discretion, suspend the right of creation or redemption or may postpone the redemption or purchase settlement date, for (1) any period during which an emergency exists as a result of which the fulfillment of a purchase order or the redemption distribution is not reasonably practicable, or (2) such other period as the Sponsor determines to be necessary for the protection of the Shareholders of the Trust. When determining whether such an emergency exists, the Sponsor may consider, among other things, the overall impact such emergency has had on price, volume, volatility and liquidity in ZEC markets; the Sponsor’s view on how long such emergency will persist; and the Sponsor’s view on whether such emergency is likely to ease or worsen. An emergency could include situations where the Trust is unable to transact in ZEC or where the Trust is unable to value its ZEC holdings, such as a circumstance where a digital asset trading platform experiences technical failure, power outage, network error or other circumstance resulting in a market-wide halt to trading, or the Trust is unable to access the ZEC in the Trust’s ZEC custody accounts at the Custodian

Table of Contents

due to technical or operating issues at the Trust or the Custodian. Such disruptions may have an effect on overall ZEC liquidity or cause price spreads of ZEC to widen, which may have a detrimental effect on the value of the Shares.

In addition, the Trust may reject a redemption order if the order is not in proper form as described in the Authorized Participant Agreement or if the fulfillment of the order might be unlawful. Any such postponement, suspension or rejection could adversely affect a redeeming Authorized Participant. Suspension of creation privileges may adversely impact how the Shares are traded and arbitraged on the secondary market, which could cause them to trade at levels materially different (premiums and discounts) from the fair value of their underlying holdings.

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

If the Pricing Benchmark is not available or the Sponsor determines, in its sole discretion, that the Pricing Benchmark should not be used, the Trust’s ZEC investments may be valued using techniques other than reliance on the price established by the Pricing Benchmark. The value established by using the Pricing Benchmark may be different from what would be produced through the use of another methodology. ZEC valued using techniques other than those employed by the Pricing Benchmark, including ZEC investments that are “fair valued,” may differ from the value established by the Pricing Benchmark.

The Trust Agreement includes provisions that limit Shareholders’ voting rights and restrict Shareholders’ right to bring a derivative action.

Under the Trust Agreement, Shareholders generally have no voting rights and the Trust will not have regular Shareholder meetings. Shareholders take no part in the management or control of the Trust. Accordingly, Shareholders do not have the right to authorize actions, appoint service providers or take other actions as may be taken by shareholders of other trusts or companies where shares carry such rights. The Sponsor may take actions in the operation of the Trust that may be adverse to the interests of Shareholders and may adversely affect the value of the Shares.

Moreover, pursuant to the terms 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), 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 (i) are not “Affiliates” (as defined in the Trust Agreement) of one another and (ii) collectively hold at least 10.0% of the outstanding Shares join in the bringing or maintaining of such action, suit or other proceeding. This provision applies to any derivative actions brought in the name of the Trust other than claims under the federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder.

Due to this additional requirement, a Shareholder attempting to bring or maintain a derivative action in the name of the Trust will be required to locate other Shareholders with which it is not affiliated and that have sufficient Shares to meet the 10.0% threshold based on the number of Shares outstanding on the date the claim is brought and thereafter throughout the duration of the action, suit or proceeding. This may be difficult and may result in increased costs to a Shareholder attempting to seek redress in the name of the Trust in court. Moreover, if Shareholders bringing a derivative action, suit or proceeding pursuant to this provision of the Trust Agreement do not hold 10.0% of the outstanding Shares on the date such an action, suit or proceeding is brought, or such Shareholders are unable to maintain Share ownership meeting the 10.0% threshold

Table of Contents

throughout the duration of the action, suit or proceeding, such Shareholders’ derivative action may be subject to dismissal. As a result, the Trust Agreement limits the likelihood that a Shareholder will be able to successfully assert a derivative action in the name of the Trust, even if such Shareholder believes that he or she has a valid derivative action, suit or other proceeding to bring on behalf of the Trust.

Table of Contents

THE TRUST AND ZEC PRICES

Overview of the Trust

The Trust’s purpose is to hold ZEC. The Trust’s investment objective is to seek to provide exposure to the price of ZEC held by the Trust, less the expenses of the Trust’s operations. In seeking to achieve its investment objective, the Trust will hold ZEC and will value its net assets and the Shares daily based on the Pricing Benchmark. ZEC will be the only digital asset held by the Trust.

The Sponsor believes that the Trust will provide a cost-efficient way for investors to implement strategic and tactical asset allocation strategies that use ZEC by investing in the Shares rather than purchasing, holding and trading ZEC directly. The latter alternative would require an investor to acquire ZEC by selecting a digital asset trading platform and opening an account or arranging a private transaction, and initiating a fiat transaction to initiate or settle such acquisition. An investor would then also be required to custody such ZEC by selecting a retail or institutional custodial platform or establishing a personal computer or hardware security module-based system capable of transacting directly on the blockchain, and incurring the risk associated with cybersecurity and maintaining a private key that is irrecoverable if lost, among other difficulties.

The Pricing Benchmark

The net assets of the Trust and its Shares are valued on a daily basis with reference to the Pricing Benchmark as of 4:00 p.m. ET, which integrates spot market prices from various digital asset trading platforms. The Pricing Benchmark is designed to reflect the performance of ZEC in U.S. dollars. The Trust uses the Pricing Benchmark to calculate its NAV, which is the aggregate U.S. dollar value of ZEC 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 Sponsor, in its sole discretion, may cause the Trust to price its portfolio based upon an index, 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 index, benchmark or standard better aligns with the Trust’s investment objectives and strategy. The Sponsor may make this decision for a number of reasons, including, but not limited to, a determination that the Pricing Benchmark price of ZEC differs materially from the global market price of ZEC and/or that third parties are able to purchase and sell ZEC on public or private markets not included among the Constituent Platforms, and such transactions may take place at prices materially higher or lower than the Pricing Benchmark price. The Sponsor, however, is under no obligation whatsoever to make such changes in any circumstance. In the event that the Sponsor intends to establish the Trust’s NAV by reference to an index, benchmark or standard other than the Pricing Benchmark, it will provide Shareholders with notice in a prospectus supplement and/or through a current report on Form 8-K or in the Trust’s annual or quarterly reports.

Pricing Benchmark Methodology

The Pricing Benchmark is a U.S. dollar-denominated composite reference rate for the price of ZEC. The Pricing Benchmark is designed to (1) mitigate the effects of fraud, manipulation and other anomalous trading activity from impacting the ZEC reference rate, (2) provide a volume-weighted fair value of ZEC and (3) appropriately handle and adjust for non-market related events.

The Benchmark Price is determined by the Benchmark Provider through a process in which trade data is cleansed and compiled in such a manner as to algorithmically reduce the impact of anomalistic or manipulative trading. This is accomplished by adjusting the weight of each data input based on price deviation relative to the observable set, as well as recent and long-term trading volume at each venue relative to the observable set. The Benchmark Price is calculated using non-GAAP methodology and is not used in the Trust’s financial statements.

Table of Contents

Determination of the Benchmark Price

The Benchmark Price is determined by producing a time-weighted average price (“TWAP”) of the [ ] (the “Underlying Index”) by using the closing minute values between 3:00 pm and 4:00 pm New York time. The Underlying Index applies an algorithm to the price of ZEC on the Constituent Platforms calculated on a per second basis over a 24-hour period.

The Underlying Index

The Underlying Index is designed to represent the fair market price of ZEC in U.S. dollars by aggregating real trading data from multiple cryptocurrency exchanges. The calculation is based on a 24-hour volume-weighted average price, with additional adjustments to ensure accuracy, reliability, and resistance to manipulation.

To determine the rate, the Underlying Index collects every individual ZEC-USD and ZEC-USDC trade from the Constituent Platforms. Each trade record includes the price at which ZEC was traded for USD, the amount (volume) of ZEC traded, the exact time the trade occurred, and the Constituent Platform where the trade took place.

The system gathers trade data in real time, updating the Underlying Index every time a new ZEC-USD and ZEC-USDC trade is reported by any of the Constituent Platforms. For each exchange, the system looks at all ZEC-USD and ZEC-USDC trades that occurred in the past 24 hours. Each trade’s price is multiplied by the amount of ZEC traded, giving more influence to larger trades. The sum of all these “price x volume” values is divided by the total volume traded in the 24-hour period, producing a volume-weighted average price for each Constituent Platform.

Once the volume-weighted average prices are calculated for all Constituent Platforms, the Underlying Index combines them, with each Constituent Platform’s contribution to the final rate weighted according to its trading volume. This means that Constituent Platforms with more trading activity have a greater influence on the final rate. If a Constituent Platform has not reported a recent trade, its influence on the Underlying Index is reduced over time, ensuring the Underlying Index reflects the most current market conditions. The methodology also includes an outlier detection step; if a Constituent Platform’s price is significantly different from the others, its influence is reduced or removed to prevent distortion of the index.

Selection of Constituent Platforms

To determine which Constituent Platforms are included in the Underlying Index, a structured and multi-step methodology is followed to ensure that only the most reliable and representative trading venues are selected. The process begins by establishing a broad universe of potential platforms, which includes all cryptocurrency exchanges that meet the baseline eligibility criteria set out in the [methodology name]. These criteria require that an exchange must be classified as either Category 1 or Category 2, with Category 1 generally referring to U.S.-licensed exchanges and Category 2 to non-U.S. licensed exchanges that still meet certain standards. There must be at least two Category 1 exchanges included, ensuring a foundation of regulated and reputable platforms.

From this initial universe, further quantitative filters are applied. Each exchange’s trading volume for the relevant currency pair over the prior three months is measured as a percentage of the total trading volume across all eligible exchanges. For exchanges already contributing to the Underlying Index, a minimum of 2% of total volume is required, while new or non-contributing exchanges must meet a 3% threshold. Additionally, only exchanges that support direct USD-denominated trading for the asset in question are considered. Any exchange that has been specifically excluded under the policy methodology is automatically ineligible.

Once the eligible universe is established, exchanges are ranked by their three-month trading volume. The two highest-ranked Category 1 exchanges are selected first. If there are not enough Category 1 exchanges meeting the volume requirement, the threshold is relaxed until two are included. The remaining Constituent Platforms are then chosen based on overall trading volume, up to a maximum of eight platforms in total. If, after this process, there are fewer than three eligible exchanges, the volume requirements are further relaxed to ensure a minimum of three Constituent Platforms are included. In rare cases where even these relaxed standards cannot be met, the Underlying Index Committee will determine the appropriate course of action, which may include further adjustments or, if necessary, the removal of the index.

Table of Contents

This methodology ensures that the Underlying Index is constructed from a universe of exchanges that are not only active and liquid, but also meet high standards for regulatory compliance and operational integrity. The process is reviewed and updated quarterly, with ongoing monitoring to address any anomalies or disruptions, thereby maintaining the accuracy and reliability of the index over time.

As of [ ], 2026, the digital asset trading platforms included in the Underlying Index were [ ]. As further described below, the Sponsor and the Trust reasonably believe each of these digital asset trading platforms are in material compliance with applicable licensing requirements based on the trading platform category and jurisdiction, as detailed below, and maintain practices and policies designed to comply with AML and KYC regulations.

[Descriptions of digital asset trading platforms to be provided.]

The below table reflects the trading volume in ZEC and market share of the ZEC-U.S. dollar trading pairs of each of the Constituent Platforms included in the Underlying Index as of [ ], 2026:

Digital Asset Trading Platforms included in the Underlying Index as of [ ], 2026

Volume
($)

Market Share(1)

[ ]

[ ]%

[ ]

[ ]%

[ ]

[ ]%

Total ZEC-U.S. Dollar trading pair

[ ]

[ ]%

(1)

Market share is calculated using trading volume provided by the Benchmark Provider.

The domicile, regulation and legal compliance of the digital asset trading platforms included in the Underlying Index varies. Information regarding each digital asset trading platform may be found, where available, on the websites for such digital asset trading platforms, among other places.

Although the Pricing Benchmark and the Underlying Index are designed to accurately capture the market price of ZEC, third parties may be able to purchase and sell ZEC on public or private markets not included among the Constituent Platforms, and such transactions may take place at prices materially higher or lower than the Benchmark Price. Moreover, there may be variances in the prices of ZEC on the various digital asset trading platforms, including as a result of differences in fee structures or administrative procedures on different digital asset trading platforms. To the extent such prices differ materially from the Benchmark Price, investors may lose confidence in the Shares’ ability to track the market price of ZEC.

Pricing Benchmark Disclaimer

[Disclaimers to be provided.]

Trust Structure

The Trust is a statutory trust formed under the Delaware Statutory Trust Act, and the Trust Agreement constitutes the “governing instrument” of the Trust under the laws of the State of Delaware relating to statutory trusts. The Trust holds ZEC and is expected from time to time to issue Baskets in exchange for deposits of cash and to distribute cash in connection with redemptions of Baskets. The Trust’s investment objective is to seek to provide exposure to the price of ZEC held by the Trust, less the expenses of the Trust’s operations and other liabilities. In seeking to achieve its investment objective, the Trust will hold ZEC and establish its NAV by reference to the Pricing Benchmark.

