FG Nexus Inc.

Risks Related to Cryptocurrencies

The further development and acceptance of cryptocurrency networks, including the ETH network, which represent a relatively new and rapidly changing industry, are subject to a variety of factors that are difficult to evaluate. The slowing or stopping of the development or acceptance of cryptocurrency networks, including the ETH network, may adversely affect an investment in the Company.

Cryptocurrency such as ETH may be used, among other things, to buy and sell goods and services or to transfer and store value by users. The cryptocurrency networks are a new and rapidly evolving industry of which the ETH network is a prominent, but not unique, part. The growth of the cryptocurrency industry in general, and the ETH network in particular, is subject to a high degree of uncertainty. The factors affecting the further development of the cryptocurrency industry, as well as the ETH network, include:

A decline in the popularity or acceptance of the ETH network and other cryptocurrency networks may harm the price of our Common Stock. There is no assurance that the ETH network, or the service providers necessary to accommodate it, will continue in existence or grow. Furthermore, there is no assurance that the availability of and access to cryptocurrency service providers will not be negatively affected by government regulation or supply and demand of ETH.

The digital asset trading platforms on which cryptocurrency trades are relatively new and largely unregulated or may not be complying with existing regulations.

Cryptocurrency markets, including the spot market for ETH, are growing rapidly. The digital asset trading platforms through which ETH and other cryptocurrencies trade are new and largely unregulated or may not be complying with existing regulations. These markets are local, national and international and include a broadening range of cryptocurrencies and participants. Significant trading may occur on systems and platforms with minimum predictability. Spot markets may impose daily, weekly, monthly or customer-specific transaction or withdrawal limits or suspend withdrawals entirely, rendering the exchange of ETH for fiat currency difficult or impossible. Participation in spot markets requires users to take on credit risk by transferring ETH or another cryptocurrency from a personal account to a third-party’s account.

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

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

No digital asset trading platform on which cryptocurrency trades is immune from these risks. The closure or temporary shutdown of digital asset trading platforms due to fraud, business failure, hackers or malware, or government-mandated regulation may reduce confidence in cryptocurrency and can slow down the mass adoption of it. Further, digital asset trading platform failures can have an adverse effect on cryptocurrency markets and the price of cryptocurrency and could therefore have a negative impact on the performance of the Common Stock.

Negative perception, a lack of stability in the digital asset trading platforms, manipulation of cryptocurrency trading platforms by customers and/or the closure or temporary shutdown of such trading platforms due to fraud, business failure, hackers or malware, or government-mandated regulation may reduce confidence in cryptocurrency generally and result in greater volatility in the market price of ETH and other cryptocurrency and our Common Stock. Furthermore, the closure or temporary shutdown of a cryptocurrency trading platform may impact the Company’s ability to determine the value of its cryptocurrency holdings.

Cryptocurrencies 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 any cryptocurrency network, participants may lose faith in the security of cryptocurrency, which could affect cryptocurrency’s value and consequently the value of our Common Stock.

Our Common Stock may trade at a substantial premium or discount to the value of the ETH and other assets we hold, and our stock price may be more volatile than the price of ETH.

The market price of our Common Stock reflects many factors that do not affect the spot price of ETH and may therefore diverge materially—positively or negatively—from the per-share value of our ETH holdings (net of cash, other assets and liabilities). These factors include, among others: our corporate-level expenses; taxes; the timing, size and pricing of equity or debt financings (including at-the-market offerings or convertible securities), equity awards and other sources of dilution; expectations about our future purchases or sales of ETH, staking activity, or special distributions; our liquidity, public float, short interest and securities lending/borrow dynamics; the availability and pricing of exchange-listed alternatives (such as exchange-traded products holding ETH) and differences between those vehicles and a corporate issuer (including the absence in our case of an in-kind creation/redemption mechanism that can reduce premiums/discounts); differences in trading hours and market microstructure between our Common Stock and spot markets for ETH; changes in index inclusion, analyst coverage or investor sentiment toward us as an operating company; our corporate governance, financial reporting, and any actual or perceived operational, custody, technology or regulatory risks specific to us; and broader equity-market conditions independent of crypto-asset markets. As a result, our stock may trade at a premium or discount to the value of our ETH holdings for extended periods, and may be more volatile than the price of ETH. Accordingly, investors could lose all or a substantial part of their investment even if the market price of ETH does not decline, and may not benefit commensurately from increases in the market price of ETH.

The market price of ETH is highly volatile and may be adversely affected by factors beyond our control, including competition from other crypto assets and relative-adoption trends, any of which could negatively affect the value of our ETH holdings and our Common Stock price.

