Ceres Orion (OFFLP) 10-K2019 FY Annual report

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(X) ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)

OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2019

OR ( ) TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)

OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the Transition period from                    to                     

Commission File Number0-50271

CERES ORION L.P.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

c/o Ceres Managed Futures LLC

522 Fifth Avenue

New York, New York 10036

(Address and Zip Code of principal executive offices)

(855) 672-4468

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:Redeemable Units of Limited Partnership Interest

                (Title of Class)

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.

Yes _NoX     

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.

Yes _NoX     

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.

YesX No_     

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of RegulationS-T (§232.405 of the chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files).

YesX No_     

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, anon-accelerated filer, a 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 Rule12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

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 13(a) of the Exchange Act.    

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule12b-2 of the Exchange Act).

Yes _NoX

Limited Partnership Redeemable Units with an aggregate value of $520,413,784 of Class A and $4,285,651 of Class Z were outstanding and held by non-affiliates as of the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter.

As of February 29, 2020, 168,167.8548 Limited Partnership Class A Redeemable Units were outstanding and 4,706.5572 Limited Partnership Class Z Redeemable Units were outstanding.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

[None]

PART I

Item 1.Business.

(a)General development of business. Ceres Orion L.P. (formerly, Orion Futures Fund L.P.) (the “Partnership”) is a limited partnership organized on March 22, 1999, under the partnership laws of the State of New York, to engage, directly or indirectly, in the speculative trading of a diversified portfolio of commodity interests, including futures, option, swap and forward contracts. The sectors traded include currencies, energy, grains, livestock, indices, United States (“U.S.”) andnon-U.S. interest rates, softs and metals. The commodity interests that are traded by the Partnership, directly and indirectly through its investment in the Funds (as defined below), are volatile and involve a high degree of market risk. The Partnership commenced trading on June 10, 1999. The Partnership privately and continuously offers redeemable units of limited partnership interest (“Redeemable Units”) to qualified investors. There is no maximum number of Redeemable Units that may be sold by the Partnership. The General Partner (as defined below) may also determine to invest up to all of the Partnership’s assets (directly or indirectly through its investment in the Funds) in U.S. Treasury bills and/or money market mutual funds, including money market mutual funds managed by Morgan Stanley or its affiliates.

During the initial offering period (March 31, 1999 through June 10, 1999) the Partnership sold 10,499 Redeemable Units at $1,000 per Redeemable Unit. The Partnership commenced trading activities on June 10, 1999.

Subscriptions and redemptions of Redeemable Units and General Partner contributions and redemptions for the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017 are reported in the Statements of Changes in Partners’ Capital under “Item 8.Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.”

Ceres Managed Futures LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, acts as the general partner (the “General Partner”) and commodity pool operator of the Partnership and is the trading manager (the “Trading Manager”) of Transtrend Master (as defined below), FORT Contrarian Master (as defined below) and NL Master (as defined below). As of January 1, 2017, the General Partner is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Morgan Stanley Domestic Holdings, Inc. (“MSD Holdings”). MSD Holdings is ultimately owned by Morgan Stanley. Morgan Stanley is a publicly held company whose shares are listed on the New York Stock Exchange. Morgan Stanley is engaged in various financial services and other businesses. Prior to January 1, 2017, the General Partner was a wholly-owned subsidiary of Morgan Stanley Smith Barney Holdings LLC.

As of December 31, 2019, all trading decisions were made for the Partnership by Winton Capital Management Limited (“Winton”), Transtrend B.V. (“Transtrend”), FORT L.P. (“FORT”), John Street Capital Limited (“JSCL”) and Northlander Commodity Advisors LLP (“Northlander”) (each an “Advisor” and, collectively, the “Advisors”), each of which is a registered commodity trading advisor. Effective December 13, 2019, the Partnership, the General Partner, John Street Capital LLP (“John Street”) and JSCL entered into a deed of novation (the “JSCL Novation Agreement”), pursuant to which John Street transferred all of its future rights, obligations, and liabilities under that certain management agreement, by and among the General Partner, the Partnership and John Street, dated as of February 1, 2019, to JSCL. On January 31, 2019, the Partnership fully redeemed its investment in CMF Willowbridge Master Fund L.P. (“Willowbridge Master”). Also effective January 31, 2019, Willowbridge Associates Inc. (“Willowbridge”) ceased to act as a commodity trading advisor to the Partnership. Effective the close of business on October 31, 2018, Systematica Investments Limited (“Systematica”) ceased to act as a commodity trading advisor to the Partnership. References herein to the “Advisors” may include, as relevant, John Street, Willowbridge and Systematica. Each Advisor is allocated a portion of the Partnership’s assets to manage. The Partnership invests the portion of its assets allocated to each of the Advisors either directly, through a managed account in the Partnership’s name, or indirectly, through its investment in the Funds. In addition, the General Partner may allocate the Partnership’s assets to additionalnon-major trading advisors (i.e., commodity trading advisors intended to be allocated less than 10% of the Partnership’s assets). Information about advisors allocated less than 10% of the Partnership’s assets may not be disclosed.

Effective on or about December 13, 2019, JSCL directly trades the Partnership’s assets allocated to it through a managed account in the name of the Partnership pursuant to JSCL’s Systematic Strategy Program. From February 1, 2019 until December 12, 2019, John Street directly traded the Partnership’s assets allocated to it through a managed account in the name of the Partnership pursuant to the same Systematic Strategy Program.

Prior to its termination effective October 31, 2018, Systematica directly traded the Partnership’s assets allocated to it through a managed account in the name of the Partnership pursuant to Systematica’s BlueTrend Program.

On June 1, 2011, the Partnership began offering “Class A” Redeemable Units and “Class Z” Redeemable Units pursuant to the offering memorandum. All Redeemable Units issued prior to June 1, 2011 were deemed Class A Redeemable Units. The rights, powers, duties and obligations associated with investment in Class A Redeemable Units were not changed. Class A Redeemable Units are available to taxable U.S. individuals and institutions, U.S. tax exempt individuals and institutions andnon-U.S. investors. Class Z Redeemable Units were first issued on August 1, 2011. Class Z Redeemable Units are offered to limited partners who receive advisory services from Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC (doing business as Morgan Stanley Wealth Management) (“Morgan Stanley Wealth Management”) and certain employees of Morgan Stanley and/or its subsidiaries (and their family members). Class A Redeemable Units and Class Z Redeemable Units will each be referred to as a “Class” and collectively referred to as the “Classes.” The Class of Redeemable Units that a limited partner receives upon a subscription will generally depend upon the status of the limited partner, although the General Partner may determine to offer a particular Class of Redeemable Units to investors at its discretion.

1

During the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017, the Partnership’s/Funds’ commodity broker was Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC (“MS&Co.”), a registered futures commission merchant. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (“JPMorgan”) was also a foreign exchange forward contract counterparty for certain Funds. During the prior periods included in this report, the Partnership/Funds deposited a portion of their cash innon-trading bank accounts at JPMorgan.

Effective February 28, 2018, the Partnership changed its name from Orion Futures Fund L.P. to Ceres Orion L.P.

The Partnership, CMF Winton Master L.P. (“Winton Master”) and CMF TT II, LLC (“Transtrend Master”) have, and prior to its termination, Willowbridge Master had, entered into futures brokerage account agreements and foreign exchange brokerage account agreements with MS&Co. CMF FORT Contrarian Master Fund LLC (“FORT Contrarian Master”) and CMF NL Master Fund LLC (“NL Master”) have entered into futures brokerage account agreements with MS&Co. Winton Master, Transtrend Master, FORT Contrarian Master and NL Master are collectively referred to as the “Funds.” References herein to “Funds” may also include, as relevant, Willowbridge Master.

Effective July 12, 2017, Winton Master, Transtrend Master and until its termination, Willowbridge Master, each entered into certain agreements with JPMorgan in connection with trading in forward foreign currency contracts on behalf of the referenced Funds and indirectly, the Partnership. These agreements include a foreign exchange and bullion authorization agreement (“FX Agreement”), an International Swap Dealers Association, Inc. master agreement (“Master Agreement”), a schedule to the Master Agreement, a 2016 credit support annex for variation margin to the schedule and an institutional account agreement. In addition to Willowbridge Master, Willowbridge was party to the FX Agreement for Willowbridge Master. Under each FX Agreement, JPMorgan charges a fee on the aggregate foreign currency transactions entered into on behalf of the respective Fund during a month.

The Partnership, directly and indirectly through its investment in the Funds, pays MS&Co. trading fees for the clearing, and where applicable, the execution of transactions.

The Partnership will be liquidated upon the first to occur of the following: December 31, 2055; the net asset value per Redeemable Unit of any Class decreases to less than $400 as of the close of any business day; or under certain other circumstances as set forth in the limited partnership agreement of the Partnership, as may be amended from time to time (the “Limited Partnership Agreement”). In addition, the General Partner may, in its sole discretion, cause the Partnership to dissolve if the aggregate net assets of the Partnership decline to less than $1,000,000.

On November 1, 2004, the assets allocated to Winton for trading were invested in Winton Master, a limited partnership organized under the partnership laws of the State of New York. Winton Master permits accounts managed by Winton using the Diversified Macro Strategies (formerly, the “Winton Futures Program”), a proprietary, systematic trading system, to invest together in one trading vehicle. The General Partner is also the general partner of Winton Master. Individual and pooled accounts currently managed by Winton, including the Partnership, are permitted to be limited partners of Winton Master. The General Partner and Winton believe that trading through this structure promotes efficiency and economy in the trading process. The General Partner and Winton have agreed that Winton will trade the Partnership’s assets allocated to Winton at a level that is up to 1.5 times the amount of assets allocated. The amount of leverage may be increased or decreased in the future.

On June 1, 2011, the Partnership allocated a portion of its assets to Transtrend Master, a limited liability company organized under the limited liability company laws of the State of Delaware. Transtrend Master permits accounts managed by Transtrend using the Diversified Trend Program-Enhanced Risk Profile (US Dollar), a proprietary, systematic trading system, to invest together in one trading vehicle. The General Partner is also the Trading Manager of Transtrend Master. Individual and pooled accounts managed by Transtrend, including the Partnership, are permitted to be members of Transtrend Master. The Trading Manager and Transtrend believe that trading through this structure promotes efficiency and economy in the trading process.

On February 1, 2018, the assets allocated to FORT for trading were invested in FORT Contrarian Master, a limited liability company organized under the limited liability company laws of the State of Delaware. FORT Contrarian Master permits accounts managed by FORT using its Global Contrarian Trading Program, a proprietary, systematic trading system, to invest together in one trading vehicle. The General Partner is also the Trading Manager of FORT Contrarian Master. Individual and pooled accounts currently managed by FORT, including the Partnership, are permitted to be members of FORT Contrarian Master. The Trading Manager and FORT believe that trading through this structure promotes efficiency and economy in the trading process. The Trading Manager and FORT have agreed that FORT will trade the Partnership’s assets allocated to FORT at a level that is up to 1.25 times the amount of the assets allocated. The amount of leverage may be increased or decreased in the future.

On April 1, 2019, the assets allocated to Northlander for trading were invested in NL Master, a limited liability company organized under the limited liability company laws of the State of Delaware. NL Master permits accounts managed by Northlander using Northlander’s Commodity Program, a proprietary, discretionary trading system, to invest together in one trading vehicle. The General Partner is also the Trading Manager of NL Master. Individual and pooled accounts currently managed by Northlander, including the Partnership, are permitted to be members of NL Master. The Trading Manager and Northlander believe that trading through this structure promotes efficiency and economy in the trading process.

On August 1, 2014, the assets allocated to Willowbridge for trading were invested in Willowbridge Master, a limited partnership organized under the partnership laws of the State of New York. Willowbridge Master permitted accounts managed by Willowbridge using its wPraxis Futures Trading Approach, a proprietary, discretionary trading system, to invest together in one trading vehicle. Effective January 31, 2019, the Partnership fully redeemed its investment in Willowbridge Master.

2

The General Partner is not aware of any material changes to any of the trading programs discussed above during the year ended December 31, 2019.

The Funds’ and the Partnership’s trading of futures, forward, swap and option contracts, if applicable, on commodities is done primarily on U.S. and foreign commodity exchanges. The Funds and the Partnership engage in such trading through commodity brokerage accounts maintained with MS&Co.

Generally, a limited partner/member in the Funds withdraws all or part of its capital contribution and undistributed profits, if any, from the Funds as of the end of any month (the “Redemption Date”) after a request has been made to the General Partner/Trading Manager at least three days in advance of the Redemption Date. Such withdrawals are classified as a liability when the limited partner/member elects to redeem and informs the Funds. However, for all Funds other than Winton Master, a limited partner/member may request a withdrawal as of the end of any day if such request is received by the General Partner/Trading Manager at least three days in advance of the proposed withdrawal day.

Management fees, ongoing selling agent fees, the General Partner fee and incentive fees are charged at the Partnership level, except for management and incentive fees payable to Transtrend, which are charged at the Transtrend Master level. Clearing fees are borne by the Funds and allocated to the Funds’ limitedpartners/non-managing members, including the Partnership. Clearing fees are also borne by the Partnership directly. Professional fees are borne by the Funds and allocated to the Partnership and are also charged directly at the Partnership level.

The General Partner fee, management fees, incentive fees and professional fees of the Partnership are allocated proportionally to each Class based on the net asset value of the Class.

For the period January 1, 2019 through December 31, 2019, the approximate average market sector distribution for the Partnership was as follows:

At December 31, 2019, the Partnership owned approximately 37.5% of Winton Master, 100.0% of Transtrend Master, 89.1% of FORT Contrarian Master and 79.6% of NL Master. At December 31, 2018, the Partnership owned approximately 45.1% of Winton Master, 99.2% of Transtrend Master, 100.0% of Willowbridge Master and 87.3% of FORT Contrarian Master. It is the Partnership’s intention to continue to invest in the Funds. The performance of the Partnership is directly affected by the performance of the Funds. Expenses to limited partners as a result of investment in the Funds are approximately the same as investing directly and the redemption rights are not affected.

The General Partner administers the business and affairs of the Partnership, including selecting one or more advisors to make trading decisions for the Partnership. The Partnership pays the General Partner a monthly fee (the “General Partner fee”) equal to 1/12 of 0.75% (0.75% per year) ofmonth-end net assets.Month-end net assets, for the purpose of calculating the General Partner fee, are Net Assets, as defined in the Limited Partnership Agreement, prior to the reduction of the current month’s incentive fee accruals, the monthly management fees, the General Partner fee and any redemptions or distributions as of the end of such month.