The Sponsor believes the Trust is a straight-forward solution to seek its investment objective. Besides cash received in connection with purchase orders of Baskets, the Trust’s sole asset is expected to be ZEC held with the Custodian. The Sponsor believes that the Pricing Benchmark is a representative value for the USD-ZEC price of ZEC, based on the methodology administered by the Benchmark Provider.

The Trust processes and pays its only ordinary expense (the Sponsor Fee) in ZEC. The Trust will only sell ZEC (1) in connection with the redemption of Baskets for cash, (2) on an as-needed basis to pay Trust expenses not

Table of Contents

assumed by the Sponsor, (3) in the event the Trust terminates and liquidates its assets, or (4) as otherwise required by law or regulation. This restriction provides protection against potential attempts by bad actors to manipulate the operation of the Trust based on how the Trust calculates its NAV.

Investors may obtain on a 24-hour basis ZEC pricing information based on the spot price for one ZEC from various financial information service providers. Current spot prices are also generally available with bid/ask spreads from digital asset trading platforms, including the digital asset trading platforms. Market prices for the Shares are available from a variety of sources including brokerage firms, information websites and other information service providers. The NAV of the Trust is published by the Sponsor at the Trust’s website ([website]) on each day that the Exchange is open for regular trading and is posted on the Trust’s website.

CALCULATION OF NAV

Under normal circumstances, the Trust’s only asset will be ZEC and, under limited circumstances, cash. The Trust’s ZEC is carried, for financial statement purposes, at fair value, as required by the U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”). The Trust’s NAV will be determined by the Administrator once each Exchange trading day at 4:00 p.m. Eastern time (“ET”), or as soon thereafter as practicable. The NAV for a normal trading day will be released 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. and almost always by 8:00 p.m.). The pause between 4:00 p.m. and 5:30 p.m. (or later) provides an opportunity for the Sponsor to algorithmically detect, flag, investigate, and correct unusual pricing should it occur.

The Administrator will calculate the NAV of the Trust by multiplying the number of ZEC held by the Trust by the Pricing Benchmark Price for such day, adding any additional receivables and subtracting the accrued but unpaid expenses and liabilities of the Trust. The Trust’s NAV per Share is calculated by dividing the Trust’s NAV by the number of Shares then outstanding. The Administrator will determine the price of the Trust’s ZEC by reference to the Pricing Benchmark, which is published between 4:00 p.m. and 4:30 p.m. ET on every calendar day. The methodology used to calculate the Pricing Benchmark Price to value ZEC in determining the NAV of the Trust may not be deemed consistent with GAAP. To the extent the methodology used to calculate the Pricing Benchmark is deemed inconsistent with GAAP, the Trust will utilize an alternative GAAP-consistent pricing source for purposes of the Trust’s periodic financial statements.

The Sponsor has the exclusive authority to determine the NAV of the Trust. The Sponsor has delegated to the Administrator the responsibility to calculate the NAV of the Trust and the NAV, based on a pricing source selected by the Sponsor (i.e., the Pricing Benchmark). The Administrator will determine the NAV of the Trust each business day. In determining the NAV of the Trust, the Administrator values the ZEC held by the Trust based on the Pricing Benchmark, unless otherwise determined by the Sponsor in its sole discretion. If the Pricing Benchmark is not available or the Sponsor in its sole discretion determines that the Pricing Benchmark should not be used, the Trust’s holdings may be fair valued in accordance with the policy approved by the Sponsor. The Sponsor does not anticipate that the need to “fair value” ZEC will be a common occurrence.

The Indicative Trust Value (the “ITV”) will be calculated by using the prior day’s closing NAV per Share of the Trust as a base and updating that value throughout the trading day to reflect changes in the most recently reported price level of the Pricing Benchmark. The ITV 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 ITV 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. The Exchange will disseminate the ITV value through the facilities of CTA/CQ High Speed Lines that allow for high-speed data transmission. In addition, the ITV will be published on the Exchange’s website and will be available through online information services such as Bloomberg and Reuters.

Dissemination of the ITV provides additional information that is not otherwise available to the public and may be useful to investors and market professionals in connection with the trading of the Shares on the Exchange. Investors and market professionals will be able throughout the trading day to compare the market price of the Trust and the ITV. If the market price of the Shares diverges significantly from the ITV, 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 ITV, a market professional could buy the Shares on the Exchange and sell short

Table of Contents

futures contracts. Such arbitrage trades can tighten the tracking between the market price of the Trust and the ITV and thus can be beneficial to all market participants.

The Sponsor reserves the right to adjust the Share price of the Trust in the future to maintain convenient trading ranges for investors. 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.

The Trust’s periodic financial statements may not utilize the NAV of the Trust determined by reference to the Pricing Benchmark to the extent the methodology used to calculate the Pricing Benchmark is deemed not to be consistent with GAAP. The Trust’s periodic financial statements will be prepared in accordance with the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification Topic 820, “Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures” (“ASC Topic 820”) and utilize an exchange-traded price from the Trust’s principal market for ZEC on the Trust’s financial statement measurement date. The Sponsor will determine in its sole discretion the valuation sources and policies used to prepare the Trust’s financial statements in accordance with GAAP. The Trust intends to engage a third-party vendor to obtain a price from a principal market for ZEC, which will be determined and designated by such third-party vendor daily based on its consideration of several exchange characteristics, including oversight, and the volume and frequency of trades. Under GAAP, such a price is expected to be deemed a Level 1 input in accordance with the ASC Topic 820 because it is expected to be a quoted price in active markets for identical assets or liabilities.

To determine which market is the Trust’s principal market (or in the absence of a principal market, the most advantageous market) for purposes of calculating the Trust’s financial statements, the Trust follows ASC 820-10, which outlines the application of fair value accounting. ASC 820-10 determines fair value to be the price that would be received for ZEC 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 ZEC 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. The Trust may transact through ZEC Trading Counterparties, in multiple markets, and its application of ASC 820-10 reflects this fact. The Trust anticipates that, while multiple venues and types of markets will be available to the ZEC Trading Counterparties from whom the Sponsor acquires or disposes of the Trust’s ZEC, the principal market in each scenario is determined by looking at the market-based level of volume and ZEC trading activity. ZEC Trading Counterparties may transact in a Brokered Market, a Dealer Market, Principal-to-Principal Markets and Exchange Markets, each as defined in the FASB ASC Master Glossary. 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 aforementioned analysis, an Exchange Market has been selected as the Trust’s principal market. The Trust determines its principal market (or in the absence of a principal market the most advantageous market) on a quarterly basis to determine which market is its Principal Market for the purpose of calculating fair value for the creation of quarterly and annual financial statements.

The process that the Sponsor has developed for identifying a principal market, as prescribed in ASC 820-10, which outlines the application of fair value accounting. The process begins by identifying publicly available, well established and reputable ZEC trading venues (Exchange Markets, as defined in the FASB ASC Master Glossary), which are selected by the Sponsor and its affiliates in their sole discretion. Those markets include [ ]. The Sponsor then, through a service provider, calculates on each valuation period, the highest volume venue during the 60-minute period prior to 4:00 ET for ZEC. The Sponsor then identifies that market as the principal market for ZEC during that period, and uses the price for ZEC from that venue at 4:00 ET as the principal market price.

Table of Contents

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE TRUST

The Trust

The Trust is a Delaware statutory trust, formed on October 6, 2026, pursuant to the Delaware Statutory Trust Act. The Trust continuously issues shares representing fractional undivided beneficial interest in and ownership of the Trust that may be purchased and sold on the Exchange. The Trust will operate pursuant to Trust Agreement, as amended and/or restated from time to time. 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 October 1, 2026.

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 represented by the NAV of the Baskets being created or redeemed. The total amount of cash 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 Sponsor recognizes that the size of the Baskets may impact the effectiveness of the arbitrage mechanism of the Trust’s creation and redemption process, and accordingly may adjust the size of the Baskets to enhance the activities of the Authorized Participants in the secondary market for the Trust’s Shares.

The Trust has no fixed termination date.

The Trust’s Fees and Expenses

The Trust will pay the Sponsor an annual unified fee of 0.25% of the Trust’s ZEC Holdings (the “Sponsor Fee”). The Trust’s “ZEC Holdings” is the quantity of the Trust’s ZEC plus any cash or other assets held by the Trust represented in ZEC as calculated using the Pricing Benchmark price, less its liabilities (which include estimated accrued but unpaid fees and expenses) represented in ZEC as calculated using the Pricing Benchmark price. The Sponsor Fee is paid by the Trust to the Sponsor as compensation for services performed under the Trust Agreement. The Administrator will calculate the Sponsor Fee in respect of each day by reference to the prior day’s ZEC Holdings. Except for periods during which all or a portion of the Sponsor Fee is being waived, the Sponsor Fee will accrue daily in ZEC and be payable monthly in ZEC or cash. To the extent there are any on-chain transaction fees incurred in connection with the transfers of ZEC to pay the Sponsor Fee, the Sponsor, and not the Trust, shall bear such fees. The Sponsor may, at its sole discretion and from time to time, waive all or a portion of the Sponsor Fee for stated periods of time. The Sponsor is under no obligation to waive any portion of its fees and any such waiver shall create no obligation to waive any such fees during any period not covered by the waiver.

As partial consideration for its receipt of the Sponsor Fee, the Sponsor is obligated under the Trust Agreement to assume and pay all fees and other expenses incurred by the Trust in the ordinary course of its affairs, excluding taxes, but including: (i) the fees of the Trust’s third-party service providers including, but not limited to, the Marketing Agent, the Administrator, the Custodian, the Cash Custodian, the Transfer Agent, the Benchmark Provider, and the Trustee, (ii) the fees and expenses related to the listing, quotation or trading of the Shares on the Exchange (including customary legal, marketing and audit fees and expenses), (iii) legal fees and expenses incurred in the ordinary course, (iv) audit fees, (v) regulatory fees, including, if applicable, any fees relating to the registration of the Trust and Shares, including any ongoing filings related to the offering of Shares, under the 1933 Act or the 1934 Act, (vi) printing and mailing costs, (vii) costs of maintaining the Trust’s website and (viii) applicable license fees (each, a “Sponsor-paid Expense” and collectively, the “Sponsor-paid Expenses”), provided that any expense that qualifies as an Extraordinary Expense (as defined below) will not be deemed to be a Sponsor-paid Expense. There is no cap on the amount of Sponsor-paid Expenses. The Sponsor has also assumed all fees and expenses related to the organization and offering of the Trust and the Shares.

Table of Contents

To the extent it does not have cash readily available, the Sponsor shall cause the transfer or sale of ZEC in such quantity as may be necessary to permit the payment of Trust expenses and liabilities not assumed by the Sponsor or for payment of redemption proceeds to Authorized Participants. The Trust will not bear any costs associated with the transfer or sale of ZEC to pay the Sponsor Fee. To the extent the Trust incurs any Extraordinary Expenses, the Trust will bear the costs of any transfers or sales of ZEC to pay such expenses. The Trust will seek to transfer ZEC at such times and in the smallest amounts required to permit such payments as they become due. With respect to transfers or sales necessary to pay Trust expenses and liabilities that are denominated other than in ZEC, the amount of ZEC transferred or sold may vary from time to time depending on the actual sales price of ZEC relative to the Trust’s expenses and liabilities (e.g., if the price of ZEC falls, the amount of ZEC needed to be transferred or sold to pay an expense denominated in U.S. dollars will increase). To the extent the Trust must buy or sell ZEC, the Trust may do so through a third-party digital asset broker or dealer. When the Trust buys or sells ZEC, the Sponsor seeks quotes from its ZEC trading counterparties. Such transactions are typically conducted over the counter rather than over a trading platform or similar order matching service. The Sponsor will select third-party brokers or dealers that it believes have implemented adequate anti-money laundering, know-your-customer and other legal compliance policies and procedures.

Termination of the Trust

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

•

Shares are delisted from the Exchange and are not approved for listing on another national securities exchange within five business days of their delisting;

•

180 days have elapsed since the Trustee notified the Sponsor of the Trustee’s election to resign or since the Sponsor removed the Trustee, and a successor trustee has not been appointed and accepted its appointment;

•

the SEC determines that the Trust is an investment company under the 1940 Act, and the Sponsor has made the determination that termination of the Trust is advisable;

•

the CFTC determines that the Trust is a commodity pool under the Commodity Exchange Act, and the Sponsor has made the determination that termination of the Trust is advisable;

•

the Trust is determined to be a “money service business” under the regulations promulgated by FinCEN under the authority of the U.S. Bank Secrecy Act and is required to comply with certain FinCEN regulations thereunder or is determined to be a “money transmitter” (or equivalent designation) under the laws of any state in which the Trust operates and is required to seek licensing or otherwise comply with state licensing requirements, and the Sponsor has made the determination that termination of the Trust is advisable;

•

a United States regulator requires the Trust to shut down or forces the Trust to liquidate its ZEC or seizes, impounds or otherwise restricts access to the Trust Estate (as defined in the Trust Agreement);

•

any ongoing event exists that either prevents the Trust from making or makes impractical the Trust’s reasonable efforts to make a fair determination of the price of ZEC for purposes of determining the NAV of the Trust;

•

the Sponsor determines that the aggregate net assets of the Trust in relation to the operating expenses of the Trust make it unreasonable or imprudent to continue the business of the Trust;

•

the Trust fails to qualify for treatment, or ceases to be treated, as a “grantor trust” under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”) or any comparable provision of the laws of any State

Table of Contents

or other jurisdiction where that treatment is sought, and the Sponsor determines that, because of that tax treatment or change in tax treatment, termination of the Trust is advisable;

•

60 days have elapsed since DTC or another depository has ceased to act as depository with respect to the Shares, and the Sponsor has not identified another depository that is willing to act in such capacity;

•

the Trustee elects to terminate the Trust after the Sponsor is conclusively deemed to have resigned effective immediately as a result of the Sponsor being adjudged bankrupt or insolvent, or a receiver of the Sponsor or of its property being appointed, or a trustee or liquidator or any public officer taking charge or control of the Sponsor or of its property or affairs for the purpose of rehabilitation, conservation or liquidation and a successor sponsor has not been appointed; or

•

the Sponsor elects to terminate the Trust after the Trustee, Administrator or the Custodian (or any successor trustee, administrator or custodian) resigns or otherwise ceases to be the trustee, administrator or custodian of the Trust, as applicable, and no replacement trustee, administrator and/or custodian acceptable to the Sponsor is engaged.

