In addition to such registration requirements, the CFTC and certain commodity exchanges have established limits on the maximum net long and net short positions which any person, including Grant Park, may hold or control in particular commodities. Most exchanges also limit the maximum changes in futures contract prices that may occur

making Grant Park’s positions more difficult to liquidate at favorable prices and increasing losses incurred while trying to do so. See “Quantitative Andand Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk.”

Cash flow needs may cause positions to be closed which may cause substantial losses.

Due to factors including differences in margin treatment between futures and options, there may be periods of time in which positions involving both kinds of instruments must be closed down prematurely due to short term cash flow needs. If this occurs during an adverse move in a spread or straddle trade, for example, then a substantial loss could occur.

An investment in Grant Park may not diversify an overall portfolio.

Historically, managed futures have generally been generally non-correlated to the performance of other asset classes such as stocks andor bonds. Non-correlation means that there is no statistically significant relationship between the performance of futures and other commodity interest transactions, on the one hand, and stocks or bonds, on the other hand. Non-correlation should not be confused with negative correlation, where the performance of two asset classes would be opposite of each other. Because of this non-correlation, Grant Park cannotshould not necessarily be expected to be profitable during unfavorable periods for the stock market, or vice versa. Grant Park may incur major losses while stock and bond prices rise substantially in a prospering economy. If, however, during a particular period of time Grant Park’s performance moves in the same general direction as the general financial markets or Grant Park does not perform successfully, youinvestors will obtain little or no diversification benefits during that period from investing in Grant Park. In such a case, Grant Park may have no gains to offset yourinvestor losses from other investments, and youinvestors may suffer losses on yourtheir investment in Grant Park at the same time as losses on yourtheir other investments are increasing. This was the case, for example, during the thirdfirst quarter of 2008,2020, when Grant Park experienced a loss of approximately 6.12%15.78% while the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index lost approximately 8.37%19.60%. YouInvestors should not consider Grant Park to be a hedge against losses in yourtheir stock and bond portfolios.

Trading in international markets exposes Grant Park to additional credit and regulatory risk.

A substantial portion of Grant Park’s trades have in the past and are expected in the future to take place on markets or exchanges outside of the United States. There is no limit to the amount of assets that Grant Park may commit to trading on non-U.S. markets, and historically, as much as approximately 30% to 60% of Grant Park’s overall market exposure has involved positions taken on non-U.S. markets. The risk of loss in trading non-U.S. commodity interests contracts can be significant. Participation in non-U.S. commodity interests involves the execution and clearing of trades on, or subject to the rules of, a foreign board of trade. Some of these non-U.S. markets, in contrast to U.S. markets, are so-called principals’ markets in which performance is the responsibility only of the individual counterparty with whom Grant Park has entered into a commodity interest transaction, not of the exchange or clearing house. In these kinds of markets, Grant Park will be subject to the risk of bankruptcy, insolvency, government intervention, payment failure or other failures or refusals to performnon-performance by the counterparty.

Moreover, many of these non-U.S. markets are unregulated, which means that Grant Park may have no or only limited recourse in the event of counterparty failures or refusals.non-performance. None of the CFTC, NFA or any domestic exchange regulates activities of any foreign boards of trade or exchanges outside of the United States, including execution, delivery and clearing of transactions, nor does any U.S. regulatory authority have the power to compel enforcement of the rules of a foreign board of trade or exchange or of any applicable non-U.S. laws.

Additionally, trading on non-U.S. exchanges is subject to risks presented by exchange controls, expropriation, increased tax burdens and exposure to local economic declines and political instability. An adverse development in any of these variables could reduce the profit or increase the loss resulting from trades in the affected international markets.

Grant Park’s international trading may expose it to losses resulting from non-U.S. exchanges that are less developed or less reliable than U.S. exchanges.

Some non-U.S. exchanges also may be in a more developmental stage, so that prior price histories may not be indicative of current price dynamics. In addition, Grant Park may not have the same access to information or positions on

Grant Park’s international trading activities subject it to foreign exchange risk.

The price of any non-U.S. commodity contracts and, therefore, the potential profit and loss on such contracts, may be affected by any variancevariances in the foreign exchange rate between the time an order is placed and the time it is executed, or the time between when a position is opened and when it is liquidated, offset or exercised. As a result, changes in the value of the local currency relative to the U.S. dollar may cause losses to Grant Park even if a contract traded is profitable as measured in the local currency.

Grant Park’s international trading activities are subject to global risks and market disruption.

Trading on international markets may increaseincreases the risk that events or circumstances that disrupt such markets may have a materially adverse effect on Grant Park’s business or operations or the value of positions held by Grant Park. Such events or circumstances may include, but are not limited to, inflation or deflation, currency devaluation, interest rate changes, exchange rate fluctuations, changes in government policies, natural disasters, pandemics or other extraordinary events such as coronavirus,COVID-19, armed conflicts, political or social instability or other unforeseen developments that cannot be quantified.

Market disruptions and government intervention in response thereto could have a material impact on Grant Park’s ability to implement trading strategies.

World financial markets have from time to time experienced widespread and systemic disruptions, which have produced and may produce government reaction and intervention. Such intervention has in certain instances occurred on an “emergency” basis without giving market participants an opportunity to adapt their trading strategies or undertake risk management over their existing positions.

Given the breadth of impact and the speed or frequency with which such government action has sometimes occurred, these interventions have also tended to increase uncertainty in various markets and, although perhaps unintentionally, contributed to overall market instability. This situation can be compounded by the sometimes apparent inconsistency with which government action has been formulated and applied. Such inconsistency has tended in the past to and may tend in the future to have a further destabilizing effect on world financial markets and, as a result, tended to reduce liquidity in many of these markets.

Several countries have limited or prohibited selected types of trading strategies, making such trading either increasingly difficult or impossible to implement. Any regulatory limitations on selected trading strategies could have a materially adverse impact on Grant Park’s ability to implement certain trading methods or allocate to trading advisors or engage reference traders who employ such methods. It is impossible to predict what impact such disruptions and interventions, if they occur, might have on Grant Park’s performance.

Grant Park may be subject to increased or changing regulation.

Regulators in the past several years have amended and increased scrutiny, reporting requirements, restrictions, and regulations in various areas concerning funds.funds, sometimes without coordinating such actions between or among regulators. Such regulations may limit Grant Park’s strategy and increase compliance risks to Grant Park. Additionally, certain regulatory agencies have conducted discussions with market participants, registrants and investors to ascertain investor protection implications of the growth of investment funds, and proposals have been made with regard to best business practices and additional regulation of such funds, their operators and advisors, and certain of their activities, including proposed restrictions on certain types of trading and proposals for increased public and private disclosure of financial, trading, and risk management information. The regulation of futures, forward, and options transactions in the United States is a rapidly changing area of law and is subject to modification by government and judicial action. In addition, various national governments have expressed concern regarding the disruptive effects of speculative trading in the currency markets and the need to regulate the “derivatives” markets in general. Any regulations that restrict the ability of Grant Park to employ various types of trading methods or trading instruments in connection with Grant Park’s trading, or otherwise limit or modify Grant Park’s trading activities, require Grant Park to disclose proprietary

Grant Park may be affected by epidemics, pandemics and Covid-19.COVID-19.

Many countries have been susceptible to epidemics, such as severe acute respiratory syndrome, avian flu, H1N1/09 flu and, currently,The onset of the disease commonly referred to as “Covid-19” which is associated with the SARS-CoV-2 novel coronavirus known as COVID-19 has caused significant shocks to global financial markets and economies, with many governments taking extreme actions to slow and contain the spread of COVID-19. These actions have had, and likely will continue to have, a severe economic impact on global economies as economic activity in some instances has essentially ceased or been declaredsubstantially reduced. Financial markets across the globe continue to experience severe stress at least comparable if not greater than what was experienced during the global financial crisis in 2008. In March 2020, U.S. equity markets entered a bear market in the fastest move in the history of U.S. financial markets. Various global economic shocks continuing to be a pandemic by the World Health Organization. A continuationexperienced as of the Covid-19 outbreak could produce further declines in global economic growth (some economists have warned that global economic growth could be cut by more than half and that countriesdate hereof, and the global economy could be plunged into recession). Many businesses aroundpossibility of such shocks occurring in the world have curtailed their travelfuture may cause the underlying assumptions and meeting plans. This is likely to slow business activity, including in particular international business activity. The impact of a viral pandemic in certain areas with large and crowded cities may be especially severe. Although the general partner has not determined or estimated whether COVID-19 has had effects or consequences on Grant Park which could be materially adverse to the general partner’s business operations or its ability to manage Grant Park, the presence of Covid-19 and its continued effect on the global economy may have an adverse impact on the business and operationsexpectations of the general partner, and Grant Park. The general partnertrading advisors or reference traders to become outdated quickly or inaccurate, resulting in potentially significant losses.

Due in part to market conditions following the COVID-19 pandemic, global interest rates have maintained historically low levels, in some cases less than zero. Although this condition has not confirmed whether COVID-19 has causedrecently begun to change, the general partner expects that Grant Park’s interest income for at least the near-term will be very low, and the amount of trading income that Grant Park will need to achieve in order to generate a profit or even break-even is higher than would be the case if interest rates were higher. Additionally, during certain periods of the COVID-19 pandemic, federal, state and local governments enacted various measures, including restricted travel and stay-at-home/shelter-at-home orders. The General Partner cannot determine or predict what impact such measures may have now or in the future on the General Partner’s, trading advisors’, reference traders’ or Grant ParkPark’s ability to incur expenses, delays,operate or interruption of critical business functions, nor has the general partner assessed whether conduct day-to-day activities.