3

The General Partner, on behalf of the Partnership, has entered into management agreements (each, a “Management Agreement”) with the Advisors. The Advisors are not affiliated with one another, the General Partner or MS&Co., and are not responsible for the organization or operation of the Partnership.

Effective February 1, 2018, the Partnership pays to FORT a monthly management fee equal to 1.15% per year ofmonth-end net assets allocated to FORT. Winton receives a monthly management fee equal to 1.5% per year ofmonth-end net assets allocated to Winton. Effective April 1, 2019, Northlander receives a monthly management fee equal to 1.25% per year ofmonth-end net assets allocated to Northlander. Effective February 1, 2019, JSCL (prior to the JSCL Novation Agreement, John Street) receives a monthly management fee of 1.35% per year ofmonth-end net assets allocated to JSCL (prior to the JSCL Novation Agreement, John Street). To the extent that themonth-end net assets allocated to JSCL (prior to the JSCL Novation Agreement, John Street) are less than $80 million, JSCL (prior to the JSCL Novation Agreement, John Street) will receive a monthly management fee of 1.5% per year ofmonth-end net assets allocated to JSCL (prior to the JSCL Novation Agreement, John Street). From April 1, 2018 until its termination on January 31, 2019, Willowbridge received a monthly management fee equal to 1.25% per year ofmonth-end net assets allocated to Willowbridge. Prior to April 1, 2018, Willowbridge received a monthly management fee equal to 1.5% per year ofmonth-end net assets allocated to Willowbridge. Prior to its termination effective October 31, 2018, Systematica received a monthly management fee equal to 1.0% per year ofmonth-end net assets allocated to Systematica.Month-end net assets, for the purpose of calculating management fees, are Net Assets, as defined in the Limited Partnership Agreement, prior to the reduction of the current month’s incentive fee accruals, the monthly management fees, the General Partner fee and any redemptions or distributions as of the end of such month.

Transtrend Master pays Transtrend a monthly management fee of 0.85% per year on the aggregate net assets of Transtrend Master as of the first day of each month. For the period from November 1, 2015 to December 31, 2016, Transtrend Master paid Transtrend a monthly management fee of 1.0% per year on the aggregate net assets of Transtrend Master as of the first day of each month. Prior to October 31, 2015, Transtrend Master paid Transtrend a monthly management fee of 1.25% per year on the aggregate net assets of Transtrend Master as of the first day of each month. The management fee paid by Transtrend Master is allocated to the Partnership based on its proportionate ownership interest of Transtrend Master.

In addition, Winton is eligible to receive and prior to its termination effective January 31, 2019, Willowbridge was eligible to receive, an incentive fee, payable quarterly, equal to 20% of the New Trading Profits, as defined in each Management Agreement, earned by Winton and Willowbridge for the Partnership during each calendar quarter. The Partnership is obligated to pay FORT and Northlander an incentive fee, payable annually, equal to 20% of the New Trading Profits, as defined in each Management Agreement, earned by FORT and Northlander for the Partnership during each calendar year. The Partnership is obligated to pay JSCL (prior to the JSCL Novation Agreement, John Street) an incentive fee, payable quarterly, equal to 22.5% of the New Trading Profits, as defined in its Management Agreement, earned by JSCL (prior to the JSCL Novation Agreement, John Street) for the Partnership during each calendar quarter. To the extent that themonth-end net assets allocated to JSCL (prior to the JSCL Novation Agreement, John Street) are less than $80 million, the Partnership will be obligated to pay JSCL (prior to the JSCL Novation Agreement, John Street) an incentive fee, payable quarterly, equal to 20% of the New Trading Profits, as defined in the Management Agreement, earned by JSCL (prior to the JSCL Novation Agreement, John Street) for the Partnership during each calendar quarter. Prior to its termination effective October 31, 2018, Systematica was eligible to receive an incentive fee, payable annually, equal to 20% of the New Trading Profits, as defined in its Management Agreement, earned by Systematica for the Partnership. Transtrend receives an incentive fee equal to 20% of the New Trading Profits, as defined in its Management Agreement, earned by Transtrend Master and payable at the end of each calendar half year. Only the incentive fees paid by Transtrend Master for New Trading Profits, as defined in its Management Agreement, earned for the Partnership are allocated to the Partnership. To the extent an Advisor incurs a loss for the Partnership, the Advisor will not be paid incentive fees until the Advisor recovers the net loss incurred and earns additional new trading profits for the Partnership.

Each Management Agreement may be terminated upon notice by either party.

In allocating the assets of the Partnership among the Advisors, the General Partner considers, among other factors, each Advisor’s past performance, trading style, volatility of markets traded and fee requirements. The General Partner may modify or terminate the allocation of assets to the Advisors and may allocate the assets to additional advisors at any time.

The Partnership has entered into a futures brokerage account agreement with MS&Co. (the “Partnership Customer Agreement”). Under the Partnership Customer Agreement and the foreign exchange brokerage account agreement, the Partnership pays MS&Co. (or will reimburse MS&Co. if previously paid) its allocable share of trading fees for the clearing and, where applicable, the execution of transactions, as well as its allocable share of exchange, user,give-up and National Futures Association (“NFA”) fees (collectively, “clearing fees”) directly and indirectly through its investment in the Funds. Clearing fees are allocated to the Partnership based on its proportionate ownership interest of each Fund. The Partnership’s assets available for trading in commodity interests not held in the Funds’ brokerage accounts at MS&Co. and JPMorgan are deposited in the Partnership’s brokerage account at MS&Co. The Partnership’s cash deposited with MS&Co. is held in segregated bank accounts to the extent required by Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”) regulations. The Partnership’s restricted cash is equal to the cash portion of assets on deposit to meet margin requirements, as determined by the exchange or counterparty, and required by MS&Co. At December 31, 2019 and 2018, the amount of cash held by the Partnership for margin requirements was $44,439,575 and $0, respectively. Cash that is not classified as restricted cash is therefore classified as unrestricted cash. MS&Co. has agreed to pay the Partnership interest on 100% of the average daily equity maintained in cash in the Partnership’s (or the Partnership’s allocable portion of the Funds’, except for Transtrend Master’s) brokerage account during each month at the rate equal to the monthly average of the4-week U.S. Treasury bill discount rate. MS&Co.

4

has agreed to pay Transtrend Master interest on 100% of the average daily equity maintained in cash in Transtrend Master’s brokerage account during each month at the rate equal to the monthly average of the4-week U.S. Treasury bill discount rate less 0.15% during such month but in no event less than zero. When the effective rate is less than zero, no interest is earned. For purposes of these interest credits, daily funds do not include monies due to Transtrend Master on or with respect to futures, forward, or option contracts that have not been received. The Partnership Customer Agreement may generally be terminated upon notice by either party.

The Partnership has entered into a selling agent agreement with Morgan Stanley Wealth Management (as amended, the “Selling Agreement”). Pursuant to the Selling Agreement, the Partnership pays Morgan Stanley Wealth Management a monthly ongoing selling agent fee. The ongoing selling agent fee is $15.00 each for futures transactions and up to an equivalent amount for swaps and $7.50 each per side for options transactions, with respect to Class A Redeemable Units. The ongoing selling agent fee for Class A Redeemable Units will not exceed 2.00% of adjustedmonth-end net assets per year, calculated monthly. Class Z Redeemable Units are not subject to an ongoing selling agent fee. The ongoing selling agent fee amount is reduced by applicable floor brokerage fees. The Partnership may pay an ongoing selling agent fee to other properly licensed and/or registered selling agents who sell Class A Redeemable Units, and such additional selling agents may share all or a substantial portion of such fees with their properly registered or exempted financial advisors who have sold Class A Redeemable Units.

As of November 1, 2018, the Partnership entered into an alternative investment placement agent agreement (the “Harbor Selling Agreement”), by and among the Partnership, the General Partner, Morgan Stanley Distribution Inc. (“MSDI”), and Harbor Investment Advisory, LLC, a Maryland limited liability company (“Harbor”), which supersedes and replaces the alternative investment selling agent agreement, dated January 19, 2018, between the Partnership, the General Partner and Harbor. Pursuant to the Harbor Selling Agreement, MSDI and Harbor have been appointed as anon-exclusive selling agent andsub-selling agent, respectively, of the Partnership for the purpose of finding eligible investors for Redeemable Units through offerings that are exempt from registration under the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Securities Act”), as amended, pursuant to Section 4(a)(2) thereof and Rule 506 of Regulation D promulgated thereunder and for Harbor to serve as an investment advisor to its customers investing in one or more of the partnerships party to the Harbor Selling Agreement; provided, that, included within such appointment, Harbor will provide certain services to certain holders of Redeemable Units of the Partnership, who had acquired such Redeemable Units prior to such holders becoming clients of Harbor. The Harbor Selling Agreement continues in effect until September 30, 2020 unless terminated in certain circumstances as set forth in the Harbor Selling Agreement, including by any party on thirty days’ prior written notice, after which the General Partner or the Partnership may, in its sole discretion, renew the Harbor Selling Agreement for additionalone-year periods. Pursuant to the Harbor Selling Agreement, the Partnership pays Harbor an ongoing selling agent fee equal to $15.00 per round turn, swaps by up to an equivalent amount and options transactions by $7.50 each per side, with respect to Class A Redeemable Units held by Harbor clients. In each case, the amount will be reduced by applicable floor brokerage fees. The ongoing selling agent fee for Class A Redeemable Units will not exceed 2.00% of adjustedmonth-end net assets per year, calculated monthly.

The General Partner has delegated certain administrative functions to SS&C Technologies, Inc., a Delaware corporation, currently doing business as SS&C GlobeOp (the “Administrator”). Pursuant to a master services agreement, the Administrator furnishes certain administrative, accounting, regulatory reporting, tax and other services as agreed from time to time. In addition, the Administrator maintains certain books and records of the Partnership. The cost of retaining the Administrator is allocated among the pools operated by the General Partner, including the Partnership.

(b)Financial Information about Segments. The Partnership’s business consists of only one segment, speculative trading of commodity interests. The Partnership does not engage in sales of goods or services. The Partnership’s net income (loss) from operations for the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016 and 2015 are set forth under “Item 6.Selected Financial Data.” The Partnership’s capital as of December 31, 2019 was $483,271,251.

(c)Narrative Description of Business. See Paragraphs (a) and (b) above.

(i) through (xii) — Not applicable.

(xiii) — The Partnership has no employees.

(d)Financial Information About Geographic Areas. The Partnership does not engage in sales of goods or services or own anylong-lived assets, and therefore this item is not applicable.

(e)Available Information. The Partnership does not have an Internet address. The Partnership will provide paper copies of its Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and any amendments to these reports free of charge upon request.

(f)Reports to Security Holders. Not applicable.

(g)Enforceability of Civil Liabilities Against Foreign Persons. Not applicable.

(h) Smaller Reporting Companies. Not applicable.

5

Item 1A.Risk Factors.

As a result of leverage, small changes in the price of the Partnership’s positions may result in major losses.

The trading of commodity interests is speculative, volatile and involves a high degree of leverage. A small change in the market price of a commodity interest contract can produce major losses for the Partnership. Market prices can be influenced by, among other things, changing supply and demand relationships, governmental, agricultural, commercial and trade programs and policies, national and international political and economic events, weather and climate conditions, insects and plant disease, purchases and sales by foreign countries and changing interest rates.

An investor may lose all of their investment.

Due to the speculative nature of trading commodity interests, an investor could lose all of their investment in the Partnership.

The Partnership will pay substantial fees and expenses regardless of profitability.

Regardless of its trading performance, the Partnership will incur fees and expenses, including, but not limited to, ongoing selling agent fees, clearing fees, management fees, and the General Partner fee. Substantial incentive fees may be paid to one or more of the Advisors even if the Partnership experiences a net loss for the full year.

An investor’s ability to redeem or transfer Redeemable Units is limited.

An investor’s ability to redeem Redeemable Units is limited and no market exists for the Redeemable Units.

Conflicts of interest exist.

The Partnership is subject to numerous conflicts of interest including those that arise from the fact that:

Investing in Redeemable Units may not provide the desired diversification of an investor’s overall portfolio.

One of the Partnership’s objectives is to add an element of diversification to a traditional stock and bond portfolio, but any benefit of portfolio diversification is dependent upon the Partnership/Funds achieving positive returns and such returns being independent of stock and bond market returns.

Past performance is no assurance of future results.

The Advisors’ trading strategies may not perform as they have performed in the past, and past performance does not necessarily predict future returns. The Advisors have from time to time incurred substantial losses in trading on behalf of clients.

An investor’s tax liability may exceed cash distributions.

Investors are taxed on their share of the Partnership’s income, even though the Partnership does not intend to make any distributions.

The General Partner may allocate the Partnership’s assets to undisclosed advisors.

The General Partner at any time may select and allocate the Partnership’s assets to undisclosed advisors. Investors may not be advised of such changes in advance, or at all. Investors must rely on the ability of the General Partner to select commodity trading advisors and allocate assets among them.

6

Regulatory changes could restrict the Partnership’s operations and increase its operational costs.

Regulatory changes could adversely affect the Partnership by restricting its markets or activities, limiting its trading and/or increasing the costs or taxes to which investors are subject. Pursuant to the mandate of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, signed into law on July 21, 2010, the CFTC and the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) have promulgated rules to regulate trading in swaps and swap dealers and to mandate additional reporting and disclosure requirements and continue to promulgate rules regarding capital and margin requirements, to require that certain swaps be traded on an exchange or a swap execution facility, and to require that derivatives (such as those traded by the Partnership) be moved into central clearinghouses. The CFTC and the prudential regulators that oversee swap dealers have adopted rules regarding margin requirements for certain derivatives. In addition, the CFTC and such prudential regulators have proposed or adopted, respectively, rules regarding capital requirements for swap dealers. These rules may negatively impact the manner in which swap contracts are traded and/or settled, increase the cost of such trading, and limit trading by speculators (such as the Partnership) in futures and over-the-counter (“OTC”) markets.

Speculative position and trading limits may reduce profitability.

