ZKH Group Limited Sponsored ADR (ZKH) Risk Analysis

Our auditor, the independent registered public accounting firm that issues the audit report included elsewhere in this annual report, as an auditor of companies that are traded publicly in the United States and a firm registered with the PCAOB, is subject to laws in the United States pursuant to which the PCAOB conducts regular inspections to assess its compliance with the applicable professional standards. The auditor is located in mainland China, a jurisdiction where the PCAOB was historically unable to conduct inspections and investigations completely before 2022. The inability of the PCAOB to conduct inspections of auditors in China in the past has made it more difficult to evaluate the effectiveness of our independent registered public accounting firm's audit procedures or quality control procedures as compared to auditors outside of China that are subject to the PCAOB inspections. On December 15, 2022, the PCAOB issued a report that vacated its December 16, 2021 determination and removed mainland China and Hong Kong from the list of jurisdictions where it is unable to inspect or investigate completely registered public accounting firms. However, if the PCAOB determines in the future that it no longer has full access to inspect and investigate completely accounting firms in mainland China and Hong Kong, and we use an accounting firm headquartered in one of these jurisdictions to issue an audit report on our financial statements filed with the SEC, we and investors in our ADSs would be deprived of the benefits of such PCAOB inspections, which could cause investors and potential investors in the ADSs to lose confidence in our audit procedures and reported financial information and the quality of our financial statements.