COVID-19 may have such effects in the future. Covid-19 may cause key personnel of the general partner and/or trading advisors or reference traders to be absent from work or work remotely for prolonged periods of time. The ability of any such personnel to work effectively on a remote basis may adversely impact the day-to-day operations of Grant Park or Grant Park’s net performance. Any future outbreak or pandemic could also have potential adverse effects on the global economy, the general partner and/or Grant Park in ways the general partner cannot predict or anticipate.

Grant Park may be affected by Brexit risks and other recent global events.

The United Kingdom’s exit from the European Union, commonly referred to as “Brexit,” went into effect on January 1, 2021. Uncertainty regarding the impact of Brexit on international trade and commerce could potentially disrupt the markets in which Grant Park trades and adversely change tax benefits or liabilities in certain jurisdictions. Such continuing uncertainty may cause or exacerbate volatility in global markets or currency exchange rate fluctuations that may adversely affect Grant Park or Grant Park’s results in one or more ways that the general partner cannot anticipate or forecast. Recent events in various world financial markets have caused significant dislocations, illiquidity and volatility in the wider global economy. An unstable geopolitical climate and continued threats of terrorism and war could have a material adverse effect on general economic conditions, market conditions and market liquidity, e.g., depressed financial and commodity market prices and problems with trading facilities and infrastructure. To the extent that such events are not temporary and continue (or even worsen), this may have an adverse impact on such items as availability of credit to businesses generally and could lead to an overall weakening of the U.S. and global economics. Such events could restrict the ability of Grant Park to make new investments, or to sell or liquidate existing investments at favorable times or for favorable prices. There can be no assurance as to the duration of any market dislocation.

Grant Park may be affected by LIBOR transition orand phaseout.

To the extent that swap transactions or other derivative instruments in which Grant Park trades or invests extend beyond December 31, 2021, interest rates for such transactions or instruments might be subject to change to the extent that such rates are calculated using the London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”).

On July 27, 2017,

LIBOR has historically been the United Kingdom’smost widely used interest rate benchmark in the world, but the U.K. Financial Conduct Authority (“FCA”), which regulatesannounced in 2017 that FCA would no longer sustain the publication of LIBOR announced that it intends to phase out LIBORas a reference rate by the end of 2021. On November 30, 2020, ICE Benchmark Administration Limited, referredLIBOR’s administrator plans to as “ICE,” announced its plan to extendretire 3-, 6-, and 12-month U.S. dollar LIBOR in late June 2023 and retired the date that most1-week and 2-month U.S. LIBOR values would cease being computed and published from December 31, 2021 to June 30, 2023. In its announcement, ICE indicated its plan that Overnight U.S. LIBOR, 1-Month U.S. LIBOR, 3-Month U.S. LIBOR, 6-Month U.S.dollar LIBOR and 1-Year U.S.all LIBOR indexes would expire on June 30, 2023, while 1-Week U.S. LIBORsettings in British sterling, euros, Swiss francs, and 2-Month U.S. LIBOR indexes would expire on the original termination dateJapanese yen as of December 31, 2021. In addition, ICE announcedU.S. regulators have encouraged banks to transition away from LIBOR “as soon as practicable.” LIBOR’s discontinuation poses various risks to parties to all financial instruments, including but not limited to derivatives, bonds, loans, mortgage-backed securities or collateralized loan obligations, that are linked to LIBOR or similar regional benchmark rates. Many financial transactions provide no contractual fallbacks, or the fallback provisions in place may not effectively cover LIBOR’s discontinuation.

Given the prevalent use of the LIBOR benchmark and risks to the financial system from its intention to cease publishing British Pound, Euro, Swiss Franc and Japanese Yen LIBOR indices and values on December 31, 2021.

To addressdiscontinuance, the possibility of LIBOR’s cessation, the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve BankState of New York (FRBNY)and the European Union have recently adopted measures to address the problems facing “tough legacy” contracts, i.e., pre-existing contracts that reference LIBOR but do not provide for a viable fallback reference rate in coordinationthe event of LIBOR’s cessation. Such measures seek to migrate certain contracts to their respective regulators’ recommended replacement benchmark, and thus to reduce the uncertainty and litigation risk surrounding LIBOR’s cessation. Other jurisdictions have adopted similar or other measures, but LIBOR transition nonetheless introduces the risk of potentially contentious disputes and litigation that could last for several years. The U.K. Financial Conduct Authority has warned that risks associated with multiplethe discontinuance of LIBOR and transition to other regulators and large industry participants, convened the Alternative Reference Rates Committee (“ARRC”). The ARRC has identified the Secured Overnight Financing Ratebenchmarks include

of the swap owned by a trading company may not fully track the performance of the relevant trading advisor program in respect of other accounts traded by such trading advisor. Further, the calculation of the underlying index for such swap includes a deduction for a fee payable to the swap counterparty. This deduction will mean that the return of such investment will be lower than would be the case if no fees were deducted.

such stop-loss orders may not necessarily limit losses, since they become market orders once triggered. As a result, the order may not be executed at the stop-loss price, resulting in a loss in excess of the loss that would have been incurred if the order had been executed at the stop-loss price. Even if a trading advisor’s or reference trader’s risk management approaches areis fully effective, it cannot anticipate all risks that itthe trading advisor or reference trader may face. To the extent one or more of

The general partner relies on the trading advisors and their key personnel.

The general partner relies on the trading advisors to achieve trading gains for Grant Park, allocating to each of them responsibility for, and discretion over, trading of their allocated portions of Grant Park’s assets. The trading advisors, in turn, are dependent on the services of a limited number of persons to develop and refine their trading approaches and strategies and execute Grant Park’s transactions. The loss of the services of any trading advisor’s principals or key employees, or the failure of those principals or key employees to function effectively as a team, may have an adverse effect on that trading advisor’s ability to manage its trading activities successfully or may cause the trading advisor to cease operations entirely, either of which, in turn, could negatively impact Grant Park’s performance. Each of Grant Park’s trading advisors is controlled, directly or indirectly, by one or more individuals. The death, incapacity or prolonged unavailability of such individuals likely would greatly hinder these trading advisors’ operations, and could result in their ceasing operations entirely, which could adversely affect the value of youran investment in Grant Park.

​

Grant Park may be exposed to style drift.

The general partner cannot control the trading conducted by each trading advisor or reference trader and relies primarily on information provided by such advisors or traders in assessing investment strategies, the underlying risks of different trading strategies and, ultimately, determining whether, and to what extent, the general partner will allocate Grant Park’s assets to such trading advisors. “Style drift” is the risk that a trading advisor or reference trader may deviate from the stated or expected investment strategy or methodology. Style drift can occur abruptly if a trading advisor or reference trader believes that it has identified an investment opportunity for higher returns from a different approach, or it can occur gradually, such as if, for example, an advisor or trader changes its leverage level or modifies its trading signals incrementally over time. Style drift can also occur if a trading advisor or reference trader focuses on factors it had deemed immaterial in its offering documents – such as particular statistical information or returns relative to certain benchmarks. Additionally, style drift poses a particular risk for multiple-manager structures such as Grant Park, since Grant Park may be exposed to particular markets or strategies to a greater extent than was anticipated by the general partner when it assessed the portfolio's risk-return characteristics and allocated assets to certain trading advisors or swap arrangements incorporating reference traders. This may, in turn, result in overlapping strategies or methodologies among various trading advisors or reference traders. The general partner's sole remedy in the event of a deviation by a trading advisor or reference trader from its offering or other governing documents may be only to cause Grant Park to withdraw capital, subject to any applicable withdrawal restrictions.

The general partner may terminate, replace and/or add trading advisors and reference traders in its sole discretion and the trading advisors and reference traders or their trading strategies may not continually serve Grant Park, which may have an adverse effect on Grant Park’s performance.

The general partner may terminate, substitute or retain trading advisors and reference traders on behalf of Grant Park in its sole discretion. Moreover, it is possible that any trading advisor will exercise its rights to terminate the advisory agreement with Grant Park under certain conditions or the advisory agreement with any trading advisor, once it expires, will not be renewed on the same terms as the current advisory agreement for that trading advisor. The addition of a new trading advisor or reference trader and/or the removal of one or more of the current trading advisors or reference traders may cause disruptions in Grant Park’s trading as assets are reallocated and new trading advisors or reference traders transition to Grant Park, which may have an adverse effect on Grant Park’s performance.

TheChanges in the general partner’s allocation of the assets of each class of Grant Park among trading advisors and reference traders may result in less than optimalpoorer performance by Grant Park.

The general partner may reallocate assets among the trading advisors and reference traders upon termination of a trading advisor or reference trader, retention of a new trading advisor or reference trader or on the first day of any month. Consequently, Grant Park’s net assets may be apportioned among trading advisors and reference traders in a different manner than the current apportionment. The general partner’s allocation of assets will directly affect the

Furthermore, adding, terminating or replacing trading advisors and reference traders cannot provide any assurance that Grant Park’s trading will be successful.

Third parties may infringe or otherwise violate a trading advisor’s intellectual property rights or assert that a trading advisor has infringed or otherwise violated their intellectual property rights, which may result in significant costs and diverted attention.