The price of ETH depends on supply-and-demand dynamics in global, largely unregulated or differently regulated markets and is subject to extreme volatility. ETH competes for users, developers, capital and transaction “blockspace” with other crypto assets and networks (including Bitcoin and alternative Layer-1 and Layer-2 protocols), with stablecoins and their underlying settlement rails, and with non-blockchain payment and computing systems. If users, developers, liquidity providers, applications, or institutions favor other networks or assets—whether due to perceived performance, scalability, fees, user experience, security, programmability, available applications, token incentives, or business/regulatory considerations—the relative demand for ETH could decline. Adoption metrics relevant to ETH’s value (e.g., active addresses, developer activity, validator participation and staking yields, Layer-2 usage, stablecoin and DeFi activity on Ethereum, and enterprise or government use) may increase or decrease over time and may do so at different rates than comparable metrics on other networks. ETH’s price may also be adversely affected by protocol-level changes (including Ethereum Improvement Proposals that alter issuance, burn, fees or economics), hard forks or chain splits, software bugs or vulnerabilities, validator/slashing events, material disruptions or exploits in applications or Layer-2 systems that depend on Ethereum, changes in MEV (maximal extractable value) dynamics, changes in transaction fees or demand for blockspace, actions by large holders or market makers, market manipulation, exchange or stablecoin failures, changes in interest rates or macroeconomic conditions, regulatory or enforcement developments (including with respect to staking, custody, market structure or the legal classification of ETH), tax treatment, and changes in access to banking or payment services for crypto market participants. Any of these factors—especially if they lead to faster growth or improved economics for competing crypto assets relative to ETH—could cause the price of ETH to decline or underperform other crypto assets. A decline in the price of ETH, or underperformance relative to other assets, would reduce the value of our ETH holdings and could adversely affect the market price of our Common Stock.

The trading prices of many cryptocurrencies, including ETH, have experienced extreme volatility in recent periods and may continue to do so. Extreme volatility in the future, including further declines in the trading price of ETH, could have a material adverse effect on the value of our Common Stock and our Common Stock could lose all or substantially all of its value.

The trading prices of many cryptocurrencies, including ETH, have experienced extreme volatility in recent periods and may continue to do so. For instance, there were steep increases in the value of certain cryptocurrencies, including ETH, over the course of 2017, followed by steep drawdowns throughout 2018 in cryptocurrency trading prices. These drawdowns notwithstanding, cryptocurrency prices, including for ETH, increased significantly again during 2019, decreased significantly again in the first quarter of 2020 amidst broader market declines as a result of the novel coronavirus outbreak, and increased significantly again over the remainder of 2020 and the first quarter of 2021. Cryptocurrency prices, including ETH, experienced significant and sudden changes throughout 2021 followed by steep drawdowns in the fourth quarter of 2021 and throughout 2022. Cryptocurrency prices again experienced steep increases in value in 2024 before suffering steep drawdowns in early 2025 and again in late 2025, and continue to be volatile in early 2026.

Extreme volatility in the future, including further declines in the trading price of ETH or related cryptocurrencies, could have a material adverse effect on the value of our Common Stock, and our Common Stock could lose all or substantially all of its value. Furthermore, negative perception and a lack of stability and standardized regulation in the cryptocurrency economy may reduce confidence in the cryptocurrency economy and may result in greater volatility in the price of ETH and other cryptocurrencies, including a depreciation in value.

We may be subject to regulatory developments related to cryptocurrencies and cryptocurrency markets, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

As cryptocurrencies are relatively novel and the application of state and federal securities laws and other laws and regulations to cryptocurrencies are unclear in certain respects, it is possible that regulators in the United States or foreign countries may interpret or apply existing laws and regulations in a manner that adversely affects the price of cryptocurrencies. The U.S. federal government, states, regulatory agencies, and foreign countries may also enact new laws and regulations, or pursue regulatory, legislative, enforcement or judicial actions, that could materially impact the price of cryptocurrencies or the ability of individuals or institutions such as us to own or transfer cryptocurrencies.

If cryptocurrencies are determined to constitute a security for purposes of the federal securities laws, the additional regulatory restrictions imposed by such a determination could adversely affect the market price of cryptocurrencies and in turn adversely affect the market price of our Common Stock. Moreover, the risks of our engaging in a Ethereum treasury strategy have created, and could continue to create complications due to the lack of experience that third parties have with companies engaging in such a strategy, such as increased costs of director and officer liability insurance or the potential inability to obtain such coverage on acceptable terms in the future.

The lack of full insurance exposes the Company and its stockholders to the risk of loss of the Company’s crypto assets for which no person or entity is liable.

The Company’s crypto assets are not covered by any specific insurance maintained by the Company. Instead, the Company’s custodians maintain insurance policies ranging from $100 million to $250 million for loss of property due to theft, robbery, or burglary, as well as third-party computer and funds transfer fraud. These insurance policies are shared among all of the custodians’ clients and are not specific to the Company or to any particular assets held by the Company. Consequently, the availability of insurance proceeds to the Company may be reduced if multiple claims are made by other customers.

In addition, the aggregate insurance coverage provided by the Company’s custodians may not be sufficient to cover all potential losses. The total coverage amount may be significantly lower than the value of the crypto assets under custody, exposing the Company to the risk that, in the event of a loss, the insurance policy will not cover the full extent of the Company’s assets. Furthermore, the types of risks covered by the crypto custodians’ insurance may not include all risks faced by the Company, and losses could arise from other sources for which there is no insurance coverage.

Lastly, even though the crypto custodians maintain capital reserve requirements depending on the assets under custody, there is no assurance that these reserves will be sufficient to cover potential losses or that insurance proceeds will be available in a timely manner in the event of a claim. Therefore, the Company and its stockholders remain exposed to risks of loss that may not be fully mitigated by insurance or other financial safeguards.

