UNITED STATES


SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Washington, D.C. 20549


FORM 10-K





x           ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934


For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010 or





o           TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934


For the transition period from __________________to__________________





Commission file number: 0-25603





MANAGED FUTURES CHARTER GRAHAM L.P.(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)





Delaware

13-4018068State or other jurisdiction of

incorporation or organization

(I.R.S. Employer

Identification No.)Ceres Managed Futures LLC522 Fifth Avenue, 14th FloorNew York, NY

10036(Address of principal executive offices)

(Zip Code)





Registrant’s telephone number, including area code

(212) 296-1999Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:Title of each class

Name of each exchangeon which registeredNone

None


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


Units of Limited Partnership Interest


(Title of Class)





Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.   Yes o No x





Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.   Yes o No x





Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes x No o





Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Registration S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files)    Yes o  No o





Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§229.404 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.  x





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





Large accelerated filer o
Accelerated filer oNon-accelerated filer x
Smaller reporting company o





Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).  Yes 0  No T





State the aggregate market value of the Units of Limited Partnership Interest held by non-affiliates of the registrant.  The aggregate market value shall be computed by reference to the price at which Units were sold as of the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter: $345,540,777 at June 30, 2010.





DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE


(See Page 1)










MANAGED FUTURES CHARTER GRAHAM L.P.


(formerly, Morgan Stanley Smith Barney Charter Graham L.P.)


INDEX TO ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K


December 31, 2010








DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
.....................................................................
1





Part I.Item 1.
Business
2-5Item 1A.
Risk Factors
5-21Item 1B.
Unresolved Staff Comments
21Item 2.
Properties
21Item 3.
Legal Proceedings
22Item 4.
(Removed and Reserved)
22Part II.Item 5.
Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters  and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
23Item 6.
Selected Financial Data
24Item 7.
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
25-45Item 7A.
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
45-55Item 8.
Financial Statements and Supplementary Data
56Item 9.
Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure
57Item 9A.
Controls and Procedures
57-59Item 9B.
Other Information
59Part III.Item 10.
Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance
60-68Item 11.
Executive Compensation
69Item 12.
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters
69Item 13.
Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence
69Item 14.
Principal Accountant Fees and Services
70Part IV.Item 15.
Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules
71











DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE








Portions of the following documents are incorporated by reference as follows:











Documents Incorporated                                                                                                                  Part of Form 10-K





Partnership’s Private Placement Memorandum (“PPM”)


Dated September 1, 2010                                                                                                                             I





Annual Report to Managed Futures Charter Graham L.P.


Limited Partners for the year ended December 31, 2010                                                                 II, III, and IV































































































- 1 -





PART I





Item 1.  BUSINESS





(a)  General Development of Business.  Managed Futures Charter Graham L.P., formerly Morgan Stanley Smith Barney Charter Graham L.P. (“Charter Graham” or the “Partnership”), was formed on July 15, 1998, under the Delaware Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act to engage primarily in the speculative trading of futures contracts, options on futures and forward contracts, and forward contracts on physical commodities and other commodity interests, including, but not limited to, foreign currencies, financial instruments, metals, energy, and agricultural products (collectively, “Futures Interests”).  The Partnership commenced trading operations on March 1, 1999.  Prior to August 23, 2010, the Partnership was one of the Morgan Stanley Smith Barney Charter series of funds, which was comprised of the Partnership, Morgan Stanley Smith Barney Charter WNT L.P., Morgan Stanley Smith Barney Charter Aspect L.P., and Morgan Stanley Smith Barney Charter Campbell L.P.





The Partnership’s general partner is Ceres Management Futures LLC (“Ceres” or the “General Partner”).  As of May 1, 2010, the non-clearing commodity broker is Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC (“MSSB”).  The clearing commodity brokers are Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated (“MS&Co.”) and Morgan Stanley & Co. International plc (“MSIP”).  MS&Co. also acts as the counterparty on all trading of foreign currency forward contracts.  MSIP serves as the commodity broker for trades on the London Metal Exchange.  Ceres is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Morgan Stanley Smith Barney Holdings LLC (“MSSBH”).  MSSBH is majority-owned indirectly by Morgan Stanley and minority-owned indirectly by Citigroup Inc. (“Citigroup”).  MSSB is the principal subsidiary of MSSBH.  MS&Co. and MSIP are wholly-owned subsidiaries of Morgan Stanley.





- 2 -







Graham Capital Management, L.P. (“Graham” or the “Trading Advisor”) is the trading advisor to the Partnership.





Prior to December 1, 2010, the Partnership’s general partner was Demeter Management LLC (“Demeter”).  Demeter was a wholly-owned subsidiary of MSSBH.





In 2009, Morgan Stanley and Citigroup combined certain assets of the Global Wealth Management Group of MS&Co., including Demeter, and the Smith Barney division of Citigroup Global Markets Inc., into a new joint venture, MSSBH.  Since their contribution to the joint venture, Demeter and Ceres, the commodity pool operator for various legacy Citigroup sponsored commodity pools, worked closely together to align the operations and management of the commodity pools they oversee.





As a result, MSSBH, together with the unanimous support of the respective Boards of Directors of Demeter and Ceres, determined that a combination of the assets and operations of Demeter and Ceres into a single commodity pool operator, Ceres, is in the best interest of the limited partners and believes that this combination will achieve the intended benefits of the joint venture.  The effective date of the combination was December 1, 2010.





Effective August 23, 2010, Demeter changed the name of Morgan Stanley Smith Barney Charter Graham L.P. to Managed Futures Charter Graham L.P. and has made the Partnership available to new investments on a private placement basis.    The name change did not have any impact on the operation of the Partnership or its limited partners.








- 3 -







On July 28, 2010, the Partnership received a settlement award payment in the amount of $20,678 from the Natural Gas Commodity Litigation Settlement Administrator.  This settlement represents the Partnership’s portion of the 2006 Net Settlement Fund and the 2007 Net Settlement Fund.  The proceeds from settlement were accounted for in the period they were received for the benefit of the partners in the Partnership.





The Partnership began the year at a net asset value per unit of limited partnership interest (“Unit(s)”) of $28.89 and returned (0.1)% to $28.87 per Unit on December 31, 2010.  For a more detailed description of the Partnership's business, see subparagraph (c).





(b) Financial Information about Segments.  The Partnership’s business consist of only one industry segment, the speculative trading of futures, forwards and options on such contracts as disclosed in Item 1(a).  The relevant financial information is presented in Items 6 and 8.





(c)  Narrative Description of Business.  The Partnership is in the business of speculative trading of futures, forwards, and options pursuant t


o trading instructions provided by the Trading Advisor.  For a detailed description of the different facets of the Partnership's business,


see those portions of the Partnership's PPM, dated September 1, 2010 incorporated by reference in this Form 10-K, set forth below.





See Item 1(a) above for a complete descriptions of the Partnership’s business.  The information requested in Section 101(c)(i) through (xiii)


of Regulation S-K is not applicable to the Partnership.  Additionally, the Partnership does not have any employees.  The directors and


officers of the General Partner are listed in Part III Item 10. “Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance”.


- 4 -







(d)  Financial Information about Geographic Areas.


Not applicable.





(e)  Available Information.  The Partnership files an annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and all amendments to these reports with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”).  You may read and copy any document filed by the Partnership at the SEC’s Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20549. Please call the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330 for information on the Public Reference Room. The Partnership does not maintain an internet website, however, the Partnership’s SEC filings are available to the public from the EDGAR database on the SEC’s website at “http://www.sec.gov”.  The Partnership’s CIK number is 0001066656.


Item 1A.  RISK FACTORS


This section includes some of the principal risks that investors will face with an investment in the Partnership.




THE UNITS IN THE PARTNERSHIP ARE SPECULATIVE AND INVOLVE A HIGH DEGREE OF RISK.  THEY ARE SUITABLE ONLY FOR PERSONS WHO CAN AFFORD TO LOSE THEIR ENTIRE INVESTMENT.




Risks Relating to the Partnership and the Offering of Units




You Should Not Rely on Past Performance of the General Partner or Graham In Deciding To Purchase Units.The past investment performance of other entities managed by the General Partner and Graham is not necessarily indicative of the Partnership’s future results.  No









- 5 -









assurance can be given that the General Partner will succeed in meeting the investment objectives of the Partnership.  You may lose all or substantially all of your investment in the Partnership.




The General Partner believes that past performance of Graham may be of interest to prospective investors, but encourages you to look at such information as an example of the respective objectives of the Partnership rather than as any indication that the Partnership’s objectives will, in fact, be achieved.




The Partnership Incurs Substantial Charges.  The Partnership must pay substantial charges, and must generate profits and interest income which exceed its fixed costs in order to avoid depletion of its assets.  The Partnership is required to pay brokerage commissions and monthly management fees to Graham regardless of its performance.  In addition, the Partnership pays Graham an incentive fee of 20% of Trading Profits, if any.




Incentive Fees may be Paid by the Partnership Even if the Partnership Sustains Trading Losses.  The Partnership pays Graham an incentive fee based upon the trading profits it generates.  These trading profits include unrealized appreciation on open positions.  Accordingly, it is possible that the Partnership will pay an incentive fee on trading profits that do not become realized.  Also, Graham will retain all incentive fees paid to it, even if it incurs a subsequent loss after payment of an incentive fee.  Due to the fact that incentive fees are paid monthly, it is possible that an incentive fee may be paid to Graham during a year in which the assets suffer a loss for the year.  Because Graham receives an incentive fee based on the trading profits, Graham may have an incentive to









- 6 -









make investments that are riskier than would be the case in the absence of such an incentive fee being paid to Graham based on trading profits.




Restricted Investment Liquidity in the Units.  There is no secondary market for the Units, and you may not redeem your Units other than as of the last business day of each month.  Your right to receive payment for a redemption of some or all of your Units is dependent upon (a) the Partnership having sufficient assets to pay its liabilities on the redemption date, and (b) the General Partner’s receipt of your request for redemption in the form provided by the General Partner no later than 3:00 p.m., New York City time, on the third business day before the end of the month, although the General Partner may accept requests for redemption at other times in its sole discretion.  The General Partner will not permit a transfer, sale, pledge or assignment of Units unless it is satisfied that the transfer, sale, pledge or assignment would not be in violation of Delaware law or applicable federal, state, or foreign securities laws and notwithstanding any transfer, sale, pledge or assignment, the Partnership will continue to be classified as a partnership rather than as an association taxable as a corporation under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”).  No transfer, sale, pledge or assignment of Units will be effective or recognized by the Partnership if the transfer, sale, pledge or assignment would result in the termination of the Partnership for federal income tax purposes.  Any attempt to transfer, sell, pledge or assign Units in violation of the Partnership Agreement will be ineffective.




General Partner Redemptions.The General Partner has a right to redeem all or part of its investment in the Partnership at any time without notice to the limited partners.  For any such redemption, the General Partner will redeem its Units at the end of the month in the same manner as









- 7 -









any limited partner would follow to redeem Units.  Additionally, the General Partner has the right to redeem Units it holds in the event redemptions for limited partners are suspended.




The Partnership’s Structure Has Conflicts of Interest.




·
The General Partner, the placement agent, Morgan Stanley Smith Barney, MS&Co., and MSIP are affiliates.  As a result, the fees and other compensation received by these parties and other terms relating to the operation of the Partnership and the sale of Units have not been negotiated independently.





·
“Bid-ask” spreads are incorporated in the price of all over-the-counter foreign exchange trades executed by the Partnership, and MS&Co. will benefit from such spreads as Graham executes a substantial portion of over-the-counter foreign exchange trades with MS&Co.





·
Graham, MS&Co., MSIP and the General Partner and their affiliates may trade futures, forwards and options for their own accounts, and thereby compete with the Partnership for positions.  Also, the other commodity pools managed by the General Partner and Graham may compete with the Partnership for futures, forwards, and options positions. These conflicts can result in less favorable prices on the Partnership’s transactions.




An Investment in Units may not Diversify an Overall Portfolio.  Because futures, forwards and options have historically performed independently of traditional investments in equities and









- 8 -









bonds, the General Partner believes that managed futures funds like the Partnership can diversify a traditional portfolio of equities and bonds.  However, the General Partner cannot assure you that the Partnership will perform with a significant degree of non- or low-correlation to limited partners’ other investments in the future.  You may lose your entire investment in the Partnership.