Third parties may obtain and use a trading advisor’s intellectual property or technology, including its trade secrets and trading program software, without permission. Any unauthorized use or misappropriation of a trading advisor’s proprietary trade secrets, software and other technology could adversely affect its competitive advantage. Proprietary software and other technology are becoming increasingly easy to duplicate, particularly as employees with proprietary knowledge leave the owner or licensed user of that software or other technology. Each trading advisor may have difficulty monitoring unauthorized uses of its proprietary software and other technology. The precautions it has taken may not prevent misappropriation or infringement of its proprietary software and other technology. Also, third parties may independently develop proprietary software and other technology similar to that of a trading advisor or claim that the trading advisor has violated their intellectual property rights, including copyrights, trademark rights, trade names, trade secrets and patent rights. As a result, a trading advisor may have to litigate in the future to protect its trade secrets, determine the validity and scope of other parties’ proprietary rights, defend itself against claims that it has infringed or otherwise violated other parties’ rights, or defend itself against claims that its rights are invalid. Any litigation of this type, even if the trading advisor is successful and regardless of the merits of the action, may result in significant costs, diversion of resources from Grant Park, or require the trading advisor to change its proprietary software and other technology or enter into royalty or licensing agreements.

The success of Grant Park depends on the ability of each of the trading advisors’ and reference traders’ personnel to accurately implement their trading systems, and any failure to do so could subject Grant Park to losses.

Trading advisors’ and reference traders’ computerized trading systems rely on the trading advisors’ and reference traders’ personnel to accurately process the systems’ outputs and execute the transactions specified by the systems. In addition, each trading advisor and reference trader relies on its staff to operate and maintain its computer and communications systems upon which the trading systems rely. Execution and operation of each trading advisor’s and reference trader’s systems is therefore subject to human error. Any failure, inaccuracy or delay in implementing any of the trading advisors’ systems and executing Grant Park’s transactions could impair Grant Park’s ability to identify potential profit opportunities and benefit from them. It could also result in decisions to undertake transactions based on inaccurate or incomplete information, which could cause substantial losses.

​

Cybersecurity risks could have material adverse effects on Grant Park. 

Cybersecurity incidents and cyber-attacks have been occurring globally at a more frequent and severe level and will likely continue to increase in frequency in the future. The general partner will seek to prevent and mitigate any such incidents but there is no guarantee that it will be successful in such efforts. A cybersecurity incident could have numerous material adverse effects on Grant Park and potentially on its investors. Such incidents could impair the operations, liquidity and financial condition of Grant Park, amongst other potential threats and risks. Cyber threats and/or incidents could cause financial costs from the theft of Grant Park assets (including proprietary information and intellectual property) as well as numerous unforeseen costs including, but not limited to:  litigation expenses, preventative and protective costs, remediation costs and costs associated with reputational damage. Such incidents could also compromise investor personal information and subject such information to the risk of loss or theft.

The inability of Grant Park to access, or the failure of, electronic trading and order routing systems may adversely affect Grant Park’s trading.

Grant Park may trade on electronic trading and order routing systems, which differ from traditional open outcry pit trading and manual order routing methods. Transactions using an electronic system are subject to the rules and

qualifications for access and grounds for termination and limitations on the types of orders that may be entered into a system. Each of these matters may present different risk factors with respect to trading on or using a particular system. Each system may also present risks related to system access, varying response times and security. In the case of internet-based systems, there may be additional risks related to service providers and the receipt and monitoring of electronic mail.

Grant Park may experience substantial losses on transactions if a trading advisor’s computer or communications systems fail or if a trading advisor, or third parties on which a trading advisor depends, fail to upgrade computer and communications systems.

Each trading advisor’s trading activities, including risk management, depends on the integrity and performance of the computer and communications systems supporting it. Extraordinary transaction volume, hardware or software failure, cyber-attack, power or telecommunications failure, natural disaster or other catastrophe could cause any trading advisor’s computer systems to operate at an unacceptably slow speed or even fail. A significant degradation or failure of the systems that a trading advisor uses to gather and analyze information, enter orders, process data, monitor risk levels and otherwise engage in trading activities may result in substantial losses, liability to other parties, lost profit opportunities, harm to the trading advisors’, the reference traders’, the general partner’s and Grant Park’s reputations, increased operational expenses or diversion of technical resources.

The development of complex communications and new technologies may render existing computer and communication systems supporting the trading advisors’ trading activities obsolete. In addition, these systems must be compatible with those of third parties, such as the systems utilized by exchanges, clearing brokers and executing brokers used by the trading advisors. If these third parties upgrade their systems, the trading advisors will need to make corresponding upgrades to continue effectively their trading activities. Grant Park’s future success will in part depend on each trading advisor’s and third party’s ability to respond to changing technologies on a timely and cost-effective basis.

Each trading advisor depends on the reliable performance of the computer or communications systems of third parties, such as brokers and futures exchanges, and may experience substantial losses on transactions if they fail.

Each trading advisor depends on the proper and timely function of complex computer and communications systems maintained and operated by the futures exchanges, brokers and other data providers that the trading advisor uses to conduct its trading activities. Failure or inadequate performance of any of these systems could adversely affect a trading advisor’s ability to complete transactions, including its ability to enter new orders, execute existing orders, modify or cancel orders that were previously entered or close out positions, and could result in lost profit opportunities and significant losses on commodity interest transactions. Any of these conditions could have a material adverse effect on revenues and materially reduce Grant Park’s capital. For example, unavailability of price quotations from third parties may make it difficult or impossible for a trading advisor to use the proprietary software that it relies upon to conduct its trading activities. Unavailability of records from brokerage firms can make it difficult or impossible for a trading advisor to accurately determine which transactions have been executed or the details, including price and time, of any transaction executed. This unavailability of information also may make it difficult or impossible for the trading advisor to reconcile its records of transactions with those of another party or to settle executed transactions.

Forwards, swaps and other derivatives are subject to varying regulation and risks.

On December 16, 2015, the CFTC adopted margin requirements for non-cleared OTC derivatives executed by registered swap dealers or major swap participants for which no U.S. federal banking agency is a prudential regulator. On December 8, 2020, the CFTC adopted certain amendments to its margin requirements for uncleared swaps to revise the calculation method for determining whether certain entities come within the scope of initial margin requirements for uncleared swaps, beginning in the last phase of a phased compliance schedule, which starts on September 1, 2022, and the timing for compliance with the initial margin requirements after the end of the phased compliance schedule. Although Grant Park is not directly subject to these margin requirements, to the extent that Grant Park enters into a non-clearednon-

Risks posed by OTC instruments and techniques include: (1) credit risk (the exposure to the possibility of loss resulting from a counterparty’s failure to meet its financial obligations); (2) market risk (adverse movements in the price of a financial asset or commodity); (3) legal risk (the characterization of a transaction or a party’s legal capacity to enter into it could render the financial contract unenforceable, and the insolvency or bankruptcy of a counterparty could preempt otherwise enforceable contract rights); (4) operational risk (inadequate controls, deficient procedures, human error, system failure or fraud); (5) documentation risk (exposure to losses resulting from inadequate documentation); (6) liquidity risk (exposure to losses created by inability to prematurely terminate the derivative); (7) systemic risk (the risk that financial difficulties in one institution or a major market disruption will cause uncontrollable financial harm to the financial system); (8) concentration risk (exposure to losses from the concentration of closely related risks such as exposure to a particular industry or exposure linked to a particular entity); and (9) settlement risk (the risk faced when one party to a transaction has performed its obligations under a contract but has not yet received value from its counterparty).

The failure to comply with the USA Patriot Act may subject Grant Park to substantial negative consequences.

The USA Patriot Act of 2001, as amended (the “Patriot Act”) contains, among other things, provisions intended to safeguard against the laundering of money in the United States by individuals involved in illicit or illegal activities. The Patriot Act focuses on individuals wishing to invest their money in U.S. ventures, and provides that domestic investment entities (such as Grant Park) that accept money from such individuals must conduct a substantial investigation to determine whether prospective investors are, or may be, engaged in illicit or illegal activities. If the general partner inadvertently admits a prohibited person or entity as an investor in Grant Park, substantial negative consequences to Grant Park could result, including but not limited to the freezing and/or forfeiture of all of Grant Park’s assets as well as reputational harm. Grant Park undertakes reasonable efforts to safeguard itself from being used by individuals to disguise their illegal or illicit activities. Despite these efforts, however, there is no guarantee that dishonest individuals or those engaged in illicit or illegal activities will be screened successfully from participating as investors in Grant Park.

​

The failure to comply with economic sanction laws and the U.S. FCPA may subject Grant Park to substantial negative consequences.

​

Economic sanction laws in the United States and other jurisdictions may prohibit the general partner and Grant Park from transacting with or in certain countries and with certain individuals and companies. In the United States, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) administers and enforces laws, Executive Orders and regulations establishing U.S. economic and trade sanctions. Such sanctions prohibit, among other things, transactions with, and the provision of services to, certain foreign countries, territories, entities and individuals identified by OFAC. In addition, certain programs administered by OFAC prohibit dealing with individuals or entities in certain countries regardless of whether such individuals or entities have been specifically identified by OFAC.

The general partner and Grant Park are committed to complying with the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) and other anti-corruption laws, anti-bribery laws and regulations, as well as anti-boycott regulations, to which they are subject. In recent years, the U.S. Department of Justice and the SEC have devoted greater resources to enforcement of the FCPA. While the general partner will generally seek to comply with the FCPA, such efforts may not be effective in all instances to prevent violations. In addition, despite the general partner’s efforts, trading advisors may engage in activities that could result in FCPA violations. Any determination that the general partner or Grant Park has violated the FCPA or other applicable laws could subject Grant Park to, among other things, various penalties, fines, litigation or general loss of investor confidence, any one of which could materially adversely affect Grant Park’s ability to achieve its investment objective and/or conduct its operations.

consisted of and currently consists of “qualifying income” as defined in Section 7704 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and (b) Grant Park is organized and operated in accordance with its governing agreements and applicable law. The general partner believes it is likely, but not certain, that Grant Park will continue to meet the foregoing test. However, an opinion of counsel is subject to changes in applicable tax laws and is not binding on the Internal Revenue Service, any other taxing authority or any court.