The CFTC and U.S. exchanges have established speculative position limits on the maximum net long or net short positions which any person or a group of persons may hold or control in particular futures and options on futures. Most exchanges also limit the amount of fluctuation in commodity futures contract prices on a single trading day. Each of the Advisors believes that established speculative position and trading limits will not materially adversely affect trading for the Partnership/Funds. The trading instructions of an Advisor, however, may have to be modified, and positions held by the Partnership/Funds may have to be liquidated, in order to avoid exceeding these limits. Such modification or liquidation could adversely affect the operations and profitability of the Partnership/Funds by increasing transaction costs to liquidate positions and limiting potential profits on liquidated positions.

In January 2020, the CFTCre-proposed new rules regarding speculative position limits. These rules, if adopted in substantially the same form, will impose position limits on certain futures and option contracts and physical commodity swaps that are “economically equivalent” to such contracts. If enacted, these rules could have an adverse effect on an Advisor’s trading for the Partnership/Funds.

The General Partner, the Partnership and its service providers (including the Advisors) and their respective operations are potentially vulnerable to cyber-security attacks or incidents.

Like other business enterprises, the use of the internet and other electronic media and technology exposes the General Partner, the Partnership and its service providers, and their respective operations, to potential risks from cyber-security attacks or incidents (collectively, “cyber events”). Cyber events may include, for example, unauthorized access to systems, networks or devices, infection from computer viruses or other malicious software code, mishandling or misuse of information and attacks which shut down, disable, slow or otherwise disrupt operations, business processes or website access or functionality. In addition to intentional cyber events, unintentional cyber events can occur. Unintentional cyber events may include, for example, the inadvertent release of confidential information, the mishandling or misuse of information and/or technological limitations or hardware failures (in the markets or otherwise) that constrain the Partnership’s and/or the Funds’ ability to gather, process and communicate information efficiently and securely, without interruption.

Any cyber event could adversely affect the Partnership’s business, financial condition or results of operations and cause the Partnership to incur financial loss and expense, as well as face exposure to regulatory penalties or legal claims, reputational damage and additional costs associated with corrective measures. A cyber-security breach could also jeopardize a limited partner’s personal, confidential, proprietary or other information processed and stored in, and transmitted through, the General Partner’s or a service provider’s computer systems. A cyber event may cause the Partnership or its service providers to lose proprietary information, suffer data corruption, lose operational capacity (such as, for example, the loss of the ability to process transactions, calculate the Partnership’s net asset value, or allow investors to transact business) and/or fail to comply with applicable privacy and other laws. Among other potentially harmful effects, cyber events also may result in theft, unauthorized monitoring and failures in the physical infrastructure or operating systems that support the Partnership or its service providers.

The nature of malicious cyber-attacks is becoming increasingly sophisticated and neither the General Partner nor the Partnership can control the cyber systems and cyber-security systems of the Advisors or other third-party service providers.

7

Tax Laws are subject to change at any time.

Tax laws and court and Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) interpretations thereof are subject to change at any time, possibly with retroactive effect. On December 22, 2017, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act was signed into law and is generally effective after December 31, 2018. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act makes significant changes to the U.S. federal income tax rules for taxation of individuals and corporations, including, in the case of individuals, reducing the top federal income rate to 37%, and eliminating or limiting various deductions, including capping the deduction for state and local taxes at $10,000 per year. Most of the changes applicable to individuals are temporary and apply only to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017 and before January 1, 2026. For corporations, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act reduces the top corporate income tax rate to 21%.

The Partnership does not anticipate that a limited partner’s share of income from the Partnership will be eligible for the 20% deduction established by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act for qualified business income. However, in certain limited circumstances unlikely to apply to the Partnership, a portion of a limited partner’s gain upon a taxable disposition of an interest in the Partnership or a complete withdrawal may be eligible for the deduction.

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act makes numerous other large and small changes to the federal income tax rules that may affect the Partnership’s investors and may directly or indirectly affect the Partnership. Moreover, Congressional leaders have recognized that the process of adopting extensive tax legislation in a short amount of time without hearings and substantial time for review is likely to have led to drafting errors, issues needing clarification, and unintended consequences that will have to be reviewed in subsequent tax legislation. At this point, it is not clear when Congress will address these issues or when the IRS will issue administrative guidance on the changes made in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.

Prospective investors are urged to consult with their tax advisors with respect to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act and any other regulatory or administrative developments and proposals, and their potential effects on them based on their unique circumstances.

The continuing spread of a new strain of coronavirus, which causes the viral disease known as COVID-19, may adversely affect our investments and operations.

Since its discovery in December 2019, a new strain of coronavirus, which causes the viral disease known as COVID-19, has spread from China to many other countries, including the United States. The outbreak has been declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization, and the U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary has declared a public health emergency in the United States in response to the outbreak.

The outbreak of the novel coronavirus in many countries is having and will likely continue to have an adverse impact on global commercial activity, which has contributed to significant volatility in financial markets. The global impact of the outbreak has been rapidly evolving, and as cases of the virus have been identified in additional countries, many countries have reacted by instituting quarantines and restrictions on travel. These actions are creating disruption in supply chains, and adversely impacting a number of industries, including but not limited to transportation, hospitality, and entertainment.

The impact of COVID-19 on the U.S. and world economies, and the extent of and effectiveness of any responses taken on a national and local level, is uncertain and could result in a world-wide economic downturn and disrupt financial markets that impact trading programs in unanticipated and unintended ways.

The rapid development of this situation precludes any prediction as to the ultimate adverse impact of the novel coronavirus. Nevertheless, the novel coronavirus presents material uncertainty and risk with respect to the Partnership’s investments and operations.

Item 2.Properties.

The Partnership does not own or lease any properties. The General Partner operates from facilities provided by Morgan Stanley and/or one of its subsidiaries.

8

Item 3.Legal Proceedings.

This section describes the major pending legal proceedings, other than ordinary routine litigation incidental to the business, to which MS&Co. or its subsidiaries is a party or to which any of their property is subject. There are no material legal proceedings pending against the Partnership or the General Partner.

On June 1, 2011, Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated converted from a Delaware corporation to a Delaware limited liability company. As a result of that conversion, Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated is now named Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC (“MS&Co.”).

MS&Co. is a wholly-owned, indirect subsidiary of Morgan Stanley, a Delaware holding company. Morgan Stanley files periodic reports with the SEC as required by the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”) which include current descriptions of material litigation and material proceedings and investigations, if any, by governmental and/or regulatory agencies or self-regulatory organizations concerning Morgan Stanley and its subsidiaries, including MS&Co. As a consolidated subsidiary of Morgan Stanley, MS&Co. does not file its own periodic reports with the SEC that contain descriptions of material litigation, proceedings and investigations. As a result, we refer you to the “Legal Proceedings” section of Morgan Stanley’s SEC10-K filings for 2018, 2017, 2016, 2015 and 2014. In addition, MS&Co. annually prepares an Audited, Consolidated Statement of Financial Condition (“Audited Financial Statement”) that is publicly available on Morgan Stanley’s website atwww.morganstanley.com. We refer you to the Commitments, Guarantees and Contingencies – Legal section of MS&Co.’s 2018 Audited Financial Statement.

In addition to the matters described in those filings, in the normal course of business, each of Morgan Stanley and MS&Co. has been named, from time to time, as a defendant in various legal actions, including arbitrations, class actions, and other litigation, arising in connection with its activities as a global diversified financial services institution. Certain of the legal actions include claims for substantial compensatory and/or punitive damages or claims for indeterminate amounts of damages. Each of Morgan Stanley and MS&Co. is also involved, from time to time, in investigations and proceedings by governmental and/or regulatory agencies or self-regulatory organizations, certain of which may result in adverse judgments, fines or penalties. The number of these investigations and proceedings has increased in recent years with regard to many financial services institutions, including Morgan Stanley and MS&Co.

MS&Co. is a Delaware limited liability company with its main business office located at 1585 Broadway, New York, New York 10036. Among other registrations and memberships, MS&Co. is registered as a futures commission merchant and is a member of the National Futures Association.

During the preceding five years, the following administrative, civil, or criminal actions pending, on appeal or concluded against MS&Co. or any of its principals are material within the meaning of CFTC Rule 4.24(l)(2) or 4.34(k)(2):

Regulatory and Governmental Matters.

On February 25, 2015, MS&Co. reached an agreement in principle with the United States Department of Justice, Civil Division and the United States Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of California, Civil Division (collectively, the “Civil Division”) to pay $2.6 billion to resolve certain claims that the Civil Division indicated it intended to bring against MS&Co. That settlement was finalized on February 10, 2016.

In October 2014, the Illinois Attorney General’s Office (“ILAG”) sent a letter to MS&Co. alleging that MS&Co. knowingly made misrepresentations related to RMBS purchased by certain pension funds affiliated with the State of Illinois and demanding that MS&Co. pay ILAG approximately $88 million. The Company and ILAG reached an agreement to resolve the matter on February 10, 2016.

9

On January 13, 2015, the New York Attorney General’s Office (“NYAG”), which is also a member of the RMBS Working Group, indicated that it intended to file a lawsuit related to approximately 30 subprime securitizations sponsored by MS&Co. NYAG indicated that the lawsuit would allege that MS&Co. misrepresented or omitted material information related to the due diligence, underwriting and valuation of the loans in the securitizations and the properties securing them and indicated that its lawsuit would be brought under the Martin Act. MS&Co. and NYAG reached an agreement to resolve the matter on February 10, 2016.

On July 23, 2014, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) approved a settlement by MS&Co. and certain affiliates to resolve an investigation related to certain subprime RMBS transactions sponsored and underwritten by those entities in 2007. Pursuant to the settlement, the Company and certain affiliates were charged with violating Sections 17(a)(2) and 17(a)(3) of the Securities Act, agreed to pay disgorgement and penalties in an amount of $275 million and neither admitted nor denied the SEC’s findings.

On April 21, 2015, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (CBOE) and the CBOE Futures Exchange, LLC (CFE) filed statements of charges against MS&Co. in connection with trading by one of MS&Co.’s former traders of EEM options contracts that allegedly disrupted the final settlement price of the November 2012 VXEM futures. CBOE alleged that MS&Co. violated CBOE Rules 4.1, 4.2 and 4.7, Sections 9(a) and 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule10b-5 thereunder. CFE alleged that MS&Co. violated CFE Rules 608, 609 and 620. The matters were resolved on July 12, 2016 and June 28, 2016, respectively, without any findings of fraud. Pursuant to the settlements, MS&Co. was required to pay a $750,000 penalty to the CBOE (for which MS&Co. and an individual were jointly and severally liable) and a $400,000 penalty to the CFE (for which MS&Co. and an individual were jointly and severally liable) and $152,664 in disgorgement.

On June 18, 2015, MS&Co. entered into a settlement with the SEC and paid a fine of $500,000 as part of the Municipalities Continuing Disclosure Corporation Initiative to resolve allegations that MS&Co. failed to form a reasonable basis through adequate due diligence for believing the truthfulness of the assertions by issuers and/or obligors regarding their compliance with previous continuing disclosure undertakings pursuant to Rule15c2-12 under the Exchange Act in connection with offerings in which MS&Co. acted as senior or sole underwriter.

On August 6, 2015, MS&Co. consented to and became the subject of an order by the CFTC to resolve allegations that MS&Co. violated CFTC Regulation 22.9(a) by failing to hold sufficient US Dollars in cleared swap segregated accounts in the United States to meet all US Dollar obligations to cleared swaps customers. Specifically, the CFTC found that while MS&Co. at all times held sufficient funds in segregation to cover its obligations to its customers, on certain days during 2013 and 2014, it held currencies, such as euros, instead of US dollars, to meet its US dollar obligations. In addition, the CFTC found that MS&Co. violated CFTC Regulation 166.3 by failing to have in place adequate procedures to ensure that it complied with CFTC Regulation 22.9(a). Without admitting or denying the findings or conclusions and without adjudication of any issue of law or fact, MS&Co. accepted and consented to the entry of findings, the imposition of a cease and desist order, a civil monetary penalty of $300,000, and undertakings related to public statements, cooperation, and payment of the monetary penalty.

On December 20, 2016, MS&co. consented to and became the subject of an order by the SEC in connection with allegations that MS&Co. willfully violated Sections 15(c)(3) and 17(a)(1) of the Exchange Act and Rules15c3-3(e),17a-5(a), and17a-5(d) thereunder, by inaccurately calculating its Reserve Account requirement under Rule15c3-3 by including margin loans to an affiliate in its calculations, which resulted in making inaccurate records and submitting inaccurate reports to the SEC. Without admitting or denying the underlying allegations and without adjudication of any issue of law or fact, MS&Co. consented to a cease and desist order, a censure, and a civil monetary penalty of $7,500,000.

10

On September 28, 2017, the CFTC issued an order filing and simultaneously settling charges against MS&Co. regarding violations of CFTC Rule 166.3 by failing to diligently supervise the reconciliation of exchange and clearing fees with the amounts it ultimately charged customers for certain transactions on multiple exchanges. The order and settlement required MS&Co. to pay a $500,000 penalty and cease and desist from violating CFTC Rule 166.3.

On November 2, 2017, the CFTC issued an order filing and simultaneously settling charges against MS&Co. fornon-compliance with applicable rules governing Part 17 Large Trader reports to the CFTC. The order requires MS&Co. to pay a $350,000 penalty and cease and desist from further violations of the Commodity Exchange Act.

Civil Litigation

On July 15, 2010, China Development Industrial Bank (“CDIB”) filed a complaint against MS&Co., styledChinaDevelopment Industrial Bank v. Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated et al., which is pending in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County (“Supreme Court of NY”). The complaint relates to a $275 million credit default swap referencing the super senior portion of the STACK2006-1 CDO. The complaint asserts claims for common law fraud, fraudulent inducement and fraudulent concealment and alleges that MS&Co. misrepresented the risks of the STACK2006-1 CDO to CDIB, and that MS&Co. knew that the assets backing the CDO were of poor quality when it entered into the credit default swap with CDIB. The complaint seeks compensatory damages related to the approximately $228 million that CDIB alleges it has already lost under the credit default swap, rescission of CDIB’s obligation to pay an additional $12 million, punitive damages, equitable relief, fees and costs. On February 28, 2011, the court denied MS&Co.’s motion to dismiss the complaint. On June 27, 2018, MS&Co. filed a motion for summary judgment and spoliation sanctions against CDIB. On December 21, 2018, the court denied MS&Co.’s motion for summary judgment and granted in part MS&Co.’s motion for sanctions relating to spoliation of evidence. On January 18, 2019, CDIB filed a motion to clarify and resettle the portion of the court’s December 21, 2018 order granting spoliation sanctions. On January 24, 2019, CDIB filed a notice of appeal from the court’s December 21, 2018 order, and on January 25, 2019, MS&Co. filed a notice of appeal from the same order. On March 7, 2019, the court denied the relief that CDIB sought in a motion to clarify and resettle the portion of the court’s December 21, 2018 order granting spoliation sanctions. On December 5, 2019, the Appellate Division, First Department (“First Department”) heard the parties’ cross-appeals. Based on currently available information, MS&Co. believes it could incur a loss in this action of up to approximately $240 million pluspre- and post-judgment interest, fees and costs.