The Partnership is not a registered investment company.  The Partnership is not required to register, and is not registered, as an investment company under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “Investment Company Act”).  Accordingly, investors will not have the protections afforded by the Investment Company Act (which, among other matters, requires investment companies to have a majority of disinterested directors and regulates the relationship between the advisor and the investment company).




The Federal Reserve Board’s Regulation of Morgan Stanley Could Affect the Activities of the Partnership.  As a financial holding company (“FHC”) subject to the Bank Holding Company Act, Morgan Stanley and its subsidiaries, including the Partnership, currently are subject to the comprehensive, consolidated supervision and regulation of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (“Federal Reserve”).  A significant focus of this regulatory framework is the operation of Morgan Stanley and its subsidiaries in a safe and sound manner, with sufficient capital, earnings and liquidity that Morgan Stanley may serve as a source of financial and managerial strength to Morgan Stanley Bank, N.A., Morgan Stanley Private Trust, National Association, and Morgan Stanley Trust, National Association (“the Banks”).  These Banks must remain well capitalized and well managed if Morgan Stanley is to maintain its FHC status and continue to engage in the widest range of permissible financial activities.  In addition, the general exercise by the Federal Reserve of its regulatory, supervisory and enforcement authority with





- 9 -







respect to Morgan Stanley and certain provisions of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank Act” or the “Act”) could result in changes to Morgan Stanley’s business practices or the scope of its current lines of business, including certain limited divestitures.  Although such changes could have an impact on and consequences for Morgan Stanley, the General Partner, and the Partnership, any limited divestiture should not involve the General Partner or the Partnership.





The recent enactment of the Dodd-Frank Act will result in enhanced regulation by the Federal Reserve and, with respect to the Banks, may result in enhanced regulation by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency ("OCC").  The relevant provisions of the Act will generally take effect during 2011.  The Act will require that, in order to maintain FHC status, Morgan Stanley (as well as the Banks) be well-capitalized and well-managed, as those terms are defined by the Federal Reserve.  The Dodd-Frank Act also grants the Federal Reserve greater regulatory authority over the subsidiaries of a bank holding company.  Additionally, because it is a bank holding company with more than $50 billion in consolidated assets, Morgan Stanley is subject to enhanced supervision by and more stringent prudential standards to be established by the Federal Reserve.  The Federal Reserve is required to apply higher capital requirements to bank holding companies with more than 50 billion in consolidated assets than to other bank holding companies.








The Units are not being offered by the Banks, and as such: (1) are not Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) insured, (2) are not deposits or other obligations of the Banks, (3) are not guaranteed by the Banks, and (4) involve investment risks, including possible loss of principal.




- 10 -









Assets Held in Accounts at U.S. Banks May Not Be Fully Insured.The assets of the Partnership that are deposited with commodity brokers or their affiliates may be placed in deposit accounts at U.S. banks.  The FDIC insures deposits held at its member banks for up to $250,000 (including principal and accrued interest) for each insurable capacity (e.g., individual accounts, joint accounts, corporate accounts, etc.). If the FDIC were to become receiver of a U.S. bank holding deposit accounts that were established by a commodity broker or one of its affiliates, then it is uncertain whether the commodity broker, the affiliate involved, the Partnership, or the investor would be able to reclaim cash in the deposit accounts above $250,000.


THE UNITS ARE SPECULATIVE AND INVOLVE A HIGH DEGREE OF RISK.  THEY ARE SUITABLE ONLY FOR PERSONS WHO CAN AFFORD TO LOSE THEIR ENTIRE INVESTMENT.




Risks Relating to Futures Interests Trading and the Futures Interests Markets




Futures Interests Trading is Speculative and Volatile.  The rapid fluctuations in the market prices of futures, forwards, and options make an investment in the Partnership volatile.  Volatility is caused by, among other things: changes in supply and demand relationships; weather; agricultural, trade, fiscal, monetary and exchange control programs; domestic and foreign political and economic events and policies; and changes in interest rates.  If Graham incorrectly predicts the direction of prices in futures, forwards, and options, large losses may occur.  The Partnership’s performance will be volatile on a monthly and an annual basis.  The Partnership could lose all or substantially all of its assets.









- 11 -









The Partnership’s Futures Interests Trading is Highly Leveraged.  Graham utilizes substantial leverage on behalf of the Partnership. Trading futures, forwards, and options involves substantial leverage, which could result in immediate and substantial losses.  Due to the low margin deposits normally required in trading futures, forwards, and options (typically between 2% and 15% of the value of the contract purchased or sold), an extremely high degree of leverage is typical of a futures interests trading account.  As a result, a relatively small price movement in futures, forwards, and options may result in immediate and substantial losses to the investor.  For example, if 10% of the face value of a contract is deposited as margin for that contract, a 10% decrease in the value of the contract would cause a total loss of the margin deposit.  A decrease of more than 10% in the value of the contract would cause a loss greater than the amount of the margin deposit.




The leverage employed by Graham in its trading can vary substantially from month to month.




Options Trading can be More Volatile than Futures Trading.  The Partnership may trade options on futures.  Although successful options trading requires many of the same skills as successful futures trading, the risks are different.  Successful options trading requires a trader to assess accurately near-term market volatility because that volatility is immediately reflected in the price of outstanding options.  Correct assessment of market volatility can therefore be of much greater significance in trading options than it is in many long-term futures strategies where volatility does not have as great an effect on the price of a futures contract.




Market Illiquidity May Cause Less Favorable Trade Prices.  Although Graham generally will purchase and sell actively traded contracts where last trade price information and









- 12 -









quoted prices are readily available, the price at which a sale or purchase occurs may differ from the price expected because there may be a delay between receiving a quote and executing a trade, particularly in circumstances where a market has limited trading volume and prices are often quoted for relatively limited quantities.  In addition, most U.S. futures exchanges have established “daily price fluctuation limits” which preclude the execution of trades at prices outside of the limit, and, from time to time, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (the “CFTC”) or the exchanges may suspend trading in market disruption circumstances.  In these cases it is possible that the Partnership could be required to maintain a losing position that it otherwise would execute and incur significant losses or be unable to establish a position and miss a profit opportunity.




Trading on Foreign Exchanges Presents Greater Risks to the Partnership than Trading on U.S. Exchanges.  The Partnership trades on exchanges located outside the United States. Trading on U.S. exchanges is subject to CFTC regulation and oversight, including, for example, minimum capital requirements for commodity brokers, segregation of customer funds, regulation of trading practices on the exchanges, prohibitions against trading ahead of customer orders, prohibitions against filling orders off exchanges, prescribed risk disclosure statements, testing and licensing of industry sales personnel and other industry professionals, and recordkeeping requirements.  Trading on foreign exchanges is not regulated by the CFTC or any other U.S. governmental agency or instrumentality and may be subject to regulations that are different from those to which U.S. exchange trading is subject, may provide less protection to investors than trading on U.S. exchanges, and may be less vigorously enforced than regulations in the U.S.









- 13 -









The percentage of the Partnership’s positions which are traded on foreign exchanges can vary significantly from month to month.




Positions on foreign exchanges also are subject to the risk of, among other things, exchange controls, expropriation, excessive taxation or government disruptions.




The Partnership may incur losses when determining the value of its foreign positions in U.S. dollars because of fluctuations in exchange rates.




The Unregulated Nature of the Over-The-Counter (“OTC”) Markets Creates Counterparty Risks that Do Not Exist in Futures Trading on Exchanges.  Unlike futures contracts, over-the-counter “spot” and forward contracts are entered into between private parties off an exchange and are not regulated by the CFTC or by any other U.S. or foreign governmental agency.  Due to the fact that such contracts are not traded on an exchange, the performance of those contracts is not guaranteed by an exchange or its clearinghouse and the Partnership is at risk with respect to the ability of the counterparty to perform on the contract, including the creditworthiness of the counterparty.  Trading in the over-the-counter foreign exchange markets is not regulated; therefore, there are no specific standards or regulatory supervision of trade pricing and other trading activities that occur in those markets.  The Partnership trades such contracts with MS&Co. and is at risk with respect to the creditworthiness and trading practices of each of MS&Co. as the counterparty to the contracts.




The Dodd-Frank Act will affect the manner in which OTC swap transactions are traded and the credit risk associated with such trading.  Depending upon actions taken by regulatory









- 14 -









authorities, these changes may also affect the manner of trading of OTC foreign currency transactions.  The general effective date of the derivatives portion of the Dodd-Frank Act is one year following its enactment.  Transactions that have been entered into prior to implementation of the provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act will remain in effect.   Accordingly, even after the new regulatory framework is fully implemented, the risks of OTC foreign exchange transactions will continue to be considerations with respect to transactions entered into prior to the implementation of the provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act.




The percentage of the Partnership’s positions that are expected to constitute forward currency contracts can vary substantially from month to month.




Deregistration of the Commodity Pool Operator orCommodity Trading AdvisorCould Disrupt Operations.  The General Partner is a registered commodity pool operator and Graham is a registered commodity trading advisor. If the CFTC were to terminate, suspend, revoke or not renew the registration of the General Partner, the General Partner would withdraw as General Partner of the Partnership. The limited partners would then determine whether to select a replacement general partner or to dissolve the Partnership. If the CFTC were to terminate, suspend, revoke or not renew the registration of Graham, the General Partner would terminate the advisory agreement. The General Partner could reallocate the Partnership’s assets managed by Graham to new advisor(s) or terminate the Partnership. No action is currently pending or threatened against the General Partner or Graham.












- 15 -









The Partnership is Subject to Speculative Position Limits.  The CFTC and U.S. futures exchanges have established speculative position limits (referred to as “position limits”) on the maximum position in certain Futures Interests contracts that may be held or controlled by any one person or group.  Therefore, Graham may have to reduce the size of its position in one or more futures contracts in order to avoid exceeding such position limits, which could adversely affect the profitability of the Partnership.  The CFTC or the futures exchange may amend or adjust these position limits or the interpretation of how such limits are applied, adversely affecting the profitability of the Partnership.   The Dodd-Frank Act requires the CFTC to adopt speculative position limits in certain commodities across futures markets, OTC transactions that perform a significant price discovery function and contracts traded on a foreign board of trade having direct market access from the U.S. that settle against the price of futures contracts traded on a U.S. market.  Such limits may adversely affect the profitability of the Partnership.




The Partnership has Credit Risk to the Commodity Brokers.  The Partnership has credit risk because the commodity brokers act as the futures commission merchants for futures transactions or the counterparties of OTC transactions, with respect to most of the Partnership’s assets.  As such, in the event that the commodity brokers are unable to perform, the Partnership’s assets are at risk and, in such event, investors may only recover a pro rata share of their investment in the Partnership or nothing at all.  Exchange-traded futures and futures-styled option contracts are marked-to-market on a daily basis, with variations in value credited or charged to the Partnership’s account on a daily basis.  The commodity brokers, as futures commission merchants for the Partnership’s exchange-traded contracts, are required, pursuant to CFTC regulations, to segregate from their own assets, and for the sole benefit of their commodity customers, all funds held by them




- 16 -









with respect to exchange-traded futures and futures-styled options contracts, including an amount equal to the net unrealized gain on all open futures and futures-styled options contracts.  With respect to the Partnership’s over-the-counter foreign exchange contracts with MS&Co. prior to implementation of the Dodd-Frank Act’s provisions, there are no daily settlements of variations in value, and there is no requirement to segregate funds held with respect to such contracts.  In the event of a shortfall in segregated customer funds held by the futures commission merchant, the Partnership’s assets on account with the futures commission merchant may be at risk, and in such event, the Partnership may only recover a pro rata share of the available customer funds.




Risks Relating to Graham




You should not rely on the past performance of Graham in deciding to purchase Units.  Since the future performance of Graham is unpredictable, Graham’s past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results.




Reliance on Graham to Trade Successfully.  Graham is responsible for making all futures, forwards, and options trading decisions on behalf of the Partnership.  The General Partner has no control over the specific trades Graham may make, leverage used, risks and/or concentrations assumed or whether Graham will act in accordance with the disclosure documents or descriptive materials furnished by them to the General Partner.  The General Partner can provide no assurance that the trading programs employed by Graham will be successful.














- 17 -









Market Factors may Adversely Influence the Trading Programs.  Often, the most unprofitable market conditions for the Partnership are those in which prices “whipsaw,” that is,




such price moves quickly upward (or downward), then reverses, then moves upward (or downward) again, then reverses again.  In such conditions, Graham may establish positions based on incorrectly identifying both the brief upward or downward price movements as trends, whereas in fact no trends sufficient to generate profits develop.