In addition, the Trust may be dissolved at any time for any reason by the Sponsor in its sole discretion. 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; 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 termination of the Trust, 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. 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 ZEC 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 ZEC holdings upon the dissolution 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

Table of Contents

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 Shareholders of any amendments to the Trust Agreement in a Prospectus supplement and/or a current report on Form 8-K or in its annual or quarterly reports.

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 Custodian, or the Benchmark Provider. The Sponsor, or its agent, 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 has agreed to pay all normal operating expenses except for Extraordinary Expenses out of the Sponsor’s unified fee.

The Sponsor is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Winklevoss Asset Services Holdings, LLC. Under the Delaware Limited Liability Company Act and the governing documents of the Sponsor, the sole member of the Sponsor Winklevoss Asset Services Holdings, LLC, is not responsible for the debts, obligations and liabilities of the Sponsor solely by reason of being the sole member of the Sponsor. At present, the primary business activities of the Sponsor and its subsidiaries are the provision of investment advisory, management, shareholder, investment information and assistance and certain fiduciary services for individual and institutional investors, exchange-traded funds, private trusts, hedge funds and digital asset treasury companies and accounts. While the Sponsor’s personnel have significant experience managing exchange-traded vehicles such as the Trust, including exchange-traded vehicles that hold digital assets, the Sponsor is a newly-formed entity with no prior experience managing pooled investment vehicles.

The principal office of the Sponsor is:

Winklevoss Asset Services, LLC
301 N. Market Street, Suite 1463
Wilmington, DE 19801
(646) 751-4444

The Zcash Ecosystem Partner

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 Delaware Statutory Trust Act (“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.

Table of Contents

Duties of the Trustee.

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. The duties of the Trustee will be limited to (i) accepting legal process served on the Trust in the State of Delaware and (ii) the execution of any certificates required to be filed with the Delaware Secretary of State which the Delaware Trustee is required to execute under the DSTA.

Resignation, discharge or removal of Trustee; successor Trustees.

The Trustee may resign at any time by giving at least one hundred eighty (180) days’ advance written notice to the Sponsor. The Sponsor may remove the Trustee at any time by giving at least sixty (60) 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 or waived by the outgoing Trustee. 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 one hundred eighty (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.

Liability of the Trustee.

The Trustee shall not be liable under any circumstances, except for its own fraud, willful misconduct, bad faith or gross negligence with respect to its express duties under the Trust Agreement. The Trustee will have no obligation to monitor or supervise the obligations of the Sponsor, Transfer Agent, Administrator, Custodian, or any other person.

Trustee’s Fee and Indemnity.

The Trustee will be compensated by the Trust, out of the Sponsors Fee, for the Trustee’s fees. The Trustee will be indemnified by the Trust for any expenses it incurs that arise out of or are imposed upon or asserted at any time against it in connection with the execution or delivery of the Trust Agreement relating to or arising out of the creation, operation or termination of the Trust, or the performance of its obligations pursuant to the Trust Agreement or the transactions contemplated thereby, except to the extent that such expenses result from gross negligence, willful misconduct or bad faith of the Trustee; provided that any such indemnification will be recoverable only from the assets of the Trust.

The Trustee and any of the officers, directors, affiliates, employees and agents of the Trustee shall be indemnified by the Trust and held harmless against any loss, damage, liability (including liability under state or federal securities laws), claim, action, suit, cost, expense, disbursement (including the reasonable fees and expenses of counsel generally and in connection with its enforcement of its indemnification rights), tax or penalty of any kind and nature whatsoever, to the extent arising out of, imposed upon or asserted at any time against such indemnified person in connection with the execution or delivery of the Trust Agreement, the performance of its obligations under the Trust Agreement, the creation, operation or termination of the Trust or the transactions contemplated therein; provided, however, that (i) the Trust shall not be required to indemnify any such indemnified person for any such expenses which are a result of the willful misconduct,

Table of Contents

bad faith or gross negligence related to the express duties of the Trustee and (ii) any such indemnification will be recoverable only from the assets of the Trust; provided however that, to the extent that the Trust has not satisfied such indemnification obligation by the sixtieth (60th) day following written demand therefor, the Sponsor shall indemnify and hold the Trustee harmless from and against any such amounts. As security for any amounts owing to the Trustee under the above-referenced indemnity, the Trustee shall have a lien against the Trust property. The obligations of the Trust to indemnify such indemnified persons under the Trust Agreement shall survive resignation or removal of the Trustee and the termination of the Trust Agreement.

The Administrator

Under the Administration Agreement, the Administrator provides necessary administrative, tax and accounting services and financial reporting for the maintenance and operations of the Trust. In addition, the Administrator makes available the office space, equipment, personnel and facilities to provide such services. The Administrator will also facilitate the instruction to transfer ZEC required for the operation of the Trust.

The Custodian

The Custodian is responsible for safekeeping all of the ZEC owned by the Trust. The Custodian is an affiliate of the Sponsor. The Sponsor has responsibility for opening the ZEC Accounts with the Custodian. In addition, the Custodian facilitates the transfer of ZEC required for the operation of the Trust upon instructions from the Sponsor or the Administrator.

The Transfer Agent

[ ] serves as the transfer agent for the Trust. 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. The Trust’s Transfer Agent will facilitate the settlement of Shares in response to the placement of creation orders and redemption orders from financial firms that are authorized to purchase or redeem Shares with the Authorized Participants.

The Cash Custodian

[ ] also serves as the cash custodian for the Trust. The Cash Custodian is responsible for safekeeping all cash and other non-ZEC assets of the Trust.

Index Services

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

The Marketing Agent

The Marketing Agent is responsible for working with the Administrator to review and approve, or reject, purchase and redemption orders of Baskets placed by Authorized Participants and for reviewing and approving the marketing materials prepared by the Sponsor for compliance with applicable SEC and FINRA advertising laws, rules, and regulations.

ZEC Trading Counterparties

The Trust buys and sells ZEC through ZEC trading counterparties selected by the Sponsor (not any Authorized Participant). The Trust does not currently intend to engage a prime broker or other liquidity provider providing similar services. As of [ ], 2026, the Trust has entered into agreements with [ ] to serve as ZEC trading counterparties to the Trust. The Sponsor is not aware of, nor has it requested any information relating to, any other affiliation or material relationship between such ZEC trading counterparties and the Authorized Participants or other service providers of the Trust in executing a transaction in ZEC with the Trust. The agreements with the ZEC trading counterparties provide that once the Sponsor determines based on its execution procedures which counterparty to execute a trade with and the Sponsor has placed a

Table of Contents

trade with a specific counterparty, that counterparty is contractually obligated to settle that trade. The ZEC trading counterparties will have no obligation to participate in cash orders for creations and redemptions. Each of these third parties are, and any other trading counterparty the Trust places orders with in the future will be, subject to U.S. federal and/or state licensing requirements or similar laws in non-U.S. jurisdictions and maintain practices and policies designed to comply with AML and KYC regulations or similar laws in non-U.S. jurisdictions.

The Sponsor will decide which ZEC trading counterparties to place trade orders with based on, among other things, their ability to provide best execution for the Trust’s orders, any relevant regulatory or disciplinary history, and competitiveness of pricing. Neither the Trust nor the Sponsor anticipate receiving any “soft dollar” or similar benefits from the selection of any ZEC trading counterparty.

CUSTODY OF THE TRUST’S ASSETS

ZEC Custody Generally

The Trust’s Custodian will keep custody of all of the Trust’s ZEC relating to its ZEC Account [and Clearing Account]. As a fiduciary under Section 100 of the New York Banking Law, the Custodian is held to specific capital reserve requirements and banking compliance standards. The Custodian is also subject to the laws, regulations and rules of applicable governmental or regulatory authorities, including money service business regulations under FinCEN, U.S. state money transmission laws, the Bank Secrecy Act of 1970, the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001, other anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing laws and regulations, issuances from OFAC, the New York Banking Law and regulations promulgated by the NYSDFS. The Custodian has been providing services as a limited purpose trust company licensed by the NYSDFS since 2015 and is a qualified custodian for purposes of Rule 206(4)-2(d)(6) under the Advisers Act.

ZEC private keys are stored in two different forms: “hot wallet” storage, whereby the private keys are connected to the internet, and “cold” storage, where private keys are stored completely offline. The Trust’s ZEC will be stored by the Custodian offline in cold storage. When under the purview of the Custodian, ZEC will only enter hot storage in the case of creations and redemptions or withdrawals to pay the Sponsor Fee or Extraordinary Expenses, meaning that the ZEC will only be in hot storage for a temporary period. The Custodian will store private keys in geographically diverse regions across the continental United States. The Custodian has adopted the following security policies and practices with respect to digital assets held in its hot wallet: HSMs are used to store and manage hot wallet private keys; operational redundancy is achieved through geographic disbursement of failover storage facilities and hardware; all hot wallet HSMs are stored within secured facilities that are access-controlled, guarded, and monitored; tiered access-controls are applied to the Custodian’s production environment to restrict access to employees based on role, following the principle of least-privilege; administrative access to its production environment requires multi-factor authentication; and it offers additional account level protections such as crypto address whitelisting.

The Custodian may receive deposits of ZEC but may not send ZEC without the use of the corresponding private keys. In order to send ZEC 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 Custodian can upload the fully signed transaction to an online network and transfer the ZEC. Because the Custodian may need to retrieve private keys from offline storage prior to initiating transactions, the initiation or crediting of withdrawals or other transactions may be delayed.

The Trust may engage third-party custodians or vendors besides the Custodian and Cash Custodian to provide custody and security services for all or a portion of its ZEC and/or cash, and the Sponsor will pay the custody fees and any other expenses associated with any such third-party custodian or vendor. The Sponsor is responsible for overseeing the Custodian and the Trust’s other service providers. The Sponsor may, in its sole discretion, add or terminate the Custodian at any time. The Sponsor may, in its sole discretion, change the custodian for the Trust’s ZEC holdings, but it will have no obligation whatsoever to do so or to seek any particular terms for the Trust from other such custodians. However, the Sponsor will only enter into ZEC custody arrangements with custodians that meet the Sponsor’s criteria, including an agreement to maintain Trust assets in a segregated account, to maintain insurance and to store the Trust’s private keys in cold storage or in such other manner as the Sponsor determines provides reasonable protection for the Trust’s assets from

Table of Contents

loss or theft. The Trust may hold cash and cash equivalents on a temporary basis to pay expenses or facilitate creation and redemption transactions. The Trust has entered into a cash custody agreement with Cash Custodian under which Cash Custodian acts as custodian of the Trust’s cash.

Custody with the Custodian

The Custodian will use segregated cold storage ZEC addresses for the Trust’s ZEC Account, which are separate from the ZEC addresses that the Custodian uses for its other customers and which are directly verifiable via the Zcash Blockchain. The Custodian will at all times record and identify in its books and records that such ZEC constitute the property of the Trust. The Custodian will not withdraw the Trust’s ZEC from the Trust’s ZEC Account, or loan, hypothecate, pledge or otherwise encumber the Trust’s ZEC, without the Trust’s instruction, nor will the Sponsor or any other entity or service provider. The Trust will not lease or loan ZEC held in the Trust’s ZEC Account and will not give instructions to that effect.

The Custodian was the first digital asset platform to achieve SOC 1 Type II and SOC 2 Type II certification for custody, and its custody operations are regularly audited. The Custodian has adopted the Gemini BSA/AML Program, which includes a customer identification program, annual training of all employees and officers in anti-money laundering regulation, filing of Suspicious Activity Reports and Currency Transaction Reports with FinCEN and annual internal and independent audits. The Custodian has also instituted the following internal controls: multiple signatories are required to transfer funds out of cold storage; the Custodian’s Chief Executive Officer and President are unable to individually or jointly transfer funds out of cold storage; all private keys are stored offsite in secure facilities; all employees undergo criminal and credit background checks and are subject to ongoing background checks throughout their employment; and all remote access by employees uses public-key authentication.