On October 15, 2010, the Federal Home Loan Bank of Chicago filed a complaint against MS&CO. and other defendants in the Circuit Court of the State of Illinois, styledFederal Home Loan Bank of Chicago v. Bank of America Funding Corporation et al. A corrected amended complaint was filed on April 8, 2011, which alleges that defendants made untrue statements and material omissions in the sale to plaintiff of a number of mortgage pass-through certificates backed by securitization trusts containing residential mortgage loans and asserts claims under Illinois law. The total amount of certificates allegedly sold to plaintiff by MS&Co. at issue in the action was approximately $203 million. The complaint seeks, among other things, to rescind the plaintiff’s purchase of such certificates. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss the corrected amended complaint on May 27, 2011, which was denied on September 19, 2012. On December 13, 2013, the court entered an order dismissing all claims related to one of the securitizations at issue. On January 18, 2017, the court entered an order dismissing all claims related to an additional securitization at issue. After those dismissals, the remaining amount of certificates allegedly issued by MS&Co. or sold to plaintiff by MS&Co. was approximately $65 million. At December 25, 2019, the current unpaid balance of the mortgage pass-through certificates at issue in this action was approximately $35 million, and the certificates had not yet incurred actual losses. Based on currently available information, the Company believes it could incur a loss in this action up to the difference between the $35 million unpaid balance of these certificates (plus any losses incurred) and their fair market value at the time of a judgment against MS&Co., pluspre- and post-judgment interest, fees and costs. MS&Co. may be entitled to be indemnified for some of these losses and to an offset for interest received by the plaintiff prior to a judgment.

11

On May 17, 2013, plaintiff inIKB International S.A. in Liquidation, et al. v. Morgan Stanley, et al. filed a complaint against MS&Co. and certain affiliates in the Supreme Court of NY. The complaint alleges that defendants made material misrepresentations and omissions in the sale to plaintiff of certain mortgage pass-through certificates backed by securitization trusts containing residential mortgage loans. The total amount of certificates allegedly sponsored, underwritten and/or sold by MS&Co. to plaintiff was approximately $133 million. The complaint alleges causes of action against MS&Co. for common law fraud, fraudulent concealment, aiding and abetting fraud, and negligent misrepresentation, and seeks, among other things, compensatory and punitive damages. On October 29, 2014, the court granted in part and denied in part MS&Co.’s motion to dismiss. All claims regarding four certificates were dismissed. After these dismissals, the remaining amount of certificates allegedly issued by MS&Co. or sold to plaintiff by MS&Co. was approximately $116 million. On August 11, 2016, the First Department affirmed the trial court’s decision denying in part MS&Co’s motion to dismiss the complaint. At December 25, 2019, the current unpaid balance of the mortgage pass-through certificates at issue in this action was approximately $22 million, and the certificates had incurred actual losses of $59 million. Based on currently available information, MS&Co. believes it could incur a loss in this action up to the difference between the $22 million unpaid balance of these certificates (plus any losses incurred) and their fair market value at the time of a judgment against MS&Co., or upon sale, pluspre- and post-judgment interest, fees and costs. MS&Co. may be entitled to be indemnified for some of these losses and to an offset for interest received by the plaintiff prior to a judgment.

In August of 2017, MS&Co. was named as a defendant in a purported antitrust class action in the United States District Court for the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York styledIowa Public Employees’ Retirement System et al. v. Bank of America Corporation et al. Plaintiffs allege, inter alia, that MS&Co., together with a number of other financial institution defendants, violated U.S. antitrust laws and New York state law in connection with their alleged efforts to prevent the development of electronic exchange-based platforms for securities lending. The class action complaint was filed on behalf of a purported class of borrowers and lenders who entered into stock loan transactions with the defendants. The class action complaint seeks, among other relief, certification of the class of plaintiffs and treble damages. On September 27, 2018, the court denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss the class action complaint.

Settled Civil Litigation

On December 23, 2009, the Federal Home Loan Bank of Seattle filed a complaint against MS&Co. and another defendant in the Superior Court of the State of Washington, styledFederal Home Loan Bank of Seattle v. Morgan Stanley & Co. Inc., et al. The amended complaint, filed on September 28, 2010, alleges that defendants made untrue statements and material omissions in the sale to plaintiff of certain mortgage pass-through certificates backed by securitization trusts containing residential mortgage loans. The total amount of certificates allegedly sold to plaintiff by MS&Co. was approximately $233 million. The complaint raised claims under the Washington State Securities Act and sought, among other things, to rescind the plaintiff’s purchase of such certificates. On January 23, 2017, the parties reached an agreement to settle the litigation.

12

On March 15, 2010, the Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco filed a complaint against MS&Co. and other defendants in the Superior Court of the State of California styledFederal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco v. Deutsche Bank Securities Inc. et al. An amended complaint, filed on June 10, 2010, alleges that defendants made untrue statements and material omissions in connection with the sale to plaintiff of certain mortgage pass-through certificates backed by securitization trusts containing residential mortgage loans. The amount of certificates allegedly sold to plaintiff by the Company was approximately $276 million. The complaint raised claims under both the federal securities laws and California law and sought, among other things, to rescind the plaintiff’s purchase of such certificates. On December 21, 2016, the parties reached an agreement to settle the litigation.

On October 25, 2010, MS&Co., certain affiliates and Pinnacle Performance Limited, a special purpose vehicle (“SPV”), were named as defendants in a purported class action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (“SDNY”), styledGe Dandong, et al. v. Pinnacle Performance Ltd., et al. On January 31, 2014, the plaintiffs in the action, which related to securities issued by the SPV in Singapore, filed a second amended complaint, which asserted common law claims of fraud, aiding and abetting fraud, fraudulent inducement, aiding and abetting fraudulent inducement, and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. On July 17, 2014, the parties reached an agreement to settle the litigation, which received final court approval on July 2, 2015.

On July 18, 2011, the Western and Southern Life Insurance Company and certain affiliated companies filed a complaint against MS&Co. and other defendants in the Court of Common Pleas in Ohio, styledWestern and Southern Life Insurance Company, et al. v. Morgan Stanley Mortgage Capital Inc., et al. An amended complaint was filed on April 2, 2012 and alleges that defendants made untrue statements and material omissions in the sale to plaintiffs of certain mortgage pass-through certificates backed by securitization trusts containing residential mortgage loans. The amount of the certificates allegedly sold to plaintiffs by MS&Co. was approximately $153 million. On June 8, 2015, the parties reached an agreement to settle the litigation.

On April 25, 2012, The Prudential Insurance Company of America and certain affiliates filed a complaint against MS&Co. and certain affiliates in the Superior Court of the State of New Jersey, styledThe Prudential Insurance Company of America, et al. v. Morgan Stanley, et al. On October 16, 2012, plaintiffs filed an amended complaint. The amended complaint alleged that defendants made untrue statements and material omissions in connection with the sale to plaintiffs of certain mortgage pass-through certificates backed by securitization trusts containing residential mortgage loans. The total amount of certificates allegedly sponsored, underwritten and/or sold by MS&Co. was approximately $1.073 billion. The amended complaint raised claims under the New Jersey Uniform Securities Law, as well as common law claims of negligent misrepresentation, fraud, fraudulent inducement, equitable fraud, aiding and abetting fraud, and violations of the New Jersey RICO statute, and included a claim for treble damages. On January 8, 2016, the parties reached an agreement to settle the litigation.

In re Morgan Stanley Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Litigation, which had been pending in the SDNY, was a putative class action involving allegations that, among other things, the registration statements and offering documents related to the offerings of certain mortgage pass-through certificates in 2006 and 2007 contained false and misleading information concerning the pools of residential loans that backed these securitizations. On December 18, 2014, the parties’ agreement to settle the litigation received final court approval, and on December 19, 2014, the court entered an order dismissing the action.

13

On November 4, 2011, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”), as receiver for Franklin Bank S.S.B, filed two complaints against MS&Co. in the District Court of the State of Texas. Each was styledFederal Deposit Insurance Corporation as Receiver for Franklin Bank, S.S.B v. Morgan Stanley & Company LLC F/K/A Morgan Stanley & Co. Inc. and alleged that MS&Co. made untrue statements and material omissions in connection with the sale to plaintiff of mortgage pass-through certificates backed by securitization trusts containing residential mortgage loans. The amount of certificates allegedly underwritten and sold to plaintiff by MS&Co. in these cases was approximately $67 million and $35 million, respectively. On July 2, 2015, the parties reached an agreement to settle the litigation.

On February 14, 2013, Bank Hapoalim B.M. filed a complaint against MS&Co. and certain affiliates in the Supreme Court of NY, styledBank Hapoalim B.M. v. Morgan Stanley et al. The complaint alleged that defendants made material misrepresentations and omissions in the sale to plaintiff of certain mortgage pass-through certificates backed by securitization trusts containing residential mortgage loans. The total amount of certificates allegedly sponsored, underwritten and/or sold by MS&Co. to plaintiff was approximately $141 million. On July 28, 2015, the parties reached an agreement to settle the litigation, and on August 12, 2015, the plaintiff filed a stipulation of discontinuance with prejudice.

On September 23, 2013, the plaintiff inNational Credit Union Administration Board v. Morgan Stanley & Co. Inc., et al.filed a complaint against MS&Co. and certain affiliates in the SDNY. The complaint alleged that defendants made untrue statements of material fact or omitted to state material facts in the sale to the plaintiff of certain mortgage pass-through certificates issued by securitization trusts containing residential mortgage loans. The total amount of certificates allegedly sponsored, underwritten and/or sold by MS&Co. to plaintiffs in the matter was approximately $417 million. The complaint alleged violations of federal and various state securities laws and sought, among other things, rescissionary and compensatory damages. On November 23, 2015, the parties reached an agreement to settle the matter.

On September 16, 2014, the Virginia Attorney General’s Office filed a civil lawsuit, styledCommonwealth of Virginia ex rel. Integra REC LLC v. Barclays Capital Inc., et al., against MS&Co. and several other defendants in the Circuit Court of the City of Richmond related to RMBS. The lawsuit alleged that MS&Co. and the other defendants knowingly made misrepresentations and omissions related to the loans backing RMBS purchased by the Virginia Retirement System. The complaint asserted claims under the Virginia Fraud Against Taxpayers Act, as well as common law claims of actual and constructive fraud, and sought, among other things, treble damages and civil penalties. On January 6, 2016, the parties reached an agreement to settle the litigation. An order dismissing the action with prejudice was entered on January 28, 2016.

On April 20, 2011, the Federal Home Loan Bank of Boston filed a complaint against MS&Co. and other defendants in the Superior Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts styledFederal Home Loan Bank of Boston v. Ally Financial, Inc. F/K/A GMAC LLC et al. An amended complaint was filed on June 29, 2012 and alleged that defendants made untrue statements and material omissions in the sale to plaintiff of certain mortgage pass-through certificates backed by securitization trusts containing residential mortgage loans. The total amount of certificates allegedly issued by MS&Co. or sold to plaintiff by MS&Co. was approximately $385 million. The amended complaint raised claims under the Massachusetts Uniform Securities Act, the Massachusetts Consumer Protection Act and common law and sought, among other things, to rescind the plaintiff’s purchase of such certificates. On November 25, 2013, July 16, 2014, and May 19, 2015, respectively, the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed its claims against MS&Co. with respect to three of the securitizations at issue. After these voluntary dismissals, the remaining amount of certificates allegedly issued by MS&Co. or sold to plaintiff by MS&Co. was approximately $332 million. On July 13, 2018, the parties reached an agreement in principle to settle the litigation.

14

On May 3, 2013, plaintiffs inDeutsche Zentral-Genossenschaftsbank AG et al. v. Morgan Stanley et al. filed a complaint against MS&Co., certain affiliates, and other defendants in the Supreme Court of NY. The complaint alleged that defendants made material misrepresentations and omissions in the sale to plaintiffs of certain mortgage pass-through certificates backed by securitization trusts containing residential mortgage loans. The total amount of certificates allegedly sponsored, underwritten and/or sold by MS&Co. to plaintiff was approximately $634 million. The complaint alleged causes of action against MS&Co. for common law fraud, fraudulent concealment, aiding and abetting fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and rescission and sought, among other things, compensatory and punitive damages. On June 26, 2018, the parties entered into an agreement to settle the litigation.

On April 1, 2016, the California Attorney General’s Office filed an action against MS&Co. in California state court styledCalifornia v. Morgan Stanley, et al., on behalf of California investors, including the California Public Employees’ Retirement System and the California Teachers’ Retirement System. The complaint alleged that MS&Co. made misrepresentations and omissions regarding residential mortgage-backed securities and notes issued by the Cheyne SIV, and asserted violations of the California False Claims Act and other state laws and sought treble damages, civil penalties, disgorgement, and injunctive relief. On April 24, 2019, the parties reached an agreement to settle the litigation.

Beginning on March 25, 2019, MS&Co. was named as a defendant in a series of putative class action complaints filed in the Southern District of NY, the first of which is styledAlaska Electrical Pension Fund v. BofA Secs., Inc., et al. Each complaint alleged a conspiracy to fix prices and restrain competition in the market for unsecured bonds issued by the following Government-Sponsored Enterprises: the Federal National Mortgage Associate; the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation; the Federal Farm Credit Banks Funding Corporation; and the Federal Home Loan Banks. The purported class period for each suit is from January 1, 2012 to June 1, 2018. Each complaint raised a claim under Section 1 of the Sherman Act and sought, among other things, injunctive relief and treble compensatory damages. On May 23, 2019, plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended class action complaint styledIn re GSE Bonds Antitrust Litigation, with a purported class period from January 1, 2009 to January 1, 2016. On June 13, 2019, the defendants filed a joint motion to dismiss the consolidated amended complaint. On August 29, 2019, the court denied MS&Co.’s motion to dismiss. On December 15, 2019, MS&Co. and certain other defendants entered into a stipulation of settlement to resolve the action as against each of them in its entirety. On February 3, 2020, the court granted preliminary approval of that settlement.

