SEC Filing Document

Company: VanEck BNB ETF
Ticker: 
CIK: 2066824
Filing Type: S-1/A
Document Type: S-1/A
Date Filed: 2026-04-28
Accession Number: 0001628280-26-027783
Exchange: 
SIC Code: 6221
SIC Description: Commodity Contracts Brokers & Dealers
URL: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/2066824/000162828026027783/vaneckbnbs-1a4.htm

Chunk 17 of 91
Word Count: 1448
Character Count: 9346

Document Content:

rebranding initiative, a digital asset may not be able to achieve or maintain brand name recognition or status that is comparable to the recognition and status previously enjoyed by such digital asset. The failure of any name change and any associated rebranding initiative by a digital asset may result in such digital asset not realizing some or all of the anticipated benefits contemplated by the name change and associated rebranding initiative, and could negatively impact the value of BNB and the value of the Shares. If A Malicious Actor, Group Or Botnet Obtains Control Of A Sufficient Amount Of The Validating Power On The BNB Smart Chain, Or Otherwise Obtains Control Over The BNB Smart Chain Through Its Influence Over Core Developers Or Otherwise, Such Actor Or Botnet Could Manipulate The BNB Smart Chain To Adversely Affect The Value Of The Shares Or The Ability Of The Trust To Operate

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

BNB Smart Chain uses a Proof-of-Staked-Authority consensus mechanism in which 45 active validators are selected based on staking and, in each epoch, 21 consensus validators, currently 18 Cabinets and 3 Candidates, are selected to produce blocks. BNB Smart Chain’s fast-finality mechanism generally requires votes from at least a two-thirds supermajority of the relevant consensus validators to justify and finalize blocks, typically within two blocks; if fast finality is unavailable, the chain may continue to grow under probabilistic finality, and block production can continue so long as more than one-half of the relevant validators remain online. Accordingly, a malicious actor or coordinated group that obtained control of two-thirds or more of the relevant validator or fast-finality voting power could materially increase the risk of censorship, transaction reordering, and double-spend-like attacks, and could continue to participate in block production and earn transaction-fee-based rewards unless and until it is slashed, removed, or otherwise displaced. A malicious actor or coordinated group that obtained one-third or more of the relevant fast-finality voting power could impede fast finality and increase confirmation delays and reorganization risk.

BNB Smart Chain’s current slashing framework penalizes double-signing, malicious fast-finality voting, and validator unavailability.

With control of the respective threshold of relevant validator voting power on the BNB Smart Chain, it could be possible for the malicious actor to control, exclude or modify the ordering of transactions on the BNB Smart Chain and prevent the confirmation of other users’ transactions, while continuing to earn transaction-fee-based validator rewards and confirm its own blocks, for so long as it maintained control. To the extent that such malicious actor or botnet did not yield its control of the validating power on the BNB Smart Chain or the BNB Smart Chain community did not reject the fraudulent blocks as malicious or to the extent that such bad actor did not yield its

control of processing power, reversing any changes made to the BNB Smart Chain may be difficult or impossible. Further, a malicious actor or botnet could create a flood of transactions in order to slow down the BNB Smart Chain.

For example, in August 2020, the Ethereum Classic network was the target of two double-spend attacks by an unknown actor or actors that gained more than 50% of the processing power of the Ethereum Classic network. The attacks resulted in reorganizations of the Ethereum Classic blockchain that allowed the attacker or attackers to reverse previously recorded transactions in excess of $5.0 million and $1.0 million. Any similar attacks on the BNB Smart Chain could negatively impact the value of BNB and the value of the Shares.

In addition, in May 2019, the Bitcoin Cash network experienced a 51% attack when two large mining pools reversed a series of transactions in order to stop an unknown miner from taking advantage of a flaw in a recent Bitcoin Cash protocol upgrade. Although this particular attack was arguably benevolent, the fact that such coordinated activity was able to occur may negatively impact perceptions of the Bitcoin Cash network. Although the two attacks described above took place on proof-of-work-based networks, it is possible that a similar attack may occur on the BNB Smart Chain, which could negatively impact the value of BNB and the value of the Shares.

Although there are no known reports of malicious control of the BNB Smart Chain, if groups of coordinating or connected BNB holders that together have more than 50% of outstanding BNB, were to stake that BNB and run validators, they could exert authority over the validation of BNB transactions. This risk is heightened if over 50% of the validating power on the network falls within the jurisdiction of a single governmental authority. If network participants, including the core developers and the administrators of validating pools, do not act to ensure greater decentralization of BNB, the feasibility of a malicious actor obtaining control of the validating power on the BNB Smart Chain will increase, which may adversely affect the value of BNB and the value of the Shares.

A malicious actor may also obtain control over the BNB Smart Chain through its influence over core developers by gaining direct control over a core developer or an otherwise influential programmer. To the extent that users and validators accept amendments to the source code proposed by the controlled core developer, other core developers do not counter such amendments, and such amendments enable the malicious exploitation of the BNB Smart Chain, the risk that a malicious actor may be able to obtain control of the BNB Smart Chain in this manner exists. Moreover, it is possible that a group of BNB holders that together control more than 50% of outstanding BNB are in fact part of the initial or core developer group, or are otherwise influential members of the BNB Smart Chain community. To the extent that the initial or existing core developer groups also control more than the relevant thresholds of outstanding BNB, as some believe, the risk of and arising from this particular group of users obtaining control of the validating power on the BNB Smart Chain will be even greater, and should this materialize, it may adversely affect the value of the Shares.

We Face Risks Relating To The Potential Compromise Of The BNB Smart Chain And Other Cryptocurrencies’ Network Security By Emerging Technologies, Including Artificial Intelligence And Quantum Computing, Which May Materially And Adversely Impact Our Operations And Financial Condition.

The security and integrity of the BNB Smart Chain and other cryptocurrencies’ networks are fundamentally dependent on the robustness of its cryptographic algorithms. BNB and other cryptocurrencies’ protocol relies heavily on public key cryptography and hashing algorithms to secure transactions, safeguard private keys, and prevent double-spending. Advances in emerging technologies, particularly artificial intelligence (“AI”) and quantum computing may pose significant risks to the BNB Smart Chain and other cryptocurrencies’ network’s security and operational stability.

Quantum computing, in particular, presents a long-term threat to the cryptographic assumptions underpinning the BNB Smart Chain and other cryptocurrencies. Should quantum computing achieve sufficient maturity, it could undermine the effectiveness of the cryptographic algorithms used to secure the blockchain, such as elliptic curve digital signature algorithms (ECDSA). A sufficiently powerful quantum computer could potentially reverse-engineer private keys from public addresses or compromise the blockchain’s consensus mechanism, leading to the theft of digital assets, double-spending, and other forms of fraud. Although current quantum computing capabilities are not yet at this level, advancements in quantum technologies could materialize more rapidly than anticipated, creating significant systemic risks for the BNB Smart Chain.