Insurance

The Custodian currently maintains [$200 million] in specie coverage for digital assets held in its cold storage system, which the Custodian has represented to the Trust applies to all customer assets held at the Custodian, including the Trust’s assets. Such insurance is shared with other customers and is not specific to the Trust. The Trust is not a named beneficiary under the Custodian’s insurance policies, though the Custodian has represented to the Sponsor that the insurance covers customer losses, including losses suffered by the Trust, arising from specified events, including fraud, theft, and cyber-security breaches. The amounts and continuing availability of this coverage are subject to change at the Custodian’s sole discretion. The Custodian also maintains separate commercial crime insurance coverage for digital assets custodied in its hot wallet.

In the event of a fork of the ZEC Blockchain, the Custodian may, in its sole discretion, determine whether or not to support (or cease supporting) either branch of the ZEC blockchain entirely, provided that it 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. Provided that the Custodian shall make commercially reasonable efforts to assist the Trust and take the necessary steps to enable the Trust to retrieve and/or obtain any assets related to a fork, airdrop or similar event, the Custodian shall not have any liability, obligation or responsibility whatsoever arising out of or relating to the operation of an unsupported branch of the ZEC blockchain in the event of a fork. The Custodian does not have any responsibility to support airdrops. The Trust Agreement provides, and the Sponsor has communicated to the Custodian, that the Trust disclaims all rights to Incidental Rights and IR Assets.

Under the Custodial Services Agreement, the Custodian’s liability is subject to the following limitations, among others: (i) the Custodian is not liable for any amount greater than the value of the ZEC on deposit in the Trust’s ZEC Account at the time of, and directly relating to, the events giving rise to the liability; (ii) the Custodian is not liable for any indirect, incidental, special, punitive or consequential losses, whether or not foreseeable; (iii) the Custodian is not liable for losses arising out of actions that are in the Trust’s control, including the Trust’s failure to follow security protocols or to secure its credentials; and (iv) the Custodian is

Table of Contents

not liable for delays, suspension of operations, failure in performance, or interruption of service to the extent directly due to a cause or condition beyond its reasonable control. See “Material Contracts — Custodial Services Agreement.”

As all custody wallets are segregated, the existence of ZEC held by the Trust can be verified on-chain by the Sponsor or any other authorized party.

Forks and Air Drops

In the event of a fork, the Custodial Services Agreement provides that the Custodian may evaluate the consequences of a fork and determine which chain resulting from the fork it will support as an eligible asset for its customers including the Trust. The Custodian will determine in its sole discretion whether to support and make available to clients assets resulting from forks or air drops. In the event that the Trust may have a right to claim assets resulting from a fork or air drop, the Custodian will seek approval of the Trust before claiming such assets on behalf of the Trust and making an entry of ownership on the Custodian’s books and records for the Trust’s account with the Custodian. The Sponsor will disclaim such assets except as described herein. The Sponsor has not communicated any anticipatory disclaimer to the Custodian regarding forked or air dropped assets and will disclaim or claim them on a case-by-case basis.

Custody of the Trust’s Cash

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. 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 has advised us as follows: It 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 1934 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.

Table of Contents

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 has advised us that it 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 has or DTC Participants have given such direction.

SEED CAPITAL INVESTOR

On [ ], 2026, [ ] (the “Seed Capital Investor”) purchased [ ] Shares at a per-Share price of $[ ] (the “Seed Shares”). Total proceeds to the Trust from the sale of the Seed Shares were $[ ]. The Trust will purchase $[ ] in ZEC with the proceeds of the Seed Shares. The Seed Capital Investor will act as a statutory underwriter in connection with the Seed Shares. As of the date of this Prospectus, these [ ] Shares represent all of the outstanding Shares. The Seed Capital Investor may offer all of the Shares comprising the Seed Shares to the public pursuant to this Prospectus.

The Seed Capital Investor will not receive from the Trust, the Sponsor or any of their affiliates any fee or other compensation in connection with the sale of the Seed Shares.

The Seed Capital Investor will not act as an Authorized Participant with respect to the Seed Shares, and its activities with respect to the Seed Shares will be distinct from those of an Authorized Participant. Unlike most Authorized Participants, the Seed Capital Investor is not in the business of purchasing and selling securities for its own account or the accounts of others. The Seed Capital Investor will not act as an Authorized Participant to purchase (or redeem) Baskets in the future.

Table of Contents

PLAN OF DISTRIBUTION

Buying and Selling Shares

Most investors buy and sell Shares of the Trust in secondary market transactions through brokers. Shares trade on the Exchange under the ticker symbol “WINK.” Shares are bought and sold throughout the trading day like other publicly traded securities. When buying or selling Shares through a broker, most investors 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. In addition to, and independent of the initial purchase of the Seed Shares (described above), the Trust continuously offers Baskets consisting of [ ] 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. 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. For example, the initial Authorized Participant will be a statutory underwriter with respect to the initial purchase of Baskets and the Seed Capital Investor will be a statutory underwriter with respect to the Seed Shares. 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

Table of Contents

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.

As of [ ], 2026, [ ] have each executed an Authorized Participant Agreement.

Selling Shareholders

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 of such Shares.

Selling shareholders (each, a “Selling Shareholder”) may sell Shares owned by them 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. Selling Shareholders may redeem Shares held in Basket size through an Authorized Participant. See “Conflicts of Interest.”

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 the amount of ZEC or cash represented by the Baskets being created or redeemed (the “Basket Deposit”). The amount of ZEC required in a Basket Deposit (the “Basket ZEC Deposit”) and the amount of cash required in a Basket Deposit (the “Basket Cash Deposit”) are based on the quantity or value of the quantity, as applicable, of ZEC or cash attributable to each Share of the Trust (net of accrued but unpaid Sponsor Fees and any accrued but unpaid Extraordinary Expenses) being created or redeemed determined as of 4:00 p.m. ET on the day the order to create or redeem Baskets is properly received.

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, that are not required to register as broker-dealers to engage in securities transactions described below and (2) DTC Participants. To become an Authorized Participant, a person must enter into an Authorized Participant Agreement with the Marketing Agent.

In connection with a Cash Creation Order (as defined below) or Cash Redemption Order (as defined below), an Authorized Participant is responsible for any operational processing and brokerage costs, transfers fees, network fees and stamp taxes (the “Transaction Fee”). The Transaction Fee may be reduced, increased or otherwise changed by the Sponsor. Authorized Participants who make deposits with the Trust in exchange for Baskets receive no fees, commissions or other form of compensation or inducement of any kind from either the Trust or the Sponsor, and no such person will have any obligation or responsibility to the Sponsor or the Trust to effect any sale or resale of Shares.

Certain Authorized Participants and their agents and affiliates are expected to be capable of participating directly in the spot markets. Some Authorized Participants or their agents and affiliates may from time to time buy or sell ZEC and may profit in these instances. To the extent that the activities of Authorized Participants or their agents and affiliates have a meaningful effect on the ZEC market, it could affect the price of ZEC and impact the ability of the Authorized Participants to effectively arbitrage the difference between the price at which the shares trade and the NAV of the Trust. While the Sponsor currently expects that Authorized Participants’ and their agents’ and affiliates’ direct activities in the ZEC or securities markets in connection with the creation and redemption activities of the Trust will not significantly affect the price of ZEC or the

Table of Contents

Shares, the impact of the activities of the Trust and its Authorized Participants and their agents and affiliates on ZEC or securities markets is unknown and beyond the control of the Sponsor.

Each Authorized Participant will be required to be registered as a broker-dealer under the 1934 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 following description of the procedures for the creation and redemption of Baskets is only a summary and a Shareholder should refer to the form of Authorized Participant Agreement for more detail. A form of Authorized Participant Agreement will be filed as an exhibit to the registration statement of which this Prospectus is a part.

Creation Procedures

On any business day, an Authorized Participant may place an order with the Transfer Agent to create one or more Baskets. For purposes of processing creation and redemption orders, a “business day” means any day other than a day when the Exchange is closed for regular trading. Purchase orders must be placed by the close of Regular Trading Hours on the Exchange or an earlier time as determined and communicated by the Sponsor and its agent. A purchase order will be effective on the date it is received in good order by the Transfer Agent (“Purchase Order Date”).

The manner by which creations are made is dictated by the terms of the Authorized Participant Agreement. Creation orders may be denominated and settled in an amount of ZEC (“In-Kind Creation Order”) or cash (“Cash Creation Order”). By placing an In-Kind Creation Order, an Authorized Participant agrees to facilitate the deposit of ZEC with the Custodian, either directly or indirectly through an Authorized Participant Designee. By placing a Cash Creation Order, an Authorized Participant agrees to facilitate the deposit of cash with the Cash Custodian. An Authorized Participant may not withdraw a creation order without the prior consent of the Sponsor in its discretion.

Following an In-Kind Creation Order from an Authorized Participant, the Trust’s account at the Custodian must be credited with the required ZEC by 11:00 a.m. ET on the following business day or such other time designated by the Sponsor. The Authorized Participant or its Authorized Participant Designee will normally send the required ZEC in an “on chain” transaction over the Zcash Network. Such on chain transactions are subject to the risks associated with Zcash Network transactions, including the irreversibility of transactions made in error or unavoidable delays due to Zcash Network congestion. Upon receipt of the Basket ZEC Deposit amount in the Trust’s account at the Custodian, the Administrator will notify the Transfer Agent. The Transfer Agent will then direct DTC to credit the number of Shares created to the Authorized Participant’s DTC account.

Following an Authorized Participant’s Cash Creation Order, the Trust’s account at the Cash Custodian must be credited with the Basket Cash Deposit amount by 11:00 a.m. ET on the following business day or such other time designated by the Sponsor. Upon receipt of the Basket Cash Deposit amount in the Trust’s account at the Cash Custodian, the Transfer Agent will notify the Marketing Agent, the Authorized Participant, and the Sponsor that the Basket Cash Amount has been deposited. The Sponsor, on behalf of the Trust, will instruct a ZEC trading counterparty to purchase the amount of ZEC 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 by the Trust to calculate NAV, taking into account any spread, commissions, or other trading costs on the applicable Purchase Order Date. The resulting ZEC will be deposited in the Trust’s account with the Custodian. Any slippage incurred (including, but not limited to, any trading fees, spreads, or commissions), on a cash equivalent basis, will be the responsibility of the Authorized Participant and not of the Trust or Sponsor. To the extent the execution price of the ZEC acquired by the trading counterparty exceeds the cash deposit amount, such cash difference will be the responsibility of the Authorized Participant and not the Trust or Sponsor. The Transfer Agent will then direct DTC to credit the number of Shares created to the Authorized Participant’s DTC account. To the extent the

Table of Contents

execution price of the ZEC acquired by the trading counterparty is less than the cash deposit amount, such excess cash will be returned to the Authorized Participant.

Determination of Required Deposits

The amount of the Basket Deposit changes from day to day. On each day that the Exchange is open for regular trading, the Administrator adjusts the quantity of cash constituting the Basket Deposit as appropriate to reflect the value of the Trust’s ZEC and cash less accrued expenses. The computation is made by the Administrator as promptly as practicable after 4:00 p.m. ET or at an earlier time set forth in the Authorized Participant Agreement or otherwise provided to all Authorized Participants on the date such order is placed in order for the creation of Baskets to be effected based on the NAV of Shares as next determined on such date after receipt of the order in proper form.

The Basket ZEC Deposit for a given day is determined by dividing the number of ZEC held by the Trust as of the opening of business on that business day, adjusted for the amount of ZEC constituting accrued expenses and other liabilities of the Trust as of the opening of business on that business day, by the number of Shares outstanding at the opening of business and multiplying such amount by the number of Shares constituting a Basket. Fractions of ZEC smaller than [.000001] are disregarded for purposes of the computation of the Basket ZEC Deposit.

The Basket Cash Deposit is an amount of cash that is in the same proportion to the total assets of the Trust, net of accrued expenses and other liabilities, on the Purchase Order Date, as the number of Shares constituting a Basket is in proportion to the total number of Shares outstanding on the Purchase Order Date, plus the amount of any Transaction Fee. For a discussion of how the Trust determines the price of ZEC, see “Calculation of NAV” above. The Basket Cash Deposit so determined is communicated via electronic mail message to all Authorized Participants.

To the extent the price at which the Trust executes a ZEC purchase in connection with a Cash Creation exceeds the amount described in the paragraph above, the Authorized Participant that placed such order will be responsible for any such difference in price. The Sponsor expects that its ZEC trading counterparties will be able to provide pricing based on the Pricing Benchmark price at 4:00 p.m. ET, which would minimize or eliminate any such shortfall. However, there can be no guarantee that the price at which the Trust executes ZEC trades will be the Pricing Benchmark price at 4:00 p.m. ET, and Authorized Participants bear the risk of any such differences in price.