Additional lawsuits containing claims similar to those described above may be filed in the future. In the course of its business, MS&Co., as a major futures commission merchant, is party to various civil actions, claims and routine regulatory investigations and proceedings that the General Partner believes do not have a material effect on the business of MS&Co. MS&Co. may establish reserves from time to time in connections with such actions.

Item 4.Mine Safety Disclosures. Not Applicable.

15

PART II

Item 5.Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.

The following chart sets forth the purchases of Redeemable Units for each Class by the Partnership.

16

Item 6.Selected Financial Data.

Total investment income, total expenses, total trading results, net income (loss) and increase (decrease) in net asset value per Redeemable Unit for the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016 and 2015 and net asset value per Redeemable Unit and total assets at December 31, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016 and 2015 were as follows:

Item 7.Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.

Overview

The Partnership seeks to achieve substantial capital appreciation through speculative trading, directly or indirectly through its investment in the Funds, in U.S. and international markets for currencies, interest rates, stock indices, agricultural and energy products and precious and base metals. The Partnership/Funds may employ futures, options on futures and forward contracts in those markets. The Partnership/Funds may also engage in swap transactions and other derivative transactions with the approval of the General Partner/Trading Manager.

The General Partner/Trading Manager manages all business of the Partnership/Funds. The General Partner has delegated its responsibility for the investment of the Partnership’s capital to the Advisors. The General Partner/Trading Manager engages a team of approximately 20 professionals whose primary emphasis is on attempting to maintain quality control among the Advisors to the funds operated or managed by the General Partner/Trading Manager. A full-time staff of due diligence professionals use proprietary technology andon-site evaluations to monitor new and existing futures money managers. The accounting and operations staff provide processing of subscriptions and redemptions and reporting to limited partners and regulatory authorities. The General Partner also engages staff involved in marketing and sales support.

Responsibilities of the General Partner include:

In addition, the General Partner/Trading Manager will prepare, or will assist the Administrator in preparing, the books and records and will provide, or will assist the Administrator in providing, the administrative and compliance services that are required by law or regulation, from time to time, in connection with the operation of the Partnership/Funds.

17

While the Partnership and the Funds have the right to seek lower commission rates from other commodity brokers at any time, the General Partner/Trading Manager believes that the customer agreements and other arrangements with the commodity broker are fair, reasonable, and competitive.

The programs traded by each Advisor on behalf of the Partnership are: Winton — Diversified Macro Strategies (formerly, the Winton Futures Program); Transtrend — Diversified Trend Program — Enhanced Risk Portfolio (US Dollar); FORT — Global Contrarian Program; effective April 1, 2019, Northlander – Commodity Program; effective December 13, 2019, JSCL — Systematic Strategy Program; from February 1, 2019 until December 12, 2019, John Street – Systematic Strategy Program; and, prior to its termination effective January 31, 2019, Willowbridge – wPraxis Futures Trading Approach. As of December 31, 2019 and September 30, 2019, the Partnership’s assets were allocated among the trading Advisors in the following approximate percentages:

* Effective December 13, 2019, John Street transferred all of its future rights, obligations, and liabilities to JSCL.

Winton Capital Management Limited

The portion of the Partnership’s assets that are currently allocated to Winton for trading are not invested in commodity interests directly. Winton’s allocation of the Partnership’s assets is currently invested in Winton Master. Winton trades the Diversified Macro Strategies (formerly, the Winton Futures Program), a proprietary, systematic trading program, on behalf of Winton Master.

The investment objective of the Diversified Macro Strategies is to achieve long-term investment growth.

The Diversified Macro Strategies (formerly, the Winton Futures Program) follows a disciplined investment process that is based on statistical analysis of historical data. The initial stage of the process involves collecting, cleaning and organizing large amounts of data. The Diversified Macro Strategies uses a wide variety of data inputs including factors that are intrinsic to markets, such as price, volume and open interest; and those that are external to markets, such as economic statistics, industrial and commodity data and public company financial data. Winton conducts statistical research into the data in an attempt to quantify the probability of particular markets rising or falling, conditional on a variety of quantifiable factors. Winton’s research is used to develop mathematical models that attempt to forecast market returns, the variability or volatility associated with such returns (often described as “risk”), and the correlation between markets and transaction costs. These forecasts are used in investment strategies that determine what positions should be held to maximize profit within a certain range of risk. As a result of Winton’s research, Winton expects that the investments made in accordance with this process will have an improved chance of being successful, which is expected to lead to profits over thelong-term.

Winton’s investment programs are operated as automated, computer-based investment systems. The programs are modified over time as Winton monitors its operation and undertakes further research. Changes to the programs occur as a result of, amongst other things, the discovery of new relationships, changes in market liquidity, the availability of new data or the reinterpretation of existing data.

Most of Winton’s investment decisions are made strictly in accordance with the output of the programs. However, Winton may, in exceptional circumstances (such as the occurrence of events that fall outside the input parameters of the programs), make investment decisions based on other factors and take action to override the output of the programs to seek to protect the interests of investors.

Winton does not take any responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this document, any representations made herein, or the performance of the Partnership. Winton disclaims any liability for any direct, indirect, consequential or other losses or damages, including loss of profits incurred by limited partners or by any third party that may arise from any reliance on this document. Winton is neither responsible for, nor involved in, the marketing, distribution or sales of shares or interests in the Partnership and is not responsible for compliance with any marketing or promotion laws, rules or regulations; and no third party other than Winton is authorized to make any statement about any of Winton’s products or services in connection with any such marketing, distribution or sales. Past performance of Winton Master or any other fund advised by Winton is not indicative of any future performance by the Partnership.

18

Transtrend B.V.

The portion of the Partnership’s assets that are currently allocated to Transtrend for trading are not invested in commodity interests directly. Transtrend’s allocation of the Partnership’s assets is currently invested in Transtrend Master. Transtrend trades Transtrend Master’s assets, and thereby the Partnership’s assets, in accordance with its Diversified Trend Program-Enhanced Risk Profile (US Dollar), a proprietary, systematic trading system. Transtrend generally trades its Enhanced Risk Profile using 1.5 times the leverage employed by the Standard Risk Profile.

Transtrend Master currently trades Financial Instruments (i.e., futures, options, options on futures, swaps, swaps on futures, forward contracts on foreign exchange, interest rates, interest rates instruments, commodities and equity related indices and instruments and other indices) on U.S. andnon-U.S. exchanges, other venues and/or OTC markets. One of the potential strengths of the program is the disciplined, systematic and dynamic nature of market participation. The overall performance is determined by the entirety of all markets and all trades. In a systematic market approach, the disciplined application by Transtrend and a consistent participation by the client are both essential to realize the pursued returns over the course of time, although profitability cannot be guaranteed and clients may incur substantial losses on their investment.

Transtrend’s market approach attempts to benefit from directional price moves in outright Financial Instruments and in intra-market and inter-market combinations of Financial Instruments.

Under the Diversified Trend Program’s Standard Risk Profile, Transtrend generally commits an average of approximately 16% of the assets in a client’s account as margin or a premium for Financial Instruments positions. Such percentage has varied, however, and is affected by various factors including, without limitation, nominal account size, market conditions, traded markets or the level of margins set by brokers and clearing houses. The Diversified Trend Program’s Enhanced Risk Profile generally includes 1.5 times the leverage, and as such the average margin commitments, of the Standard Risk Profile.

FORT L.P.

The portion of the Partnership’s assets that are allocated to FORT for trading are not invested in commodity interests directly. FORT’s allocation of the Partnership’s assets is currently invested in FORT Contrarian Master. FORT trades the Partnership’s assets allocated to it pursuant to its Global Contrarian Program, a systematic, technical, trend-anticipating futures trading strategy.

The Global Contrarian Trading Program attempts to profit from emerging trends by identifying price behaviors that signal possible turning points. Rather than attempting to identify existing trends, the Global Contrarian Trading Program attempts to anticipate trends before they occur. Trading decisions are based primarily on an analysis of market prices, volume and volatility; factors external to the trading markets are incorporated only in rare cases. The Global Contrarian Trading Program generally operates on the theory that market prices reflect all known factors affecting supply and demand of a particular financial instrument.

The Global Contrarian Trading Program is designed to incorporate concepts akin to “channels,” which FORT defines using systematic, mathematical tools. The Global Contrarian Trading Program estimates a large number of channels and identifies a confluence of channels to find resistance and support points. FORT believes that this style is markedly different from most trend-following strategies, which are generally late to enter and exit a trend. In contrast, the Global Contrarian Trading Program is designed to enter and exit a trend early. The Global Contrarian Trading Program generally seeks to anticipate and capitalize on short to intermediate-term trends. Because the Global Contrarian Trading Program seeks to anticipate trends in market prices, it has the potential to perform well even in what standard trend-following systems perceive as directionless periods.

The Global Contrarian Trading Program takes positions while a market is moving against one of its signals. As a result, its performance can be much more volatile than traditional trend-following models, but the potential for diversification is much greater. In an attempt to reduce the volatility of returns, the allocation of the Global Contrarian Trading Program’s capital is geographically diversified across Asia, Europe, Australia and North America. This diversification also provides the Global Contrarian Trading Program with opportunities to seek profits in a variety of market environments.

Total risk is measured primarily by using themargin-to-equity ratio, which is targeted not to exceed 14% for a fully funded account, although FORT may adjust the foregoing target from time to time. Themargin-to-equity ratio is monitored systematically as well as by FORT’s trading principals.

John Street Capital Limited/John Street Capital LLP

The portion of the Partnership’s assets that are allocated to JSCL (and prior to the JSCL Novation Agreement, John Street) are traded directly in a managed account in the name of the Partnership pursuant to JSCL’s/John Street’s Systematic Strategy Program. The Systematic Strategy Program seeks to profit from price movements in global markets and employs a systematic approach to trading. This means that the vast majority of the Systematic Strategy Program’s trades will be made without discretion, based on the orders generated by the advisor’s proprietary trading system. The Systematic Strategy Program employs a multi-model approach, applying different trading methods across different time horizons with the goal of having a diversified mix of potential return drivers within the strategy.

The Systematic Strategy Program trades exchange-traded futures and OTC derivatives. The exchange-traded futures represent a

19

wide range of underlying asset classes, including, but not limited to, equities, bonds, interest rates, currencies, energies, metals and agricultural products.

Northlander Commodity Advisors LLP

The portion of the Partnership’s assets that are allocated to Northlander for trading are not invested in commodity interests directly. Northlander’s allocation of the Partnership’s assets is currently invested in NL Master. Northlander trades the Partnership’s assets allocated to it pursuant to its Northlander Commodity Program. The Northlander Commodity Program is a commodity focused trading program which invests in energy products globally, but with an emphasis on European power, European gas, European emissions, and international coal markets. The program is an absolute return strategy which seeks to identify value in mispriced markets through careful fundamental analysis by focusing on market dynamics and market structure and then expressing its thesis through its proprietary portfolio construction and risk management procedures.

Willowbridge Associates Inc.

The portion of the Partnership’s assets that were allocated to Willowbridge for trading were not invested in commodity interests directly. Willowbridge’s allocation of the Partnership’s assets were invested in Willowbridge Master. Willowbridge traded the Partnership’s assets allocated to it in accordance with the wPraxis Futures Trading Approach, a proprietary, discretionary trading system. The wPraxis Futures Trading Approach utilized a fully discretionary trading strategy to build a portfolio consisting of futures on currency, fixed income, stock indices and commodities. The approach could have traded commodities, futures, forwards, options, swaps, spot contracts in the commodities, currencies and fixed income markets. All positions were closely monitored to evaluate risk parameter status. As markets moved, positions were refined and expectations updated in response to existing market conditions.

20

Specific Fund level performance information is included in Note 6 to the Partnership’s financial statements included in “Item 8.Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.”

For the period January 1, 2019 through December 31, 2019, the average allocation by commodity market sector for each of the Funds was as follows:

(a) From April 1, 2019, commencement of operations for NL Master, to December 31, 2019.

21

(a)Liquidity.

The Partnership does not engage in sales of goods or services. Its assets are its (i) investment in the Funds, (ii) redemptions receivable from the Funds, (iii) equity in trading account, consisting of unrestricted and restricted cash, net unrealized appreciation on open futures contracts, net unrealized appreciation on open forward contracts, options purchased at fair value and investment in U.S. Treasury bills at fair value, if applicable, and (iv) interest receivable. Because of the low margin deposits normally required in commodity futures trading, relatively small price movements may result in substantial losses to the Partnership, through its investment in the Funds and direct investments. While substantial losses could lead to a material decrease in liquidity, no such illiquidity occurred during the year ended December 31, 2019.

To minimize the risk relating to low margin deposits, the Partnership and Funds follow certain trading policies, including:

From January 1, 2019 through December 31, 2019, the Partnership’s average margin to equity ratio (i.e.,the percentage of assets on deposit required for margin) was approximately 16.4%. The foregoing margin to equity ratio takes into account cash held in the Partnership’s name, as well as the allocable value of the positions and cash held on behalf of the Partnership in the name of the Funds.

In the normal course of business, the Partnership and the Funds are parties to financial instruments withoff-balance-sheet risk, including derivative financial instruments and derivative commodity instruments. These financial instruments may include forwards, futures, options, and swaps, whose values are based upon an underlying asset, index, or reference rate, and generally represent future commitments to exchange currencies or cash balances, or to purchase or sell other financial instruments at specific terms at specified future dates, or, in the case of derivative commodity instruments, to have a reasonable possibility to be settled in cash, through physical delivery or with another financial instrument. These instruments may be traded on an exchange, a swap execution facility or OTC. Exchange-traded instruments include futures and certain standardized forward, option and swap contracts. Certain swap contracts may also be traded on a swap execution facility or OTC. OTC contracts are negotiated between contracting parties and also include certain forward and option contracts. Specific market movements of commodities or futures contracts underlying an option cannot accurately be predicted. The purchaser of an option may lose the entire premium paid for the option. The writer or seller of an option has unlimited risk. Each of these instruments is subject to various risks similar to those relating to the underlying financial instruments, including market and credit risk. In general, the risks associated with OTC contracts are greater than those associated with exchange-traded instruments because of the greater risk of default by the counterparty to an OTC contract. The General Partner estimates that at any given time approximately 4.0% to 24.3% of the Partnership’s/Funds’ contracts are traded OTC.