You Will Not be Aware of Changes to Trading Programs.  Because of the proprietary nature of Graham’s trading programs, you generally will not be advised if adjustments are made to Graham’s trading program in order to accommodate additional assets under management or for any other reason.





Single-Advisor Funds Lack the Diversity of Multi-Advisor Funds.The Partnership is managed by a single trading advisor. Therefore, the Partnership lacks the potential benefit of trading advisor diversification available in funds that are managed by more than one trading advisor.





Increasing the Assets Managed by Graham May Adversely Affect Performance.The rates of return achieved by trading advisors may diminish as the assets under their management increase. This can occur for many reasons, including the inability of the trading advisor to execute larger position sizes at desired prices and because of the need to adjust the trading advisor’s trading program to avoid exceeding speculative position limits. These are limits established by the CFTC and the exchanges on the number of speculative futures and options contracts in a commodity that





- 18 -







one trader may own or control. You should know that Graham has not agreed to limit the amount of additional assets that it will manage.





The Partnership’s Use of an Increased Rate of Leverage Could Affect Performance.The General Partner and Graham have agreed that Graham will trade the Partnership’s assets pursuant to its K4D-15V Program , which will employ greater leverage  than certain of Graham’s other trading programs. This increased leverage could result in increased gain or loss and trading volatility, as compared to other accounts employing certain of Graham’s other trading programs.





Graham may Terminate its Advisory Agreement.  The advisory agreement with Graham automatically renews every year unless terminated by the General Partner or Graham.  In the event the advisory agreement is not renewed, the General Partner may not be able to enter into an arrangement with Graham or another trading advisor on terms substantially similar to the advisory agreement described in the Partnership’s private placement memorandum.




Disadvantages of Replacing or Switching Trading Advisors.  Graham is required to recoup previous trading losses before it can earn performance-based compensation.  However, the General Partner may elect to replace Graham if it has a “loss carry-forward.”  In that case, the Partnership would lose the “free ride” of any potential recoupment of the prior losses.  In addition, the new trading advisor(s) would earn performance-based compensation on the first dollars of investment profits.  The effect of the replacement of or the reallocation of assets away from Graham therefore could be significant.









- 19 -









Taxation Risks




You May Have Tax Liability Attributable To Your Interest in the Partnership Even If You Have Received No Distributions and Redeemed No Units and Even if the Partnership Generated a Loss.  If the Partnership has profit for a taxable year, the profit will be includible in your taxable income, whether or not cash or other property is actually distributed to you by the Partnership.  The General Partner presently does not intend to make any distributions from the Partnership.  Accordingly, it is anticipated that federal income taxes on your allocable share of the Partnership’s profits will exceed the amount of distributions to you, if any, for a taxable year, so that you must be prepared to fund any tax liability from redemptions of Units or other sources.  In addition, the Partnership may have capital losses from trading activities that cannot be deducted against the Partnership’s interest income so you may have to pay taxes on interest income even if the Partnership generates a net loss.




The Partnership’s Tax Returns Could be Audited.  The Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS”) could audit the Partnership’s federal income tax returns.  If an audit results in an adjustment to the Partnership’s tax return, limited partners in the Partnership could be required to file amended returns and pay additional tax.




You Will Recognize Short-Term Capital Gain.  Profits on futures contracts traded in regulated U.S. and some foreign exchanges, foreign currency contracts traded in the interbank market, and U.S. and some foreign exchange-traded options on commodities are generally taxed as short-term capital gain to the extent of 40% of gains with respect to section 1256 contracts and at









- 20 -









least 50% of the gain arising from a mixed straddle account and are currently taxed at a maximum marginal ordinary U.S. federal income tax rate of 35%.




The IRS Could Challenge Allocations of Recognized Gains to Limited Partners who Redeem.  The Partnership Agreement provides that recognized gains may be specially allocated for tax purposes to redeeming limited partners.  If the IRS were to successfully challenge such allocations, each remaining limited partner’s share of recognized gains would be increased.




The IRS Could Take the Position that Deductions for Certain Partnership Expenses Are Subject To Various Limitations.Non-corporate taxpayers are subject to certain limitations for deductions for “investment advisory expenses” for federal income tax and alternative minimum tax purposes.   The IRS could argue that certain Partnership expenses are investment advisory expenses.  Prospective investors should discuss with their tax advisors the tax consequences of an investment in the Partnership.




The Laws Are Subject to Change at Any Time, Including Already Enacted Changes Scheduled to Take Effect in 2011.The laws, and court and IRS interpretations thereof, are subject to change at any time, possibly with retroactive effect.




Item 1B.  UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS


Not applicable.





Item 2.  PROPERTIES


The Partnership does not own or lease any properties.  Ceres operates out of facilities operated by Morgan Stanley.  The address is 522 Fifth Avenue, 14th Floor, New York, NY 10036.





-  21 -







Item 3.  LEGAL PROCEEDINGS


None.





Item 4.  (REMOVED AND RESERVED)



























































- 22 -





PART II





Item 5.
MARKET FOR REGISTRANT'S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES








(a)   Market Information.  There is no established public trading market for Units of the Partnership.





(b)   Holders.  The number of holders of Units at December 31, 2010, was approximately 8,700.





(c)  Distributions. No distributions have been made by the Partnership since it commenced trading operations on March 1, 1999. Ceres


(Demeter, prior to December 1, 2010) has sole discretion to decide what distributions, if any, shall be made to investors in the Partnership.


Ceres currently does not intend to make any distributions of the Partnership’s profits until termination of the Partnership.





(d)  Securities Sold; Consideration. Units of the Partnership are sold to persons and entities who are accredited investors as the term is


defined in Rule 501(a) of Regulation D.





The aggregate proceeds of unregistered securities sold to the limited partners through December 31, 2010, was $16,833,556.  The


Partnership received $25,000 in consideration from the sale of Units to the General Partner.








(e)  Placement agent.  The Placement agent for the Partnership is MSSB.





(f)  Use of Proceeds.


Not applicable.


- 23 -





Item 6.  SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA (in dollars)























For the Years Ended December 31,





2010
2009
2008
2007
2006$
$
$
$
$Total Trading Resultsincluding interest income
25,671,583
34,054,406
190,864,940
84,308,915
53,330,934Net Income (Loss)
(2,535,881)
(5,250,245)
140,466,274
50,906,801
19,292,183Net Income (Loss) PerUnit (Limited & GeneralPartners)
(0.02)
(0.24)
7.11
2.56
0.86Total Assets
368,403,032
409,978,898
564,613,437
447,241,975
434,681,492Total Limited Partners’Capital
357,913,170
395,815,421
519,261,648
435,434,673
415,478,418Net Asset Value Per Unit
28.87
28.89
29.13
22.02
19.46










































































- 24 -









Item 7.
MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION  AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
 
 Liquidity.  The Partnership deposits its assets with MSSB as non-clearing commodity broker and MS&Co. and MSIP as clearing commodity brokers in separate futures, forward and options trading accounts established for the Trading Advisor.  Such assets are used as margin to engage in trading and may be used as margin solely for the Partnership’s trading.  The assets are held in either non-interest bearing bank accounts or in securities and instruments permitted by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission for investment of customer segregated or secured funds.  Since the Partnership’s sole purpose is to trade in futures, forwards and options, it is expected that the Partnership will continue to own such liquid assets for margin purposes.
 
 The Partnership’s investment in futures, forwards and options may, from time to time, be illiquid.  Most U.S. futures exchanges limit fluctuations in prices during a single day by regulations referred to as “daily price fluctuations limits” or “daily limits”.  Trades may not be executed at prices beyond the daily limit.  If the price for a particular futures or options contract has increased or decreased by an amount equal to the daily limit, positions in that futures or options contract can neither be taken nor liquidated unless traders are willing to effect trades at or within the limit.  Futures prices have occasionally moved the daily limit for several consecutive days with little or no trading.  These market conditions could prevent the Partnership from promptly liquidating its futures or options contracts and result in restrictions on redemptions.
 
 
 
 - 25 -
  
 There is no limitation on daily price moves in trading forward contracts on foreign currencies.  The markets for some world currencies have low trading volume and are illiquid, which may prevent the Partnership from trading in potentially profitable markets or prevent the Partnership from promptly liquidating unfavorable positions in such markets, subjecting it to substantial losses.  Either of these market conditions could result in restrictions on redemptions.  For the periods covered by this report, illiquidity has not materially affected the Partnership’s assets.
 
 There are no known material trends, demands, commitments, events, or uncertainties at the present time that are reasonably likely to result in the Partnership’s liquidity increasing or decreasing in any material way.
 
 Capital Resources.  The Partnership does not have, nor does it expect to have, any capital assets.  Redemptions, exchanges, and sales of Units in the future will affect the amount of funds available for investments in futures, forwards and options in subsequent periods.  It is not possible to estimate the amount, and therefore the impact, of future inflows and outflows of Units.
 
 There are no known material trends, favorable or unfavorable, that would affect, nor any expected material changes to, the Partnership’s capital resource arrangements at the present time.
 
 
 
 
 
 - 26 -
  
  Results of Operations
 General.  The Partnership’s results depend on the Trading Advisor and the ability of the Trading Advisor’s trading programs to take advantage of price movements in the futures, forwards and options markets.  The following presents a summary of the Partnership’s operations for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2010 and a general discussion of its trading activities during each period.  It is important to note, however, that the Trading Advisor trades in various markets at different times and that prior activity in a particular market does not mean that such market will be actively traded by the Trading Advisor or will be profitable in the future.  Consequently, the results of operations of the Partnership are difficult to discuss other than in the context of the Trading Advisor’s trading activities on behalf of the Partnership during the period in question.  Past performance is no guarantee of future results.
 
 The Partnership’s results of operations set forth in the financial statements are prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“U.S. GAAP”), which require the use of certain accounting policies that affect the amounts reported in these financial statements, including the following:  the contracts the Partnership trades are accounted for on a trade-date basis and marked to market on a daily basis. The difference between their original contract value and market value is recorded on the Statements of Operations as “Net change in unrealized trading profit (loss)” for open (unrealized) contracts, and recorded as “Realized trading profit (loss)” when open positions are closed out.  The sum of these amounts constitutes the Partnership’s trading results.  The market value of a futures contract is the settlement price on the exchange on which that futures contract is traded on a particular day.
 
 - 27 -
  
  The value of a foreign currency forward contract is based on the spot rate as of approximately 3:00 P.M. (E.T.) of the business day.  Interest income, as well as management fees, incentive fees, and brokerage fees of the Partnership are recorded on an accrual basis.
 
 Ceres (Demeter, prior to December 1, 2010) believes that, based on the nature of the operations of the Partnership, no assumptions relating to the application of critical accounting policies other than those presently used could reasonably affect reported amounts.
 
 The Partnership recorded total trading results including interest income totaling $25,671,583 and expenses totaling $28,207,464, resulting in a net loss of $2,535,881 for the year ended December 31, 2010.  The Partnership’s net asset value per Unit decreased from $28.89 at December 31, 2009, to $28.87 at December 31, 2010.  Total redemptions and subscriptions for the year were $52,629,357, and $16,858,555, respectively, and the Partnership’s ending capital was $361,601,794 at December 31, 2010, a decrease of $38,306,683 from ending capital at December 31, 2009, of $399,908,477.
 