If Grant Park were to be treated as an association or publicly traded partnership taxable as a corporation instead of as a partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes, (1) its net taxable income would be taxed at corporate income tax rates, thereby substantially reducing its profitability, (2) youlimited partners would not be allowed to deduct yourtheir share of losses, and (3) distributions to you,limited partners, other than liquidating distributions, would constitute dividends to the extent of Grant Park’s current and accumulated earnings and profits and would be taxable as such.

YourLimited partners’ tax liability may exceed yourtheir cash distributions.

Cash is distributed to limited partners at the sole discretion of the general partner, and the general partner does not currently intend to distribute cash to limited partners. Limited partners nevertheless will be subject to federal income tax, and in some cases, state, local or foreign income tax, on their share of Grant Park’s net income and gain each year, regardless of whether they redeem any units or receive any cash distributions from Grant Park.

YouLimited partners could owe taxes on yourtheir share of Grant Park’s ordinary income despite overall losses.

Gain or loss on domestic futures and options on futures as well as on most foreign currency contracts will generally be taxed as capital gains or losses for U.S. federal income tax purposes. Interest income and other ordinary income earned by Grant Park generally cannot be offset by capital losses. Consequently, youlimited partners could owe taxes on yourtheir allocable share of Grant Park’s ordinary income for a calendar year even if Grant Park reports a net trading loss for that year. Also, particular operating expenses of Grant Park, such as trading advisor consulting and incentive fees, may not be deductible, or may be subject to limitations, for purposes of calculating yourlimited partners’ federal and/or state and local income tax liability.

There is the possibility of a tax audit.

No assurances can be given that Grant Park’s tax returns will not be audited by a taxing authority or that an audit will not result in adjustments to Grant Park’s tax returns. Any adjustments resulting from an audit may require each limited partner to file an amended tax return and to pay additional taxes plus interest, which generally is not deductible, and might result in an audit of the limited partner’s own tax return. An audit of a limited partner’s tax return could result in adjustments of non-Grant Park, as well as Grant Park, income and deductions.

The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 introduced new procedures and rules that apply in the case of an audit of a partnership for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017. These procedures and rules generally provide that assessment and collection of additional income taxes will be made at the partnership level rather than at the partner level. As a result, any such income tax assessment would be borne by limited partners that own units of Grant Park at the time of such assessment, which may be different persons, or persons with different ownership percentages, than persons owning units for the tax year at issue.

​

Tax law changes could affect an investment in Grant Park.

​

Legislative, regulatory or administrative changes to the tax laws could be enacted or promulgated at any time, either prospectively or with retroactive effect, and may adversely affect Grant Park and/or its investors. The individual and collective impact of such changes is uncertain, and may not become evident for some period of time.

Grant Park does not own or use any physical properties in the conduct of its business. Its assets currently consist of U.S. and international futures and forward contracts and other interests in commodities, including options contracts on futures, forwards, commodities, spot contracts, security futures contracts, swap contracts, mutual funds, exchange-traded funds and fixed income products. Grant Park’s main office is located at 555566 West Jackson Boulevard,Adams Street, Suite 600,300, Chicago, Illinois 60661.

Grant Park is not a party to any pending material legal proceedings.

Not applicable.

PART II

There is no established trading market for any of Grant Park’s units. All units may be transferred or redeemed subject to the conditions imposed by Grant Park’s Third Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement (the “Partnership Agreement”).As of January 31, 20212022 there were 2927 Class A unit holders, 1,4201,173 Class B unit holders, 1512 Legacy 1 Class unit holders, 6 Legacy 2 Class unit holders, 518468 Global 1 Class unit holders, 1917 Global 2 Class unit holders, 1 Global 3 Class unit holders, and 4,027.893,924.35 Class A units, 38,594.8531,889.63 Class B units, 479.12452.87 Legacy 1 Class units, 403.68391.22 Legacy 2 Class units, 15,620.7113,425.07 Global 1 Class units, 749.18457.53 Global 2 Class units and 12.62 Global 3 Class units outstanding.

Dearborn Capital Management, L.L.C., as Grant Park’s general partner, has sole discretion in determining what distributions, if any, Grant Park will make to its unit holders. Grant Park has not made any such distributions as of the date hereof. The general partner does not intend to make any distributions of Grant Park’s assets.

Effective April 1, 2019, Grant Park no longer offers its limited partnership units for sale. For existing investors in Grant Park, business continues to be conducted as usual. The proceeds of the offering were deposited in Grant Park’s bank and brokerage accounts for the purpose of engaging in trading activities in accordance with Grant Park’s trading policies and its trading advisors’ respective trading strategies.

Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

There are no Grant Park units authorized for issuance under any equity compensation plans. There have been no sales of unregistered securities of Grant Park during the quarter ended December 31, 2020.2021. In addition, Grant Park did not repurchase any units under a formal repurchase plan. All Grant Park unit redemptions were in the ordinary course of business during the quarter ended December 31, 2020.2021.  There have not been any purchases of units by Grant Park or any affiliated purchasers during the quarter ended December 31, 2020.2021.

The following selected consolidated financial data of Grant Park as of and for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017 and 2016 is derived from the consolidated financial statements that have been audited by RSM US LLP. Grant Park’s independent registered public accountant. This financial data should be read in conjunction with “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations”, and with Grant Park’s consolidated financial statements and the notes thereto, included in Item 8. in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Results from past periods are not necessarily indicative of results that may be expected for any future period.​

​

​

​

​

​

Supplementary Quarterly Financial Information

The following summarized quarterly financial information presents Grant Park’s results of operations for the three-month periods ended March 31, June 30, September 30, and December 31, 2020 and 2019, which is unaudited. However, in the opinion of Grant Park, all adjustments, consisting of normal recurring adjustments, necessary for a fair presentation have been made. Interim results are subject to significant seasonal variations and are not indicative of the results of operations to be expected for a full fiscal year.

​

​

​

​

29

​

Introduction

Grant Park has been in continuous operation since it commenced trading on January 1, 1989. Since its inception and through February 28, 2003, Grant Park offered its beneficial interests exclusively to qualified investors on a private placement basis. Effective June 30, 2003, Grant Park publicly offered its units for sale. Grant Park’s registration statement was withdrawn on April 1, 2019 and units of Grant Park are no longer offered for sale. For existing investors in Grant Park, business continues to be conducted as usual. There was no change in the trading, operations, or monthly statements, etc. as a result of the termination of the offering, and redemption requests continue to be offered on a monthly basis.

Critical Accounting Policies

Grant Park’s most significant accounting policy is the valuation of its assets invested in U.S. and international futures and forward contracts, options contracts, swap transactions, other interests in commodities, mutual funds, exchange-traded funds and fixed income products. The majority of these investments are exchange-traded contracts, valued based upon exchange settlement prices. The remainder of its investments are non-exchange-traded contracts with valuation of those investments based on quoted forward spot prices, swap transactions with the valuation based on daily price reporting from the swap counterparty, and fixed income products, including U.S. Government securities, securities of U.S. Government-sponsored enterprises, corporate bonds and commercial paper, which are stated at cost plus accrued interest, which approximates fair value based on quoted market prices in an active market. With the valuation of the investments easily obtained, there is little or no judgment or uncertainty involved in the valuation of investments, and accordingly, it is unlikely that materially different amounts would be reported under different conditions using different but reasonably plausible assumptions.

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. Grant Park’s significant accounting policies are described in detail in Note 1 of the consolidated financial statements.

Grant Park is the sole member of each of the Trading Companies. The Trading Companies, in turn, are the only members of GP Cash Management, LLC. Grant Park presents consolidated financial statements which include the accounts of the Trading Companies and GP Cash Management, LLC. All material inter-company accounts and transactions are eliminated in consolidation.

Valuation of Financial Instruments

Grant Park follows the provisions of the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification Topic (“ASC”) 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures. Grant Park utilizes valuation techniques that are consistent with the market approach per the requirement of ASC 820 for the valuation of futures (exchange traded) contracts, forward (non-exchange traded) contracts, option contracts, swap transactions, other interests in commodities, mutual funds, exchange-traded funds and fixed income products. FASB ASC 820 defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value and expands disclosures about fair value measurement and also emphasizes that fair value is a market-based measurement, not an entity-specific measurement. Grant Park records all investments at fair value in the financial statements. Changes in fair value from the prior period are recorded as unrealized gain or losses and are reported in the consolidated statement of operations. Fair value of exchange-traded futures contracts, options on futures contracts and exchange-traded funds are based upon exchange settlement prices. Grant Park values forward contracts and options on forward contracts based on the average bid and ask price of quoted forward spot prices obtained. U.S. Government securities, securities of U.S. Government-sponsored enterprises, corporate bonds and commercial paper are stated at cost plus accrued interest, which approximates fair value based on quoted market prices in an active market. Grant Park compares market prices quoted by dealers to the cost plus accrued

30

interest to ensure a reasonable approximation of fair value. Grant Park values bank deposits at face value plus accrued

positions in the FTSE, MSCI EM, Dax, Nikkei and Hang Seng indices. Positive performance in the fixed income sector was driven by positions in the Bund, U.S. Treasury Bonds, Euro OAT Futures, U.S. 10-year Treasury Notes and eurodollars. Gains in the agriculturals sector were led by positions in soybeans, soybean meal and sugar. Performance in the energies sector was driven by positions in gas oil, heating oil and natural gas. Positive performance in metals was led by positions in gold. Performance in the currencies sector was slightly positive as gains from positions in the euro and Australian dollar were somewhat offset by losses in positions in the Swedish krona.