22

As both a buyer and seller of options, the Partnership/Funds pay or receive a premium at the outset and then bear the risk of unfavorable changes in the price of the contract underlying the option. Written options expose the Partnership/Funds to potentially unlimited liability; for purchased options, the risk of loss is limited to the premiums paid. Certain written put options permit cash settlement and do not require the option holder to own the reference asset. The Partnership/Funds do not consider these contracts to be guarantees.

The Partnership and the Funds do not isolate the portion of the results of operations arising from the effect of changes in foreign exchange rates on investments from fluctuations due to changes in market prices of investments held. Such fluctuations are included in total trading results in the Partnership’s/Funds’ Statements of Income and Expenses.

Market risk is the potential for changes in the value of the financial instruments traded by the Partnership/Funds due to market changes, including interest and foreign exchange rate movements and fluctuations in commodity or security prices. Market risk is directly impacted by the volatility and liquidity in the markets in which the related underlying assets are traded. The Partnership and the Funds are exposed to market risk equal to the value of the futures and forward contracts held and unlimited liability on such contracts sold short.

Credit risk is the possibility that a loss may occur due to the failure of a counterparty to perform according to the terms of a contract. The Partnership’s/Funds’ risk of loss in the event of a counterparty default is typically limited to the amounts recognized in the Partnership’s/Funds’ Statements of Financial Condition and is not represented by the contract or notional amounts of the instruments. The Partnership’s/Funds’ risk of loss is reduced through the use of legally enforceable master netting agreements with counterparties that permit the Partnership/Funds to offset unrealized gains and losses and other assets and liabilities with such counterparties upon the occurrence of certain events. The Partnership/Funds have credit risk and concentration risk as MS&Co. or an MS&Co. affiliate are counterparties or brokers with respect to the Partnership’s and the Funds’ assets. For certain OTC contracts traded by certain Funds, JPMorgan is the counterparty with respect to those assets. Credit risk with respect to exchange-traded instruments is reduced to the extent that, through MS&Co. or an MS&Co. affiliate, the Partnership’s/Funds’ counterparty is an exchange or clearing organization.

The General Partner/Trading Manager monitors and attempts to mitigate the Partnership’s/Funds’ risk exposure on a daily basis through financial, credit and risk management monitoring systems, and accordingly, believes that it has effective procedures for evaluating and limiting the credit and market risks to which the Partnership/Funds may be subject. These monitoring systems generally allow the General Partner/Trading Manager to statistically analyze actual trading results with risk-adjusted performance indicators and correlation statistics. In addition, online monitoring systems provide account analysis of futures, exchange-cleared swaps, forward and option contracts by sector, margin requirements, gain and loss transactions and collateral positions. (See also “Item 8.Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.” for further information on financial instrument risk included in the notes to financial statements.)

The majority of these financial instruments mature within one year of the inception date. However, due to the nature of the Partnership’s/Funds’ business, these instruments may not be held to maturity.

The risk to the limited partners that have purchased Redeemable Units is limited to the amount of their share of the Partnership’s net assets and undistributed profits. This limited liability is a result of the organization of the Partnership as a limited partnership under New York law.

Other than the risks inherent in U.S. Treasury bills, money market mutual fund securities, commodity futures, forward, option and swap contracts, the Partnership and the Funds know of no trends, demands, commitments, events or uncertainties which will result in or which are reasonably likely to result in the Partnership’s/Funds’ liquidity increasing or decreasing in any material way. The Limited Partnership Agreement provides that the Partnership shall terminate under certain circumstances including a decrease in net asset value per Redeemable Unit to less than $400 as of the close of business on any business day. In addition, the General Partner may, in its sole discretion, cause the Partnership to dissolve if the Partnership’s aggregate net assets decline to less than $1,000,000.

(b)Capital Resources.

(i) The Partnership has made no material commitments for capital expenditures.

(ii) The Partnership’s capital consists of the capital contributions of the partners, as increased or decreased by net income or losses on trading and by expenses, interest income, redemptions of Redeemable Units and distributions of profits, if any. Gains or losses on trading cannot be predicted. Market movements in commodities are dependent upon fundamental and technical factors which the Advisors may or may not be able to identify, such as changing supply and demand relationships, weather, government, agricultural, commercial and trade programs and policies, national and international political and economic events and changes in interest rates. Partnership expenses consist of, among other things, clearing fees, ongoing selling agent fees, management fees, the General Partner fee and expenses allocated from Funds. The level of these expenses is dependent upon trading performance and the level of net assets maintained. In addition, the amount of interest income earned by the Partnership/Funds is dependent upon (1) the average daily equity maintained in cash in the Partnership’s and/or the Funds’ accounts, (2) the amount of U.S. Treasury bills and/or money market mutual fund securities held by the Partnership and/or the Funds and (3) interest rates over which none of the Partnership, the Funds, MS&Co. or JPMorgan has control.

23

No forecast can be made as to the level of redemptions in any given period. A limited partner may require the Partnership to redeem some or all of their Redeemable Units at the net asset value per Redeemable Unit as of the end of each month on three business days’ notice to the General Partner. There is no fee charged to limited partners in connection with redemptions. Redemptions are generally funded out of the Partnership’s cash holdings and/or redemptions from the Funds. For the year ended December 31, 2019, 62,979.8050 limited partner Redeemable Units of Class A were redeemed totaling $170,139,279, 749.6080 limited partner Redeemable Units of Class Z were redeemed totaling $822,040 and 1,436.9980 General Partner Redeemable Units of Class Z were redeemed totaling $1,590,064. For the year ended December 31, 2018, 54,390.7030 limited partner Redeemable Units of Class A were redeemed totaling $150,354,149, 260.3190 limited partner Redeemable Units of Class Z were redeemed totaling $280,456 and 2,056.7070 General Partner Redeemable Units of Class Z were redeemed totaling $2,300,010. For the year ended December 31, 2017, 69,458.8670 limited partner Redeemable Units of Class A were redeemed totaling $198,980,126, 742.9280 limited partner Redeemable Units of Class Z were redeemed totaling $802,540 and 1,178.1120 General Partner Redeemable Units of Class Z were redeemed totaling $1,274,988.

The Partnership continues to offer Redeemable Units at the net asset value per Redeemable Unit as of the end of each month. For the year ended December 31, 2019, there were subscriptions of 7,968.6900 limited partner Redeemable Units of Class A totaling $22,602,847 and 1,288.0100 limited partner Redeemable Units of Class Z totaling $1,470,323. For the year ended December 31, 2018, there were subscriptions of 10,485.7950 limited partner Redeemable Units of Class A totaling $29,451,751 and 1,407.0670 limited partner Redeemable Units of Class Z totaling $1,554,831. For the year ended December 31, 2017, there were subscriptions of 11,683.0890 limited partner Redeemable Units of Class A totaling $33,736,567 and 1,074.6210 limited partner Redeemable Units of Class Z totaling $1,180,838.

(c) Results of Operations.

For the year ended December 31, 2019, the net asset value per Redeemable Unit for Class A increased 4.6% from $2,608.11 to $2,728.91. For the year ended December 31, 2019, the net asset value per Redeemable Unit for Class Z increased 7.0% from $1,034.06 to $1,106.01. For the year ended December 31, 2018, the net asset value per Redeemable Unit for Class A decreased 9.7% from $2,887.46 to $2,608.11. For the year ended December 31, 2018, the net asset value per Redeemable Unit for Class Z decreased 7.9% from $1,122.81 to $1,034.06. For the year ended December 31, 2017, the net asset value per Redeemable Unit for Class A decreased 3.2% from $2,982.64 to $2,887.46. For the year ended December 31, 2017, the net asset value per Redeemable Unit for Class Z decreased 1.5% from $1,139.98 to $1,122.81.

The Partnership experienced a net trading gain of $50,049,263 before fees and expenses in 2019. Gains were primarily attributable to the Partnership’s/Funds’ trading in currencies, energy,non-U.S. interest rates, and indices and were partially offset by losses in grains, U.S. interest rates, livestock, metals and softs.

During the first quarter of 2019, the most notable gains were achieved during March from long positions in European fixed income futures as prices rallied amid continued uncertainty surrounding the UK’s exit from the European Union. Gains within the global stock index sector were recorded throughout the first quarter as investor demand for risk assets buoyed stock prices. In the agricultural markets, gains were recorded during February from short positions in wheat futures and during March from short positions in coffee and sugar futures as prices declined amid growing global commodity supply gluts. Additional gains were achieved within the currency sector during February and March from short positions in the euro as the relative value of the Eurozone’s currency weakened. The Partnership’s overall trading gains for the first quarter were partially offset by trading losses incurred during January in metals from short positions in copper, aluminum, nickel, and zinc futures as industrial metals prices rebounded on signs of a potential resolution to the U.S. versus China trade battles. Smaller losses were experienced within the energy sector during January and February.

During the second quarter of 2019, the Partnership’s most significant gains came from within the global interest rate sector during May and June from long positions in U.S., European, and Asian fixed income futures as central banks across the globe indicated they would fight slowing economic growth with a variety of easing policies. Within the metals markets, gains were experienced during May from short positions in copper and platinum futures as global trade concerns weighed on prices. Gains in the global stock index sector were achieved during April and June from long positions in U.S., European, and Asian equity index futures as ebbing trade concerns and supportive fiscal measures buoyed global stocks. A portion of the Partnership’s gains for the second quarter was offset by losses incurred within the energy sector primarily during May from long positions in Brent crude oil and refined oil products as prices reversed lower. Losses in the agricultural markets were experienced during May and June from short positions in the grains markets as continued adverse weather in the U.S. Midwest threatened to diminish planting acreage. Within the currency markets, losses were incurred during June from short positions in the euro versus the U.S. dollar following calls for the Fed to weaken the dollar to boost the U.S. economy.

24

During the third quarter of 2019, the Partnership’s most significant gains came from within the global interest rate markets during July and August from long positions in U.S., European, and Asian fixed income futures as concerns for the strength of the global economy boosted demand for safe-haven assets. These gains more than offset losses incurred during September from the Partnership’s long global fixed income futures positions. Within the currency sector, gains were primarily achieved during July from short positions in the euro and British pound versus the U.S. dollar as the relative value of the European currencies suffered under concern for the long-term implications of the UK’s exit from the European Union. Further gains during the quarter were experienced within the agricultural sector during July and August from short positions in grains and soft commodity futures. A portion of the Partnership’s gains for the third quarter was offset by losses incurred within the energy sector during August and September from long positions in emission futures and refined crude oil products as the ongoing trade war between the U.S. and China and fears of a global economic slowdown weighed on prices. Within the global stock index sector, losses were experienced primarily during August from long positions in U.S., European, and Asian equity index futures as stock prices declined.

During the fourth quarter of 2019, the most significant losses were experienced from long positions in global interest rate futures during October, November, and December as prices fell amid growing confidence in the strength of the global economy. Further losses were incurred throughout the fourth quarter from positions in grains and soft commodity futures. Losses in the currency sector were primarily recorded during October and December from short positions in the euro versus the U.S. dollar as political turmoil pulled the dollar lower. In the metals, losses were experienced from long positions in gold, nickel, and silver futures in November as currency fluctuations roiled metals markets. The Partnership’s losses for the fourth quarter were partially offset by gains within the energy markets during December from short positions in European electricity and power futures as mild weather in the Eurozone limited demand. Further gains were achieved throughout the fourth quarter from long positions in global stock index futures.

The Partnership experienced a net trading loss of $48,172,549 before fees and expenses in 2018. Losses were primarily attributable to the Partnership’s/Funds’ trading in currencies, energy, grains, indices, U.S. interest rates, livestock and metals and were partially offset by gains innon-U.S. interest rates and softs.

During the first quarter of 2018, the most notable losses were recorded during February from long positions in global stock indices as prices reversed sharply lower early in the month after previously trending higher for several months. Smaller losses in global stock indices were recorded in March. In commodities, losses were incurred in the grains markets throughout the quarter as weather related factors resulted in short-term price volatility. Additional commodity losses were experienced from long positions in industrial metals as prices reversed lower in February on equity market weakness and in March on concerns of a burgeoning trade war. Smaller losses from long positions in the energy sector during February offset gains recorded during January and March. The Partnership’s overall trading losses for the first quarter were partially offset by trading gains in U.S. interest rate futures during January and in European interest rate futures during March. Smaller gains were also recorded in sugar futures trading during January and March.

During the second quarter of 2018, the most significant gains were achieved within the energy markets during April and May from long positions in crude oil and its refined products as prices surged amid fears tensions in the Middle East region could affect oil supplies. Within the global interest rate sector, gains were achieved during May from long positions in European fixed income futures as turmoil surrounding the election of a populist Prime Minister in Italy sparked investor demand for the safety of government debt. Additional gains within the fixed income sector were recorded during June from short positions in U.S. fixed income futures as a strengthening U.S. economy limited demand for safe-haven assets. A portion of the Partnership’s gains for the second quarter was offset by losses incurred within the currency sector during April from long positions in the Russian ruble versus the U.S. dollar as the value of the ruble slumped following the announcement of new economic sanctions to be imposed on Russia. Additional losses in currencies occurred during May due to positions in the Mexican peso, Turkish lira, and Japanese yen. Within the agricultural markets, losses were experienced during May from long positions in soybean, soybean meal, and soybean oil futures as prices slumped on prospects of a potential trade war between the U.S. and China. Further losses in the agricultural complex were incurred during May from positions in sugar and cocoa futures.

During the third quarter of 2018, the most significant gains were achieved within the metals markets during July and August from short positions in gold and silver futures as a strengthening U.S. dollar diminished investor demand for precious metals. Additional gains were experienced within the agriculturals during July from short positions in coffee and sugar futures as global supply stocks swelled. Within the global stock index sector, gains were achieved primarily during July from long positions in European and Asian equity index futures as positive global economic sentiment overcame trade war concerns, pushing stock prices higher. The Partnership’s gains for the third quarter were offset by losses incurred within the global interest rate markets during July and September from long positions in European fixed income futures as comments from the European Central Bank indicated a more hawkish position on raising interest rates. Within the currency sector, losses were recorded during July and September from positions in the euro versus the U.S. dollar as competing geopolitical and economic tensions resulted in choppy price action for the European currency.