 The most significant trading losses were incurred within the global stock index markets, primarily during January, May, June, July, and August. In January, long positions in U.S., European, and Pacific Rim equity index futures resulted in losses as prices declined amid disappointing U.S. corporate earnings reports, concerns regarding U.S. President Barack Obama’s proposed limits on risk-taking by banks, and speculation that China might raise interest rates. During May and June, long positions in European and Pacific Rim equity index futures recorded losses as prices declined on growing concerns that Greece’s sovereign debt crisis might begin to spread throughout Europe.  In July, newly established
 
 - 28 -
  
 short positions in European and U.S. equity index futures incurred losses as prices increased amid unexpected growth in Europe’s manufacturing and service industries and positive U.S. corporate earnings reports. Lastly, newly established long positions in European and U.S. equity index futures experienced losses during August as prices fell after the U.S. Federal Reserve said the pace of economic recovery is likely to be “more modest” than forecast and a report revealed U.S. productivity unexpectedly fell in the second quarter. Within the energy sector, losses were incurred primarily during January, May, June, and September. In January, long positions in crude oil futures recorded losses as prices fell due to reports of increased U.S. inventories, as well as on speculation that China’s economic activity and energy demand might ease. Additional losses in the energies were incurred from long positions in crude oil futures in May and June as prices dropped amid worries that Europe’s sovereign debt troubles might weaken global energy demand. During September, losses were experienced from newly established short futures positions in crude oil and its related products as prices rose after positive economic indicators from the U.S., Asia, and Europe restored confidence that the economic recovery might stimulate energy demand. The Partnership’s trading losses for the year were offset by trading gains recorded within the global interest rate sector throughout the majority of the first nine months of the year from long positions in U.S., European, and Japanese fixed-income futures. In this sector, prices increased during the first quarter on concerns that lending restrictions in China, possible reductions in U.S. stimulus measures, and Greece’s fiscal struggles might stifle the global economic rebound. Prices were then pressured higher during the second quarter amid an unexpected drop in U.S. consumer confidence, increased regulatory scrutiny of the financial industry, and the growing European debt crisis. During the third quarter, prices continued to climb higher due to concern that European governments might struggle to repay their debt and worries over the global economy. Within the currency markets, gains were recorded primarily during February,
 
 - 29 -
  
 September, October, and December. In February, long positions in the Japanese yen versus the euro and British pound experienced gains as the value of the yen moved higher against most of its rivals after concerns regarding Greece’s credit rating caused investors to unwind existing carry trades. In September, long positions in the Australian dollar versus the U.S. dollar resulted in gains as the value of the Australian dollar appreciated to a 26-month high against the U.S. dollar amid speculation that the Reserve Bank of Australia might raise interest rates in October. During October, long positions in the Japanese yen, Australian dollar, and New Zealand dollar versus the U.S. dollar resulted in gains as the value of the U.S. dollar fell against these currencies after a report revealed U.S. private-sector employment unexpectedly dropped in September, fueling worries that the U.S. Federal Reserve would undertake additional quantitative easing. Lastly, gains were achieved in the currency sector during December from long futures positions in the Australian dollar, South African rand, Canadian dollar, and New Zealand dollar versus the U.S. dollar as better-than-expected U.S. economic data diminished demand for the U.S. dollar as a “safe-haven” currency. Within the metals markets, gains were recorded primarily during September, October, and December from long positions in silver and gold futures as prices rose amid increased demand for the precious metals as an alternative investment due to a drop in the value of the U.S. dollar, with silver futures rallying to a 30-year high and gold prices reaching a new all-time high. Smaller gains were experienced within the agricultural complex, primarily during September and October, from long futures positions in the soybean complex as prices rose amid concern that reduced rains in Brazil and Argentina may diminish crop yields.
 
 
 
 
 - 30 -
  
 The Partnership recorded total trading results including interest income totaling $34,054,406 and expenses totaling $39,304,651, resulting in a net loss of $5,250,245 for the year ended December 31, 2009.  The Partnership’s net asset value per Unit decreased from $29.13 at December 31, 2008, to $28.89 at December 31, 2009.  Total redemptions for the year were $119,379,227, and the Partnership’s ending capital was $399,908,477 at December 31, 2009, a decrease of $124,629,472 from ending capital at December 31, 2008, of $524,537,949.
 
 The most significant trading losses of approximately 6.0% were incurred within the global interest rate sector, primarily during January, April, June, July, August, October, and December.  During January, losses were recorded from long positions in European fixed-income futures as prices decreased following news that debt sales might increase as governments around the world boosted spending in an effort to ease the deepening economic slump.  European fixed-income futures prices then moved lower during April and June amid rising investor confidence, which reduced demand for the relative “safety” of government debt, thus resulting in further losses from long positions.  Meanwhile, losses were experienced from short positions in Japanese fixed-income futures as prices increased during the second half of June after the Bank of Japan indicated that it remained cautious about the Japanese economy.  During July, newly established short positions in U.S. and European fixed-income futures resulted in losses as prices moved higher on investor sentiment that the slow pace of the global economic recovery and signs of moderate inflation might lead central banks in these regions to maintain low interest rates in the near term.  Additional losses were recorded during August from newly established long positions in European fixed-income futures as prices reversed lower at the beginning of the month amid a rise in the European equity markets, thus reducing demand for the relative “safety” of government bonds.  Lastly, losses were
 
 - 31 -
  
 incurred during October and December from long positions in U.S. and European fixed-income futures as prices decreased on concerns that an unprecedented supply of government debt might outweigh demand.  Within the energy markets, losses of approximately 2.5% were experienced primarily during May from short positions in heating oil and gas oil as prices increased amid better-than-expected economic data in the U.S. and China, the world’s largest consumers of energy.  Additional losses were recorded during July and September from both long and short futures positions in crude oil and its related products as prices moved without consistent direction amid conflicting data regarding supply and demand.  Smaller losses were incurred during December from long futures positions in crude oil and its related products as prices dropped on speculation of waning energy demand after the U.S. government reported a rise in inventories.  A significant portion of the Partnership’s losses for the year was offset by gains of approximately 11.1% achieved within the global stock index sector during January, February, May, July, August, September, November, and December.  During January and February, short positions in U.S., European, and Pacific Rim equity index futures resulted in gains as prices dropped on concerns that financial firms might need to raise additional capital and a continued slowdown in global economic growth may further erode corporate earnings.  Additional gains were experienced during May, July, August, and September from long positions in U.S., European, and Pacific Rim equity index futures as prices rose due to positive economic data and increased merger and acquisition activity in the technology sector.  Further gains were achieved during November and December as global equity prices were pressured higher by a pledge from the Group of 20 leaders to maintain stimulus measures, as well as signs that the global economy might be recovering.  Within the currency sector, gains of approximately 2.9% were recorded primarily during January, May, July, August, September, and November.  During January, gains were experienced from short positions in the Australian dollar and New Zealand dollar versus the U.S. dollar as the value of the
 
 - 32 -
  
 U.S. dollar moved higher against these currencies after a government report showed the U.S. trade deficit narrowed by the largest amount in 12 years.  Newly established long positions in the Australian dollar, New Zealand dollar, and Canadian dollar versus the U.S. dollar resulted in additional gains, primarily during May, July, August, September, and November as the value of the U.S. dollar declined relative to these currencies after improving global economic data reduced demand for the U.S. dollar as a “safe haven” currency.  The value of the U.S. dollar was also pressured lower by speculation that the U.S. Federal Reserve might keep borrowing rates low after the U.S. central bank indicated that it remained committed to its quantitative easing program.  In the metals markets, gains of approximately 2.6% were recorded primarily during May, July, August, September, and November from long futures positions in copper, aluminum, lead, and zinc as prices increased after positive economic data boosted speculation that demand for base metals may rise.  Additional gains were achieved during November from long positions in gold and silver futures as prices increased due to a drop in the value of the U.S. dollar.  Smaller gains of approximately 0.4% were experienced within the agricultural sector, primarily during February, May, July, August, September, and December from long positions in sugar futures as prices rose amid expectations of a drop in global production.  As such, prices climbed to a 28-year high on deepening concerns that unfavorable weather in producing countries and rising import demand might worsen the global supply shortfall.
 
 
 
 
 
 - 33 -
  
 The Partnership recorded total trading results including interest income totaling $190,864,940 and expenses totaling $50,398,666, resulting in net income of $140,466,274 for the year ended December 31, 2008.  The Partnership’s net asset value per Unit increased from $22.02 at December 31, 2007, to $29.13 at December 31, 2008.  Total redemptions and subscriptions for the year were $164,418,815, and $108,216,510, respectively, and the Partnership’s ending capital was $524,537,949 at December 31, 2008, an increase of $84,263,969 from ending capital at December 31, 2007, of $440,273,980.
 
 The most significant trading gains of approximately 11.4% were experienced within the energy markets, primarily during the first half of the year, from long futures positions in crude oil and its related products as prices moved consistently higher due to speculation that OPEC would cut production, ongoing geopolitical concerns in the Middle East, growing Asian fuel consumption, and strong demand for physical commodities as an inflation hedge.  Additional gains were recorded primarily during the fourth quarter from newly established short futures positions in crude oil and its related products as prices sharply decreased on concerns that a substantial global economic slowdown would erode energy demand.  Elsewhere, long positions in natural gas futures also resulted in gains during the first and second quarters as prices rose on expectations of a rise in demand due to colder weather in the U.S. Northeast, news of a drop in U.S. inventories, and forecasts for an active hurricane season in the Atlantic.  Further gains were recorded during October and December from newly established short positions in natural gas futures as prices dropped amid rising U.S. inventories and slowing global energy demand.  Within the global stock index sector, gains of approximately 11.3% were experienced primarily during January, February, March, and June from short positions in U.S., European, and Pacific Rim equity index futures as prices decreased during the first half of the
 
 - 34 -
  
 year on concerns that a persistent U.S. housing slump, mounting losses linked to U.S. sub-prime mortgage investments, rising commodity prices, and a weakening job market would restrain consumer spending, erode corporate earnings, and curb global economic growth.  Additional gains were recorded during September and October as prices dropped sharply amid unprecedented U.S. financial market turmoil and growing concerns that efforts by central banks and governments around the world to support the financial system would not prevent a global recession. Within the global interest rate sector, gains of approximately 7.4% were experienced primarily during January, February, September, October, November, and December from long positions in U.S. and European fixed-income futures as prices moved higher in a worldwide “flight-to-quality” following the aforementioned drop in the global equity markets throughout most of the year, as well as worries regarding the fundamental health of the global economy and financial system.  Additionally, prices of U.S. fixed-income futures moved higher as the U.S. Federal Reserve cut interest rates to an unprecedented target range of 0% to 0.25%, while European interest rate futures prices increased after the European Central Bank lowered borrowing costs in an attempt to stimulate economic growth.  Within the currency sector, gains of approximately 3.6% were recorded primarily during March, April, May, and July from long positions in the Australian dollar, euro, and Chilean peso versus the U.S. dollar as the value of the U.S. dollar moved lower against these currencies during the first six months of the year amid speculation that signs of a slowing U.S. economy would spur the U.S. Federal Reserve to lower interest rates at a faster pace than other central banks around the world.  Short positions in the Korean won versus the U.S. dollar resulted in additional gains, primarily during March, as the value of the Korean won decreased relative to the U.S. dollar amid news of a widening
 
 
 - 35 -
  
 current account deficit out of Korea.  Further gains were experienced during October and November from newly established short positions in the Australian dollar and euro versus the U.S. dollar as the value of the U.S. dollar moved higher against most of its rivals in tandem with rising U.S. dollar-denominated Treasury bonds amid the aforementioned “flight-to-quality”.  Within the agricultural markets, gains of approximately 3.3% were recorded primarily during January, February, and June from long positions in corn futures as prices increased during the first half of the year following news that global production might drop, rising energy prices might boost demand for alternative biofuels made from ethanol, and severe floods in the U.S. Midwest had damaged crops.  Meanwhile, short futures positions in cotton resulted in gains as prices dropped to a one-year low in September after the U.S. Department of Agriculture reported exports remained below average due to a decline in demand.  Additional gains were experienced during October and November from short futures positions in wheat, corn, and cotton as prices decreased amid rising inventories and growing concerns that slowing global economic growth would erode demand for food, biofuels, and raw materials.  Similarly, smaller gains of approximately 1.8% were recorded within the metals markets, primarily during the fourth quarter, from short futures positions in copper, zinc, aluminum, lead, and nickel as prices declined amid worries that a global economic recession would erode demand for base metals.
 
 For an analysis of unrealized gains and (losses) by contract type and a further description of 2010 trading results, refer to the Partnership’s Annual Report to Limited Partners for the year ended December 31, 2010, which is incorporated by reference to Exhibit 13.01 of this Form 10-K.
 
 
 
 - 36 -
  
 The Partnership’s gains and losses are allocated among its partners for income tax purposes.
 
 Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements and Contractual Obligations.
 The Partnership does not have any off-balance sheet arrangements, nor does it have contractual obligations or commercial commitments to make future payments that would affect its liquidity or capital resources.
 