February. Grant Park recorded losses during the month. Class A units were down 3.79%, Class B units were down 3.84%, Legacy 1 Class units were down 3.60%, Legacy 2 Class units were down 3.62%, Global 1 Class units were down 3.55%, Global 2 Class units were down 3.57% and Global 3 Class units were down 3.72%. Overall Grant Park performance was negative, led by losses in the equities and agriculturals sectors. Positive performance in the fixed income, currencies, metals and energies sectors partially offset Grant Park losses. Negative performance in equities was driven by positions in the FTSE, Nikkei, S&P 500, Dow, MSCI EM and Eurostoxx indices. Losses in agriculturals were led by positions in wheat, cotton, soybean meal and soybeans. Positive performance in the fixed income sector was driven by positions in the Bund, eurodollars, U.S. Treasury Bonds, U.S. 10-year Treasury Notes, Euro OAT Futures and U.S. 5-year Treasury Notes. Gains in the currencies sector were led by positions in the euro, Japanese yen, Australian dollar, New Zealand dollar and Canadian dollar. Performance in the metals sector was driven by positions in gold and

​

June. Grant Park recorded losses during the month. Class A units were down 0.72%, Class B units were down 0.76%, Legacy 1 Class units were down 0.52%, Legacy 2 Class units were down 0.54%, Global 1 Class units were down 0.48%, Global 2 Class units were down 0.50% and Global 3 Class units were down 0.64%. Overall Grant Park performance was negative, led by losses in the agriculturals, currencies and energies sectors. Positive performance in the equities, metals and fixed income sectors partially offset Grant Park losses. Negative performance in agriculturals was led by positions in soybeans, corn and soybean meal. Currencies performance was driven by positions in the euro, Japanese yen, Mexican peso, Canadian dollar and Australian dollar. Negative performance in energies was led by positions in gas oil. Positive performance in the equities sector was driven by positions in the Eurostoxx, OMX 30, Nikkei, MSCI EM and the NASDAQ indices. Gains in the metals sector were led by positions in gold, copper and nickel. Performance in the fixed income sector was led by positions in Euro OAT Futures and short sterling.

July. Grant Park recorded gains during the month. Class A units were up 0.77%, Class B units were up 0.71%, Legacy 1 Class units were up 0.96%, Legacy 2 Class units were up 0.94%, Global 1 Class units were up 1.01%, Global 2 Class units were up 0.99% and Global 3 Class units were up 0.84%. Overall Grant Park performance was positive, led by gains in the metals and fixed income sectors. Positive performance in metals was led by positions in gold, silver and copper. Fixed income performance was driven by positions in Euro OAT Futures, short sterling, Eurodollars, U.S. 5-year

led by positions in brent oil, gas oil and heating oil. Fixed income performance was driven by positions in Euro OAT futures and German bunds.

November. Grant Park recorded gains during the month. Class A units were up 4.99%, Class B units were up 4.93%, Legacy 1 Class units were up 5.19%, Legacy 2 Class units were up 5.16%, Global 1 Class units were up 5.23%, Global 2 Class units were up 5.21% and Global 3 Class units were up 5.06%. Overall Grant Park performance was positive, led by gains in the equities, agriculturals and currencies sectors. Performance in equities was positive and was primarily driven by positions in the Nikkei and OMX 30 indices. Positive performance in agriculturals was driven by positions in soybeans, soybean meal, cotton and canola. Performance in currencies was led by positions in the Norwegian krone, the New Zealand dollar and the Polish zloty. Performance in metals was flat as gains in copper, zinc and silver were offset by losses in gold. Negative performance in the energies and fixed income sectors partially offset Grant Park losses. Performance in energies was driven by positions in brent oil, gas oil and heating oil. Negative performance in fixed income was led by positions in German bunds, Japanese government bonds and Euro OAT futures.

December. Grant Park recorded gains during the month. Class A units were up 3.29%, Class B units were up 3.27%, Legacy 1 Class units were up 3.40%, Legacy 2 Class units were up 3.41%, Global 1 Class units were up 3.36%, Global 2 Class units were up 3.43% and Global 3 Class units were up 3.36%. Overall Grant Park performance was positive, led by gains across multiple sectors. Positive performance in agriculturals was driven by positions in soybeans,

on growing expectations that Britain can avoid a no-deal Brexit. Crude oil prices rose over 18% as domestic crude oil inventories rose less than expected and after the U.S. imposed sanctions on Venezuela. Natural gas prices declined on elevated supplies. Global equity markets rose due to the Federal Reserve’s announcement concerning interest rate hikes, on optimism for trade talks between the U.S. and China and due to stronger-than-expected earnings for the fourth quarter. Global fixed income markets rose in reaction to the Federal Reserve’ policy announcement and the European Central Bank indicated it would leave interest rates at current levels at least through the summer. Wheat markets rose in anticipation of reopening trade with China and as Russia considered reducing exports. Soybean prices rose as poor weather in Brazil threatened to reduce crop yields. Cocoa markets fell over 10% as weather conditions in West Africa improved and eased supply concerns. Coffee prices rose when the Brazilian government projected this year's coffee crop would experience a significant decline compared to last year's record harvest. Gold and precious metals markets rose as the Federal Reserve left interest rates unchanged and indicated a slower pace for raising interest rates. Copper and other base metal prices rose on firming demand, on optimism that Beijing’s stimulus will help China’s economy and on optimism about the resolution of the U.S.-China trade negotiations.

February. Grant Park recorded gains during the month. Class A units were up 0.80%, Class B units were up 0.74%, Legacy 1 Class units were up 0.99%, Legacy 2 Class units were up 0.97%, Global 1 Class units were up 1.04%, Global 2 Class units were up 1.02% and Global 3 Class units were up 0.87%. The U.S. dollar strengthened on hopes for progress in trade talks between the U.S. and China. The Australian and New Zealand dollars weakened after Australia’s central bank considered a possible rate cut as it acknowledged growing economic risks. The Japanese yen fell following data of weakening economic performance. The British pound strengthened after Prime Minister Theresa May said Parliament will be allowed to vote on a “no-deal” Brexit or delay. Crude oil prices rose due to new U.S. imposed sanctions on Venezuela, reduced output by OPEC and a continued slowdown in U.S. drilling activity. Heating oil prices moved higher on lower inventories. Global equity markets rose on reports of progress in trade talks between the U.S. and China and a boost in energy stocks amid rising oil prices. Global fixed income markets declined slightly on optimism for a U.S.-China trade deal and easing Brexit fears. Wheat and corn markets fell on muted demand and abundant supplies. Coffee prices declined over 10% due to excess supplies and a weaker Brazilian real. Cocoa markets moved higher as demand increased and concerns arose about poor weather conditions in the Ivory Coast. Cotton markets moved higher on optimism about a possible trade deal between the U.S. and China. Gold and silver markets moved lower as a stronger dollar reduced demand for the safe-haven assets. Copper and other base metal prices rose on firming demand and hopes of a U.S.-China trade deal.

March. Grant Park recorded gains during the month. Class A units were up 2.01%, Class B units were up 1.96%, Legacy 1 Class units were up 2.17%, Legacy 2 Class units were up 2.09%, Global 1 Class units were up 2.09%, Global 2 Class units were up 2.15% and Global 3 Class units were up 2.08%. The U.S. dollar strengthened on optimism about the trade talks between the U.S. and China and on better-than-expected economic data. The Canadian dollar weakened after the Bank of Canada expressed uncertainty about future rate hikes. The British pound weakened due to Brexit concerns. Crude oil prices rose as OPEC reduced production and the U.S. continued to impose sanctions against Iran and Venezuela. Natural gas prices declined as mild weather weakened demand. Global equity markets rose on optimism for a trade deal between the U.S. and China and on dovish central bank policies. Global fixed income markets rose on dovish central bank policies and concerns of slowing global growth. Corn prices fell due to an excess of supplies and greater-than-expected crop plantings. Soybean markets fell on reports of elevated storage levels. Cotton prices rose over 8% in response to a 2% reduction in plantings and in anticipation a trade deal between the U.S. and China would lead to increased exports. Lean hog markets rose over 38% as China made its biggest purchase of the commodity from the U.S. in nearly two years. Gold and precious metals markets moved lower as a stronger dollar reduced demand for the safe-haven assets. Copper and other base metal prices were down on concerns about China’s exports, growth and slow trade negotiations with the U.S.

April. Grant Park recorded gains during the month. Class A units were up 2.67%, Class B units were up 2.65%, Legacy 1 Class units were up 2.89%, Legacy 2 Class units were up 2.83%, Global 1 Class units were up 2.90%, Global 2 Class units were up 2.88% and Global 3 Class units were up 2.75%. Overall Grant Park performance was positive, led by profitable positions in the equities, currencies, agriculturals, energies and metals sectors. Performance in the fixed income sector was negative. Positive equity performance was led by positions in the S&P 500 Index, the Nasdaq 100 Index, the Dax Index and the Eurostoxx Index. The currencies sector was positive, led by positions in the Mexican peso, Swiss franc and Japanese yen. In the agriculturals sector, positions in coffee, wheat and soybeans led positive performance. Performance in the energy sector was slightly positive, where gains in natural gas and gasoline blendstock

35

positions were partially offset by losses in gas oil positions. Performance in the metals sector was essentially unchanged, with gains in aluminum offset by losses in zinc, copper, platinum and gold. The fixed income sector performance was negative, led by losses in German Bunds, U.S. Treasury Bonds and Short Sterling positions. Positive performance by Australian 3-Year Treasury Bonds and Australian Treasury Bills partially offset sector losses.