Additional Risks Related to Investing in ETH

Given we are solely invested in ETH, we are particularly subject to ETH-related risks.

Given we are solely invested in ETH, we are particularly subject to risks related to ETH holdings and exposure, such as, but not limited to, the risk factors listed above, including extreme volatility in the trading price of ETH. We may have less protection from these risks, as we do not plan on hedging our ETH exposure. Further, and relatedly, given that we also do not maintain insurance coverage on our ETH holdings, and instead rely solely on the insurance coverage maintained by our third party custodians, we may have further limited protection from risks related to our ETH holdings and exposure.

We have shifted our business strategy towards a focus on ETH, and we may be unable to successfully implement this new strategy.

We have shifted our business strategy towards ETH and tokenization. We currently hold primarily ETH and in the future may engage in staking, restaking, liquid staking and other decentralized finance activities. There is no assurance that we will be able to successfully implement this new strategy or operate ETH-related activities at the scale or profitability currently anticipated. The ETH network operates with a Proof-of-Stake consensus mechanism, which differs significantly from BTC’s Proof-of-Work mining mechanism. This strategic shift requires specialized employee skillsets and operational, technical and compliance infrastructure to support ETH and related staking activities. This also requires that we implement different security protocols, and treasury management practices. There is no assurance that we will be able to execute this strategy by building out the needed infrastructure within the timeframe that we currently anticipate. Errors in key management could result in significant loss of funds and reduced rewards. As a result, our shift towards ETH could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

Our shift towards an ETH-focused strategy requires substantial changes in our day-to-day operations and exposes us to significant operational risks.

Our shift towards an ETH-focused strategy potentially exposes us to operational risks. ETH’s Proof-of-Stake consensus mechanism requires the operation of validator nodes, secure key management and slashing protection. It also requires that we maintain constant up time to ensure that we are eligible for staking rewards and to avoid penalties. In addition, the ETH ecosystem rapidly evolves, with frequent upgrades and protocol changes that may require significant adjustments to our operational setup. The upgrades and protocol changes may require that we incur unanticipated costs and it could cause temporary service disruptions. We may also need to employ third-party service providers in our operations, which may introduce risks outside of our control, including significant cybersecurity risks. Any of these operational risks could materially and adversely affect our ability to execute our ETH strategy and may prevent us from realizing positive returns and could severely hurt our financial condition.

In connection with our focus on ETH, we expect to interact with various smart contracts deployed on the ETH network, which may expose us to risks and technical vulnerabilities.

In connection with our ETH strategy, including currently, through staking, but potentially in the future, through restaking, liquid staking, and other decentralized finance activities, we expect to interact with various smart contracts deployed on the ETH network in order to optimize our strategy. Smart contracts are self-executing code that operate without human intervention once deployed. Although smart contracts are integral to the functionality of staking deposit contracts, liquid staking protocols, restaking platforms, and decentralized finance applications, they are subject to many known risks such as technical vulnerabilities, coding errors, security flaws, and exploits. Any vulnerability in a smart contract we interact with could result in the loss or theft of ETH or other digital assets, which could have a materially adverse impact on our business. A vulnerability in a smart contract could create an unintended and unforeseeable consequence that has adverse financial consequences, such as the inability to access funds. There is no assurance that the smart contracts we integrate with or rely upon will function as intended or remain secure. Exploitation of such vulnerabilities could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

Transactions using ETH require the payment of “gas fees,” which are subject to fluctuations that may result in high transaction fees.

Transactions using ETH, including purchases, sales and staking, require the payment of “gas fees” in ETH. Gas fees are payments made by the user to compensate for the computational energy required to process and validate transactions, such as purchases, sales and staking, on the ETH network. These fees can fluctuate and can be very expensive relative to the cost of the transaction depending upon congestion and demand on the network. If fees are high, the cost of a transaction will potentially decrease the return of the investment, which could be negative. High gas fees may also cause delays in the execution of a transaction, which could affect the preferred timing of execution and may lead to execution of a transaction during inopportune times. In addition, gas fees are paid in ETH itself, which would require that sufficient ETH balances are maintained. Future upgrades to the Ethereum protocol, regulatory changes, or technical issues could also adversely impact the cost of gas fees and could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition, treasury and prospects.

There is a possibility that ETH may be classified as a “security.” If ETH is classified as a “security,” that would subject us to additional regulation and could materially impact the operations of our treasury strategy and our business.

Neither the SEC nor any other U.S. federal or state regulator has publicly stated whether they agree that ETH is a “security,” and ETH has not yet been classified with respect to the U.S. federal securities laws. Although we believe that ETH is not a “security” within the meaning of the U.S. federal securities laws, and that registration of the Company or our treasury under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “Investment Company Act”), is therefore not required under applicable securities laws, we acknowledge the uncertainty that a regulatory body or federal court may determine otherwise in the future. If this occurs, we may face legal or regulatory action, even if our beliefs were reasonable under the circumstances, and we could be required to register as an investment company under the Investment Company Act.