 Market Risk.
 The Partnership is a party to financial instruments with elements of off-balance sheet market and credit risk.  The Partnership trades futures contracts, options on futures contracts and forward contracts on physical commodities and other commodity interests, including, but not limited to, foreign currencies, financial instruments, metals, energy, and agricultural products. In entering into these contracts, the Partnership is subject to the market risk that such 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 positions held by the Partnership at the same time, and the Trading Advisor was unable to offset positions of the Partnership, the Partnership could lose all of its assets and the limited partners would realize a loss equal to 100% of their capital account.
 
 In addition to the Trading Advisor’s internal controls, the Trading Advisor must comply with the Partnership’s trading policies that include standards for liquidity and leverage that must be maintained.  The Trading Advisor and Ceres (Demeter, prior to December 1, 2010) monitor the Partnership's trading activities to ensure compliance with the trading policies and Ceres (Demeter, prior to December 1, 2010)
 
 - 37 -
  
 can require the Trading Advisor to modify positions of the Partnership if Ceres (Demeter, prior to December 1, 2010) believes they violate the Partnership's trading policies.
 
 Credit Risk.
 In addition to market risk, in entering into futures, forward and options contracts, there is a credit risk to the Partnership that the counterparty on a contract will not be able to meet its obligations to the Partnership.  The ultimate counterparty or guarantor of the Partnership for futures, forward and options contracts, traded in the United States and most foreign exchanges on which the Partnership trades is the clearinghouse associated with such exchange.  In general, a clearinghouse is backed by the membership of the exchange and will act in the event of non-performance by one of its members or one of its member’s customers, which should significantly reduce this credit risk.  There is no assurance that a clearinghouse, exchange, or other exchange member will meet its obligations to the Partnership, and Ceres (Demeter, prior to December 1, 2010) and the commodity brokers will not indemnify the Partnership against a default by such parties. Further, the law is unclear as to whether a commodity broker has any obligation to protect its customers from loss in the event of an exchange or clearinghouse defaulting on trades effected for the broker’s customers.  In cases where the Partnership trades off-exchange forward contracts with a counterparty, the sole recourse of the Partnership will be the forward contract’s counterparty.
 
 
 
 
 
 - 38 -
  
  Ceres (Demeter, prior to December 1, 2010) deals with these credit risks of the Partnership in several ways.  First, Ceres (Demeter, prior to December 1, 2010) monitors the Partnership’s credit exposure to each exchange on a daily basis.  The commodity brokers inform the Partnership, as with all of their customers, of the Partnership’s net margin requirements for all of its existing open positions, and Ceres (Demeter, prior to December 1, 2010) has installed a system which permits it to monitor the Partnership’s potential net credit exposure, exchange by exchange, by adding the unrealized trading gains on each exchange, if any, to the Partnership’s margin liability thereon.
 
 Second, the Partnership’s trading policies limit the amount of its net assets that can be committed at any given time to futures contracts and require a minimum amount of diversification in the Partnership’s trading, usually over several different products and exchanges.  Historically, the Partnership’s exposure to any one exchange has typically amounted to only a small percentage of its total net assets and on those relatively few occasions where the Partnership’s credit exposure climbs above such level, Ceres (Demeter, prior to December 1, 2010) deals with the situation on a case by case basis, carefully weighing whether the increased level of credit exposure remains appropriate.  Material changes to the trading policies may be made only with the prior written approval of the limited partners owning more than 50% of Units then outstanding.
 
 Third, with respect to forward contract trading, the Partnership trades with only those counterparties which Ceres, (Demeter, prior to December 1, 2010) together with MS&Co., has determined to be creditworthy.  The Partnership presently deals with MS&Co. as the sole counterparty on all trading of foreign currency forward contracts.
 
 - 39 -
  
 For additional information, see the “Financial Instruments” section under “Notes to Financial Statements” in the Partnership’s Annual Report to Limited Partners for the year ended December 31, 2010, which is incorporated by reference to Exhibit 13.01 of this Form 10-K.
 
 Inflation has not been a major factor in the Partnership’s operations.
 
 Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures.
 Financial instruments are carried at fair value, which is the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants.  Assets and liabilities carried at fair value are classified and disclosed in the following three levels: Level 1 – unadjusted quoted market prices in active markets for identical assets and liabilities; Level 2 - inputs other than unadjusted quoted market prices that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly (including quoted market prices for similar investments, interest rates, credit risk); and Level 3 - unobservable inputs for the asset or liability (including the Partnership’s own assumptions used in determining the fair value of investments).
 
 In certain cases, the inputs used to measure fair value may fall into different levels of the fair value hierarchy.  In such cases, an investment’s level within the fair value hierarchy is based on the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement.  The Partnership’s assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement in its entirety requires judgment, and considers factors specific to the investment.
 
 
 - 40 -











The Partnership’s assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis are summarized in the following tables by the type of inputs applicable to the fair value measurements.


December 31, 2010
Unadjusted

Quoted Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets

(Level 1)
Significant Other Observable Inputs

(Level 2)
Significant Unobservable Inputs

(Level 3)

Total$
$
$

$AssetsFutures
7,142,799
–
n/a

7,142,799Forwards
–
5,003,221
n/a

5,003,221Total Assets
7,142,799
5,003,221
n/a

12,146,020LiabilitiesFutures
2,700,493
–
n/a

2,700,493Forwards
–
955,416
n/a

955,416Total Liabilities
2,700,493
955,416
n/a

3,655,909Unrealized currency loss




(184,614)*Net fair value
4,442,306
4,047,805
n/a

8,305,497








December 31, 2009 **
Unadjusted

Quoted Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets

(Level 1)
Significant Other Observable Inputs

(Level 2)
Significant Unobservable Inputs

(Level 3)

Total$
$
$

$AssetsFutures
9,639,812
–
n/a

9,639,812Forwards
–
2,754,171
n/a

2,754,171Total Assets
9,639,812
2,754,171
n/a

12,393,983LiabilitiesFutures
4,721,705
–
n/a

4,721,705Forwards
–
1,711,116
n/a

1,711,116Total Liabilities
4,721,705
1,711,116
n/a

6,432,821Unrealized currency loss




(39,656)* Net fair value
4,918,107
1,043,055
n/a

5,921,506





* This amount comprises of the net unrealized gain/(loss) on open contracts and options purchased and options written on the Statements of Financial Condition.





** The amounts have been reclassified from the December 31, 2009 prior year financial statements to conform to the current year


presentation based on new fair value guidance.





- 41 -







Derivatives and Hedging


The Partnership’s objective is to profit from speculative trading in Futures Interests.  Therefore, the Trading Advisor for the Partnership will take speculative positions in Futures Interests where they feel the best profit opportunities exist for their trading strategy.  As such, the average number of contracts outstanding in absolute quantities (the total of the open long and open short positions) has been presented as a part of the volume disclosure, as position direction is not an indicative factor in such volume disclosures. In regards to foreign currency forward trades, each notional quantity amount has been converted to an equivalent contract based upon an industry convention.





The following tables summarize the valuation of the Partnership’s investments as required by the disclosures about Derivatives and Hedging as of December 31, 2010 and 2009. respectively.





The Effect of Trading Activities on the Statements of Financial Condition as of December 31, 2010:


Futures and Forward Contracts
Long Unrealized

Gain
Long Unrealized

Loss
Short Unrealized

Gain
Short Unrealized

Loss
Net

Unrealized Gain/(Loss)
Average number of contracts

outstanding

for the year

(absolute quantity)$
$
$
$
$Commodity
5,781,673
(67,947)
5,710
(105,138)
5,614,298
4,640Equity
244,826
(1,176,255)
39,537
—
(891,892)
2,866Foreign currency
4,755,171
(678,453)
854,409
(294,469)
4,636,658
17,648Interest rate
392,619
(69,212)
72,075
(1,264,435)
(868,953)
8,548Total
11,174,289
(1,991,867)
971,731
(1,664,042)
8,490,111Unrealized currency loss




(184,614)Total net unrealized gain on open contracts




8,305,497














- 42 -







The Effect of Trading Activities on the Statements of Financial Condition as of December 31, 2009:


Futures and Forward Contracts
Long Unrealized

Gain
Long Unrealized

Loss
Short Unrealized

Gain
Short Unrealized

Loss
Net

Unrealized Gain/(Loss)
*Average number of contracts

outstanding

for the year

(absolute quantity)$
$
$
$
$Commodity
7,291,580
(1,397,853)
499,089
(253,409)
6,139,407
4,941Equity
1,413,940
(626,978)
18,522
—
805,484
3,384Foreign currency
1,718,378
(1,102,078)
1,070,003
(631,454)
1,054,849
41,153Interest rate
154,564
(2,323,801)
227,907
(97,248)
(2,038,578)
10,824Total
10,578,462
(5,450,710)
1,815,521
(982,111)
5,961,162Unrealized currency loss




(39,656)Total net unrealized gain on open contracts




5,921,506





*The amounts have been reclassified from the December 31, 2009 prior year financial statements to conform to the current year presentation.








The following tables summarize the net trading results of the Partnership for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009 as required by the disclosures about Derivatives and Hedging Topic.





The Effect of Trading Activities on the Statements of Operations for the year ended December 31, 2010 included in Total Trading Results:





Type of Instrument
$Commodity
(2,284,314)Equity
(11,812,474)Foreign currency
10,670,505Interest rate
28,877,259Unrealized currency loss
(144,958)Proceeds from Litigation
20,678Total
25,326,696





Line Items on the Statements of Operations for the year ended December 31, 2010:





Trading Results
$Realized
22,922,027Net change in unrealized
2,383,991Proceeds from Litigation
20,678Total Trading Results
25,326,696





The Effect of Trading Activities on the Statements of Operations for the year ended December 31, 2009 included in Total Trading Results:





- 43 -







Type of Instrument
$Commodity
1,660,953Equity
45,253,372Foreign currency
13,138,360Interest rate
(25,166,393)Unrealized currency loss
(1,214,454)Total
33,671,838





Line Items on the Statements of Operations for the year ended December 31, 2009:





Trading Results
$Realized
28,733,723Net change in unrealized
4,938,115Total Trading Results
33,671,838





Statement of Cash Flows


The Partnership is not required to provide a Statement of Cash Flows.





Other Pronouncements


Improving Disclosures about Fair Value Measurements


In January 2010, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued accounting guidance under the FASB Accounting Standards Codification(“ASC” or the “Codification”), which, among other things, amends fair value measurements and disclosures to require entities to separately present purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements in their reconciliation of Level 3 fair value measurements (i.e., to present such items on a gross basis rather than on a net basis), and which clarifies existing disclosure requirements regarding the level of disaggregation and the inputs and valuation techniques used to measure fair value for measurements that fall within either Level 2 or Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy.  This guidance is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2009, except for the disclosures about purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements in the roll forward





- 44 -







of activity in Level 3 fair value measurements which are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2010, and for interim periods within those fiscal years.  The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on the Partnership’s financial statements.





Subsequent Events


Management of Ceres (“Management”) performed its evaluation of subsequent events and has determined that there were no subsequent events requiring adjustments or disclosure in the financial statements.





Item 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK


Introduction





The Partnership is a commodity pool engaged primarily in the speculative trading of futures, forwards and options. The market-sensitive instruments held by the Partnership are acquired for speculative trading purposes only and, as a result, all or substantially all of the Partnership’s assets are at risk of trading loss.  Unlike an operating company, the risk of market-sensitive instruments is inherent to the primary business activity of the Partnership.





The futures, forwards and options on such contracts traded by the Partnership involve varying degrees of related market risk.  Market risk is often dependent upon changes in the level or volatility of interest rates, exchange rates, and prices of financial instruments and commodities, factors that result in frequent changes in the fair value of the Partnership’s open positions, and consequently in its earnings, whether realized or unrealized, and cash flow.  Gains and losses on open positions of exchange- traded futures,





- 45 -







exchange-traded forward, and exchange-traded futures-styled options contracts are settled daily through variation margin.  Gains and losses on off-exchange-traded forward currency contracts and forward currency options contracts are settled upon termination of the contract. However, the Partnership is required to meet margin requirements equal to the net unrealized loss on open forward currency contracts in the Partnership accounts with the counterparty, which is accomplished by daily maintenance of the cash balance in a custody account held at MSSB for the benefit of MS&Co.





The Partnership’s total market risk may increase or decrease as it is influenced by a wide variety of factors, including, but not limited to, the diversification among the Partnership’s open positions, the volatility present within the markets, and the liquidity of the markets.