May. Grant Park recorded losses during the month. Class A units were down 2.21%, Class B units were down 2.29%, Legacy 1 Class units were down 2.04%, Legacy 2 Class units were down 2.02%, Global 1 Class units were down 1.97%, Global 2 Class units were down 1.98% and Global 3 Class units were down 2.15%. Overall Grant Park performance was negative, led by losses in the equities, agriculturals, energies and currencies sectors. Performance in the fixed income and metals sectors was positive. Negative equity performance was driven by positions in the S&P 500, Nasdaq 100, MSCI EM, Dow and Nikkei indices. In the agriculturals sector, positions in corn, wheat and coffee led negative performance. Performance in the energy sector was negative, where losses in brent oil, gas oil, crude oil and gasoline blendstock positions were partially offset by gains in natural gas positions. The currencies sector was slightly negative, led by positions in the Mexican peso and Japanese yen. The fixed income sector performance was positive, led by gains in German Bunds, Eurodollars and Australian 10-Year Treasury Bonds. Performance in the metals sector was slightly positive, where gains in copper, lead, platinum and silver were partially offset by losses in zinc and palladium.

June. Grant Park recorded gains during the month. Class A units were up 0.98%, Class B units were up 0.98%, Legacy 1 Class units were up 1.14%, Legacy 2 Class units were up 1.12%, Global 1 Class units were up 1.19%, Global 2 Class units were up 1.17% and Global 3 Class units were up 1.04%. Fixed income performance was driven by positions in Italian government bonds, German bunds and eurodollars. Positive equity performance was driven by positions in the S&P 500, Nasdaq 100, FTSE, Dow and Euro Stoxx indices. In the metals sector, positive performance in gold and palladium positions was slightly offset by negative performance in lead, nickel and copper. Performance in the energy sector was positive, led by positions in crude oil and natural gas. Positions in heating oil and Brent oil offset some positive performance. The currencies sector performance was negative, led by losses in the euro, Canadian, U.S., New Zealand and Australian dollars. Performance in the agriculturals sector was slightly negative, led by losses in coffee, sugar and soybeans.

July. Grant Park recorded gains during the month. Class A units were up 2.39%, Class B units were up 2.34%, Legacy 1 Class units were up 2.64%, Legacy 2 Class units were up 2.56%, Global 1 Class units were up 2.64%, Global 2 Class units were up 2.61% and Global 3 Class units were up 2.47%. Overall Grant Park performance was positive, led by gains in the currencies, fixed income, equities and grains/foods sectors. Performance in the energies and metals sectors was negative. Positive currency performance was led by positions in the British pound, U.S. dollar and Australian dollar. Fixed income performance was driven by positions in Italian government bonds, German bunds and short sterling. Positions in eurodollars offset some of the positive performance. Positive equity performance was driven by positions in the All Ordinaries, S&P 500, Nasdaq 100 and FTSE indices. Losses in the Hang Seng, Dax and MSCI EM indices offset some of the gains. In the grains/foods sector, positive performance was led by positions in soybeans and cotton. The energies sector performance was negative, led by losses in natural gas, heating oil, gasoline blendstock and brent oil. Performance in the metals sector was negative, as positive performance from gold positions was offset by losses from positions in nickel, lead, aluminum and copper.

August. Grant Park recorded gains during the month. Class A units were up 1.95%, Class B units were up 1.89%, Legacy 1 Class units were up 2.14%, Legacy 2 Class units were up 2.12%, Global 1 Class units were up 2.18%, Global 2 Class units were up 2.16% and Global 3 Class units were up 2.02%. Overall Grant Park performance was positive, led by gains in the fixed income, metals, grains, foods and energies sectors. Performance in the equities and currencies sectors was negative. Positive fixed income performance was driven by positions in the German bund, U.S. treasury bonds, Italian government bonds, and French government bonds. The metals sector performance was led by positions in gold and nickel. In the grains/foods sector, positive performance was driven by positions in cotton, sugar, live cattle and coffee. Energies sector performance was slightly positive as gains from positions in heating oil, brent oil and gas oil were largely offset by losses in crude oil and gasoline blendstock positions. The equities sector performance was negative, led by positions in the FTSE, Nasdaq and the S&P 500 indices. Performance in the currencies sector was negative, led by losses in the Mexican peso and the Russian ruble.

36

September. Grant Park recorded losses during the month. Class A units were down 1.44%, Class B units were down 1.49%, Legacy 1 Class units were down 1.30%, Legacy 2 Class units were down 1.28%, Global 1 Class units were down 1.21%, Global 2 Class units were down 1.23% and Global 3 Class units were down 1.37%. Overall Grant Park performance was negative for the month. The fixed income, agriculturals/softs/meats, metals and energies sectors contributed to losses while gains in the equities and currencies sectors partially offset trading losses. Negative fixed income performance was driven by positions in the German Bund, U.S. Treasury Bonds and Euro-OAT futures. Negative performance in agriculturals/softs/meats was driven by positions in cocoa, cotton, soybean meal, wheat and coffee. The metals sector negative performance was led by positions in gold and zinc; small gains from positions in palladium reduced negative performance. The energies sector negative performance was led by positions in gas oil, heating oil and natural gas. The equities sector performance was positive, led by positions in the FTSE, Euro Stoxx and S&P 500 indices. Performance in the currencies sector was positive, led by gains in foreign exchange positions in the U.S. dollar against the euro and Japanese yen and in euro positions.

October. Grant Park recorded losses during the month. Class A units were down 1.59%, Class B units were down 1.64%, Legacy 1 Class units were down 1.41%, Legacy 2 Class units were down 1.42%, Global 1 Class units were down 1.37%, Global 2 Class units were down 1.38% and Global 3 Class units were down 1.53%. Overall Grant Park performance was negative, led by losses in the fixed income, currencies, agriculturals. Gains in the equities, metals and energies sectors partially offset trading losses. Negative fixed income performance was driven by positions in the German bund, Euro OAT futures and short sterling. Negative performance in currencies was driven by positions in the British pound, euro, Australian dollar, and Brazilian real. Gains from positions in the Mexican peso partially offset sector losses. The negative performance in agriculturals was led by positions in soybeans, soybean meal and coffee. The equities sector performance was positive, led by positions in the Nikkei, EMINI MSCI EM and the OMX 30 indices. Losses from positions in the FTSE index offset some of the gains. Performance in the metals sector was positive and led by positions in gold, palladium and silver. Positive energies performance was driven by positions in gas oil and heating oil.

November. Grant Park recorded losses during the month. Class A units were down 0.24%, Class B units were down 0.30%, Legacy 1 Class units were down 0.06%, Legacy 2 Class units were down 0.08%, Global 1 Class units were down 0.01%, Global 2 Class units were down 0.03% and Global 3 Class units were down 0.18%. Overall Grant Park performance was negative, led by losses in the metals, fixed income and agriculturals sectors. Gains in the currencies, equities and energies sectors partially offset trading losses. Negative performance in metals was primarily driven by positions in gold; in fixed income, by positions in the German bund and U.S. government debt; and in agriculturals, by positions in soybeans, coffee and sugar. Performance in the currencies sector was positive and led by positions in FX USD/EUR, euro, FX US/JY, Japanese yen, Brazilian real and Australian dollar. The equities sector performance was positive, led by positions in the FTSE, Nikkei, ALL ORD, Nasdaq and S&P indices. Positive performance in the energies performance was driven by positions in natural gas, brent oil and crude oil.

December. Grant Park recorded gains during the month. Class A units were up 0.93%, Class B units were up 0.88%, Legacy 1 Class units were up 1.12%, Legacy 2 Class units were up 1.10%, Global 1 Class units were up 1.16%, Global 2 Class units were up 1.14% and Global 3 Class units were up 1.00%. Overall Grant Park performance was positive, led by gains in the equities, metals, energies and agriculturals sectors. Losses in the fixed income and currencies sectors partially offset trading profits. Positive performance in equities was driven by positions in the FTSE, MSCI EM, Nasdaq and Hang Seng indices. Performance in metals was driven by positions in gold and platinum. Gains in energies were led by positions in brent oil and crude oil. Losses in heating oil and gas oil positions offset some of the gains. Performance in agriculturals was slightly positive, as gains in positions in wheat, cotton and soybean oil were mostly offset by losses in soybean meal, soybeans and cocoa. Negative performance in the fixed income sector was driven by positions in the Bund, U.S. Treasury Bond and Euro OAT Futures. Performance in the currencies sector was negative and led by positions in foreign exchange of the U.S. dollar against the euro, euro and the Australian dollar.

For the year ended December 31, 2019, Grant Park had a positive return of 4.9% for the Class A units, a positive return of 4.2% for the Class B units, a positive return of 7.2% for the Legacy 1 Class units, a positive return of 6.9% for the Legacy 2 Class units, a positive return of 7.7% for the Global 1 Class units, a positive return of 7.5% for the Global 2 Class units, and a positive return of 5.7% for the Global 3 Class units. On a combined basis prior to expenses, Grant Park had trading gains of approximately 10.2%, which were increased by gains of approximately 1.7% from swap transactions and increased by approximately 1.8% from interest and dividend income. These trading gains were

37

decreased by approximately 8.5% in combined total brokerage fees, performance fees and operating and offering costs borne by Grant Park. An analysis of the 10.2% trading gains by sector, excluding the swap transactions and securities, is as follows:

​

Capital Resources

Due to the nature of Grant Park’s business, it does not make any capital expenditures and does not have any capital assets that are not operating capital or assets.