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. Upon receipt of the deposit amount by the Custodian or Cash Custodian, as applicable, the Transfer Agent will direct DTC to credit the number of Shares ordered to the Authorized Participant’s DTC account on the following business day or such later time as may be agreed upon by the Authorized Participant and the Sponsor, following the Purchase Order Date. The Sponsor has the authority to set or modify the cut-off time for purchase orders in order for the creation of Baskets to be effected based on the Pricing Benchmark price at 4:00 p.m. ET as next determined on such date after receipt of the order in proper form. For example, the Sponsor may modify the cut-off time in the event of an early market close, perceived capacity constraints from the Trust’s ZEC trading counterparties, or highly volatile markets. Cut-off times are communicated periodically to Authorized Participants. In circumstances where purchase orders are due before 4:00 p.m. ET, Authorized Participants will not know the total Basket Deposit at the time they submit a purchase order for the Basket. The Trust’s NAV and the price of a Basket Deposit could rise or fall substantially between the time a purchase order is submitted and the time the amount of the purchase price in respect thereof is determined, and the risk of such price movements will be borne solely by the Authorized Participant.

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 Basket Deposit for any reason, including if the Sponsor determines that:

Table of Contents

the purchase order is not in proper form;

the Basket Deposit delivered is not as specified by the Trust through the Sponsor and/or Transfer Agent, and the Sponsor has not consented to acceptance of an in-kind deposit that varies from the designated portfolio;

the acceptance of the Basket Deposit would have certain adverse tax consequences to the Trust;

the acceptance of the Basket Deposit would, in the opinion of counsel, be unlawful;

the acceptance of the Basket Deposit would otherwise, in the discretion of the Trust or the Sponsor, have an adverse effect on the Trust or the rights of beneficial owners of the Trust;

the value of Baskets to be created exceeds a purchase authorization limit afforded to the Authorized Participant by the Trust, and the Authorized Participant has not deposited an amount in excess of such purchase authorization with the Custodian prior to the designated cut-off time; or

there exist circumstances outside the control of the Trust, the Transfer Agent, or the Sponsor that make it impossible to process purchase orders for all practical purposes.

The Sponsor may in its sole discretion limit the number of Shares created pursuant to purchase orders on any specified day without notice to the Authorized Participants and may direct the Marketing Agent to reject any purchase orders in excess of such capped amount. The Sponsor may choose to limit the number of Shares created pursuant to purchase orders when it deems so doing to be in the best interest of Shareholders. It may choose to do so when it believes the market is too volatile to execute a ZEC transaction, when it believes the price of ZEC is being inconsistently, irregularly, or discontinuously published from ZEC trading venues and other data sources, or when it believes other similar circumstances may create a scenario in which accepting purchase orders would not be in the best interests of the Shareholders. The Sponsor does not believe that the Trust’s ability to arrive at such a determination will have a significant impact on the Shares in the secondary market because it believes that the ability to create Shares would be reinstated shortly after such determination is made, and any entity desiring to create Shares would be able to do so once the ability to create Shares is reinstated. However, it is possible that such a determination would cause the Shares to trade at premiums or discounts relative to the Trust’s NAV on the secondary market if arbitrageurs believe that there is risk that the creation and redemption process is not available, as this process is a component of keeping the price of the Shares on the secondary market closely aligned to the Trust’s NAV.

Neither the Sponsor, nor the Transfer Agent, nor the Trust will be liable for the rejection of any purchase order or Basket Deposit.

Redemption Procedures

The procedures by which an Authorized Participant can redeem one or more Baskets mirror the procedures for the creation of Baskets with an additional safeguard on ZEC being removed from the ZEC Account at the Custodian. On any business day, an Authorized Participant may place an order with the Transfer Agent to redeem one or more Baskets. Redemption orders must be placed by the close of Regular Trading Hours on the Exchange or an earlier time as determined and communicated by the Sponsor and its agent. A redemption order will be effective on the date it is received by the Transfer Agent (“Redemption Order Date”).

The manner by which redemptions are made is dictated by the terms of the Authorized Participant Agreement. Redemption orders are denominated and settled either in-kind (“In-Kind Redemption Order”) or in cash (“Cash Redemption Order”). By placing a redemption order, an Authorized Participant agrees to facilitate the deposit of Shares with the Transfer Agent. If an Authorized Participant fails to consummate the foregoing, the order will be cancelled or delayed until the required Shares have been received. An Authorized Participant may not withdraw a redemption order without the prior consent of the Sponsor in its discretion.

In the case of an In-Kind Redemption Order, the redemption distribution from the Trust consists of a movement of ZEC to the Authorized Participant, or its Authorized Participant Designee, representing the amount of ZEC held by the Trust, net of accrued expenses and other liabilities, evidenced by the Shares being redeemed on the Redemption Order Date. In the case of a Cash Redemption Order, the redemption

Table of Contents

distribution from the Trust consists of a transfer to the Authorized Participant of an amount of cash that is in the same proportion to the total assets of the Trust, net of accrued expenses and other liabilities, on the Redemption Order Date, as the number of Shares to be redeemed under the purchase order is in proportion to the total number of Shares outstanding on the Redemption Order Date. With respect to either an In-Kind Redemption Order or Cash Redemption Order, the redemption distribution due from the Trust will be delivered once the Transfer Agent notifies the Cash Custodian, the Marketing Agent and the Sponsor that the Authorized Participant has delivered the Shares represented by the Baskets to be redeemed to the Transfer Agent’s DTC account. If the Transfer Agent’s DTC account has not been credited with all of the Shares of the Baskets to be redeemed, the redemption distribution will be cancelled or delayed until such time as the Transfer Agent confirms receipt of all such Shares.

By placing a redemption order, an Authorized Participant agrees to deliver the Baskets to be redeemed through DTC’s book-entry system to the Trust by the end of the following business day or such later time as may be agreed upon by the Authorized Participant and the Sponsor following the Redemption Order Date. An Authorized Participant may not withdraw a redemption order without the prior consent of the Sponsor in its discretion.

Determination of Redemption Distribution

The redemption distribution from the Trust will consist of a transfer to the redeeming Authorized Participant or its Authorized Participant Designee of an amount of either ZEC (in the case of an In-Kind Redemption Order) or cash (in the case of a Cash Redemption Order) that is determined in the same manner as the determination of Basket Deposits discussed above.

Delivery of Redemption Distribution

The Transfer Agent will notify the Custodian, the Cash Custodian, the Marketing Agent and the Sponsor that the Shares have been received in the Transfer Agent’s DTC account. For an In-Kind Redemption Order, the Sponsor will transfer the redemption ZEC amount from the Custodian to the designated wallet address of the Authorized Participant or its Authorized Participant Designee. For a Cash Redemption Order, the redemption distribution due from the Trust will be sent by the Cash Custodian to the Authorized Participant on the following business day or such later time as may be agreed upon by the Authorized Participant and the Sponsor, following the Redemption Order Date if, by 4:00 p.m. ET, on such business day, the Transfer Agent’s DTC account has been credited with the Baskets to be redeemed. If the Transfer Agent’s DTC account has not been credited with all of the Baskets to be redeemed by such time, the redemption distribution will be cancelled or delayed until such time as the Transfer Agent confirms receipt of all such Shares.

Rejection of Redemption Orders

Redemption orders must be made in whole Baskets. The Marketing Agent acting by itself or through the person authorized to take redemption orders in the manner provided in the Authorized Participant Agreement may, in its sole discretion, reject any redemption order (1) the Sponsor determines not to be in proper form or (2) if requested by the Marketing Agent, the Authorized Participant fails to deliver or execute supporting documentation evidencing ownership or the Authorized Participant’s right to deliver sufficient Shares.

Suspension of Orders

The Sponsor may, in its discretion, suspend redemption or creation transactions during any period when the transfer books of the Transfer Agent are closed or if circumstances outside the control of the Sponsor or its delegate make it for all practicable purposes not feasible to process Redemption Orders or for any other reason at any time or from time to time. 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 or an unanticipated delay in the liquidation of a position in an over-the-counter contract, it may be appropriate to suspend creations and redemptions until such time as such circumstances are rectified. Neither the Marketing Agent, the person authorized to take redemption orders in the manner provided in the Authorized Participant Agreement, nor the Custodian will be liable to any person or in any way for any loss or damages that may result from any such suspension or postponement. Any such suspension may cause the price of the Shares to deviate more significantly from the

Table of Contents

Trust’s NAV per Share than would be the case if such suspension had not occurred. The Trust will notify Shareholders of any such suspension in a Prospectus supplement and/or a current report on Form 8-K or in its annual or quarterly reports.

Creation and Redemption Transaction Fees

In connection with a creation order or redemption order, an Authorized Participant is responsible for the Transaction Fee, which consist of the operational processing and brokerage costs, transfers fees, network fees and stamp taxes. The Transaction Fee may be reduced, increased or otherwise changed by the Sponsor.

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 Participant, and agree 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 ZEC or cash equal to the number of Shares included in the Baskets being created or redeemed 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 that 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 the 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 ZEC. 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 either 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 ZEC.

Table of Contents

USE OF PROCEEDS

OWNERSHIP OR 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.

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 divide the beneficial interest in the Trust into an unlimited amount of shares, with or without par value, as the Sponsor will determine, (c) to issue 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 By-Laws, if any, at such time or times and on such terms as the Sponsor may deem appropriate, (d) to divide or combine 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 Sponsor and its affiliates engage in a broad spectrum of activities and may expand the range of services that they provide over time. The Sponsor and its affiliates will generally not be restricted in the scope of their business or in the performance of any such services (whether now offered or undertaken in the future), even if such activities could give rise to conflicts of interest, and whether or not such conflicts are described herein. In the ordinary course of their business activities, the Sponsor and its affiliates may engage in activities where the interests of the Sponsor and its affiliates or the interests of their clients conflict with the interests of the Trust. Certain employees of the Sponsor also have responsibilities relating to the business of one or more affiliates. These employees are not restricted in the amount of time that may be allocated to the business activities of the Sponsor’s affiliates, and the allocation of such employees’ time between the Sponsor and its affiliates may change over time.

Table of Contents

In addition, the Sponsor and its affiliates may also be responsible for managing other accounts in addition to the services that they provide to the Trust, including other accounts of the Sponsor or its affiliates. Other accounts may include, without limitation, private or SEC-registered funds, separately managed accounts, or investments owned by the Sponsor or its affiliates. Management of other accounts in addition to services provided to the Trust can present certain conflicts of interest or the appearance thereof. The other accounts might have similar or different investment objectives or strategies as the Trust, or otherwise hold, purchase or sell investments that are eligible to be held, purchased or sold by the Trust, or may take positions that are opposite in direction from those taken by the Trust.

The Sponsor and its affiliates may from time to time obtain exposure to ZEC through investments in the Trust and may hold a material position in the Trust. The Trust will not receive any of the proceeds from the resale by the Sponsor or its affiliates of these Shares, and the sale of such Shares may impact the price at which Shareholders may be able to sell their Shares. In addition, the Sponsor and its affiliates may have substantial direct investments in ZEC outside of the Trust. The Sponsor and its affiliates are permitted to manage such investments, taking into account their own interests, without regard to the interests of the Trust or its Shareholders. The Sponsor and its affiliates reserve the right, subject to compliance with applicable law, to sell into the market or redeem through an Authorized Participant at any time some or all of the Shares of the Trust acquired for their own accounts. The Sponsor and its affiliates face potential conflicts of interest in determining whether, when and in what amount to sell or redeem Shares of the Trust. The Sponsor and its affiliates are under no obligation to consider the effect of sales or redemptions on the Trust and other Shareholders in deciding whether to sell or redeem their Shares. The Sponsor and its affiliates may invest or trade in digital assets for their own accounts, which activities may conflict or compete with the Trust. Additionally, the Sponsor does not have policies and procedures requiring that personnel pre-clear trading activity in certain digital assets, including ZEC. The Sponsor may not be able to fully mitigate the risk of conflicts of interest in connection with the purchase and sale of digital assets. There is no guarantee that every employee, officer, director, or similar person associated with the Sponsor and its affiliates will refrain from engaging in impermissible activity in violation of their duties to the Trust and Sponsor.

The Sponsor will have the authority to manage the operations of the Trust, and this may create or give the appearance of a conflict with shareholders’ best interests. The Sponsor has selected, and may in the future select, service providers that are affiliates. Gemini Trust Company, LLC, the Custodian of the Trust, is an affiliate of the Sponsor. The Sponsor may have a conflict of interest in selecting an affiliated service provider because doing so increases the overall revenue for its affiliates. You should be aware that there may be less expensive service providers or parties with greater experience or expertise than the affiliates selected by the Sponsor. Because of the Sponsor’s affiliated status, it may be disincentivized from replacing affiliated service providers, including the Custodian. In connection with this conflict of interest, Shareholders should understand that affiliated service providers will be compensated for providing services to the Trust. Clients of the affiliated service providers may pay commissions at negotiated rates which are greater or less than the rate paid by the Sponsor. The Sponsor and any affiliated service provider may, from time to time, have conflicting demands in respect of their obligations to the Trust and, in the future, to other clients.

The Sponsor may 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.

Resolution of Conflicts Procedures

The Trust Agreement will provide that whenever a conflict of interest exists between the Sponsor or any of its affiliates, on the one hand, and the Trust or any Shareholders or any other person, on the other hand, the Sponsor will resolve such conflict of interest considering the relative interest of each party (including its own interest) and the benefits and burdens relating to such interests, any customary or accepted industry practices, and any applicable accepted accounting practices or principles.