As part of our ongoing review of applicable securities laws, we take into account a number of factors, including the various definitions of “security” under such laws and federal court decisions interpreting the elements of these definitions, such as the U.S. Supreme Court’s decisions in theHowey andReves cases, and we also consider court rulings, reports, orders, press releases, public statements, and speeches by the SEC Commissioners and SEC Staff providing guidance on when a digital asset or a transaction to which a digital asset may relate may be a security for purposes of U.S. federal securities laws. Our position that ETH is not a “security” is premised, among other reasons, on our conclusion that ETH does not appear to meet certain elements of the Howey test, such as that holders of ETH do not have a reasonable expectation of profits from our efforts in respect of their holding of ETH. Also, ETH ownership does not convey the right to receive any interest, rewards, or other returns.

We acknowledge, however, that the SEC, a federal court or another relevant entity could take a different view. The regulatory treatment of ETH is such that it has drawn significant attention from legislative and regulatory bodies, in particular the SEC, which has previously stated it deemed ETH a security. The application of securities laws to the specific facts and circumstances of digital assets is complex and subject to change. Our conclusion, even if reasonable under the circumstances, would not preclude legal or regulatory action based on a finding that Ether, or any other digital asset we might hold, is a “security.” Therefore, we are at risk of enforcement proceedings against us, which could result in potential injunctions, cease-and-desist orders, fines and penalties or other actions, if ETH or components of the Ethereum blockchain was determined to be a security by a regulatory body or a court. Such developments could subject us to fines, penalties and other damages, and adversely affect our business, results of operations, financial condition, treasury operations and prospects.

With respect to Section 3(a)(1)(A), the substantial majority of the proceeds from our recent PIPE Offering were used to acquire ETH, which is an amount in excess of 40% of our total assets. Since we believe ETH is not an investment security, we do not hold ourselves out as being engaged primarily, or propose to engage primarily, in the business of investing, reinvesting, or trading in securities within the meaning of Section 3(a)(1)(A) of the Investment Company Act. With respect to Section 3(a)(1)(C), we believe we satisfy the elements of Rule 3a-1 and therefore are deemed not to be an investment company under, and we intend to conduct our operations such that we will not be deemed an investment company under, Section 3(a)(1)(C). We believe that we are not an investment company pursuant to Rule 3a-1 under the Investment Company Act because, on a consolidated basis with respect to wholly-owned subsidiaries but otherwise on an unconsolidated basis, no more than 45% of the value of our total assets (exclusive of U.S. government securities, shares of registered money market funds under Rule 2a-7 of the Investment Company Act, and cash items) consists of, and no more than 45% of our net income after taxes (for the last four fiscal quarters combined) is derived from, securities other than U.S. government securities, shares of registered money market funds under Rule 2a-7 of the Investment Company Act, securities issued by employees’ securities companies, securities issued by qualifying majority owned subsidiaries of the Company, and securities issued by qualifying companies that are controlled primarily by the Company.

ETH is created and transmitted through the operations of the peer-to-peer ETH network, a decentralized network of computers running software following the ETH protocol. If the ETH network is disrupted or encounters any unanticipated difficulties, the value of ETH could be negatively impacted.

If the ETH network is disrupted or encounters any unanticipated difficulties, then the processing of transactions on the ETH network may be disrupted, which in turn may prevent us from depositing or withdrawing ETH from our accounts with our custodians or otherwise effecting ETH transactions. Such disruptions could include, for example: the price volatility of ETH; the insolvency, business failure, interruption, default, failure to perform, security breach, or other problems of participants, custodians, or others; the closing of ETH trading platforms due to fraud, failures, security breaches or otherwise; or network outages or congestion, power outages, or other problems or disruptions affecting the ETH network.

In addition, although we do not currently intend to mine ETH, digital asset validating 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 validating operations. Additionally, validators may be forced to cease operations during an electricity shortage or power outage.

We face risks relating to the custody of our ETH, including the loss or destruction of private keys required to access our ETH and cyberattacks or other data loss relating to our ETH, including smart contract related losses and vulnerabilities.

We currently hold our ETH with Anchorage Digital Bank N.A. and BitGo Trust Company, Inc., as custodians (the “Custodians”) that have duties to safeguard our private keys, and use multisignature keys to prevent unauthorized access in accordance with our treasury operations. Our custodial services contracts do not restrict the asset manager’s ability to reallocate our ETH among other custodians, provided, however that our ETH holdings may be concentrated with a single custodian from time to time. In light of the significant amount of ETH we expect to hold, we may seek to engage additional custodians to achieve a greater degree of diversification in the custody of our ETH as the extent of potential risk of loss is dependent, in part, on the degree of diversification. However, multiple custodians may utilize similar wallet infrastructure, cloud service providers or software systems, which could increase systemic technology risk.

If there is a decrease in the availability of digital asset custodians that we believe can safely custody our ETH, for example, due to regulatory developments or enforcement actions that cause custodians to discontinue or limit their services in the United States, we may need to enter into agreements that are less favorable than our current agreements or take other measures to custody our ETH, and our ability to seek a greater degree of diversification in the use of custodial services would be materially adversely affected. While we conduct due diligence on our custodians and any smart contract platforms we may use, there can be no assurance that such diligence will uncover all risks, including operational deficiencies, hidden vulnerabilities or legal noncompliance.