Grant Park maintains 65% to 95% of its net asset value in cash, cash equivalents or other liquid positions over and above that needed to post as collateral for trading. These funds are available to meet redemptions each month.

Liquidity

Most U.S. futures exchanges limit fluctuations in some futures and options contract prices during a single day by regulations referred to as daily price fluctuation limits or daily limits. During a single trading day, no trades may be executed at prices beyond the daily limit. Once the price of a contract has reached the daily limit for that day, positions in that contract can neither be taken nor liquidated. Futures prices have occasionally moved to the daily limit for several consecutive days with little or no trading. Similar occurrences could prevent Grant Park from promptly liquidating unfavorable positions and subject Grant Park to substantial losses that could exceed the margin initially committed to those trades. In addition, even if futures or options prices do not move to the daily limit, Grant Park may not be able to execute trades at favorable prices, if little trading in the contracts is taking place. Other than these limitations on liquidity, which are inherent in Grant Park’s futures and options trading operations, Grant Park’s assets are expected to be highly liquid.

A portion of each Trading Company’s assets is used as margin to support its trading. Margin requirements are satisfied by the deposit of U.S. Treasury bills and/or cash with brokers subject to CFTC regulations and various exchange and broker requirements.

commodity interest contracts and is therefore a party to financial instruments with elements of off-balance sheet market and credit risk. In entering into these contracts, Grant Park faces the market risk that these contracts may be significantly influenced by market conditions, such as interest rate volatility, resulting in such contracts being less valuable. If the markets should move against all of the commodity interest positions of Grant Park at the same time, and if Grant Park were unable to offset positions, Grant Park could lose all of its assets and the limited partners would realize a 100% loss. Grant Park minimizes market risk through real-time monitoring of open positions, diversification of the portfolio and maintenance of a margin-to-equity ratio that rarely exceeds 25%. All positions of Grant Park are valued each day on a mark-to-market basis.

In addition to market risk, when entering into commodity interest contracts there is a credit risk that a counterparty will not be able to meet its obligations to Grant Park. The counterparty for futures and options on futures contracts traded in the United States and on most non-U.S. futures exchanges is the clearing organization associated with such exchange. In general, clearing organizations are backed by the corporate members of the clearing organization who are required to share any financial burden resulting from the nonperformance by one of their members and, as such, should significantly reduce this credit risk.

In cases where the clearing organization is not backed by the clearing members, like some non- U.S. exchanges, it is normally backed by a consortium of banks or other financial institutions.

In the case of forward contracts, over-the-counter options contracts or swap contracts, which are traded on the interbank or other institutional market rather than on exchanges, the counterparty is generally a single bank or other financial institution, rather than a central clearing organization backed by a group of financial institutions. As a result, there likely will be greater counterparty credit risk in these transactions. Grant Park trades only with those counterparties that it believes to be creditworthy. Nonetheless, the clearing member, clearing organization or other counterparty to these transactions may not be able to meet its obligations to Grant Park, in which case Grant Park could suffer significant losses on these contracts.

In the normal course of business, Grant Park enters into contracts and agreements that contain a variety of representations and warranties and which provide general indemnifications. Grant Park’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown, as this would involve future claims that may be made against Grant Park that have not yet occurred. Grant Park expects the risk of any future obligation under these indemnifications to be remote.

Contractual Obligations

None.

​

Introduction

Grant Park is a speculative commodity pool. The market sensitive instruments held by it are acquired for speculative trading purposes, and all or a substantial amount of Grant Park’s assets are subject to the risk of trading loss. Unlike an operating company, the risk of market sensitive instruments is integral, not incidental, to Grant Park’s business.

realized may result in unprofitable transactions. Grant Park’s past performance is not necessarily indicative of its future results.

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, and multiplier features of Grant Park’s market sensitive instruments.

The following quantitative and qualitative disclosures regarding Grant Park’s 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 of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934). All quantitative and qualitative disclosures in this section are deemed to be forward-looking statements, except for statements of historical fact and descriptions of how Grant Park manages its risk exposure. Grant Park’s primary market risk exposures, as well as the strategies used and to be used by its trading advisors for managing such exposures, are subject to numerous uncertainties, contingencies and risks, any one of which could cause the actual results of Grant Park’s risk controls 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 risk management strategies of Grant Park. Grant Park’s current market exposure and/or risk management strategies may not be effective in either the short-or long-term and may change materially.

Quantitative Market Risk

Trading Risk

Grant Park’s approximate risk exposure in the various market sectors traded by its trading advisors is quantified below in terms of Value at Risk (VaR). Due to Grant Park’s mark-to-market accounting, any loss in the fair value of Grant Park’s open positions is directly reflected in Grant Park’s earnings, realized or unrealized.

Grant Park uses an Aggregate Returns Volatility method to calculate VaR for the portfolio. The method consists of creating a historical price time series for each instrument or its proxy instrument for the past 200 days, and then measuring the standard deviation of that return history. Then, using a normal distribution (a normal distribution curve has a mean of zero and a standard deviation of one), the standard deviation measurement is scaled up in order to achieve a result in line with the 95% degree of confidence, which corresponds to a scaling factor of approximately 1.645 times of standard deviations.

The VaR for each market sector represents the one day risk of loss for the aggregate exposures associated with that sector. The current methodology used to calculate VaR represents the VaR of Grant Park’s open positions across all market sectors and is less than the sum of the VaR of the individual market sectors due to the diversification benefit across all market sectors combined.

Grant Park’s VaR methodology and computation is based on the underlying risk of each contract or instrument in the portfolio and does not distinguish between exchange and non-exchange traded contracts. It is also not based on exchange maintenance margin requirements. VaR does not typically represent the worst case outcome.

The composition of Grant Park’s trading portfolio, based on the nature of its business of speculative trading of futures, forwards and options, can change significantly, over any period of time, including a single day of trading. These changes can have a positive or negative material impact on the market risk as measured by VaR.

Value at Risk by Market Sectors

The following tables indicate the trading value at risk associated with Grant Park’s open positions by market category as of December 31, 20202021 and 20192020 and the trading gains/losses by market category for the years ended December 31, 20202021 and 2019.2020. All open position trading risk exposures of Grant Park, except for the swap transactions, have been included in calculating the figures set forth below. As of December 31, 2021, Grant Park’s net asset value was approximately $40.6 million. As of December 31, 2020, Grant Park’s net asset value was approximately $45.2 million. As of December 31, 2019, Grant Park’s net asset value was approximately $63.2 million.

​

* The VaR for a market sector represents the one day risk of loss for the aggregate exposure for that particular sector. The aggregate VaR represents the VaR of Grant Park’s open positions across all market sectors excluding the swap transaction and is less than the sum of the VaR of the individual market sectors due to the diversification benefit across all market sectors combined.

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

Past market risk factors will not always result in an accurate prediction of future distributions and correlations of future market movements. Changes in the portfolio value caused by market movements may differ from those

Non-Trading Risk

Grant Park has non-trading market risk on its foreign cash balances not needed for margin. However, these balances, as well as the market risk they represent, are immaterial. Grant Park also has non-trading market risk as a result of investing a portion of its available assets in U.S. Treasury bills. The market risk represented by these investments is also immaterial.

Qualitative Market Risk

Trading Risk

The following were the primary trading risk exposures of Grant Park as of December 31, 2020,2021, by market sector.

Agriculturals/Softs/Meats

Grant Park’s primary commodities risk exposure is driven by agricultural price movements, which are often directly affected by severe or unexpected weather conditions, as well as other factors.

Currencies

Exchange rate risk is a significant market exposure of Grant Park. Grant Park’s currency exposure is due 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. Grant Park trades in a large number of currencies, including cross-rates, which are positions between two currencies other than the U.S. dollar. The general partner anticipates that the currency sector will remain one of the primary market exposures for Grant Park for the foreseeable future.

Energy

Grant Park’s primary energy market risk exposure is due to price movements in the gas and oil markets, which often result from political developments in the Middle East, Nigeria, Russia, and South America. Energy prices can be volatile and substantial profits and losses have been and are expected to continue to be experienced in these markets.

Interest Rates

Interest rate risk is a principal market exposure of Grant Park. Interest rate movements directly affect the price of the futures positions held by Grant Park and indirectly affect the value of its stock index and currency positions. Interest rate movements in one country, as well as relative interest rate movements between countries, could materially impact Grant Park’s profitability. Grant Park’s primary interest rate exposure is due to interest rate fluctuations in the United States and the other G-7 countries. Grant Park also takes futures positions on the government debt of smaller nations, such as Australia and New Zealand. The general partner anticipates that G-7 interest rates will remain the primary market exposure of Grant Park for the foreseeable future.

Metals

Grant Park’s metals market risk exposure is due to fluctuations in the price of both precious metals, including gold and silver, and on base metals, including aluminum, lead, copper, tin, nickel, palladium and zinc.

Non-Trading Risk Exposure

The following were the only non-trading risk exposures of Grant Park as of December 31, 2020.2021.

Foreign Currency Balances

Grant Park’s primary foreign currency balances are in Japanese yen, British pounds, euros, Australian dollars, Canadian dollars and Swiss francs. The trading advisors regularly convert foreign currency balances to U.S. dollars in an attempt to control Grant Park’s non-trading risk.

Managing Risk Exposure

The general partner monitors and controls Grant Park’s 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 Grant Park is subject.