On December 26, 2017, the National Development and Reform Commission promulgated the Administrative Measures on Enterprise Overseas Investments, which became effective on March 1, 2018. According to this regulation, non-sensitive overseas investment projects are subject to record-filing requirements with the local branch of the National Development and Reform Commission. On September 6, 2014, the Ministry of Commerce promulgated the Administrative Measures on Overseas Investments, which became effective on October 6, 2014. According to this regulation, overseas investments of PRC enterprises that involve non-sensitive countries and regions and non-sensitive industries are subject to record-filing requirements with a local branch of Ministry of Commerce. According to the Circular of the State Administration of Foreign Exchange on Issuing the Regulations on Foreign Exchange Administration of the Overseas Direct Investment of Domestic Institutions, which was promulgated by SAFE on July 13, 2009 and became effective on August 1, 2009, PRC enterprises must register for overseas direct investment with a local SAFE branch. We may not be fully informed of the identities of all of our shareholders or beneficial owners who are PRC entities, and we cannot provide any assurance that all of our shareholders and beneficial owners who are PRC entities will comply with our request to complete the overseas direct investment procedures under the aforementioned regulations or other related rules in a timely manner, or at all. If they fail to complete the filings or registrations required by the overseas direct investment regulations, the authorities may order them to suspend or cease the implementation of such investment and make corrections within a specified time, which may adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The trading price of our ADSs has been volatile and has ranged from a low of US$12.75 per ADS to a high of US$21.91 per ADS since our ADSs started to trade on the NYSE, and could fluctuate widely due to factors beyond our control. This may happen because of broad market and industry factors, like the performance and fluctuation of the market prices of other companies with business operations located mainly in China that have listed their securities in the United States. A number of Chinese companies have listed or are in the process of listing their securities on U.S. stock markets. The securities of some of these companies have experienced significant volatility, including price declines in connection with their initial public offerings. The trading performances of these Chinese companies' securities after their offerings may affect the attitudes of investors toward Chinese companies listed in the United States in general and consequently may impact the trading performance of our ADSs, regardless of our actual operating performance. In addition to market and industry factors, the price and trading volume for our ADSs may be highly volatile for factors specific to our own operations, including the following: - variations in our revenues, earnings and cash flow;- announcements of new investments, acquisitions, strategic partnerships or joint ventures by us or our competitors;- announcements of new services and expansions by us or our competitors;- changes in financial estimates by securities analysts;- detrimental adverse publicity about us, our services or our industry;- additions or departures of key personnel;- release of lock-up or other transfer restrictions on our outstanding equity securities or sales of additional equity securities;- trends in the global economy in general and China's economy in particular;- rising international geopolitical tensions; and - potential litigation or regulatory investigations. Any of these factors may result in large and sudden changes in the volume and price at which our ADSs will trade. In the past, shareholders of public companies have often brought securities class action suits against those companies following periods of instability in the market price of their securities. If we were involved in a class action suit, it could divert a significant amount of our management's attention and other resources from our business and operations and require us to incur significant expenses to defend the suit, which could harm our results of operations. Any such class action suit, whether or not successful, could harm our reputation and restrict our ability to raise capital in the future. In addition, if a claim is successfully made against us, we may be required to pay significant damages, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Our authorized share capital is divided into Class A ordinary shares and Class B ordinary shares (with certain shares remaining undesignated, with power for our directors to designate and issue such classes of shares as they think fit.) Holders of Class A ordinary shares are entitled to one vote per share, while holders of Class B ordinary shares are entitled to 25 votes per share. Each Class B ordinary share is convertible into one Class A ordinary share at any time by the holder thereof, while Class A ordinary shares are not convertible into Class B ordinary shares under any circumstances. Any future issuances of Class B ordinary shares may be dilutive to the voting power of holders of Class A ordinary shares. Any conversions of Class B ordinary shares into Class A ordinary shares may dilute the percentage ownership of the existing holders of Class A ordinary shares within their class of ordinary shares. Such conversion may increase the aggregate voting power of the existing holders of Class A ordinary shares. In the event that we have multiple holders of Class B ordinary shares in the future and certain of them convert their Class B ordinary shares into Class A ordinary shares, the remaining holders who retain their Class B ordinary shares may experience increases in their relative voting power. Certain executive officers, an employee and an employee shareholding platform of our company, collectively, or the Management Shareholders, beneficially owned all of our issued Class B ordinary shares. As of March 31, 2024, Mr. Long Chen beneficially owned 890,677,378 Class B ordinary shares, representing 15.8% of our total issued and outstanding ordinary shares and 66.5% of our total voting power; and the Management Shareholders, as a group, in aggregate beneficially owned 1,161,080,000 Class B ordinary shares, representing 20.6% of our total issued and outstanding ordinary shares and 86.6% of our total voting power. Each of the shareholding entities of the Management Shareholders other than Mr. Long Chen executed an irrevocable proxy and power of attorney, pursuant to which the voting rights of all Class B ordinary shares held by it have been irrevocably and fully delegated to Mr. Long Chen, causing Mr. Long Chen's total voting power to increase to 86.6% as of March 31, 2024. As a result of the dual-class share structure, the delegation of voting rights and the concentration of ownership, Mr. Long Chen has considerable influence over matters requiring shareholders' approval, such as decisions regarding mergers and consolidations, election of directors, amendments to our memorandum and articles of association and other significant corporate actions, except that holders of Class B ordinary shares shall abstain from voting in the event that ZKH Group Limited seeks its shareholders' approval with respect to any amendment of its Amended and Restated 2022 Stock Incentive Plan. Holders of our Class B ordinary shares may take actions that are not in the best interest of us or our other shareholders. As of March 31, 2024, we have 4,455,000 ADSs outstanding, representing 155,925,000 Class A ordinary shares. Holders of these ADSs beneficially own 2.8% of our total ordinary shares on an as-converted basis and 0.5% of the aggregate voting power. This concentration of ownership will discourage, delay or prevent a change in control of our company, which could have the effect of depriving our other shareholders of the opportunity to receive a premium for their shares as part of a sale of our company and may reduce the price of our ADSs. This concentrated control may significantly limit your ability to influence corporate matters and could discourage others from pursuing any potential merger, takeover or other change of control transactions that holders of Class A ordinary shares and ADSs may view as beneficial.

Certain shareholder advisory firms have announced changes to their eligibility criteria for inclusion of shares of public companies on certain indices, including the S&P 500, to exclude companies with multiple classes of shares and companies whose public shareholders hold no more than 5% of total voting power from being added to such indices. In addition, several shareholder advisory firms have announced their opposition to the use of multiple class structures. As a result, the dual-class structure of our ordinary shares may prevent the inclusion of our ADSs representing Class A ordinary shares in such indices and may cause shareholder advisory firms to publish negative commentary about our corporate governance practices or otherwise seek to cause us to change our capital structure. Any such exclusion from indices could result in a less active trading market for our ADSs. Any actions or publications by shareholder advisory firms critical of our corporate governance practices or capital structure could also adversely affect the value of our ADSs.