During the fourth quarter of 2018, the most significant losses were experienced in global stock index futures primarily during October from long positions amid fears of stagnating global economic growth. In the energies, losses were recorded during October from long positions in crude oil futures and during December from long positions in natural gas futures. Further losses were incurred during December from short positions in the euro and Japanese yen as the value of the respective currencies rallied on safe-haven demand. Losses in the agricultural markets were incurred during October from short positions in coffee and sugar futures as prices experienced a sharp rally. In the metals, losses were experienced from positions in industrial metals futures in October and precious

25

metals futures positions during December. The Partnership’s losses were partially offset by gains from long positions in European fixed income futures as bond prices trended higher throughout the fourth quarter.

The results of operations for the twelve months ended 2017 is discussed under “Item 7.Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.” in the Partnership’s Annual Report on Form10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017.

Interest income is earned on 100% of the average daily equity maintained in cash in the Partnership’s (or the Partnership’s allocable portion of a Fund’s, except for Transtrend Master’s) brokerage account during each month at the rate equal to the monthly average of the4-week U.S. Treasury bill discount rate. MS&Co. will pay monthly interest to Transtrend Master on 100% of the average daily equity maintained in cash in Transtrend Master’s brokerage account during each month at the rate equal to the monthly average of the4-week U.S. Treasury bill discount rate less 0.15% during such month but in no event less than zero. When the effective rate is less than zero, no interest is earned. For the avoidance of doubt, the Partnership/Funds will not receive interest on amounts in the futures brokerage account that are committed to margin. Any interest earned on the Partnership’s and/or each Fund’s cash account in excess of the amounts described above, if any, will be retained by MS&Co. and/or shared with the General Partner. All interest earned on U.S. Treasury bills and money market mutual fund securities will be retained by the Partnership and/or the Funds, as applicable. Any interest income earned on collateral or excess cash deposited by certain of the Funds and held by JPMorgan in its capacity as such Funds’ forward foreign currency counterparty will be retained by such Funds, and the Partnership will receive its allocable portion of such interest from the applicable Fund. Interest income earned by the Partnership for the three and twelve months ended December 31, 2019 decreased by $1,576,433 and $1,968,343, respectively, as compared to the corresponding periods in 2018. The decrease in interest income is primarily due to lower average daily equity during the three and twelve months ended December 31, 2019 as compared to the corresponding periods in 2018. Interest earned by the Partnership will increase the net asset value of the Partnership. The amount of interest income earned by the Partnership depends on (1) the average daily equity maintained in cash in the Partnership’s and/or the Funds’ accounts, (2) the amount of U.S. Treasury bills and/or money market mutual fund securities held by the Partnership and/or the Funds and (3) interest rates over which none of the Partnership, the Funds, MS&Co. or JPMorgan has control.

Certain clearing fees are based on the number of trades executed by the Advisors for the Partnership/Funds. Accordingly, they must be compared in relation to the number of trades executed during the period. Clearing fees related to direct investments for the three and twelve months ended December 31, 2019 increased by $1,418,477 and $5,101,561, respectively, as compared to the corresponding periods in 2018. The increase in these clearing fees is primarily due to an increase in the number of direct trades made by the Partnership during the three and twelve months ended December 31, 2019 as compared to the corresponding periods in 2018.

Ongoing selling agent fees are based on the number of trades executed by the Advisors and the adjustedmonth-end net assets calculated monthly. Accordingly, they must be compared in relation to the number of trades executed during the period as well as the fluctuations in the monthly net asset values. Ongoing selling agent fees for the three and twelve months ended December 31, 2019 decreased by $219,634 and $1,996,126, respectively, as compared to the corresponding periods in 2018. The decrease in ongoing selling agent fees is primarily due to lower average net assets attributable to Class A Redeemable Units during the three and twelve months ended December 31, 2019 as compared to the corresponding periods in 2018.

Management fees, except fees payable to Transtrend, are calculated as a percentage of the Partnership’s adjusted net asset value as of the end of each month and are affected by trading performance, subscriptions and redemptions. Accordingly, they must be compared in relation to the fluctuations in the monthly net asset values. Management fees payable to Transtrend are charged at the Transtrend Master level and are affected by trading performance, subscriptions and redemptions of Transtrend Master. Management fees for the three and twelve months ended December 31, 2019 decreased by $446,252 and $2,075,439, respectively, as compared to the corresponding periods in 2018. The decrease in management fees is due to lower average adjusted net assets during the three and twelve months ended December 31, 2019 as compared to the corresponding periods in 2018.

Fees are paid to the General Partner for administering the business and affairs of the Partnership including, among other things, (i) selecting, appointing and terminating the Partnership’s commodity trading advisors, (ii) allocating and reallocating the Partnership’s assets among the commodity trading advisors and (iii) monitoring the activities of the commodity trading advisors. These fees are calculated as a percentage of the Partnership’s adjusted net asset value as of the end of each month and are affected by trading performance, subscriptions and redemptions. Accordingly, they must be compared in relation to the fluctuations in the monthly net asset values. The General Partner fee for the three and twelve months ended December 31, 2019 decreased by $280,483 and $1,305,743, respectively, as compared to the corresponding periods in 2018. The decrease in the General Partner fee is due to lower average adjusted net assets during the three and twelve months ended December 31, 2019 as compared to the corresponding periods in 2018.

Incentive fees paid by the Partnership are based on the New Trading Profits, as defined in the respective Management Agreements among the Partnership, the General Partner and each Advisor, generated by each Advisor at the end of the quarter, calendar half year or annually, as applicable. Trading performance for the three months ended December 31, 2019 resulted in a reversal of an incentive fee accrual of $801,474. Trading performance for the twelve months ended December 31, 2019 resulted in incentive fees of $2,906,619. Trading performance for the three and twelve months ended December 31, 2018 resulted in incentive fees of $0 and $47,039, respectively. To the extent an Advisor incurs a loss for the Partnership, the Advisor will not be paid an incentive fee until such Advisor recovers any net loss incurred by the Advisor and earns additional new trading profits for the Partnership.

The Partnership pays professional fees, which generally include legal, accounting expenses, administrative, filing, reporting and

26

data processing fees. Professional fees for the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018 were $1,226,099 and $1,489,943, respectively.

In the General Partner’s opinion, the Partnership’s Advisors continue to employ trading methods consistent with the objectives of the Partnership. The General Partner monitors the Advisors’ performance on a daily, weekly, monthly and annual basis to assure these objectives are met.

Commodity futures markets are highly volatile. Broad price fluctuations and rapid inflation increase the risks involved in commodity trading, but also increase the possibility of profit. The profitability of the Partnership/Funds depends on the existence of major price trends and the ability of the Advisors to correctly identify those price trends. Price trends are influenced by, among other things, changing supply and demand relationships, weather, governmental, agricultural, commercial and trade programs and policies, national and international political and economic events and changes in interest rates. To the extent that market trends exist and the Advisors are able to identify them, the Funds and the Partnership expect to increase capital through operations.

In allocating the assets of the Partnership among the Advisors, the General Partner considers, among other factors, each Advisor’s past performance, trading style, volatility of markets traded and fee requirements. The General Partner may modify or terminate the allocation of assets among the Advisors and may allocate assets to additional advisors at any time. Each Advisor’s percentage allocation and trading program is described in the “Overview” section of this Item 7.

(d)Off-balance Sheet Arrangements. None.

(e)Contractual Obligations. None.

(f)Operational Risk.

The Partnership, directly or indirectly through its investment in the Funds, is exposed to market risk and credit risk, which arise in the normal course of its business activities. Slightly less direct, but of critical importance, are risks pertaining to operational and back office support. This is particularly the case in a rapidly changing and increasingly global environment with increasing transaction volumes and an expansion in the number and complexity of products in the marketplace.

Such risks include:

Operational/Settlement Risk— the risk of financial and opportunity loss and legal liability attributable to operational problems, such as inaccurate pricing of transactions, untimely trade execution, clearance and/or settlement, or the inability to process large volumes of transactions. The Partnership/Funds are subject to increased risks with respect to their trading activities in emerging market instruments, where clearance, settlement, and/or custodial risks are often greater than in more established markets.

Technological Risk— the risk of loss attributable to technological limitations or hardware failure that constrain the Partnership’s/Funds’ ability to gather, process, and communicate information efficiently and securely, without interruption, to customers and in the markets where the Partnership/Funds participate. Additionally, the General Partner’s computer systems may be vulnerable to unauthorized access, mishandling or misuse, computer viruses or malware, cyber-attacks and other events that could have a security impact on such systems. If one or more of such events occur, this potentially could jeopardize a limited partner’s personal, confidential, proprietary or other information processed and stored in, and transmitted through, the General Partner’s computer systems, and adversely affect the Partnership’s business, financial condition or results of operations.

Legal/Documentation Risk— the risk of loss attributable to deficiencies in the documentation of transactions (such as trade confirmations) and customer relationships (such as master netting agreements) or errors that result innon-compliance with applicable legal and regulatory requirements.

Financial Control Risk— the risk of loss attributable to limitations in financial systems and controls. Strong financial systems and controls ensure that assets are safeguarded, that transactions are executed in accordance with the General Partner’s authorization, and that financial information utilized by the General Partner and communicated to external parties, including the Partnership’s Redeemable Unit holders, creditors, and regulators, is free of material errors.

(g) Critical Accounting Policies.

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) requires the General Partner to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of income and expenses during the reporting period. As a result, actual results could differ from these estimates. A summary of the Partnership’s significant accounting policies is described in Note 2 to the Partnership’s financial statements included in “Item 8.Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.”

The Partnership’s most significant accounting policy is the valuation of its investment in the Funds and in futures, option and forward contracts and U.S. Treasury bills, as applicable. The fair value of the investment in the Funds is determined based on the respective Fund’s net asset value per unit as calculated by the Fund or the Partnership’s (1) net contribution to the Funds and (2) its allocated share of the undistributed profits and losses, including realized gains (losses) and net change in unrealized gains (losses), of the Funds. The fair value of exchange-traded futures, option and forward contracts is determined by the various exchanges, and reflects the settlement price for each contract as of the close of business on the last business day of the reporting period. The fair value of foreign currency forward contracts is extrapolated on a forward basis from the spot prices quoted as of approximately 3:00 P.M.

27

(E.T.) on the last business day of the reporting period from various exchanges. The fair value ofnon-exchange-traded foreign currency option contracts is calculated by applying an industry standard model application for options valuation of foreign currency options, using as inputs the spot prices, interest rates, and option implied volatilities quoted as of approximately 3:00 P.M. (E.T.) on the last business day of the reporting period. U.S. Treasury bills are valued at the last available bid price received from independent pricing services as of the close of the last business day of the reporting period.

28

Item 7A.Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk.

The Partnership/Funds are speculative commodity pools. The market sensitive instruments held by the Partnership/Funds are acquired for speculative trading purposes, and all or substantially all of the Partnership’s/Funds’ assets are subject to the risk of trading loss. Unlike an operating company, the risk of market sensitive instruments is integral, not incidental, to the Partnership’s/Funds’ main line of business.

The limited partners will not be liable for losses exceeding the current net asset value of their investment. This limited liability is a result of the organization of the Partnership as a limited partnership under New York law.

Market movements result in frequent changes in the fair value of the Partnership’s/Funds’ open contracts and, consequently, in their earnings and cash balances. The Partnership’s/Funds’ market risk is influenced by a wide variety of factors. These primarily include factors which affect energy price levels, including supply factors and weather conditions, but could also include the level and volatility of interest rates, exchange rates, equity price levels, the market value of financial instruments and contracts, the diversification effects among the Partnership’s/Funds’ open contracts and the liquidity of the markets in which they trade.

The Partnership/Funds rapidly acquire and liquidate both long and short positions in a wide range of different markets. Consequently, it is not possible to predict how a particular future market scenario will affect performance, and the Partnership’s/Funds’ past performances is not necessarily indicative of their future results.

“Value at Risk” is a measure of the maximum amount which the Partnership/Funds could reasonably be expected to lose in a given market sector. However, the inherent uncertainty of the Partnership’s/Funds’ speculative trading and the recurrence in the markets traded by the Partnership/Funds of market movements far exceeding expectations could result in actual trading ornon-trading losses far beyond the indicated Value at Risk or the Partnership’s/Funds’ experience to date (i.e., “risk of ruin”). In light of the foregoing, as well as the risks and uncertainties intrinsic to all future projections, the inclusion of the quantification in this section should not be considered to constitute any assurance or representation that the Partnership’s/Funds’ losses in any market sector will be limited to Value at Risk or by the Partnership’s/Funds’ attempts to manage their market risk.

Materiality as used in this section is based on an assessment of reasonably possible market movements and the potential losses caused by such movements, taking into account the leverage, optionality and multiplier features of the Partnership’s/Funds’ market sensitive instruments.

Quantifying the Partnership’s Trading Value at Risk

The following quantitative disclosures regarding the Partnership’s/Funds’ market risk exposures contain “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the safe harbor from civil liability provided for such statements by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (set forth in Section 27A of the Securities Act and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”)). All quantitative disclosures in this section are deemed to be forward-looking statements for purposes of the safe harbor except for statements of historical fact (such as the terms of particular contracts and the number of market risk sensitive instruments held during or at the end of the reporting period).

The Partnership’s/Funds’ risk exposure in the various market sectors traded by the Advisors is quantified below in terms of Value at Risk. Due to the Partnership’s/Funds’ mark-to-market accounting, any loss in the fair value of the Partnership’s/Funds’ open positions, including investment in the Funds, is directly reflected in the Partnership’s earnings (realized or unrealized) and cash balances.

Exchange margin requirements have been used by the Partnership/Funds as the measure of their Value at Risk. Margin requirements are set by exchanges to equal or exceed the maximum losses reasonably expected to be incurred in the fair value of any given contract in95%-99% of anyone-day interval. The margin levels are established by dealers and exchanges using historical price studies as well as an assessment of current market volatility (including the implied volatility of the options on a given futures contract) and economic fundamentals to provide a probabilistic estimate of the maximum expected near-termone-day price fluctuation.

In the case of market sensitive instruments which are not exchange-traded (almost exclusively currencies in the case of the Partnership/Funds), the margin requirements for the equivalent futures positions have been used as Value at Risk. In those rare cases in which afutures-equivalent margin is not available, dealers’ margins have been used.

The fair value of the Partnership’s/Funds’ futures and forward positions does not have any optionality component. However, the Advisors do trade commodity options. Where this instrument is a futures contract, the futures margin has been used, and where this instrument is a physical commodity, thefutures-equivalent margin has been used. This calculation is conservative in that it assumes that the fair value of an option will decline by the same amount as the fair value of the underlying instrument, whereas, in fact, the fair values of the options traded by the Partnership/Funds in almost all cases fluctuate to a lesser extent than those of the underlying instruments.