Our use of a custodian exposes us to the risk that the ETH our custodian holds on our behalf could be subject to insolvency proceedings and we could be treated as a general unsecured creditor of the custodian, inhibiting our ability to exercise ownership rights with respect to such ETH. Any loss associated with such insolvency proceedings is unlikely to be covered by any insurance coverage that we might purchase or maintain related to our ETH. The legal framework governing digital asset ownership and rights in custodial or insolvency contexts remains uncertain and continues to evolve, which could result in unexpected losses, protracted recovery processes or adverse treatment in insolvency proceedings.

ETH is controllable only by the possessor of both the unique public key and private key(s) relating to the local or online digital wallet in which the ETH is held. While the Ethereum blockchain ledger requires a public key relating to a digital wallet to be published when used in a transaction, private keys must be safeguarded and kept private in order to prevent a third party from accessing the ETH held in such wallet. To the extent the private key(s) for a digital wallet are lost, destroyed, or otherwise compromised and no backup of the private key(s) is accessible, neither we nor our custodians will be able to access the ETH held in the related digital wallet. Furthermore, we cannot provide assurance that our digital wallets, nor the digital wallets of our custodians held on our behalf, will not be compromised as a result of a cyberattack. The Ethereum and blockchain ledger, as well as other digital assets and blockchain technologies, have been, and may in the future be, subject to security breaches, cyberattacks, or other malicious activities.

As part of our treasury management strategy, we may engage in staking, restaking, or other permitted activities that involve the use of “smart contracts” or decentralized applications. The use of smart contracts or decentralized applications entails certain risks including risks stemming from the existence of an “admin key” or coding flaws that could be exploited, potentially allowing a bad actor to issue or otherwise compromise the smart contract or decentralized application, potentially leading to a loss of our ETH. Like all software code, smart contracts are exposed to risk that the code contains a bug or other security vulnerability, which can lead to loss of assets that are held on or transacted through the contract or decentralized application. Smart contracts and decentralized applications may contain bugs, security vulnerabilities or poorly designed permission structures that could result in the irreversible loss of ETH or other digital assets. Exploits, including those stemming from admin key misuse, admin key compromise, or protocol flaws, have occurred in the past and may occur in the future.

The introduction of any government-issued digital currency could eliminate or reduce the need or demand for private-sector issued crypto currencies, or significantly limit their utility. National governments around the world could introduce CBDCs, which could in turn limit the size of the market opportunity for cryptocurrencies, including ETH.

Operational Risk Factors

Our capital allocation strategy may not be successful, which could adversely impact our financial condition.

We intend to continue allocating part of our cash balances to companies and real estate and may engage in mergers, acquisitions and divestitures. These types of holdings are riskier than holding our cash balances as bank deposits or, for example, conservative options such as treasury bonds or money market funds. There can be no assurance that we will be able to maintain or enhance the value or the performance of the companies in which we have invested or may invest in the future, or that we will achieve returns or benefits from these holdings. Under certain circumstances, significant declines in the fair values of these holdings may require the recognition of other-than-temporary impairment losses. We may lose all or part of our holdings relating to such companies if their value decreases as a result of their financial performance or for any other reason. If our interests differ from those of other investors in companies over which we do not have control, we may be unable to effect any change at those companies. We are not required to meet any diversification standards, and our holdings may continue to remain concentrated. In addition, we may seek to sell some or all of our existing businesses as part of our holding company strategy.

If our capital allocation strategy is not successful or we achieve less than expected returns from these holdings, it could have a material adverse effect on us. The Board may also change our capital allocation strategy at any time, and such changes could further increase our exposure, which could adversely impact us.

Any potential future acquisitions, strategic investments, entry into new lines of business, divestitures, mergers or joint ventures may subject us to significant risks, any of which could harm our business.

Our long-term strategy may include identifying and acquiring, investing in or merging with suitable candidates on acceptable terms, entry into new lines of business and markets or divesting of certain business lines or activities. Mergers, acquisitions, divestitures and entries into new lines of business include a number of risks and present financial, managerial and operational challenges, including but not limited to:

Any acquired business, technology, service or product, or entry into a new line of business could significantly under-perform relative to our expectations and may not achieve the benefits we expect. For all these reasons, our pursuit of an acquisition, investment, new line of business, divestiture, merger or joint venture could cause our actual results to differ materially from those anticipated.

Our holdings in special purpose acquisition companies as well as the sponsors of special purpose acquisition companies involve a high degree of risk.

We have invested in initial public offerings (“IPOs”) of special purpose acquisition companies, including SPACs that are sponsored by our affiliates. In general, a SPAC is a special purpose vehicle that is formed to raise capital from the public through an IPO with the purpose, usually, of using the proceeds to acquire a single unspecified business or assets to be identified after the IPO. The IPO proceeds are held in a trust account until released to fund a business combination or used to redeem shares sold in the IPO. SPACs are required to either consummate a business combination or liquidate within a set period of time following their IPO. Because, at the time of the IPO, the SPAC has no operating history or any plans, arrangements or understandings with any prospective investment targets, we will have no basis upon which to evaluate the SPAC’s ability to achieve its business objectives. If a SPAC fails to complete its initial business transaction within the required time period, it will never generate any operating revenues and our SPAC holding may receive only a fixed dollar amount per share upon redemption, or less than such fixed amount in certain circumstances which could significantly affect our operating results and stockholders’ equity.