The trading market for our ADSs will be influenced by research or reports that industry or securities analysts publish about our business. If one or more analysts who cover us downgrade our ADSs, the market price for our ADSs would likely decline. If one or more of these analysts cease to cover us or fail to regularly publish reports on us, we could lose visibility in the financial markets, which in turn could cause the market price or trading volume for our ADSs to decline.

We are an exempted company incorporated under the laws of the Cayman Islands. Our corporate affairs are governed by our memorandum and articles of association, the Companies Act (As Revised) of the Cayman Islands and the common law of the Cayman Islands. The rights of shareholders to take action against the directors, actions by minority shareholders and the fiduciary duties of our directors to us under Cayman Islands law are to a large extent governed by the common law of the Cayman Islands. The common law of the Cayman Islands is derived in part from comparatively limited judicial precedent in the Cayman Islands as well as from the common law of England, the decisions of whose courts are of persuasive authority, but are not binding, on a court in the Cayman Islands. The rights of our shareholders and the fiduciary duties of our directors under Cayman Islands law are not as clearly established as they would be under statutes or judicial precedent in some jurisdictions in the United States. In particular, the Cayman Islands has a less developed body of securities laws than the United States. Some U.S. states, such as Delaware, have more fully developed and judicially interpreted bodies of corporate law than the Cayman Islands. In addition, Cayman Islands companies may not have a standing to initiate a shareholder derivative action in a federal court of the United States. Shareholders of Cayman Islands exempted companies like us have no general rights under Cayman Islands law to inspect corporate records (other than the memorandum and articles of association, special resolutions, and the register of mortgages and charges, of such companies) or to obtain copies of lists of shareholders of these companies. Our directors have discretion under our articles of association to determine whether or not, and under what conditions, our corporate records may be inspected by our shareholders, but are not obliged to make them available to our shareholders. This may make it more difficult for you to obtain the information needed to establish any facts necessary for a shareholder motion or to solicit proxies from other shareholders in connection with a proxy contest. Certain corporate governance practices in the Cayman Islands, which is our home country, differ significantly from requirements for companies incorporated in other jurisdictions such as the United States. If we choose to follow home country practice in the future, our shareholders may be afforded less protection than they otherwise would under rules and regulations applicable to U.S. domestic issuers. As a result of all of the above, our public shareholders may have more difficulty in protecting their interests in the face of actions taken by management, members of the board of directors or controlling shareholders than they would as public shareholders of a company incorporated in the United States. For a discussion of significant differences between the provisions of the Companies Act (As Revised) of the Cayman Islands and the laws applicable to companies incorporated in the United States and their shareholders, see "Item 10. Additional Information-B. Memorandum and Articles of Association-Differences in Corporate Law."

ZKH Group Limited is a Cayman Islands exempted company and substantially all of our assets are located outside of the United States. Substantially all of our current operations are conducted through our mainland China subsidiaries. In addition of our current directors and officers are nationals and residents of countries other than the United States. Substantially all of the assets of these persons are located outside the United States. As a result, it may be difficult or impossible for you to bring an action against us or against these individuals in the United States in the event that you believe that your rights have been infringed under the U.S. federal securities laws or otherwise. Even if you are successful in bringing an action of this kind, the laws of the Cayman Islands and in mainland China may render you unable to enforce a judgment against our assets or the assets of our directors and officers. There is uncertainty as to whether the judgment of United States courts will be directly enforced in Hong Kong, as the United States and Hong Kong do not have a treaty or other arrangements providing for reciprocal recognition and enforcement of judgments of courts of the United States in civil and commercial matters. However, a foreign judgment may be enforced in Hong Kong at common law by bringing an action in a Hong Kong court since the judgment may be regarded as creating a debt between the parties to it; provided that the foreign judgment, among other things, is a final judgment conclusive upon the merits of the claim and is for a liquidated amount in a civil matter and not in respect of taxes, fines, penalties, or similar charges. Such a judgment may not, in any event, be so enforced in Hong Kong if (a) it was obtained by fraud; (b) the proceedings in which the judgment was obtained were opposed to natural justice; (c) its enforcement or recognition would be contrary to the public policy of Hong Kong; (d) the court of the United States was not jurisdictionally competent; or (e) the judgment was in conflict with a prior Hong Kong judgment. For more information regarding the relevant laws of the Cayman Islands, mainland China and Hong Kong, see "Item 6. Directors, Senior Management and Employees-E. Share Ownership-Enforceability of Civil Liabilities."