Issues Relating to Valuations of Assets

To the extent it is required to do so, the Sponsor will value the Trust’s assets in accordance with the valuation policies of the Sponsor; however, the manner in which the Sponsor exercises its discretion with respect to

Table of Contents

valuation decisions will impact the valuation of assets of the Trust. To the extent that fees are based on valuations, the exercise of discretion in valuation by the Sponsor will give rise to conflicts of interest including in connection with the calculation of Sponsor Fees. In addition, various divisions and units within the Sponsor and its affiliates are required to value assets, including in connection with managing or advising other accounts for clients, such as registered and unregistered funds and owners of separately managed accounts. These various divisions, units and affiliated entities may, but are under no obligation to, share information regarding valuation techniques and models or other information relevant to the valuation of a specific asset or category of assets. Regardless of whether or not the Sponsor has access to such information, to the extent the Sponsor values the assets held by the Trust, the Sponsor will value investments according to its valuation policies, and may value an identical asset differently than such other divisions, units or affiliated entities.

DUTIES OF THE SPONSOR

The general fiduciary duties that 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:

•

Execute, file, record and/or publish all certificates, statements and other documents and do any and all other things as may be appropriate for the formation, qualification and operation of the Trust and for the conduct of its business in all appropriate jurisdictions;

•

Retain independent public accountants to audit the accounts of the Trust;

•

Employ attorneys to represent the Trust;

•

Select the Trust’s Trustee, Administrator, Transfer Agent, Custodian, Marketing Agent, Benchmark Provider, insurer(s) and any other service provider(s) and cause the Trust to enter into contracts with such service provider(s);

•

Provide for the safekeeping and use of the Trust’s assets;

•

[To the extent any such rights exist and are applicable and available with respect to ZEC held by the Trust, exercise (or refrain from exercising) in the Sponsor’s sole discretion any voting, signaling, consent, election or similar rights associated with such ZEC, without any obligation to seek or obtain Shareholder input, and delegate any such authority, in whole or in part, to one or more affiliates or other persons, including service providers or the Custodian;]

•

Not employ or permit others to employ the Trust’s assets in any manner except for the benefit of the Trust;

•

At all times act with integrity and good faith and exercise due diligence in all activities relating to the Trust and in resolving conflicts of interest;

•

Enter into directly or through its delegates an Authorized Participant Agreement with each Authorized Participant and discharge the duties and responsibilities of the Trust and the Sponsor thereunder;

•

Receive directly or through its delegates from Authorized Participants and process or cause its delegates to process properly submitted purchase orders, as will be described in the Trust Agreement and in the Authorized Participant Agreement;

•

In connection with purchase orders, receive directly or through its delegates the amount of cash in a Basket;

•

In connection with purchase orders, after accepting a purchase order and receiving the corresponding amount of cash, either directly or through its delegates, direct the Trust’s Transfer Agent to credit the Baskets to fill the Authorized Participant’s purchase order;

Table of Contents

•

Receive directly or through its delegates from Authorized Participants and process or cause its delegates to process properly submitted redemption orders, as will be described in the Trust Agreement and in the Authorized Participant Agreement;

•

In connection with redemption orders, after receiving a redemption order specifying the number of Baskets that the Authorized Participant wishes to redeem and after the Transfer Agent’s DTC account has been credited with the Baskets to be redeemed, directly or through its delegates transfer to the redeeming Authorized Participant the quantity of ZEC attributable to the Shares redeemed;

•

Interact with the Custodian and any other party as required;

•

Cause the Trust to comply with all rules, orders and regulations of the Exchange, and take all such other actions that may reasonably be taken and are necessary for the Shares to remain listed, quoted or traded on the Exchange until the Trust is terminated or the Shares are no longer listed, quoted or traded on the Exchange;

•

Assist in the preparation and filing of reports and proxy statements (if any) to the Shareholders, the periodic updating of the Registration Statement and Prospectus and other reports and documents for the Trust required to be filed by the Trust with the SEC and other governmental bodies;

•

Use its best efforts to maintain the status of the Trust as a grantor trust for U.S. federal income tax purposes, including making such elections, filing such tax returns, and preparing, disseminating and filing such tax reports, as it is advised by its counsel or accountants are from time to time required by any statute, rule or regulation of the United States, any State or political subdivision thereof, or other jurisdiction having taxing authority in respect of the Trust or its administration. The expense of accountants employed to prepare such tax returns and tax reports will be an expense of the Trust;

•

Perform such other services as the Sponsor believes the Trust may from time to time require; and

•

In general, to carry out any other business in connection with or incidental to any of the foregoing powers, to do everything necessary, suitable or proper for the accomplishment of any purpose or the attainment of any object or the furtherance of any power herein set forth, either alone or in association with others, and to do every other act or thing incidental or appurtenant or growing out of or connected with the aforesaid business or purposes, objects or powers.

Consistent with the intention to maintain the status of the Trust as a grantor trust for U.S. federal income tax purposes, the Sponsor will not have the power to vary the investments of the Trust and must manage the Trust’s assets in accordance with the strict limitations set forth in the Trust Agreement.

To the extent that a 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

Trustee

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 fraud, willful misconduct, bad faith or gross negligence. In particular, but not by way of limitation:

(a) the Trustee will not be personally liable for any error of judgment made in good faith except to the extent such error of judgment constitutes gross negligence on its part;

(b) no provision of the Trust Agreement will require the Trustee to expend or risk its personal funds or otherwise incur any financial liability in the performance of its rights or powers under the Trust Agreement;

Table of Contents

(c) under no circumstances will the Trustee be personally liable for any representation, warranty, covenant, agreement, or indebtedness of the Trust;

(d) the Trustee will not be personally responsible for or in respect of the validity or sufficiency of the Trust Agreement or for the due execution hereof by the Sponsor;

(e) the Trustee will incur no liability to anyone in acting upon any signature, instrument, notice, resolution, request, consent, order, certificate, report, opinion, bond or other document or paper reasonably believed by it to be genuine and reasonably believed by it to be signed by the proper party or parties. The Trustee may accept a certified copy of a resolution of any governing body of any corporate party as conclusive evidence that such resolution has been duly adopted by such body and that the same is in full force and effect. As to any fact or matter the manner of ascertainment of which is not specifically prescribed herein, the Trustee may for all purposes hereof rely on a certificate, signed by an authorized officer of the Sponsor or any other corresponding directing party, as to such fact or matter, and such certificate will constitute full protection to the Trustee for any action taken or omitted to be taken by it in good faith in reliance thereon;

(f) in the exercise or administration of the trust hereunder, the Trustee (i) may act directly or through agents or attorneys pursuant to agreements entered into with any of them, and the Trustee will not be liable for the default or misconduct of such agents or attorneys if such agents or attorneys will have been selected by the Trustee in good faith and with due care and (ii) may consult with counsel, accountants and other skilled persons to be selected by it in good faith and with due care and employed by it, and it will not be liable for anything done, suffered or omitted in good faith by it in accordance with the advice or opinion of any such counsel, accountants or other skilled persons;

(g) except as will be expressly provided in the Trust Agreement, the Trustee will act solely as a trustee under the Trust Agreement and not in its individual capacity, and all persons having any claim against the Trustee by reason of the transactions contemplated by the Trust Agreement will look only to the Trust’s property for payment or satisfaction thereof; and

(h) the Trustee will not be liable for punitive, exemplary, consequential, special or other similar damages under any circumstances.

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.

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 ZEC or other assets held in trust hereunder; provided, however, 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.

Table of Contents

In addition, as will be 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 and held harmless against any loss, liability or expense incurred hereunder 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 under the Trust Agreement or any actions taken in accordance with the provisions of the Trust Agreement. Any amounts payable to a Sponsor Indemnified Party under Section 6.7 of 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 Custodian

The Custodian has limited liability, impairing the ability of the Trust to recover losses relating to its ZEC and any recovery may be limited, even in the event of fraud. In addition, the Custodian may not be liable for any delay in performance of any of its custodial obligations by reason of any cause beyond its 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 Custodian may be limited.

Cash Custodian

In carrying out its duties and obligations under the Cash Custody Agreement, the Cash Custodian shall exercise reasonable care, prudence and diligence and shall be liable to the Trust for all loss, damage and expense suffered or incurred by the Trust resulting from the failure of the Cash Custodian to exercise such reasonable care, prudence and diligence. The Trust has agreed to indemnify the Cash Custodian and its nominees from all loss, damage and expense suffered or incurred by the Cash Custodian or its nominee in the performance of its duties.

The Benchmark Provider

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. The Benchmark Provider does not make any express or implied warranties, and expressly disclaims all warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose or use with respect to the Pricing Benchmark or any data included therein. 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 or index calculation, errors, omissions or interruptions of any index or any data included therein. Without limiting any of the foregoing, in no event shall the Benchmark Provider have any liability for any special, punitive, direct, indirect or consequential damages (including lost profits) arising out of matters relating to the use of the Pricing Benchmark, even if notified of the possibility of such damages.

Table of Contents

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 interests.

MANAGEMENT; VOTING BY SHAREHOLDERS

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.

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. No amendment affecting the Trustee will be binding upon or effective against the Trustee unless consented to by the Trustee in the form of an instruction letter.

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 officers are primarily responsible for the management of the Trust’s ongoing operations:

[Bios to be provided]

BOOKS AND RECORDS

The Trust keeps its books of record and account at the office of the Sponsor located at 301 N. Market Street, Suite 1463, Wilmington, DE 19801, or at the offices 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 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.

Table of Contents

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 1934 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 is the [calendar year]. The Sponsor may select an alternate fiscal year to the extent permitted under applicable law.

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, provided that (i) the forum selection provisions do not apply to suits brought to enforce a duty or liability created by the 1934 Act or any other claim for which the federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction and (ii) the federal district courts of the United States of America shall be the exclusive forum for the resolution of any complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the 1933 Act, or the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder. Such consent is not required for any person to assert a claim of Delaware jurisdiction over the Sponsor, the Trust. Notwithstanding the foregoing, 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. Further, there is uncertainty as to whether a court would enforce the exclusive forum jurisdiction for actions arising under the 1933 Act or 1934 Act.

Table of Contents

LEGAL MATTERS

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.

Legal Opinion

Chapman and Cutler LLP has advised the Sponsor in connection with the Shares being offered. Chapman and Cutler LLP also advises the Sponsor with respect to its responsibilities as sponsor of, and with respect to matters relating to, the Trust. Chapman and Cutler LLP will render an opinion regarding the material U.S. federal income tax consequences of ownership of the Shares. Certain opinions of counsel will be filed with the SEC as exhibits to the Registration Statement of which this Prospectus is a part.

EXPERTS

The financial statement as of [ ], 2026, included in this Prospectus has been so included 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.

MATERIAL CONTRACTS

Administration Agreement

Under the Administration Agreement, the Administrator provides necessary administrative, tax and accounting services and financial reporting for the maintenance and operations of the Trust, including valuing the Trust’s ZEC and calculating the NAV per Share of the Trust and the NAV of the Trust and supplying pricing information to the Sponsor for the relevant website. In addition, the Administrator makes available the office space, equipment, personnel and facilities required to provide such services.

Standard of Care; Limitations of Liability

The Administrator shall exercise reasonable care in carrying out all of its duties and obligations under the Administration Agreement. The Administrator shall not be liable for any error of judgment, mistake of law, fraud or misconduct by the Trust or the Sponsor, or any loss suffered by the Trust or its affiliates in connection with the Administrator’s duties under the Administration Agreement, except a loss arising out of or relating to the Administrator’s refusal or failure to comply with the terms of the Administration Agreement or from the Administrator’s bad faith, gross negligence, or willful misconduct in the performance of its duties under the Administration Agreement.

The Administrator shall be responsible for the performance only of such duties as are set forth in the Administration Agreement and, except as otherwise provided in the Administration Agreement, shall have no responsibility for the actions or activities of any other party, including other service providers.

Neither the Trust nor the Administrator shall be liable for any special, indirect, or consequential damages, including lost profits or goodwill, of any kind whatsoever arising in connection with the Administration Agreement even if advised of the possibility of such damages.

The Administrator shall not be responsible or liable for any failure or delay in performance of its obligations under the Administration Agreement arising out of or caused, directly or indirectly, by circumstances beyond its control, including, without limitation, work stoppage, power or other mechanical failure, computer virus, natural disaster, governmental action or communication disruption.

Indemnity

The Trust will indemnify the Administrator against, and hold Administrator harmless from, any loss, damage, or expense that may be imposed on, incurred by, or asserted against the Administrator as a result of any

Table of Contents

action or omission taken in accordance with any instruction, except to the extent that such loss, damage, or expense is caused by the bad faith, gross negligence, or willful misconduct of the Administrator in the manner in which it carries out the instruction.

Administrator’s Fee

Pursuant to the Trust’s unitary fee structure, the Administrator’s fee is paid by the Sponsor in accordance with the Administration Agreement.

Governing Law

The Administration Agreement is governed by the laws of the State of Wisconsin.