Additionally, we have acquired equity interests in various sponsors of SPACs (“Sponsor”) and expect to acquire additional interests in sponsors of SPACs in the future. By investing in a Sponsor, we have provided at-risk capital which allows the Sponsor to launch the IPO of the SPAC. In exchange for this investment, we own interests in the Sponsor that entitle us to receive distributions of shares and warrants in the SPAC. These Sponsor interests do not have redemption rights to receive any portion of our original investment back from the trust account of the SPAC, as is normally associated with an IPO investment directly into a SPAC. Accordingly, an investment in a Sponsor is subject to a much higher degree of risk than an investment directly in a SPAC’s IPO because the entire investment may be lost if the SPAC is not successful in consummating a business combination. Such potential loss could have a material effect on our financial results and stockholders’ equity.

As the number of SPACs evaluating targets increases, attractive targets may become more scarce, and there may be increased competition for attractive targets. This could increase the cost of an initial business combination and it could even result in an inability to find a target or to consummate an initial business combination.

In recent years, the number of SPACs that have been formed has increased substantially. Many potential targets for special purpose acquisition companies have already entered into an initial business combination. As a result, at times, fewer attractive targets may be available to consummate an initial business combination.

In addition, because there are more SPACs seeking to enter into an initial business combination with available targets, the competition for available targets with attractive fundamentals or business models may increase, which could cause target companies to demand improved financial terms. Attractive deals could also become more scarce for other reasons, such as economic or industry sector downturns, geopolitical tensions, or increases in the cost of additional capital needed to close business combinations or operate targets post-business combination. Together, this could increase the cost of, delay or otherwise complicate or frustrate the ability of a SPAC to find and consummate an initial business combination and may result in an inability to consummate an initial business combination on terms favorable to investors altogether.

Furthermore, the strength of the market for SPAC IPOs has fluctuated substantially from year to year and has experienced cycles of relative strength and weakness. There can be no assurance that the SPAC market will be strong in the future.

We may not be successful in carrying out our merchant banking strategy, and the fair value of our holdings will be subject to a loss in value.

Through our SPAC sponsorships, we may be subject to lock-up agreements, and our ability to access the capital used to sponsor SPACs may be limited for a defined period, which may increase a risk of loss of all or a significant portion of value. Our holdings may also become concentrated. A significant decline in the values of these holdings may produce a large decrease in our consolidated stockholders’ equity and can have a material adverse effect on our consolidated book value per share and earnings.

If we are unable to maintain our brand and reputation, our business, results of operations and prospects could be materially harmed.

Our business, results of operations and prospects depend, in part, on maintaining and strengthening our brand and reputation for providing high quality products and services. Reputational value is based in large part on perceptions. Although reputations may take decades to build, any negative incidents can quickly erode trust and confidence, particularly if they result in adverse publicity, governmental investigations or litigation. If problems with our products cause operational disruption or other difficulties, or there are delays or other issues with the delivery of our products or services, our brand and reputation could be diminished. Damage to our reputation could also arise from actual or perceived legal violations, product safety issues, data security breaches, actual or perceived poor employee relations, actual or perceived poor service, actual or perceived poor privacy practices, operational or sustainability issues, actual or perceived ethical issues or other events within or outside of our control that generate negative publicity with respect to us. Any event that has the potential to negatively impact our reputation could lead to lost sales, loss of new opportunities and retention and recruiting difficulties. If we fail to promote and maintain our brand and reputation successfully, our business, results of operations and prospects could be materially harmed.

We maintain property, business interruption and casualty insurance but such insurance may not cover all risks associated with the hazards of our business and is subject to limitations, including deductibles and maximum liabilities covered. We are potentially at risk if one or more of our insurance carriers fail. Additionally, severe disruptions in the domestic and global financial markets could adversely impact the ratings and survival of some insurers. In the future, we may not be able to obtain coverage at current levels, and our premiums may increase significantly on coverage that we maintain.

Our results of operations and the implementation of our business strategies could be adversely affected by general conditions in the global economy, including conditions that are outside of our control. A severe or prolonged economic downturn could result in a variety of risks to our business and could delay the implementation of our new business strategy.

In the event of a major disruption, we may lose the services of our employees, experience system interruptions or face challenges accessing the capital or credit markets, which could lead to diminishment of our business operations. Any of the foregoing could harm our business and delay the implementation of our business strategy.

Adverse developments in the financial markets could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial position and our businesses, and may also limit our access to capital.

Adverse developments in the financial markets, such as disruptions, uncertainty or volatility in the capital and credit markets, may result in realized and unrealized capital losses that could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial position and our businesses, and may also limit our access to capital required to operate our business. Depending on market conditions, we could incur additional realized and unrealized losses on our portfolio of equity and other holdings in future periods, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition and business. Economic conditions could also have a material impact on the frequency and severity of claims and therefore could negatively impact our underwriting returns. The volatility in the financial markets could continue to significantly affect the returns on our equity and other holdings, reported results, and stockholders’ equity.