The general partner monitors Grant Park’s performance and the concentration of its open positions and consults with the trading advisors concerning Grant Park’s overall risk profile. If the general partner felt it necessary to do so, the general partner could require the trading advisors to close out individual positions as well as enter positions traded on behalf of Grant Park. However, any intervention would be a highly unusual event. Approximately 10% to 20% of Grant Park’s assets are deposited with over-the-counter counterparties in order to initiate and maintain forward and swap contracts. The general partner primarily relies on the trading advisors’ own risk control policies while maintaining a general supervisory overview of Grant Park’s market risk exposures. The trading advisors apply their own risk management policies to their trading. The trading advisors often follow diversification guidelines, margin limits and stop loss points to exit a position. The trading 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 the trading advisors to discuss their risk management and to look for any material changes to the trading advisors’ portfolio balance and trading techniques. The trading advisors are required to notify the general partner of any material changes to their programs.

General

From time to time, certain regulatory or self-regulatory organizations have proposed increased margin requirements on futures contracts. Because Grant Park generally will use a small percentage of assets as margin, Grant Park does not believe that any increase in margin requirements, as proposed, will have a material effect on Grant Park’s operations.

Financial statements meeting the requirements of Regulation S-X appear beginning on page F-1 of this report. The supplementary financial information specified by Item 302 of Regulation S-K is included in this report under the heading “Selected Financial Data” above.

None.

principal financial officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of Grant Park’s disclosure controls and procedures as contemplated by Rule 13a-15 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Based on, and as of the date of that evaluation, the general partner’s principal executive officer and principal financial officer concluded that Grant Park’s disclosure controls and procedures are effective, in all material respects, in timely alerting them to material information relating to Grant Park required to be included in the reports required to be filed or submitted by Grant Park with the SEC under the Exchange Act.

Report on Management’s Assessment of Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

The general partner, on behalf of Grant Park, is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as such term is defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a- 15(f) and 15d-15(f) to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and includes those policies and procedures that:

Under the supervision and with the participation of the general partner’s management, including its principal executive officer and principal financial officer, we conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of Grant Park’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 20202021 based on the framework in Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) in 2013. Based on that evaluation, the general partner concluded that Grant Park’s internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2020.2021.

Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting

There were no changes in Grant Park’s internal control over financial reporting during the quarter ended December 31, 20202021 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, Grant Park’s internal control over financial reporting.

None.

Not Applicable.

PART III

Grant Park has no directors or executive officers and also does not have any employees. Grant Park is managed solely by Dearborn Capital Management, L.L.C. in its capacity as general partner.

became president, a principal and an associated person of Dearborn Capital Brokers Ltd., an independent introducing broker. From 1983 to 2003, Mr. Kavanagh was a member in good standing of the Chicago Board of Trade. Between 1983 and October 1998, Mr. Kavanagh served as an institutional salesman in the financial futures area on behalf of Refco and Conti Commodity Services, Inc., which was acquired by Refco in 1984. His clients included large hedge funds and financial institutions. Between October 1998 and October 2011, Mr. Kavanagh performed introducing brokerage services from time to time for MF Global Inc., a former futures commission merchant, through Dearborn Capital Brokers. He has also been an owner since May 2012 of a greater than 10% interest in an unregistered proprietary trading firm and has provided occasional consulting services to this firm since May 2012. Neither Dearborn Capital Brokers nor Mr. Kavanagh provides brokerage services to Grant Park’s trading account. In the past, from time to time Mr. Kavanagh has provided brokerage services to Financial Consortium International LLC, a registered introducing broker, commodity pool operator and broker-dealer, since October 1999. In 1980, Mr. Kavanagh received an MBA from the University of Notre Dame, and in 1978 graduated with a B.S. in business administration from John Carroll University.

Mr. Meehan, chief operating officer of the general partner, 65,66, is primarily responsible for the day to day operations of the general partner. Mr. Meehan became listed as a principal of the general partner effective January 2009. Prior to joining the general partner in April 2008, Mr. Meehan was a member of the senior executive team at Houghton Mifflin Company in Boston, MA, beginning in March 1999. His assignments focused on leading technology and operational organizations and included a three year assignment as the President of the business unit that was the largest provider of professional testing and licensure services to state regulatory agencies in the United States. He also served as the Chief Information/Technology Officer of the company for three years, responsible for directing an annual technology portfolio in excess of $100 million. Mr. Meehan began his career as a commissioned officer in the United States Marine Corps, retiring after 20 years in the grade of Lieutenant Colonel. He received B.A. degree from John Carroll University, an MBA from Webster University and holds Series 3, 22, 31, and 63 licenses.

Ms. O’Rourke, chief financial officer of the general partner, 55,56, is responsible for financial reporting and compliance issues. Prior to joining the general partner in May 2003, Ms. O’Rourke was employed as assistant vice president at MetLife Investors Life Insurance Company from 1992 to September 2001. Before that, Ms. O’Rourke was employed as a tax senior at KPMG LLP (formerly KPMG Peat Marwick LLP) from 1987 to 1991. Ms. O’Rourke is a certified public accountant. She received a B.B.A. in accounting from the University of Notre Dame in 1987 and received a M.S. in Taxation from DePaul University in 1996.

Code of Ethics

Grant Park has not adopted a code of ethics because it does not have any officers or employees. The general partner of Grant Park has adopted a Code of Ethics for all employees.

Delinquent Section 16(a) Reports

Section 16 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, requires an issuer’s directors and certain executive officers and certain other beneficial owners of the issuer’s equity securities to periodically file notices of changes in their beneficial ownership with the SEC. Grant Park does not have any directors or officers. However, the officers of Grant Park’s general partner, as well as the general partner itself, file such notices regarding their beneficial ownership in Grant Park, if any. Grant Park believes that for 2020,2021, all required filings were timely filed by each of these persons.

assets. Legacy 2 Class units pay the general partner a monthly brokerage charge equal to a rate of 0.3958%, a rate of 4.75% annually, of Legacy 2’s month-end net assets. Global 1 Class units pay the general partner a monthly brokerage charge equal to a rate of 0.3292%, a rate of 3.95% annually, of Global 2’s month-end net assets. Global 2 units pay the general partner a monthly brokerage charge equal to a rate of 0.3500%, a rate of 4.20% annually, of Global 2’s month-end net assets. Global 3 Class units pay the general partner a monthly brokerage charge equal to a rate of 0.4958%, a rate of 5.95% annually, of Global 3’s month-end net assets. The brokerage charge reimbursement paid to the general partner amounted to $2,763,989 for the year ended December 31, 2021 and $3,042,636 for the year ended December 31, 2020 and $4,278,902 for the year ended December 31, 2019.2020.

The general partner pays from the brokerage charge all clearing, execution and give-up, floor brokerage, exchange and NFA fees, any other transaction costs, selling agent compensation and consulting fees to the trading advisors. The payments to the clearing brokers are based upon a specified amount per round-turn for each commodity interest transaction executed on behalf of Grant Park. The amounts paid to selling agents, trading advisors or others may be based upon a specified percentage of Grant Park’s net asset value or round-turn transactions. A round-turn is both the purchase, or sale, of a commodity interest contract and the subsequent offsetting sale, or purchase, of the contract. The balance of the brokerage charge not paid out to other parties is retained by the general partner as payment for its services to Grant Park.

Grant Park pays the general partner the brokerage charge, which is based on a fixed percentage of net assets, regardless of whether actual transaction costs were less than or exceeded this fixed percentage or whether the number of trades significantly increases.

The clearing brokers are also paid by the general partner, out of its brokerage charge, an average of between approximately $5.00 and $10.00 per round turn transaction entered into by Grant Park. This round turn commission includes all clearing, exchange and NFA fees.

The Guidelines for the Registration of Commodity Pool Programs developed by the North American Securities Administrators Association, Inc., or NASAA Guidelines, require that the brokerage charge payable by Grant Park will not be greater than (1) 80% of the published retail commission rate plus pit brokerage fees, or (2) 14% annually of Grant Park’s average net assets, including pit brokerage fees. Net assets for purposes of this limitation exclude assets not directly related to trading activity, if any. The general partner intends to operate Grant Park so as to comply with these limitations.

Additionally, all expenses incurred in connection with the organization and the initial and ongoing public offering of Grant Park interests are paid by the general partner and are reimbursed to the general partner by Grant Park. Class A units bear organization and offering expenses at a monthly rate of 0.0083%, a rate of 0.10% annually, of the adjusted net assets of the Class A units, calculated and payable monthly on the basis of month-end adjusted net assets. Legacy 1 Class, Legacy 2 Class, Global 1 Class, Global 2 Class, Global 3 Class and, Class B units bear these expenses at a monthly rate of 0.025%, a rate of 0.30% annually, of the adjusted net assets of the Legacy 1 Class, Legacy 2 Class, Global 1 Class, Global 2 Class, Global 3 Class and Class B units, respectively, calculated and payable monthly on the basis of month-end adjusted net assets.

In no event, however, will the reimbursement from Grant Park to the general partner exceed 1.0% per annum of the average month-end net assets of Grant Park. The general partner has the discretion to change the amounts assessed to each class for organization and offering expenses, provided the amounts do not exceed the limits set forth in the limited partnership agreement. In its discretion, the general partner may require Grant Park to reimburse the general partner in

Operating expenses of Grant Park are paid for by the general partner and reimbursed by Grant Park. Each of the Class A, Class B, Legacy 1, Legacy 2, Global 1, Global 2 and Global 3 units bear monthly operating expenses at a rate of 0.02083%, a rate of 0.25% annually, of the average month-end net assets of each respective Class. This reimbursement is made monthly.

​

Grant Park has no officers or directors. Its affairs are managed by its general partner, Dearborn Capital Management, L.L.C. Set forth in the table below is information regarding the beneficial ownership of the general partner and the officers of the general partner in Grant Park as of January 31, 2021.2022.