In quantifying the Partnership’s/Funds’ Value at Risk, 100% positive correlation in the different positions held in each market risk category has been assumed. Consequently, the margin requirements applicable to the open contracts have simply been added to determine each trading category’s aggregate Value at Risk. The diversification effects resulting from the fact that the Partnership’s/Funds’ positions are rarely, if ever, 100% positively correlated have not been reflected.

29

The Partnership’s and the Funds’ Trading Value at Risk in Different Market Sectors

Value at Risk tables represent a probabilistic assessment of the risk of loss in market risk sensitive instruments. The Advisors, with the exception of JSCL, currently trade the Partnership’s assets indirectly in master fund managed accounts established in the name of the master funds over which they have been granted limited authority to make trading decisions. Prior to its termination effective October 31, 2018, Systematica directly traded a managed account in the name of the Partnership. From February 1, 2019 to December 12, 2019, John Street and effective December 13, 2019, JSCL directly trades a managed account in the name of the Partnership. The first two trading Value at Risk tables reflect the market sensitive instruments held by the Partnership directly and through its investment in the Funds, as applicable. The remaining trading Value at Risk tables reflect the market sensitive instruments held by the Partnership directly as of December 31, 2019 (i.e. in the managed account in the Partnership’s name traded by JSCL) and indirectly by each Fund separately as of December 31, 2019 and 2018.

The following tables indicate the trading Value at Risk associated with the Partnership’s open positions by market category as of December 31, 2019 and 2018. As of December 31, 2019, the Partnership’s total capitalization was $483,271,251.

December 31, 2019

As of December 31, 2018, the Partnership’s total capitalization was $606,058,475.

December 31, 2018

30

The following tables indicate the trading Value at Risk associated with the Partnership’s direct investments as of December 31, 2019 and indirect investments in the Funds by market category as of December 31, 2019 and 2018, the highest and lowest at any point and average value during the years. All open position trading risk exposures have been included in calculating the figures set forth below.

As of December 31, 2019, the Partnership’s Value at Risk for the portion of its assets that were traded directly was as follows:

December 31, 2019

31

At December 31, 2019, Winton Master’s total capitalization was $205,402,609 and the Partnership owned approximately 37.5% of Winton Master. As of December 31, 2019, Winton Master’s Value at Risk for its assets (including the portion of the Partnership’s assets allocated to Winton for trading) was as follows:

December 31, 2019

At December 31, 2018, Winton Master’s total capitalization was $339,199,614 and the Partnership owned approximately 45.1% of Winton Master. As of December 31, 2018, Winton Master’s Value at Risk for its assets (including the portion of the Partnership’s assets allocated to Winton for trading) was as follows:

December 31, 2018

32

At December 31, 2019, Transtrend Master’s total capitalization was $119,608,248 and the Partnership owned 100.0% of Transtrend Master. As of December 31, 2019, Transtrend Master’s Value at Risk for its assets (including the portion of the Partnership’s assets allocated to Transtrend for trading) was as follows:

December 31, 2019

At December 31, 2018, Transtrend Master’s total capitalization was $149,798,704 and the Partnership owned approximately 99.2% of Transtrend Master. As of December 31, 2018, Transtrend Master’s Value at Risk for its assets (including the portion of the Partnership’s assets allocated to Transtrend for trading) was as follows:

December 31, 2018

33

At December 31, 2019, FORT Contrarian Master’s total capitalization was $130,997,887 and the Partnership owned approximately 89.1% of FORT Contrarian Master. As of December 31, 2019, FORT Contrarian Master’s Value at Risk for its assets (including the portion of the Partnership’s assets allocated to FORT for trading) was as follows:

December 31, 2019

At December 31, 2018, FORT Contrarian Master’s total capitalization was $178,393,437 and the Partnership owned approximately 87.3% of FORT Contrarian Master. As of December 31, 2018, FORT Contrarian Master’s Value at Risk for its assets (including the portion of the Partnership’s assets allocated to FORT for trading) was as follows:

December 31, 2018

34

At December 31, 2019, NL Master’s total capitalization was $21,701,870 and the Partnership owned approximately 79.6% of NL Master. As of December 31, 2019, NL Master’s Value at Risk for its assets (including the portion of the Partnership’s assets allocated to Northlander for trading) was as follows:

December 31, 2019

As of January 31, 2019, the Partnership fully redeemed its investment in Willowbridge Master.

At December 31, 2018, Willowbridge Master’s total capitalization was $148,381,987 and the Partnership owned 100.0% of Willowbridge Master. As of December 31, 2018, Willowbridge Master’s Value at Risk for its assets (including the portion of the Partnership’s assets allocated to Willowbridge for trading) was as follows:

December 31, 2018

Material Limitations on Value at Risk as an Assessment of Market Risk

The face value of the market sector instruments held by the Partnership/Funds is typically many times the applicable maintenance margin requirement (margin requirements generally range between 1% and 15% of contract face value, although an exchange may increase margin requirements on short notice) as well as many times the capitalization of the Partnership/Funds. The magnitude of the Partnership’s/Funds’ open positions creates a “risk of ruin” not typically found in most other investment vehicles. Because of the size of the Partnership’s/Funds’ positions, certain market conditions—unusual, but historically recurring from time to time —could cause the Partnership/Funds to incur severe losses over a short period of time. The foregoing Value at Risk tables—as well as the past performance of the Partnership/Funds—give no indication of this “risk of ruin.”

35

Non-Trading Risk

The Partnership/Funds have non-trading market risk on their foreign cash balances not needed for margin. However, these balances (as well as any market risk they represent) are immaterial.

A decline in short-term interest rates would result in a decline in the Partnership’s cash management income. This cash flow risk is not considered to be material.

Materiality, as used throughout this section, is based on an assessment of reasonably possible market movements and any associated potential losses, taking into account the leverage, optionality and multiplier features of the Partnership’s/Funds’ market-sensitive instruments, in relation to the Partnership’s/Funds’ net assets.

Qualitative Disclosures Regarding Primary Trading Risk Exposures

The following qualitative disclosures regarding the Partnership’s/Funds’ market risk exposures — except for (i) those disclosures that are statements of historical fact and (ii) the descriptions of how the Partnership/Funds manage their primary market risk exposures— constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act and Section 21E of the Exchange Act. The Partnership’s/Funds’ primary market risk exposures, as well as the strategies used and to be used by the General Partner and the Advisors for managing such exposures, are subject to numerous uncertainties, contingencies and risks, any one of which could cause the actual results of the Partnership’s/Funds’ risk control to differ materially from the objectives of such strategies. Government interventions, defaults and expropriations, illiquid markets, the emergence of dominant fundamental factors, political upheavals, changes in historical price relationships, an influx of new market participants, increased regulation and many other factors could result in material losses as well as in material changes to the risk exposures and the management strategies of the Partnership/Funds. There can be no assurance that the Partnership’s/Funds’ current market exposure and/or risk management strategies will not change materially or that any such strategies will be effective in either the short or long term. Investors must be prepared to lose all or substantially all of their investment in the Partnership.

The following were the primary trading risk exposures of the Partnership at December 31, 2019 by market sector. It may be anticipated, however, that these market exposures will vary materially over time.

Currencies. The Partnership’s/Funds’ currency exposure is to exchange rate fluctuations, primarily fluctuations that disrupt the historical pricing relationships between different currencies and currency pairs. These fluctuations are influenced by interest rate changes as well as political and general economic conditions. The General Partner/Trading Manager does not anticipate that the risk profile of the Partnership’s/Funds’ currency sector will change significantly in the future.

Equities. The Partnership’s/Funds’ primary equity exposure is to equity price risk in the G8 countries. The stock index futures traded by the Partnership/Funds are limited to futures on broadly based indices. As of December 31, 2019, the Partnership’s/Funds’ primary exposures were in the Dow Jones Euro STOXX 50 (European Union), S&P 500 (U.S.), SPI 200 (Australia), CAC 40 (France), CBOE VIX Volatility Index (U.S.), NASDAQ 100 (U.S.), and FTSE 200 (United Kingdom) stock indices. The Partnership/Funds are primarily exposed to the risk of adverse price trends or static markets in the major European, U.S., and Pacific Rim indices, as well as in emerging markets. (Static markets would not cause major market changes but would make it difficult for the Partnership/Funds to avoid being “whipsawed” into numerous small losses.)

Interest Rates. Interest rate movements directly affect the price of the futures positions held by the Partnership/Funds and indirectly the value of their stock index and currency positions. Interest rate movements in one country as well as relative interest rate movements between countries materially affect the Partnership’s/Funds’ profitability. The Partnership’s/Funds’ primary interest rate exposure is to interest rate fluctuations in the United States and the other G8 countries. However, the Partnership/Funds may also take futures positions on the government debt of smaller nations — e.g., Australia, New Zealand and Switzerland.

Commodities:

Energy. The Partnership’s/Funds’ primary energy market exposure is to oil and natural gas price movements, often resulting from political developments in the Middle East, weather conditions, and other factors contributing to supply and demand. Energy prices can be volatile and substantial profits and losses, which have been experienced in the past, are expected to continue to be experienced in these markets in the future.

Metals. The Partnership’s/Funds’ primary metal market exposure as of December 31, 2019 was to fluctuations in the prices of copper, iron ore, palladium, platinum, aluminum, silver, and gold.

Grains. The Partnership’s/Funds’ trading risk exposure in the grains is primarily to agricultural price movements, which are often directly affected by severe or unexpected weather conditions. Corn, wheat and the soybean complex accounted for the majority of the Partnership’s/Funds’ grain exposure as of December 31, 2019.

Softs. The Partnership’s/Funds’ trading risk exposure in the soft commodities is to agricultural-related price movements, which are often directly affected by severe or unexpected weather conditions. Coffee, sugar, cocoa, and cotton accounted for the majority of the Partnership’s/Funds’ soft commodities exposure as of December 31, 2019.

Livestock. The Partnership’s/Funds’ primary risk exposure in livestock is to fluctuations in hog and cattle prices.

36

Qualitative Disclosures Regarding Non-Trading Risk Exposure

The following was the onlynon-trading risk exposure of the Partnership/Funds as of December 31, 2019.

Foreign Currency Balances. The Partnership/Funds may hold various foreign currency balances. The Advisors regularly convert foreign currency balances to U.S. dollars in an attempt to control the Partnership’s/Funds’non-trading risk.

Qualitative Disclosures Regarding Means of Managing Risk Exposure

The General Partner/Trading Manager monitors and attempts to mitigate the Partnership’s/Funds’ risk exposure on a daily basis through financial, credit and risk management monitoring systems and accordingly, believes that it has effective procedures for evaluating and limiting the credit and market risks to which the Partnership/Funds may be subject.

The General Partner/Trading Manager monitors the Partnership’s/Funds’ performance and the concentration of their open positions, and consults with the Advisors concerning the Partnership’s/Funds’ overall risk profile. If the General Partner/Trading Manager felt it necessary to do so, the General Partner/Trading Manager could require the Advisors to close out positions as well as enter positions traded on behalf of the Partnership/Funds. However, any such intervention would be a highly unusual event. The General Partner/Trading Manager primarily relies on the Advisors’ own risk control policies while maintaining a general supervisory overview of the Partnership’s/Funds’ market risk exposures.

The Advisors apply their own risk management policies to their trading. The Advisors often follow diversification guidelines, margin limits and stop loss points to exit a position. The Advisors’ research of risk management often suggests ongoing modifications to their trading programs.

As part of the General Partner’s risk management, the General Partner periodically meets with each Advisor to discuss its risk management and to look for any material changes to the Advisor’s portfolio balance and trading techniques. Each Advisor is required to notify the General Partner of any material changes to its programs.

37

Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.

CERES ORION L.P.

The following financial statements and related items of the Partnership are filed under this Item 8: Oath or Affirmation, Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting, Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm, for the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018, and 2017; Statements of Financial Condition at December 31, 2019 and 2018; Condensed Schedules of Investments at December 31, 2019 and 2018; Statements of Income and Expenses for the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017; Statements of Changes in Partners’ Capital for the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017; and Notes to Financial Statements. Additional financial information has been filed as Exhibits to this Form 10-K.

38

To the Limited Partners of

Ceres Orion L.P.

To the best of the knowledge and belief of the undersigned, the information contained herein is accurate and complete.

39

Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

The management of Ceres Orion L.P. (the “Partnership”), Ceres Managed Futures LLC, is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting as defined in Rules 13a – 15(f) and 15d – 15(f) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and for our assessment of internal control over financial reporting. The Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. The Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that:

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

The management of Ceres Orion L.P. has assessed the effectiveness of the Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2019. In making this assessment, management used the criteria set forth in theInternal Control-Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on our assessment, management concluded that the Partnership maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2019 based on the criteria referred to above.

Patrick T. Egan				Steven Ross
President and Director				Chief Financial Officer and Director
Ceres Managed Futures LLC				Ceres Managed Futures LLC
General Partner,				General Partner,
Ceres Orion L.P.				Ceres Orion L.P.

40

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Partners of Ceres Orion L.P.,

Opinion on the Financial Statements

We have audited the accompanying statements of financial condition of Ceres Orion L.P. (the “Partnership”), including the condensed schedules of investments, as of December 31, 2019 and 2018, and the related statements of income and expenses and changes in partners’ capital for each of the three years in the period then ended, and the related notes (collectively referred to as the “financial statements”). In our opinion, the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Partnership at December 31, 2019 and 2018, and the results of its operations and changes in its partners’ capital for each of the three years in the period then ended, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.

Basis for Opinion

These financial statements are the responsibility of the Partnership’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Partnership’s financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (“PCAOB”) and are required to be independent with respect to the Partnership in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. The Partnership is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of the Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting. As part of our audits, we are required to obtain an understanding of internal control over financial reporting but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion.

Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. Our procedures included confirmation of securities owned as of December 31, 2019, by correspondence with the custodian and brokers. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

We have served as the auditor of the Partnership since 2017.

Boston, MA

March 19, 2020

41

Ceres Orion L.P.

Statements of Financial Condition

December 31, 2019 and 2018

⁽¹⁾ Defined in Note 1.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

42

Ceres Orion L.P.

Condensed Schedule of Investments

December 31, 2019

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

43

Ceres Orion L.P.

Condensed Schedule of Investments

December 31, 2018

*         Due to rounding.

See accompanying notes to financial statements.

44

Ceres Orion L.P.

Statements of Income and Expenses

For the Years Ended

December 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017