The capital requirements of our businesses depend on many factors, including regulatory requirements, the performance of our portfolio of equity and other holdings, our ability to write new business successfully, the frequency and severity of catastrophe events and our ability to establish premium rates and reserves at levels sufficient to cover losses.

Legal and Regulatory Risks

The requirements of being a public company may strain our resources, divert management’s attention, affect our ability to attract and retain qualified board members and have a material adverse effect on us and our stockholders.

As a publicly traded company, we are required to develop and implement substantial control systems, policies and procedures to satisfy our periodic SEC reporting and Nasdaq obligations. Management’s previous experience may not be sufficient to successfully develop and implement these systems, policies and procedures and to operate our Company. Failure to do so could jeopardize our status as a public company, and the loss of such status may have a material adverse effect on us and our stockholders.

In addition, as a public company, we are subject to the reporting requirements of the Exchange Act, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the Dodd-Frank Act, and Nasdaq rules, including those promulgated in response to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. The requirements of these rules and regulations increase our legal and financial compliance costs, make some activities more difficult, time-consuming or costly and increase demand on our systems and resources. The Exchange Act requires, among other things, that we file annual, quarterly and current reports with respect to our business and financial condition. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires, among other things, that we maintain effective disclosure controls and procedures and internal controls for financial reporting. To maintain and improve the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures, we need to continually commit significant resources, maintain staff and provide additional management oversight. In addition, implementing our business strategy and sustaining our growth will require us to commit additional management, operational and financial resources to identify new professionals to join our organization and to maintain appropriate operational and financial systems to adequately support expansion. These activities may divert management’s attention from other business concerns, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

If we fail to establish and maintain an effective system of integrated internal controls, we may not be able to report our financial results accurately, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Ensuring that we have adequate internal financial and accounting controls and procedures in place so that we can produce accurate financial statements on a timely basis is a costly and time-consuming effort that we will need to evaluate frequently. Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires public companies to conduct an annual review and evaluation of their internal controls and attestations of the effectiveness of internal controls by independent auditors. We currently qualify as a smaller reporting company and nonaccelerated filer under the regulations of the SEC. As a nonaccelerated filer, we are exempt from the requirement to include the auditor’s attestation on the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting until such time as we no longer qualify as a nonaccelerated filer, based on our public float and reporting more than $100 million in annual revenues in a fiscal year. Regardless of our qualification status, we have implemented control systems and procedures to satisfy the reporting requirements under the Exchange Act and applicable requirements of Nasdaq, among other items. Maintaining these internal controls is costly and may divert management’s attention.

Our evaluation of our internal controls over financial reporting may identify material weaknesses that may cause us to be unable to report our financial information on a timely basis and thereby subject us to adverse regulatory consequences, including sanctions by the SEC, or violations of Nasdaq’s listing rules. There also could be a negative reaction in the financial markets due to a loss of investor confidence in us and the reliability of our financial statements. Confidence in the reliability of our financial statements also could suffer if we or our independent registered public accounting firm were to report a material weakness in our internal controls over financial reporting. This may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations and could also lead to a decline in the price of our common stock.

While we currently qualify as a smaller reporting company under SEC regulations, we cannot be certain, if we take advantage of the reduced disclosure requirements applicable to these companies, that we will not make our stock less attractive to investors. If we lose smaller reporting company status, the costs and demands placed upon our management would be expected to increase.

The SEC’s rules exempt smaller reporting companies, like us, from various reporting requirements applicable to public companies that are not smaller reporting companies. So long as we qualify as a nonaccelerated filer, based on our public float, and report less than $100 million in annual revenues in a fiscal year, we are permitted, and we intend, to omit the auditor’s attestation on internal control over financial reporting that would otherwise be required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.

Until such time that we lose smaller reporting company status, it is unclear if investors will find our stock less attractive because we may rely on certain disclosure exemptions. If some investors find our stock less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for the stock, and our stock price may be more volatile and could cause our stock price to decline. Even if we remain a smaller reporting company, if our public float exceeds $75 million and we report $100 million or more in annual revenues in a fiscal year, we will become subject to the provisions of Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, requiring our independent registered public accounting firm to provide an attestation report on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting, making the public reporting process more costly.

Holders of our outstanding shares of 8.00% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series A, have dividend, liquidation and other rights that are senior to the rights of holders of our common shares.

As of March 23, 2026, we have 692,806 shares of preferred stock outstanding designated as 8.00% Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series A, par value $25.00 per share (the “Series A Preferred Stock”). The aggregate liquidation preference with respect to the outstanding shares of Series A Preferred Stock is approximately $17.3 million, and annual dividends on the outstanding shares of Series A Preferred Stock are approximately $1.4 million. Holders of our Series A Preferred Stock are entitled to receive, when, as and if declared by our Board cumulative cash dividends from and including the original issue date at the rate of 8.00% of the $25.00 per share liquidation preference per annum (equivalent to $2.00 per annum per share). Upon our voluntary or involuntary liquidation, dissolution or winding up, before any payment is made to holders of our common shares, holders of these preferred shares are entitled to receive, for each share held, an amount equal to the $25.00 liquidation preference and unpaid dividends. This would reduce the remaining amount of our assets, if any, available to distribute to holders of our common shares.