The face value of the market sector instruments held by the Partnership is typically many times the applicable margin requirements.  Margin requirements generally range between 2% and 15% of contract face value.  Additionally, the use of leverage causes the face value of the market sector instruments held by the Partnership typically to be many times the total capitalization of the Partnership.





The Partnership’s past performance is no guarantee of its future results.  Any attempt to numerically quantify the Partnership’s market risk is limited by the uncertainty of its speculative trading.  The Partnership’s speculative trading and use of leverage may cause future losses and volatility (i.e., “risk of ruin”) that far exceed the Partnership’s experience to date under the“Partnership’s Value at Risk in Different Market Sectors” section and significantly exceed the Value at Risk (“VaR”) tables disclosed.





- 46 -







Limited partners will not be liable for losses exceeding the current net asset value of their investment.





Quantifying the Partnership’s Trading Value at Risk


The following quantitative disclosures regarding the Partnership’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 disclosures in this section are deemed to be forward-looking statements for purposes of the safe harbor, except for statements of historical fact.





The Partnership accounts for open positions on the basis of mark to market accounting principles.  Any loss in the market value of the Partnership’s open positions is directly reflected in the Partnership’s earnings and cash flow.





The Partnership’s risk exposure in the market sectors traded by the Trading Advisor is estimated below in terms of VaR. The Partnership estimates VaR using a model based upon historical simulation (with a confidence level of 99%) which involves constructing a distribution of hypothetical daily changes in the value of a trading portfolio.  The VaR model takes into account linear exposures to risks including equity and commodity prices, interest rates, foreign exchange rates, and correlation among these variables. The hypothetical changes in portfolio value are based on daily percentage changes observed in key market indices or other market factors (“market risk factors”) to which the portfolio is sensitive.  The one-day 99% confidence level of the Partnership’s VaR corresponds to the





- 47 -







negative change in portfolio value that, based on observed market risk factors, would have been exceeded once in 100 trading days, or one day in 100.  VaR typically does not represent the worst case outcome.  Ceres (Demeter, prior to December 1, 2010) uses approximately four years of daily market data (1,000 observations) and re-values its portfolio (using delta-gamma approximations) for each of the historical market moves that occurred over this time period.  This generates a probability distribution of daily “simulated profit and loss” outcomes.  The VaR is the appropriate percentile of this distribution.  For example, the 99% one-day VaR would represent the 10th worst outcome from Ceres’ (Demeter’s, prior to December 1, 2010) simulated profit and loss series.





The Partnership’s VaR computations are based on the risk representation of the underlying benchmark for each instrument or contract and do not distinguish between exchange and non-exchange dealer-based instruments.  They are also not based on exchange and/or dealer-based maintenance margin requirements.  VaR models, including the Partnership’s, are continually evolving as trading portfolios become more diverse and modeling techniques and systems capabilities improve.  Please note that the VaR model is used to numerically quantify market risk for historic reporting purposes only and is not utilized by either Ceres (Demeter, prior to December 1, 2010) or the Trading Advisor in their daily risk management activities.  Please further note that VaR as described above may not be comparable to similarly-titled measures used by other entities.





The Partnership’s Value at Risk in Different Market Sectors


The following table indicates the VaR associated with the Partnership’s open positions as a percentage of total net assets by primary market risk category at December 31, 2010 and 2009.  At December 31, 2010





- 48 -







and 2009, the Partnership’s total capitalization was approximately $362 million and $400 million, respectively.





Primary Market
December 31, 2010
December 31, 2009Risk Category
Value at Risk
Value at RiskEquity
(2.85)%
(2.65)%Currency
(1.11)
(0.93)Interest Rate
(0.42)
(0.61)Commodity
(2.05)
(1.71)Aggregate Value at Risk
(5.46)%
(4.44)%





The VaR for a market category represents the one-day downside risk for the aggregate exposures associated with this market category.  The Aggregate Value at Risk listed above represents the VaR of the Partnership’s open positions across all the market categories, and is less than the sum of the VaRs for all such market categories due to the diversification benefit across asset classes.





Because the business of the Partnership is the speculative trading of futures, forwards and options, the composition of its trading portfolio can change significantly over any given time period, or even within a single trading day.  Such changes could positively or negatively materially impact market risk as measured by VaR.





The tables below supplement the December 31, 2010 and 2009 VaR set forth above by presenting the Partnership’s high, low, and average VaR, as a percentage of total net assets for the four quarter-end reporting periods from January 1, 2010 through December 31, 2010 and January 1, 2009 through December 31, 2009, respectively.


- 49 -







December 31, 2010Primary Market Risk Category
High
Low
AverageEquity
(6.04)%
(0.23)%
(3.29)%Currency
(1.77)
(0.32)
(1.24)Interest Rate
(1.28)
(0.42)
(0.86)Commodity
(2.05)
(0.70)
(1.27)Aggregate Value at Risk
(7.50)%
(1.12)%
(4.90)%





December 31, 2009Primary Market Risk Category
High
Low
AverageEquity
(3.45)%
(0.64)%
(2.21)%Currency
(1.37)
(0.51)
(0.96)Interest Rate
(1.78)
(0.32)
(0.85)Commodity
(1.71)
(0.28)
(0.98)Aggregate Value at Risk
(4.44)%
(0.95)%
(3.19)%





Limitations on Value at Risk as an Assessment of Market Risk





VaR models permit estimation of a portfolio’s aggregate market risk exposure, incorporating a range of varied market risks, reflect risk reduction due to portfolio diversification or hedging activities, and can cover a wide range of portfolio assets.  However, VaR risk measures should be viewed in light of the methodology’s limitations, which include, but may not be limited to the following:





·
changes in portfolio value caused by market movements may differ from those of the VaR model;
 ·
VaR results reflect past market fluctuations applied to current trading positions while future risk depends on future positions;
 ·
VaR using a one-day time horizon does not fully capture the market risk of positions that cannot be liquidated or hedged within one day; and
 ·
the historical market risk factor data used for VaR estimation may provide only limited insight into losses that could be incurred under certain unusual market movements.
 
 In addition, the VaR tables above, as well as the past performance of the Partnership, give no indication of the Partnership’s potential “risk of ruin.”
 
 The VaR tables provided present the results of the Partnership’s VaR for the Partnership’s market risk exposures and on an aggregate basis
 at December 31, 2010 and 2009, and for the four quarter-end reporting periods during calendar years 2010 and 2009. VaR is not
 necessarily representative of the Partnership’s historic risk, nor should it be used to predict the Partnership’s future financial performance or
 its ability to manage or monitor risk.  There can be no assurance that the Partnership’s actual losses on a particular day will not exceed the
 VaR amounts indicated above or that such losses will not occur more than once in 100 trading days.
 
 Non-Trading Risk
 The Partnership has non-trading market risk on its foreign cash balances not needed for margin.  These balances and any market risk they
 may represent are immaterial.
 - 51 -
  
 The Partnership also maintains a substantial portion of its available assets in cash at MSSB; as of December 31, 2010, such amount is equal to approximately 91% of the Partnership‘s net asset value.  A decline in short-term interest rates would result in a decline in the Partnership’s cash management income. This cash flow risk is not considered to be material.
 
 Materiality, as used throughout this section, is based on an assessment of reasonably possible market movements and any associated
 potential losses, taking into account the leverage, optionality, and multiplier features of the Partnership’s market-sensitive instruments,
 in relation to the Partnership’s net assets.
 
 Qualitative Disclosures Regarding Primary Trading Risk Exposures
 The following qualitative disclosures regarding the Partnership’s market risk exposures – except for (A) those disclosures that are statements of historical fact and (B) the descriptions of how the Partnership manages its primary market risk exposures – constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act.  The Partnership’s primary market risk exposures, as well as the strategies used and to be used by Ceres (Demeter, prior to December 1, 2010) and the Trading  Advisor for managing such exposures, are subject to numerous uncertainties, contingencies and risks, any one of which could cause the actual results of the Partnership’s 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
 
 - 52 -
  
 material changes to the risk exposures and the risk management strategies of the Partnership. Investors must be prepared to lose all or substantially all of their investment in the Partnership.
 
 The Trading Advisor, in general, tends to utilize trading system(s) to take positions when market opportunities develop, and Ceres
 (Demeter, prior to December 1, 2010) anticipates that the Trading Advisor will continue to do so.
 
 The following were the primary trading risk exposures of the Partnership as of December 31, 2010, by market sector. It may be anticipated, however, that these market exposures will vary materially over time.
 
 Stock Indices.  The Partnership’s primary equity exposure is to equity price risk in the G-8 countries. The G-8 countries consist of Canada, the Russian Federation, France, Germany, Japan, Italy, the United Kingdom, and the U.S.  The stock index futures traded by the Partnership are limited to futures on broadly based indices. As of December 31, 2010, the Partnership’s primary exposures were in the S&P 500 (U.S.) and DAX (Germany) stock indices. The Partnership is primarily exposed to the risk of adverse price trends or static markets in the major U.S., European, and Asian indices. (Static markets would not cause major market changes but would make it difficult for the Partnership to avoid being “whipsawed” into numerous small losses.)
 
 
 
 
 - 53 -
  
 Currencies.  The Partnership’s currency exposure is to exchange rate fluctuations, primarily fluctuations which 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.  Ceres does not anticipate that the risk profile of the Partnership’s currency sector will change significantly in the future.
 
 Interest Rates.  Interest rate movements directly affect the price of the futures positions held by the Partnership and indirectly the value of its stock index and currency positions. Interest rate movements in one country as well as relative interest rate movements between countries materially impact the Partnership’s profitability. The Partnership’s primary interest rate exposure is to interest rate fluctuations in the U.S. and other G-8 countries.  However, the Partnership also takes futures positions on the government debt of smaller nations – e.g., Australia.
 
 Commodity.
 Energy.  The Partnership’s primary energy market exposure is to oil and natural gas price movements, often resulting from political developments in the Middle East and weather conditions. Energy prices can be volatile and substantial profits and losses have been experienced and are expected to continue in this market.
 
 Metals.  The Partnership’s primary metal market exposure is to fluctuations in the price of copper, gold, silver, and aluminum.
 
 
 - 54 -
  
 Grains.  The Partnership’s trading risk exposure in grains is primarily to agricultural-related price movements which are often directly affected by severe or unexpected weather conditions. The soybean complex and corn accounted for the majority of the Partnership’s grain exposure as of December 31, 2010.
 
 Softs.  The Partnership’s trading risk exposure in soft commodities is primarily to agricultural-related price movements which are often directly affected by severe or unexpected weather conditions. Cotton accounted for the majority of the Partnership’s soft commodity exposure as of December 31, 2010.
 
 Qualitative Disclosures Regarding Means of Managing Risk Exposure
 The Partnership and the Trading Advisor, separately, attempt to manage the risk of the Partnership’s open positions in essentially the same manner in all market categories traded.  Ceres (Demeter, prior to December 1, 2010) attempts to manage market exposure by diversifying the Partnership’s assets among different market sectors through the selection of a Commodity Trading Advisor and by daily monitoring its performance.  In addition, the Trading Advisor establishes diversification guidelines, often set in terms of the maximum margin to be committed to positions in any one market sector or market-sensitive instrument.
 
 Ceres (Demeter, prior to December 1, 2010) monitors and controls the risk of the Partnership’s non-trading instrument, cash.  Cash is the only Partnership investment directed by Ceres (Demeter, prior to December 1, 2010), rather than the Trading Advisor.
 
 
 
 - 55 -
  
  Item 8.  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA





The financial statements are incorporated by reference to the Partnership's Annual Report, which is filed as Exhibit 13.01 hereto.





Supplementary data specified by Item 302 of Regulation S-K:





Summary of Quarterly Results (Unaudited)








Total Trading Results
Net
Net Income/Quarter Ended
including interest income
Income/(Loss)
(Loss) Per Unit2010March 31
$   (13,364,180)
$   (20,836,137)
$  (1.49)June 30
1,397,728
(5,947,718)
(0.45)September 30
13,705,254
6,813,361
0.54December 31
23,932,781
17,434,613
1.38Total
$   25,671,583
$    (2,535,881)
$ (0.02)2009March 31
$    (4,875,075)
$   (16,819,838)
$  (1.00)June 30
(9,204,328)
(17,889,607)
(1.16)September 30
45,743,954
37,584,015
2.56December 31
2,389,855
(8,124,815)
(0.64)Total
$   34,054,406
$    (5,250,245)
$ (0.24)









































- 56 -





Item 9.
CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
 
 None.
 