Because we are a foreign private issuer under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, we are exempt from certain provisions of the securities rules and regulations in the United States that are applicable to U.S. domestic issuers, including: - the rules under the Exchange Act requiring the filing of quarterly reports on Form 10-Q or current reports on Form 8-K with the SEC;- the sections of the Exchange Act regulating the solicitation of proxies, consents, or authorizations in respect of a security registered under the Exchange Act;- the sections of the Exchange Act requiring insiders to file public reports of their stock ownership and trading activities and liability for insiders who profit from trades made in a short period of time;- the selective disclosure rules by issuers of material nonpublic information under Regulation FD; and - certain audit committee independence requirements in Rule 10A-3 of the Exchange Act. We are required to file an annual report on Form 20-F within four months of the end of each fiscal year. In addition, we intend to publish our results on a quarterly basis through press releases, distributed pursuant to the rules and regulations of the NYSE. Press releases relating to financial results and material events will also be furnished to the SEC on Form 6-K. However, the information we are required to file with or furnish to the SEC will be less extensive and less timely than that required to be filed with the SEC by U.S. domestic issuers. As a result, you may not be afforded the same protections or information that would be made available to you were you investing in a U.S. domestic issuer.

As a Cayman Islands exempted company listed on the NYSE, we are subject to the NYSE corporate governance listing standards. However, the NYSE rules permit a foreign private issuer like us to follow the corporate governance practices of its home country. Certain corporate governance practices in the Cayman Islands, which is our home country, may differ significantly from the NYSE corporate governance listing standards. We are permitted to elect to rely on home country practice to be exempted from the corporate governance requirements. Currently, we do not plan to rely on home country practice with respect to our corporate governance. If we choose to follow home country practices in the future, our shareholders may be afforded less protection than they would otherwise enjoy under the NYSE corporate governance listing standards applicable to U.S. domestic issuers.

We are a "controlled company" as defined under the NYSE corporate governance listing standards because Mr. Long Chen, our chairman of the board of directors and chief executive officer, beneficially owns more than 50% of our total voting power. For so long as we remain a controlled company under that definition, we are permitted to elect to rely on, and in the future may rely on, certain exemptions from corporate governance rules, including an exemption from the rule that a majority of our board of directors must be independent directors. As a result, you may not have the same protection afforded to shareholders of companies that are subject to these corporate governance requirements.

Holders of ADSs do not have the same rights as our registered shareholders. As a holder of our ADSs, you do not have any direct right to attend general meetings of our shareholders or to cast any votes at such meetings. You are only able to exercise the voting rights with respect to the underlying Class A ordinary shares represented by your ADSs indirectly by giving voting instructions to the depositary in accordance with the provisions of the deposit agreement. Under the deposit agreement, you may only vote by giving voting instructions to the depositary. Upon receipt of your voting instructions, the depositary will vote the underlying Class A ordinary shares represented by your ADSs in accordance with your instructions. You are not able to directly exercise your right to vote with respect to the underlying shares unless you withdraw the Class A ordinary shares and become the registered holder of such Class A ordinary shares prior to the record date for the general meeting. Under our currently effective memorandum and articles of association, the minimum notice period required for convening a general meeting is seven calendar days. When a general meeting is convened, you may not receive sufficient advance notice to withdraw the shares underlying your ADSs to allow you to vote with respect to any specific matter or resolution to be considered and voted upon at the general meeting. In addition, under our currently effective memorandum and articles of association, for the purposes of determining those shareholders who are entitled to attend and vote at any general meeting, our directors may close our register of members and/or fix in advance a record date for such meeting, and such closure of our register of members or the setting of such a record date may prevent you from withdrawing the underlying Class A ordinary shares represented by your ADSs and from becoming the registered holder of such shares prior to the record date, so that you would not be able to attend the general meeting or to vote directly. If we ask for your instructions, the depositary will notify you of the upcoming vote and will arrange to deliver our voting materials to you. We cannot assure you that you will receive the voting materials in time to ensure that you can instruct the depositary to vote your shares. In addition, the depositary and its agents are not responsible for failing to carry out voting instructions or for their manner of carrying out your voting instructions. This means that you may not be able to exercise your right to vote and you may have no legal remedy if the shares underlying your ADSs are not voted as you requested. Furthermore, as a Cayman Islands exempted company, we are not obliged by the Companies Act (As Revised) of the Cayman Islands to call shareholders' annual general meetings, and in your capacity as an ADS holder, you will not have any rights to call or requisition a shareholders' meeting.