Our Board has the authority to designate and issue additional preferred shares with liquidation, dividend and other rights that are senior to those of our common shares, similar or senior to the rights of the holders of our Series A Preferred Stock. Because our decision to issue additional securities will depend on market conditions and other factors beyond our control, we cannot predict or estimate the amount, timing or nature of any future offerings. Thus, our stockholders bear the risk that future securities issuances might dilute their interests and reduce the market price of our stock.

We may fail to satisfy the continued listing standards of Nasdaq, in which case our stock might be delisted.

Even though we currently satisfy the continued listing standards for Nasdaq and expect to continue to do so, we can provide no assurance that we will continue to satisfy the continued listing standards in the future. In the event that we are unable to satisfy the continued listing standards of Nasdaq, our stock may be delisted from that market. Any delisting of our stock from Nasdaq could:

In addition, delisting our stock could deter broker-dealers from making a market in or otherwise seeking or generating interest in our stock and might deter some institutions or others from investing in our securities at all. For these reasons and others, delisting could adversely affect the price of our stock and our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Technology and Operational Risks

Our information technology systems may fail or suffer a loss of security which may have a material adverse effect on our business.

Our business is highly dependent upon the successful and uninterrupted functioning of our computer and data processing systems. Our operations are dependent upon our ability to process our business timely and efficiently and protect our information systems from physical loss or unauthorized access. In the event that our systems cannot be accessed due to a natural catastrophe, terrorist attack or power outage, or systems and telecommunications failures or outages, external attacks such as computer viruses, malware or cyber-attacks, or other disruptions occur, our ability to perform business operations on a timely basis could be significantly impaired and may cause our systems to be inaccessible for an extended period of time. A sustained business interruption or system failure could adversely impact our ability to perform necessary business operations in a timely manner, hurt our relationships with our business partners and customers and have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Our operations also depend on the reliable and secure processing, storage and transmission of confidential and other information in our computer systems and networks. From time to time, we may experience threats to our data and systems, including malware and computer virus attacks, unauthorized access, systems failures and disruptions. Computer viruses, hackers, phishing attacks, social engineering schemes, ransomware, employee misconduct and other external hazards could expose our data systems to security breaches, cyber-attacks or other disruptions. In addition, we routinely transmit and receive personal, confidential and proprietary information by electronic means. Our systems and networks may be subject to breaches or interference. Any such event may result in operational disruptions as well as unauthorized access to or the disclosure or loss of our proprietary information or our customers’ information or theft of funds and other monetary loss, which in turn may result in legal claims, regulatory scrutiny and liability, damage to our reputation, the incurrence of costs to eliminate or mitigate further exposure, the loss of customers or affiliated advisers or other damage to our business.

Risks Related to Our Officers and Directors

The Company may be unable to retain current personnel.

The success of the Company will depend in part on its ability to retain the talents and dedication of key employees and officers. It is possible that these employees and officers may decide not to remain with the Company. If we are unable to retain key employees, including management, who are critical to the successful integration and future operations of the companies, the Company could face disruptions in their operations, loss of existing customers, loss of key information, expertise or know-how and unanticipated additional recruitment costs. In addition, if key employees terminate their employment, the Company’s business activities may be adversely affected and management’s attention may be diverted from successfully integrating the businesses to hiring suitable replacements, all of which may cause the Company’s business to suffer. In addition, the Company may not be able to locate or retain suitable replacements for any key employees who leave either company.

Some of our directors and officers also serve as directors and/or executive officers for other public companies or for our controlling stockholders or their affiliates, which may lead to conflicting interests.

Certain of our executive officers and members of our Board have fiduciary duties to our stockholders; likewise, persons who serve in similar capacities at other public companies have fiduciary duties to those companies’ investors. There may be potential conflicts of interest if our Company and one or more of these other companies pursue acquisitions and other business opportunities that may be suitable for each of us. Our directors who find themselves in these multiple roles may, as a result, have conflicts of interest or the appearance of conflicts of interest with respect to matters involving or affecting more than one of the companies to which they owe fiduciary duties. Furthermore, our directors who find themselves in these multiple roles own stock options, shares of common stock and other securities in some of these entities. These ownership interests could create, or appear to create, potential conflicts of interest when the applicable individuals are faced with decisions that could have different implications for our Company and these other entities. From time to time, we may enter into transactions with or participate jointly in ventures with those other entities or their affiliates. We may create new situations in the future in which our directors serve as directors or executive officers in future holdings of such entities.

Our executive officers and directors allocate their time to our and other businesses in which they are involved, at their discretion, potentially to the detriment of the Company.

Certain of our executive officers and directors are not required to, and will not, commit their full time to our affairs, which may result in conflicts of interest in allocating their time between our operations and those other businesses in which they are involved. If those executive officers and directors elect to devote substantial amounts of time to the affairs of other businesses, in excess of current levels, they might not assign sufficient attention to the Company, potentially impairing our results of operations, financial condition, and prospects and the value of our securities.

Members of our management and companies with which they are affiliated in the past have been, and may in the future be, involved in civil disputes and litigation and governmental investigations relating to their business affairs unrelated to the Company. Any such claims or investigations may divert management’s attention from our business or be detrimental to our reputation, resulting in adverse effects upon our results of operations, financial condition, and prospects and the value of our securities held by investors.