 Item 9A.  CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
 Under the supervision and with the participation of the management of Ceres, at the time this annual report was filed, Ceres’ President (Ceres’ principal executive officer) and Chief Financial Officer (Ceres’ principal financial officer) have evaluated the effectiveness of the design and operation of the Partnership’s disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Exchange Act) as of December 31, 2010.  The Partnership’s disclosure controls and procedures are designed to provide reasonable assurance that information the Partnership is required to disclose in the reports that the Partnership files or submits under the Exchange Act are recorded, processed and summarized and reported within the time period specified in the applicable rules and forms.  Based on this evaluation, the President and Chief Financial Officer of Ceres have concluded that the disclosure controls and procedures of the Partnership were effective at December 31, 2010.
 
 Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
 Ceres (Demeter, prior to December 1, 2010) is responsible for the management of the Partnership.
 
 Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting.  The internal control over financial reporting is designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.
 
 - 57 -
  
 The Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that:
 
 ·
Pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the Partnership;
 
 ·
Provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with U.S. GAAP, and that the Partnership’s transactions are being made only in accordance with authorizations of Management and directors of Ceres, (Demeter, prior to December 1, 2010); and
 
 ·
Provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection and correction of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of the Partnership’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
 
 Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements.  Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
 
 Management assessed the effectiveness of the Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2010.  In making this assessment, Management used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission in Internal Control-Integrated Framework. Based on our assessment and those criteria, Management believes that the Partnership maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2010.
 - 58 -
  
 Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting
 There have been no material changes during the period covered by this annual report in the Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) of the Exchange Act) that have materially affected or are reasonably likely to affect the Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting.
 
 Limitations on the Effectiveness of Controls
 Any control system, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide reasonable (not absolute) assurance that its objectives will be met.  Furthermore, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that all control issues and instances of fraud, if any, have been detected.
 
 Item 9B.  OTHER INFORMATION
 None.
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 - 59 -
  
 PART III
 
 Item 10.  DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
 
 The Partnership has no officers or directors and its affairs are managed by its General Partner.  Investment decisions are made by the Advisors.
 
 The officers and directors of the General Partner are Walter Davis (President and Chairman of the Board of Directors), Jennifer Magro (Chief Financial Officer and Director), Michael McGrath (Director), Douglas J. Ketterer (Director), Ian Bernstein (Director), Harry Handler (Director), Patrick T. Egan (Director) and Alper Daglioglu (Director). Each director holds office until the earlier of his or her death, resignation or removal.  Vacancies on the board of directors may be filled by either (i) the majority vote of the remaining directors or (ii) MSSBH, as the sole member of the General Partner.  The officers of the General Partner are designated by the General Partner’s board of directors.  Each officer will hold office until his or her successor is designated and qualified or until his or her death, resignation or removal.
 
 Walter Davis, age 46, is President and Chairman of the Board of Directors of the General Partner (since June 2010).  Mr. Davis was registered as an associated person of the General Partner and listed as a principal in June 2010.  Mr. Davis is responsible for the oversight of the General Partner’s funds and accounts.  Prior to the combination of Demeter and Ceres effective December 1, 2010, Mr. Davis served as Chairman of the Board of Directors and President of Demeter, a registered commodity pool operator.  Mr. Davis was a principal and associated person of Demeter from May 2006 to December 2010 and July 2006 to December 2010, respectively.  Mr. Davis was an associated person of
 
 - 60 -
  
 Morgan Stanley DW Inc., a financial services firm, from August 2006 to April 2007, when, because of the merger of Morgan Stanley DW Inc. into MS&Co., a global financial services firm, he became an associated person of MS&Co. (due to the transfer of his original registration as an associated person of Morgan Stanley DW Inc.).  Prior to becoming an associated person in August 2006, Mr. Davis was responsible for overseeing the sales and marketing of MS&Co.’s managed futures funds to high net worth and institutional investors on a global basis.  Mr. Davis withdrew as an associated person of MS & Co. in June 2009.  Mr. Davis has been an associated person of MSSB since June 2009.  MSSB registered as a broker-dealer with FINRA, an investment adviser with the SEC and a futures commission merchant with the CFTC.  Mr. Davis is a Managing Director of MSSB and the Director of MSSB’s Managed Futures Department.  Prior to joining Morgan Stanley in September 1999, Mr. Davis worked for Chase Manhattan Bank’s Alternative Investment Group from January 1992 until September 1999, where his principal duties included marketing managed futures funds to high net worth investors, as well as developing and structuring managed futures funds.  Throughout his career, Mr. Davis has been involved with the development, management and marketing of a diverse array of commodity pools, hedge funds and other alternative investment vehicles.  Mr. Davis received an MBA in Finance and International Business from the Columbia University Graduate School of Business in 1992 and a BA in Economics from the University of the South in 1987.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 - 61 -
  
 Jennifer Magro, age 39, is Chief Financial Officer and Director of the General Partner (since October 2006 and May 2005, respectively).  Ms. Magro was listed as a principal in June 2005.  Ms. Magro served as Vice President and Secretary of the General Partner from August 2001 to December 2010 and June 2010 to December 2010, respectively.  She was also a Managing Director of Citi Alternative Investments (“CAI”), a division of Citigroup that administered its hedge fund and fund of funds business, and was Chief Operating Officer of CAI’s Hedge Fund Management Group from October 2006 to July 2009.  Ms. Magro is responsible for the financial, administrative and operational functions of the General Partner.  She is also responsible for the accounting and financial and regulatory reporting of the General Partner’s managed futures funds.  From March 1999 to July 2009, Ms. Magro was responsible for the accounting and financial and regulatory reporting of Citigroup’s managed futures funds.  She had similar responsibilities with CAI’s Hedge Fund Management Group (from October 2006 to July 2009).  Prior to joining the General Partner in January 1996, Ms. Magro was employed by Prudential Securities Inc., a securities brokerage services company, (from July 1994) as a staff accountant whose duties included the calculation of net asset values for commodity pools and real estate investment products.  Ms. Magro received a BS in Accounting from the State University of New York, Oswego in 1993.
 
 Michael McGrath, age 41, has been a Director of the General Partner since June 2010.  Mr. McGrath was listed as a principal in June 2010.  Mr. McGrath was a principal and Director of Demeter from May 2006 until Demeter’s combination with the General Partner in December 2010.  Mr. McGrath is a Managing Director of MSSB and currently serves as the Head of Alternative Investments for the Global Wealth Management Group of MSSB.  He also serves on the Management Committee
 
 - 62 -
  
 of the Global Wealth Management Group.  Prior to his current role, Mr. McGrath served as the Director of Product Management for the Consulting Services Group in Morgan Stanley as well as the Chief Operating Officer for Private Wealth Management North America and Private Wealth Management Latin America (the Americas) and the Director of Product Development for Morgan Stanley’s Global Wealth Management Group.  Mr. McGrath served as a Managing Director of Morgan Stanley from May 2004 until May 2009, when Mr. McGrath became a Managing Director of MSSB.  Mr. McGrath joined Morgan Stanley from Nuveen Investments, a publicly traded investment management company headquartered in Chicago, Illinois, where he worked from July 2001 to May 2004.  At Nuveen Investments, Mr. McGrath served as a Managing Director and oversaw the development of alternative investment products catering to high net worth investors.  Mr. McGrath received his BA degree from Saint Peters College in 1990, and currently serves on the school’s Board of Regents.  He received his MBA in Finance from New York University in 1996.
 
 Douglas J. Ketterer, age 45, has been a Director of the General Partner since December 2010.  Mr. Ketterer was listed as a principal in December 2010.  Mr. Ketterer was a principal of Demeter from October 2003 until Demeter’s combination with the General Partner in December 2010.  Mr. Ketterer is a Managing Director and Head of the U.S. Private Wealth Management Group within MSSB.  Mr. Ketterer joined MS&Co. in March 1990 and has served in many roles in the corporate finance/investment banking, asset management, and wealth management divisions of the firm; most recently as Chief Operating Officer, Wealth Management Group and Head of the Products Group with responsibility for a number of departments (including, among others, the Alternative Investments
 
 - 63 -
  
 Group, Consulting Services Group, Annuities & Insurance Department and Retirement & Equity Solutions Group) which offered products and services through MS & Co.’s Global Wealth Management Group.  Mr. Ketterer received his MBA from New York University’s Leonard N. Stern School of Business and his BS in Finance from the University at Albany’s School of Business.
 
 Ian Bernstein, age 48, is a Director of the General Partner.  Mr. Bernstein has been a Director, and listed as a principal of the General Partner since December 2010.  Mr. Bernstein held various positions, including Managing Director, within the Capital Markets group at Morgan Stanley DW Inc. from October 1984 to April 2007, when Morgan Stanley DW Inc. was merged into, its institutional affiliate, MS&Co. and became the Global Wealth Management Division of MS&Co.  Mr. Bernstein first served as a Managing Director with MS&Co. in March 2004, prior to its merger with Morgan Stanley DW Inc.  Since June 1, 2009, Mr. Bernstein has served as a Managing Director of Capital Markets at MSSB, a new broker-dealer formed as a result of a joint venture between Citigroup and Morgan Stanley.  The respective retail business of MS&Co. and Citigroup (formerly known as Smith Barney) was contributed to MSSB.  Mr. Bernstein has continued as Managing Director of both MSSB, the retail broker-dealer, and MS&Co., the institutional broker-dealer, up to the present.  Mr. Bernstein received his MBA from New York University’s Leonard N. Stern School of Business in 1988, and his BA from the University of Buckingham in 1980.
 
 
 
 
 
 - 64 -
  
 Harry Handler, age 51, has been a Director of the General Partner since December 2010.  Mr. Handler became registered as an associated person of the General Partner and listed as a principal in December 2010.  Mr. Handler was a principal and associated person of Demeter from May 2005 until Demeter’s combination with the General Partner in December 2010, and from April 2006 until December 2010, respectively.  He has been an associate member of the NFA since August 1985.  Mr. Handler was an associated person of Morgan Stanley DW Inc., a financial services firm, from February 1984 to April 2007, when, because of the merger of Morgan Stanley DW Inc. into MS&Co., he became an associated person of MS&Co. due to the transfer of his original registration as an associated person of Morgan Stanley DW Inc.  Mr. Handler withdrew as an associated person of MS&Co. in June 2009.  Mr. Handler has been an associated person of MSSB since June 2009.  Mr. Handler serves as an Executive Director at MSSB in the Global Wealth Management Group.  Mr. Handler works in the Capital Markets Division and is responsible for Electronic Equity and Securities Lending.  Additionally, Mr. Handler serves as Chairman of the Global Wealth Management Group’s Best Execution Committee.  In his prior position, Mr. Handler was a Systems Director in Information Technology, in charge of Equity and Fixed Income Trading Systems along with the Special Products, such as Unit Trusts, Managed Futures, and Annuities.  Prior to his transfer to the Information Technology Area, Mr. Handler managed the Foreign Currency and Precious Metals Trading Desk of Dean Witter, a financial services firm and predecessor company to Morgan Stanley, from July 1982 until January 1984.  He also held various positions in the Futures Division where he helped to build the Precious Metals Trading Operation at Dean Witter.  Before joining Dean Witter, Mr. Handler worked at Mocatta Metals, a precious metals trading firm and futures broker that was sold to Standard Charted Bank in the 1980’s, as an Assistant to the Chairman from March 1980 until June 1982.  His
 
 - 65 -
  
 roles at Mocatta Metals included positions on the Futures Order Entry Desk and the Commodities Exchange Trading Floor.  Additional work included building a computerized Futures Trading System and writing a history of the company.  Mr. Handler graduated on the Dean’s List from the University of Wisconsin-Madison with a BA degree and a double major in History and Political Science.
 