Termination of the Administration Agreement

The Administration Agreement shall continue for an initial term of three (3) years. Following the initial term, the Administration Agreement shall automatically renew for successive one (1) year periods unless either party provides at least ninety (90) days’ prior notice to the end of the current term that is will not be renewing the agreement. The Administration Agreement may also be terminated by either party at any time upon ninety (90) days’ prior written notice to the other party, subject in the case of termination by the Trust to early termination fees (which will be assumed by the Sponsor).

Custodial Services Agreement

Under the Custodial Services Agreement, the Custodian makes available to the Trust a custodial account for ZEC maintained by the Custodian (the “ZEC Account”) and access to an omnibus custodial account held at depository institutions or money market funds in the Custodian’s name for the benefit of its customers at which a cash balance may be maintained (the “Fiat Account”). The Custodian is an affiliate of the Sponsor and a New York State-chartered limited purpose trust company that operates under the direct supervision and regulatory authority of the NYSDFS. The Custodial Services Agreement provides that ZEC is deemed delivered to the Trust’s ZEC Account only after the required number of confirmations on the Zcash Blockchain. Once the Trust submits a withdrawal request, the ZEC subject to the request shall be delivered to the designated address within one business day of 4:00 p.m. ET on the business day on which the request is submitted, subject to delays in connection with scheduled maintenance or congestion or disruption of the Zcash Network. The Custodian shall not, without the prior written consent of the Trust, deposit or hold the Trust’s ZEC with any third-party depositary, custodian, clearance system, wallet, or sub-custodian. No more than once per calendar year, the Trust may request that the Custodian produce a copy of its audited annual financial statements.

The Custodian agrees to take reasonable care and use commercially reasonable efforts in executing its responsibilities to the Trust, which includes exercising the degree of care, diligence and skill that a prudent and competent professional provider of similar services would exercise in the circumstances, or such higher care where required by law or the Custodial Services Agreement (the “Standard of Care”). Subject to the force majeure provision and the limitations of liability in the Custodial Services Agreement, the Custodian shall be liable to the Trust for the Loss of any of the Trust’s ZEC or fiat currency to the extent caused by the negligence, fraud, willful or reckless misconduct of the Custodian or breach of its Standard of Care, in which case the Custodian will, as soon as practicable, return to the Trust a quantity of ZEC or fiat currency equal to that involved in the Loss. “Loss” includes situations where the Custodian fails to execute a valid withdrawal request, ZEC is withdrawn other than pursuant to a withdrawal request, or the Trust is not able to timely withdraw ZEC, in each case due to a failure caused by the Custodian, but does not include a failure to permit timely withdrawals because of applicable law or the Custodian’s fraud detection controls, provided the Custodian acts reasonably and in good faith. The Custodian is not liable for any amount greater than the value of the ZEC on deposit in the Trust’s ZEC Account at the time of, and directly relating to, the events giving rise to the liability, and no party is liable for indirect, incidental, special, punitive or consequential losses. The Custodian is not liable for any System Failure or Downtime (each as defined in the Custodial Services Agreement), provided it took reasonable care to prevent or limit them; however, a cybersecurity attack, data breach or hack is not a System Failure to the extent due to the Custodian’s failure to comply with its obligations. The

Table of Contents

Custodian is also not liable for malware affecting the Trust’s equipment that did not originate from the Custodian or its agents.

Under the Custodial Services Agreement, each of the Custodian and the Trust has agreed to indemnify and hold harmless the other party from any third-party claim or demand arising out of or related to its non-performance of its obligations under, or material breach of, the Custodial Services Agreement and any inaccuracy in its representations or warranties. In addition, the Custodian agrees to indemnify the Trust for damages relating to the holding of the Trust’s ZEC and fiat currency, including any loss caused by any act or omission of any employee, agent, representative or independent contractor of the Custodian, but excluding losses arising from market price fluctuations, forks, governance changes, airdrops or other events that impact all holders of ZEC as a class. The Custodial Services Agreement provides that the Custodian shall notify the Trust of material changes in its insurance coverage.

The Custodial Services Agreement may be terminated by either party upon [90] days’ written notice; provided that, if the Custodian terminates and the Trust is unable to engage a replacement custodian using commercially reasonable efforts within such period, the Custodian shall continue to act as custodian until the Trust engages a replacement, provided the Trust uses commercially reasonable efforts to do so promptly. Either party may also terminate on the tenth business day after written notice, or immediately if the triggering event cannot be cured within ten business days, if the other party (i) makes a representation that is materially incorrect, (ii) materially breaches the agreement, (iii) becomes subject to bankruptcy or insolvency or fails to meet applicable minimum capital requirements, or (iv) undergoes a change of control or a material adverse effect. The Trust may also terminate if the Zcash Blockchain forks and the Trust disagrees with the Custodian’s choice of which forked network to support, or upon a change in law that may have a material adverse effect on the Trust. The Custodian may immediately suspend the Trust’s accounts or freeze the assets in them if required by a regulatory authority or court order, if it reasonably believes the Trust has violated applicable law or is required to do so under its BSA/AML Program, or if it believes there is unauthorized access or unusual activity in the account. Any other suspension constitutes a breach of the Custodial Services Agreement, and in certain cases the Custodian must permit the Trust to withdraw its assets for ninety (90) days after the suspension is permitted to end.

Marketing Agent Agreement

Pursuant to a marketing agent agreement (the “Marketing Agent Agreement”) between the Trust and [ ], the Marketing Agent assists the Sponsor and the Administrator with certain functions and duties relating to distribution and marketing of Shares including reviewing and approving marketing materials.

Pursuant to the Marketing Agent Agreement, the Marketing Agent will not be liable for, and 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 Securities 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) that any Marketing Agent Indemnitee may incur arising out of or relating to (i) the Marketing Agent’s provision of services under the Marketing Agent Agreement; (ii) the Trust’s breach of any of its obligations, representations, warranties or covenants contained in the Marketing Agent Agreement; (iii) the Sponsor’s or the Trust’s failure to comply in all material respects with any applicable laws, rules or regulations; (iv) any claim that the prospectus, registration statement, marketing 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 such losses, as determined by a court of competent jurisdiction in a final decision on the merits, 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 marketing 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 marketing literature. In no event shall anything contained herein be so construed

Table of Contents

as to protect the Marketing Agent against any liability to the Trust for which the Marketing Agent would otherwise be subject by reason of willful misfeasance, bad faith or gross negligence in the performance of its duties under the Marketing Agent Agreement.

Unless sooner terminated as provided herein, the Marketing Agent Agreement shall continue in effect for three years from its effective date. Thereafter, if not terminated, the Marketing Agent Agreement shall continue automatically in effect for successive one-year periods. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Marketing Agent Agreement may be terminated by any party at any time upon written notice to the other parties if (a) any other party becomes insolvent or bankrupt or files a voluntary petition, or is subject to an involuntary petition, in bankruptcy or attempts to or makes an assignment for the benefit of its creditors or consents to the appointment of a trustee or receiver or (b) any other party willfully and materially breaches its obligations under the Marketing Agent Agreement and such breach has not been cured to the reasonable satisfaction of the non-breaching party prior to the expiration of sixty (60) days after written notice by the non-breaching party to the breach party of such breach.

Transfer Agency and Services Agreement

[ ] serves as the Transfer Agent pursuant to a Transfer Agency and Services Agreement. The Transfer Agent, among other things, provides transfer agent services with respect to the creation and redemption of Baskets by Authorized Participants, the issuance and redemption of Shares, the payment, if any, of distributions with respect to the Shares, the recording of the issuance of the Shares and the maintaining of certain records therewith.

Resignation, Discharge or Removal of Transfer Agent

The Transfer Agency and Services Agreement will continue in effect for an initial period of three (3) years from its effective date and automatically renew for successive one (1) year terms unless terminated. Either the Trust or the Transfer Agent may terminate the Transfer Agency and Service Agreement for cause for the reasons set forth in the Transfer Agency and Service Agreement, such as either party’s committing a material breach of the Transfer Agency and Service Agreement. The Trust may terminate the Transfer Agency and Service Agreement prior to the expiration of the initial term upon ninety (90) days’ prior written notice.

Limitation on Transfer Agent’s Liability; Indemnification

The Transfer Agent is obligated to exercise reasonable care. Its liability is limited to direct damages arising from its refusal or failure to comply with the terms of the agreement or from its bad faith, gross negligence or willful misconduct in the performance of its duties. The Trust is obligated to indemnify the Trust against claims not arising from its refusal or failure to comply with the terms of the agreement or from its bad faith, negligence, or willful misconduct.

Cash Custody Agreement

Under the Cash Custody Agreement, the Cash Custodian will keep safely all cash and other non-ZEC assets of the Trust delivered to the Cash Custodian and, on behalf of the Trust, the Cash Custodian shall, from time to time, accept delivery of cash and other non-ZEC assets for safekeeping. Amounts received in connection with the sale of ZEC shall be deposited into the Cash Account.

Standard of Care; Limitations of Liability; Indemnification

Liability of the Cash Custodian under the Agreement is generally limited to direct damages caused by its failure to perform its obligations in accordance with the agreed standard of care. The Trust is obligated to indemnify the Cash Custodian against losses, expenses, damages, and liabilities incurred in the performance of its duties under the Agreement, except where such issues arise from the Cash Custodian’s failure to meet the agreed standard of care.

The Cash Custodian is responsible for any actions or omissions of sub-custodians (if any) to the same extent as if those actions or omissions were performed by the Custodian itself. The Trust retains the discretion to

Table of Contents

appoint additional custodians as necessary to manage its assets, subject to the terms of separate agreements. The Sponsor has the authority to add or terminate the Custodian as deemed appropriate.

Cash Custodian’s Fee

Pursuant to the Trust’s unitary fee structure, the Cash Custodian’s fees are paid by the Sponsor in accordance with the Cash Custody Agreement.

Termination of the Cash Custody Agreement

With respect to the Trust, the Cash Custody Agreement shall continue in full force and effect for an initial term of three (3) years and automatically renew for successive one (1) year terms unless terminated. The Cash Custody Agreement may be terminated by either party upon giving ninety (90) days’ prior written notice to the other party. The Custodian may terminate the Cash Custody Agreement immediately for the causes specified in the Cash Custody Agreement.

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 (as defined below), and certain U.S. federal income consequences that may apply to an investment in Shares by a Non-U.S. Shareholder (as defined below). The discussion below is based on 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:

•

an individual who is treated as a citizen or resident of the United States for U.S. federal income tax purposes;

•

a corporation (or entity treated as a corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes) created or organized in or under the laws of the United States, any state thereof or the District of Columbia;

•

an estate, the income of which is includible in gross income for U.S. federal income tax purposes regardless of its source; or

•

a trust, if a court within the United States is able to exercise primary supervision over the administration of the trust and one or more United States persons have the authority to control all substantial decisions of the trust.

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.

100

Table of Contents

Taxation of the Trust

The Sponsor and the Trustee will treat the Trust as a “grantor trust” for U.S. federal income tax purposes. In the opinion of Chapman and Cutler LLP, although not free from doubt due to the lack of directly governing authority, the Trust should be classified as a “grantor trust” for U.S. federal income tax purposes (and the following discussion assumes such classification). As a result, the Trust itself should not be subject to U.S. federal income tax. Instead, the Trust’s income, expenses and amounts realized should “flow through” to the Shareholders, and the Trustee will report to Shareholders and the IRS on that basis. The opinion of Chapman and Cutler LLP is not binding on the IRS or any court. Accordingly, there can be no assurance that the IRS will agree with the conclusions of counsel’s opinion 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 currency 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, and as if it directly incurred its respective pro rata share of the Trust’s expenses, subject to some specialized allocation rules for widely held fixed investment trusts. In the case of a Shareholder that acquires Shares as part of the creation of a Basket in cash, the delivery of cash to the Trust in exchange for a pro rata share of the underlying ZEC represented by the Shares and the additional ZEC purchased with the cash 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 ZEC held in the Trust will be based upon the amount of cash contributed and the date that the Trust purchased the ZEC with the cash. 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 ZEC related to such Shares.

Current IRS guidance on the treatment of convertible virtual currencies classifies ZEC as “property” that is not currency for U.S. federal income tax purposes and clarifies that ZEC can be held as a capital asset, but it does not address several other aspects of the U.S. federal income tax treatment of ZEC. Because ZEC is a new technological innovation, the U.S. federal income tax treatment of ZEC or transactions relating to investments in ZEC 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 virtual currency transactions, such as transactions involving ZEC. While the IRS 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 ZEC or in transactions relating to investments in ZEC is unknown. Moreover, future developments that may arise with respect to digital currencies may increase the uncertainty with respect to the treatment of digital currencies for U.S. federal income tax purposes.

The Trust expects to sell or use ZEC to pay certain expenses of the Trust or to fund cash redemptions if and when applicable. If the Trust sells ZEC (for example to generate cash to pay fees or expenses) or is treated as selling ZEC (for example by using ZEC to pay fees or expenses), a Shareholder will generally 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 ZEC that was sold. A Shareholder’s tax basis for its share of any ZEC sold by the Trust will generally be a pro rata portion of the

101

Table of Contents

Shareholder’s total tax basis for its share of all of the ZEC held in the Trust. After any such sale, a Shareholder’s tax basis for its pro rata share of the ZEC remaining in the Trust should be equal to its tax basis for its share of the total amount of the ZEC held in the Trust immediately prior to the sale less the portion of such basis allocable to its share of the ZEC that was sold.