 Patrick T. Egan, age 41, has been a Director of the General Partner since December 2010.  Mr. Egan became registered as an associated person of the General Partner and listed as a principal in December 2010.  Mr. Egan has been an associate member of the NFA since December 1997.  He has been an associated person of MSSB since November 2010.  Mr. Egan was an associated person of Morgan Stanley DW Inc., a financial services firm, from February 1998 to April 2007, when, because of the merger of Morgan Stanley DW Inc. into MS&Co., he became an associated person of MS&Co. due to the transfer of his original registration as an associated person of Morgan Stanley DW Inc.  Mr. Egan withdrew as an associated person of MS&Co. in November 2010.  Mr. Egan is an Executive Director at MSSB and currently serves as the Co-Chief Investment Officer for MSSB managed futures department.  Prior to his current role, Mr. Egan served as the Head of Due Diligence & Manager Research for Morgan Stanley’s managed futures department from October 2003 until the formation of MSSB in June 2009. From March 1993 through September 2003, Mr. Egan was an analyst and manager within the managed futures department for Morgan Stanley DW Inc., and its predecessor firm, Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., a financial services firm, with his primary responsibilities being dedicated to the product development, due diligence, investment analysis and risk management of the firm’s commodity pools.  Mr. Egan began his career in August 1991, joining Dean Witter Intercapital, the asset management arm of Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., until March 1993 when he joined the firm’s
 
 - 66 -
  
 managed futures department.  Mr. Egan received a Bachelor of Business Administration with a concentration in Finance from the University of Notre Dame in May 1991.  Mr. Egan is a former Director to the Managed Funds Association’s Board of Directors, a position he was elected to by industry peers for two consecutive two-year terms, from November 2004 to October 2006 and November 2006 to October 2008.
 
 Alper Daglioglu, age 33, has been a Director, and listed as a principal of the General Partner since December 2010.  Mr. Daglioglu is an Executive Director at MSSB and the Co-Chief Investment Officer for MSSB’s managed futures department.  Mr. Daglioglu also serves on the Alternative Investments Product Review Committee of MSSB’s Alternative Investments Group.  Prior to his current role, Mr. Daglioglu was a Senior Analyst at the Product Origination Group within Morgan Stanley managed futures department from December 2003 until the formation of MSSB in June 2009.  In addition to his responsibilities within managed futures department, Mr. Daglioglu was also the lead investment analyst for Global Macro and Managed Futures strategies within Morgan Stanley Graystone Research Group from February 2007 to June 2009.  Mr. Daglioglu served as a consultant at the Product Origination Group within Morgan Stanley managed futures department from June 2003 to November 2003.  Mr. Daglioglu received a BS degree in Industrial Engineering from Galatasaray University in June 2000 and a MBA degree in Finance from the University of Massachusetts-Amherst’s Isenberg School of Management in May 2003.  Mr. Daglioglu was awarded a full merit scholarship and research assistantship at the Center for International Securities and Derivatives Markets during his graduate studies.  In this capacity, he worked with various major financial
 
 
 - 67 -
  
 institutions in performance monitoring, asset allocation and statistical analysis projects and specialized on alternative approaches to risk assessment for hedge funds and managed futures.  Mr. Daglioglu wrote and published numerous research papers on alternative investments.  Mr. Daglioglu is a Chartered Alternative Investment Analyst charterholder.
 
 Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance
 To the Partnership’s knowledge, all required Section 16(a) filings during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010, were timely and correctly made.
 
 Code of Ethics
 The Partnership has not adopted a code of ethics that applies to the Partnership’s principal executive officer, principal financial officer, principal accounting officer or controller, or persons performing similar functions.  The Partnership is operated by its general partner, Ceres (Demeter, prior to December 1, 2010).  The President, Chief Financial Officer, and each member of the Board of Directors of Ceres (Demeter, prior to December 1, 2010) are employees of Morgan Stanley or Morgan Stanley Smith Barney and are subject to the code of ethics adopted by Morgan Stanley, the text of which can be viewed on Morgan Stanley’s website at http://www.morganstanley.com/individual/ourcommitment/codeofconduct.html.
 
 The Audit Committee
 The Partnership is operated by its general partner, Ceres (Demeter, prior to December 1, 2010), and has no audit committee.  However, Demeter had a Disclosure Committee that met quarterly to review periodic filings made by the Partnership for which Demeter acted as the general partner.  Demeter’s Disclosure Committee reported directly to the Board of Directors of Demeter which served as its audit committee.
 - 68 -
 
 
 Item 11.  EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
 The Partnership has no directors and executive officers.  As a limited partnership, the business of the Partnership is managed by Ceres (Demeter, prior to December 1, 2010), which is responsible for the administration of the business affairs of the Partnership but receives no compensation for such services.
 
 Item 12.   SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND
 MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS
 (a) Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners – At December 31, 2010, there were no persons known to be beneficial owners of more than 5 percent of the Units.
 
 (b)  Security Ownership of Management – At December 31, 2010, Ceres owned 127,751.316 Units of general partnership interest, representing a 1.02 percent interest in the Partnership.
 
 (c)  Changes in Control – None.
 
 
 
 Item 13.  CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND
 DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE
 
 
 Refer to Note 2 – “Summary of Significant Accounting Policies”, Note 3 – “Related Party Transactions”, and Note 4 “Trading Advisors”) of “Notes to Financial Statements”, in the accompanying Annual Report to Limited Partners for the year ended December 31, 2010, which is incorporated by reference to Exhibit 13.01 of this Form 10-K.  In its capacity as the Partnership’s retail commodity broker, MS&Co. received commodity brokerage fees (paid and accrued by the Partnership) of $21,017,924 for the year ended December 31, 2010.
 
 - 69 -
  
 Item 14.  PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES
 MS&Co. on behalf of the Partnership, pays all accounting fees.  The Partnership reimburses MS&Co. through the brokerage fees it pays, as discussed in the Notes to Financial Statements in the Annual Report to the Limited Partners for the year ended December 31, 2010.
 
 (1)  Audit Fees.  The aggregate fees for professional services rendered by Deloitte & Touche LLP (“D&T”) in connection with their audit of the Partnership’s Financial Statements and review of the Financial Statements included in the Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and in connection with statutory and regulatory filings were approximately $39,933 for the year ended December 31, 2010, and $54,009 for the year ended December 31, 2009.
 
 (2)  Audit-Related Fees.  None.
 
 (3)  Tax Fees. The Partnership did not pay D&T any amounts in 2010 and 2009 for professional services in connection with tax compliance, tax advice, and tax planning.  The Partnership engaged another unaffiliated professional firm to provide services in connection with tax compliance, tax advice, and tax planning.
 
 
 
 (4)  All Other Fees.  None.
 
 
 
 
 - 70 -
  
 PART IV
 
 Item 15.   EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES
 
 1. Listing of Financial Statements
 The following financial statements and report of independent registered public accounting firm, all appearing in the accompanying Annual Report to Limited Partners for the year ended December 31, 2010, are incorporated by reference to Exhibit 13.01 of this Form 10-K:
 -
Report of Deloitte & Touche LLP, independent registered public accounting firm.
 
 -
Statements of Financial Condition, including the Condensed Schedules of Investments, as of December 31, 2010 and 2009.
 
 -
Statements of Operations and Changes in Partners' Capital for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009, and 2008.
 
 -           Notes to Financial Statements.
 
 
 With the exception of the aforementioned information and the information incorporated in Items 7, 8, and 13, the Annual Report to Limited Partners for the year ended December 31, 2010, is not deemed to be filed with this report.
 
 2. Listing of Financial Statement Schedules
 No Financial Statement schedules are required to be filed with this report.
 
 3. Exhibits
 For the exhibits incorporated by reference or filed herewith to this report, refer to Exhibit Index on Pages E-1 to E-3.
 
 - 71 -




















SIGNATURE





Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.





MORGAN STANLEY SMITH BARNEY CHARTER GRAHAM L.P.(Registrant)By:
Ceres Managed Futures LLC(General Partner)March 29, 2011
By:Walter Davis,President





Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.





Ceres Managed Futures LLC





BY:
/s/


March 29, 2011Walter Davis, President/s/


March 29, 2011Jennifer Magro, Chief Financial Officer, Director/s/


March 29, 2011Ian Bernstein, Director/s/


March 29, 2011Alper Daglioglu, Director/s/


March 29, 2011Patrick T. Egan, Director/s/


March 29, 2011Harry Handler, Director/s/


March 29, 2011Douglas J. Ketterer, Director/s/


March 29, 2011Michael P. McGrath, Director





- 72 -





EXHIBIT INDEX


ITEM




3.01
Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement, dated September 16, 2010, is incorporated by reference from Exhibit 2.01(B) of the Partnership’s Form 8-K (File No. 0-25603) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on September 16, 2010.




3.02
Certificate of Limited Partnership, dated July 15, 1998, is incorporated by reference from Exhibit 3.02 of the Partnership’s Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-60115) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on July 29, 1998.




3.03
Certificate of Amendment of Certificate of Limited Partnership, dated November 1, 2001 (changing its name from Dean Witter Graham L.P.), is incorporated by reference from Exhibit 3.01 of the Partnership's Form 10-K (File No. 0-25603) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 6, 2001.




3.04
Certificate of Amendment of Certificate of Limited Partnership, dated June 1, 2009 (changing the name and mailing address of the general partner of the Partnership), is incorporated by reference from Exhibit 3.04 of the Partnership’s Form 8-K (File No. 0-25603) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on June 4, 2009.




3.05
Certificate of Amendment of Certificate of Limited Partnership, dated September 29, 2009, (changing its name from Morgan Stanley Charter Graham L.P. to Morgan Stanley Smith Barney Charter Graham L.P.), is incorporated by reference from Exhibit 3.05 of the Partnership’s Form    8-K (File No. 0-25603) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 5, 2009.




3.06
Certificate of Amendment of Certificate of Limited Partnership, dated August 23, 2010, (changing its name from Morgan Stanley Smith Barney Charter Graham L.P. to Managed Futures Charter Graham L.P.), is incorporated by reference from Exhibit 99.31 of the Partnership’s Form 8-K (File No. 0-25603) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 31, 2010.




10.02
Management Agreement, dated as of November 6, 1998, among the Partnership, the General Partner, and Graham Capital Management, L.P., is incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.01 of the Partnership's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (File No. 0-25603) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 17, 1999.




10.03
Form of Subscription and Exchange Agreement and Power of Attorney to be expected by each purchaser of Units is incorporated by reference from Exhibit B of the Partnership’s Prospectus, dated May 1, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Rule 424(b)(3) under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, on May 6, 2008.



















E-1










10.04
Escrow Agreement, dated as of July 25, 2007, among The Bank of New York, the General Partner, and Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated is incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.04 of the Partnership’s Form 8-K (File No. 0-25603) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on July 31, 2007.




10.05
Amended and Restated Customer Agreement between the Partnership and Morgan Stanley DW, dated as of November 13, 2000, is incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.01 of the Partnership’s Form 8-K (File No. 0-25603) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 6, 2001.




10.05(a)
Amendment No. 1 to the Amended and Restated Customer Agreement between the Partnership and Morgan Stanley DW Inc. is incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.05(a) of the Partnership’s Form 10-Q (File No. 0-25603) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 10, 2005.




10.05(b)
Amendment No. 1 to the Customer Agreement between the Partnership and Morgan Stanley DW Inc., dated July 1, 2005, is incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.05(b) of the Partnership’s Form 10-Q (File No. 0-25603) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 12, 2005.




10.06
Commodity Futures Customer Agreement between MS&Co. and the Partnership, and acknowledged and agreed to by Morgan Stanley DW, dated as of November 6, 2000, is incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.02 of the Partnership’s Form 8-K (File No. 0-25603) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 6, 2001.




10.07
Customer Agreement between the Partnership and MSIP, dated as of November 6, 2000, is incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.04 of the Partnership’s Form 8-K (File No. 0-25603) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 6, 2001.




10.08
Foreign Exchange and Options Master Agreement between MS&Co. and the Partnership, dated as of August 30, 1999, is incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.05 of the Partnership’s Form 8-K (File No. 0-25603) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 6, 2001.




10.10
Securities Account Control Agreement among the Partnership and MS&Co. dated as of May 1, 2000, is incorporated by reference from Exhibit 10.03 of the Partnership’s Form 8-K (File No. 0-25603) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 6, 2001.





























E-2







13.01
December 31, 2010, Annual Report to Limited Partners is filed herewith.




31.01
Certification of President of Ceres Managed Futures LLC, the general partner of the Partnership pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.




31.02
Certification of Chief Financial Officer of Ceres Managed Futures LLC, the general partner of the Partnership pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.




32.01
Certification of President of Ceres Managed Futures LLC, the general partner of the Partnership, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.




32.02
Certification of Chief Financial Officer of Ceres Managed Futures LLC, the general partner of the Partnership, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.


































































































E-3