Upon a Shareholder’s sale of some or all of its Shares, the Shareholder will be treated as having sold the pro rata share of the ZEC 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 ZEC 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. A selling Shareholder may recognize additional gain or loss when the Trust sells or disposes of ZEC, as described above, attributable to the portion of the year the Shares were held. Based on current IRS guidance, such gain or loss on the sale of Shares (as well as any gain or loss realized by a Shareholder on account of the Trust selling ZEC) 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 ZEC that was sold and otherwise will be short-term capital gain or loss.

Sales of ZEC to fund cash redemptions are expected to result in gains and losses with such gains and 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 ZEC and the Shareholder’s tax basis for the portion of the Shareholder’s pro rata share of the ZEC 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.

If permitted, Authorized Participants may request an in-kind distribution of Trust assets when an Authorized Participant redeems its Shares at any time prior to 30 business days before the Trust’s termination date. An Authorized Participant will not recognize gain or loss if the Authorized Participant only receives whole Trust assets in exchange for the identical amount of the Authorized Participant’s pro rata portion of the same Trust assets held by the Trust. However, if the Authorized Participant is acting on its own behalf and also receives cash in exchange for a Trust asset or a fractional portion of a Trust asset, the Authorized Participant will generally recognize gain or loss based on the difference between the amount of cash received and the Authorized Participant’s tax basis in such Trust asset or fractional portion.

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 ZEC 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 ZEC 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 for ZEC, that is treated as the basis of the ZEC received by the Shareholder in the redemption.

Except for cash temporarily held to pay Trust expenses, to facilitate redemption transactions, or received in creation transactions, the Trust will only invest in ZEC. In the event of a fork, the Sponsor will cause the Trust to irrevocably abandon any digital asset resulting from a fork in the Zcash Network (other than what the Sponsor determines to be ZEC). If the Trust were to change this policy, the Trust would need to seek and obtain certain regulatory approvals, including an amendment to the Trust’s registration statement of which this Prospectus is a part and approval of an application by the Exchange to amend its listing rules. If, despite such abandonment, the Trust were to receive any digital asset resulting from a fork in the Zcash Network (other than what the Sponsor determines to be ZEC), the Trust Agreement requires the Sponsor to cause the forked asset to be sold and have the proceeds distributed to the Shareholders. The sale of a forked asset received by the Trust 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.

3.8% Tax on Net Investment Income

Certain U.S. Shareholders, who are individuals, are required to pay a 3.8% 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

102

Table of Contents

$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 ZEC 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 for tax years beginning after December 31, 2017 and before January 1, 2026. For tax years beginning after December 31, 2025, noncorporate taxpayers may deduct certain miscellaneous itemized deductions only to the extent they exceed in the aggregate 2% of the taxpayer’s adjusted gross income.

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.

United States Information Reporting and Backup Withholding; Tax Return Reporting for Cryptocurrency

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 federal income tax return the receipt, acquisition, sale, or exchange of any financial interest in virtual currency, which includes a Shareholder’s interest in ZEC held by the Trust.

Taxation of Authorized Participants

If an Authorized Participant invests in the Trust on its own behalf, the Authorized Participant will generally recognize income, gain, loss or deduction as described for U.S. Shareholders. If an Authorized Participant is acting as agent for one or more other persons, who are the beneficial owners of the Shares, the Authorized Participant will be obligated to issue an information statement to the beneficial owners, who will recognize the consequences described above for U.S. Shareholders.

Taxation in Jurisdictions Other Than the United States

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

103

Table of Contents

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 individual retirement accounts 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 (the “Plan Assets Regulation”), 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 ZEC 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 Custodian 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.

104

Table of Contents

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. None of the Trust or 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.

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 Sponsor has filed on behalf of the Trust 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 Trust’s website, which is [website]. The Trust’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 1934 Act and will file certain reports and other information with the SEC under the 1934 Act.

The reports and other information are available online at www.sec.gov.

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.

105

Table of Contents

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 available at [website].

106

Table of Contents

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

[Report, Financial Statements and Notes to be provided.]

107

Table of Contents

WINKLEVOSS ZCASH ETF

PROSPECTUS

, 2026

Until , 2026 (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.

Table of Contents

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 [ ], the sponsor of the Trust. Except for the Securities and Exchange Commission Registration Fee and Exchange Listing Fee, all such expenses are estimated:

SEC registration fee (actual)	$	0*
Listing fee (actual)	$	[ ]
Auditor’s fees and expenses	$	[ ]
Legal fees and expenses	$	[ ]
Printing expenses	$	[ ]
Miscellaneous expenses	$	[ ]
Total	$	[ ]

An indeterminate number of the securities is being registered as may from time to time be sold at indeterminate prices. In accordance with Rules 456(d) and 457(u), the Trust is deferring payment of all of the additional registration fee and will pay the additional registration fee subsequently on an annual basis.

Item 14. Indemnification of Directors and Officers.

The Trust Agreement will provide that the Trust shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the Trustee (including in its individual capacity) and any of the officers, directors, employees and agents of the Trustee (the “Indemnified Persons”) from and against any and all losses, damages, liabilities, claims, actions, suits, costs, expenses, disbursements (including the reasonable fees and expenses of counsel and fees and expenses incurred in connection with enforcement of its indemnification rights under the Trust Agreement), taxes and penalties of any kind and nature whatsoever (collectively, “Expenses”), to the extent that such Expenses arise out of or are imposed upon or asserted at any time against such Indemnified Persons with respect to the performance of the Trust Agreement, the creation, operation or termination of the Trust or the transactions contemplated thereby; provided, however, that the Trust shall not be required to indemnify any Indemnified Person for any Expenses which are a result of the willful misconduct, bad faith or gross negligence of an Indemnified Person. If the Trust shall have insufficient assets or improperly refuses to pay an Indemnified Person within sixty (60) days of a request for payment owed hereunder, the Sponsor shall, as secondary obligor, compensate or reimburse the Trustee or indemnify, defend and hold harmless an Indemnified Person as if it were the primary obligor under the Trust Agreement; provided, however, that the Sponsor shall not be required to indemnify any Indemnified Person for any Expenses which are a result of the willful misconduct, bad faith or gross negligence of an Indemnified Person. To the fullest extent permitted by law and by the requirement for treatment of the Trust as a grantor trust for tax purposes, Expenses to be incurred by an Indemnified Person shall, from time to time, be advanced by, or on behalf of, the Sponsor prior to the final disposition of any matter upon receipt by the Sponsor of an undertaking by, or on behalf of, such Indemnified Person to repay such amount if it shall be determined that the Indemnified Person is not entitled to be indemnified under this Trust Agreement.

Item 15. Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities.

II-1

Table of Contents

Item 16. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules.

(a) Exhibits.

	Exhibit No.			Exhibit Description
	3.1**			Trust Agreement
	3.2**			Certificate of Trust
	5.1**			Opinion of Chapman and Cutler LLP as to legality
	8.1**			Opinion of Chapman and Cutler LLP as to tax matters
	10.1**			Form of Initial Authorized Participant Agreement
	10.2**			Marketing Agreement
	10.5**			Fund Administration Servicing Agreement
	10.6**			Transfer Agent Servicing Agreement
	10.7**			Fund Accounting Servicing Agreement
	10.8**			Sponsor Agreement
	10.9**			Custodian Agreement
	10.10**			Cash Custody Agreement (Custodian Agreement)
	10.11**			Index License Agreement
	23.1**			Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
	23.2**			Consent of Chapman and Cutler LLP (included in Exhibits 5.1 and 8.1)
	107*			Filing Fee Tables

Filed herewith

To be filed by amendment

(b) Financial Statement Schedules.

Not applicable.

Item 17. Undertakings.

The undersigned registrant hereby undertakes:

(1)

To file, during any period in which offers or sales are being made, a post-effective amendment to this registration statement:

(i)

to include any prospectus required by section 10(a)(3) of the Securities Act of 1933; (ii) to reflect in the prospectus any facts or events arising after the effective date of the registration statement (or the most recent post-effective amendment thereof) which, individually or in the aggregate, represent a fundamental change in the information set forth in the registration statement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any increase or decrease in volume of securities offered (if the total dollar value of securities offered would not exceed that which was registered) and any deviation from the low or high end of the estimated maximum offering range may be reflected in the form of prospectus filed with the Commission pursuant to Rule 424(b) if, in the aggregate, the changes in volume and price represent no more than 20% change in the maximum aggregate offering price set forth in the “Calculation of Registration Fee” table in the effective registration statement; and

(ii)

to include any material information with respect to the plan of distribution not previously disclosed in the registration statement or any material change to such information in the registration statement.

(2)

That, for the purpose of determining any liability under the Securities Act of 1933, each such post-effective amendment shall be deemed to be a new registration statement relating to the securities

II-2

Table of Contents

offered therein, and the offering of such securities at that time shall be deemed to be the initial bona fide offering thereof.

(3)

To remove from registration by means of a post-effective amendment any of the securities being registered which remain unsold at the termination of the offering.

(4)

That, for the purpose of determining liability under the Securities Act of 1933 to any purchaser:

(i)

If the registrant is relying on Rule 430B:

(A)

each prospectus filed by the registrant pursuant to Rule 424(b)(3) shall be deemed to be part of the registration statement as of the date the filed prospectus was deemed part of and included in the registration statement; and

(B)

each prospectus required to be filed pursuant to Rule 424(b)(2), (b)(5), or (b)(7) as part of a registration statement in reliance on Rule 430B relating to an offering made pursuant to Rule 415(a)(1)(i), (vii), or (x) for the purpose of providing the information required by section 10(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 shall be deemed to be part of and included in the registration statement as of the earlier of the date such form of prospectus is first used after effectiveness or the date of the first contract of sale of securities in the offering described in the prospectus. As provided in Rule 430B, for liability purposes of the issuer and any person that is at that date an underwriter, such date shall be deemed to be a new effective date of the registration statement relating to the securities in the registration statement to which that prospectus relates, and the offering of such securities at that time shall be deemed to be the initial bona fide offering thereof. Provided, however, that no statement made in a registration statement or prospectus that is part of the registration statement or made in a document incorporated or deemed incorporated by reference into the registration statement or prospectus that is part of the registration statement will, as to a purchaser with a time of contract of sale prior to such effective date, supersede or modify any statement that was made in the registration statement or prospectus that was part of the registration statement or made in any such document immediately prior to such effective date; or

(ii)

If the registrant is subject to Rule 430C, each prospectus filed pursuant to Rule 424(b) as part of a registration statement relating to an offering, other than registration statements relying on Rule 430B or other than prospectuses filed in reliance on Rule 430A, shall be deemed to be part of and included in the registration statement as of the date it is first used after effectiveness. Provided, however, that no statement made in a registration statement or prospectus that is part of the registration statement or made in a document incorporated or deemed incorporated by reference into the registration statement or prospectus that is part of the registration statement will, as to a purchaser with a time of contract of sale prior to such first use, supersede or modify any statement that was made in the registration statement or prospectus that was part of the registration statement or made in any such document immediately prior to such date of first use.

(5)

That, for the purpose of determining liability of the registrant under the Securities Act of 1933 to any purchaser in the initial distribution of the securities:

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:

(i)

any preliminary prospectus or prospectus of the undersigned registrant relating to the offering required to be filed pursuant to Rule 424;

(ii)

any free writing prospectus relating to the offering prepared by or on behalf of the undersigned registrant or used or referred to by the undersigned registrant;

II-3

Table of Contents

(iii)

the portion of any other free writing prospectus relating to the offering containing material information about the undersigned registrant or its securities provided by or on behalf of the undersigned registrant; and

(iv)

any other communication that is an offer in the offering made by the undersigned registrant to the purchaser.

(6)

Insofar as indemnification for liabilities arising under the Securities Act of 1933 may be permitted to directors, officers and controlling persons of the registrant pursuant to the foregoing provisions, or otherwise, the registrant has been advised that in the opinion of the Securities and Exchange Commission such indemnification is against public policy as expressed in the Act and is, therefore, unenforceable. In the event that a claim for indemnification against such liabilities (other than the payment by the registrant of expenses incurred or paid by a director, officer or controlling person of the registrant in the successful defense of any action, suit or proceeding) is asserted by such director, officer or controlling person in connection with the securities being registered, the registrant will, unless in the opinion of its counsel the matter has been settled by controlling precedent, submit to a court of appropriate jurisdiction the question whether such indemnification by it is against public policy as expressed in the Act and will be governed by the final adjudication of such issue.

II-4

Table of Contents

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 Wilmington, and the State of Delaware, on October 6, 2026.

WINKLEVOSS ZCASH ETF

Winklevoss Asset Services, LLC,
as Sponsor of the Trust

By:

/s/ Cameron Winklevoss

Name: Cameron Winklevoss
Title: Chief Executive Officer

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.

Signature	Title	Date
/s/ Cameron Winklevoss Cameron Winklevoss	Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)	October 6, 2026
/s/ Khing Oei Khing Oei	Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer	October 6, 2026

The registrant is a trust and the persons are signing in their capacities as officers of Winklevoss Asset Services, LLC, the Sponsor of the registrant.

II-5