Under the deposit agreement for the ADSs, if you do not timely provide voting instructions to the depositary, the depositary will give us a discretionary proxy to vote our Class A ordinary shares underlying your ADSs at shareholders' meetings unless: - we have failed to timely provide the depositary with notice of the meeting and related voting materials;- we have instructed the depositary that we do not wish a discretionary proxy to be given;- we have informed the depositary that there is substantial opposition as to a matter to be voted on at the meeting;- we have informed the depositary that a matter to be voted on at the meeting may have an adverse impact on shareholders; or - the voting at the meeting is to be made on a show of hands. The effect of this discretionary proxy is that if you do not timely provide voting instructions to the depositary in the manner required by the deposit agreement, you cannot prevent our Class A ordinary shares underlying your ADSs from being voted, except under the circumstances described above. This may make it more difficult for ADS holders to influence the management of our company. Holders of our Class A ordinary shares are not subject to this discretionary proxy.

The deposit agreement governing the ADSs representing our Class A ordinary shares provides that, to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law, holders and beneficial owners of ADSs irrevocably waive the right to a jury trial of any claim that they may have against us or the depositary arising from or relating to our Class A ordinary shares, our ADSs or the deposit agreement, including any claim under the U.S. federal securities laws. The waiver continues to apply to claims that arise during the period when a holder holds the ADSs, even if the ADS holder subsequently withdraws the underlying Class A ordinary shares. However, you will not be deemed, by agreeing to the terms of the deposit agreement, to have waived our or the depositary's compliance with U.S. federal securities laws and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder. In fact, you cannot waive our or the depositary's compliance with U.S. federal securities laws and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder. If we or the depositary opposed a demand for jury trial relying on the above-mentioned jury trial waiver, it is up to the court to determine whether such waiver is enforceable considering the facts and circumstances of that case in accordance with the applicable state and federal law. If this jury trial waiver provision is prohibited by applicable law, an action could nevertheless proceed under the terms of the deposit agreement with a jury trial. To our knowledge, the enforceability of a jury trial waiver under the federal securities laws has not been finally adjudicated by a federal court or by the United States Supreme Court. Nonetheless, we believe that a jury trial waiver provision is generally enforceable under the laws of the State of New York, which govern the deposit agreement, by a federal or state court in the City of New York. In determining whether to enforce a jury trial waiver provision, New York courts will consider whether the visibility of the jury trial waiver provision within the agreement is sufficiently prominent such that a party has knowingly waived any right to trial by jury. We believe that this is the case with respect to the deposit agreement and the ADSs. In addition, New York courts will not enforce a jury trial waiver provision in order to bar a viable setoff or counterclaim sounding in fraud or one which is based upon a creditor's negligence in failing to liquidate collateral upon a guarantor's demand, or in the case of an intentional tort claim, none of which we believe are applicable in the case of the deposit agreement or the ADSs. If you or any other holders or beneficial owners of ADSs bring a claim against us or the depositary relating to the matters arising under the deposit agreement or our ADSs, including claims under federal securities laws, you or such other holder or beneficial owner may not have the right to a jury trial regarding such claims, which may limit and discourage lawsuits against us or the depositary. If a lawsuit is brought against us or the depositary according to the deposit agreement, it may be heard only by a judge or justice of the applicable trial court, which would be conducted according to different civil procedures and may have different outcomes compared to that of a jury trial, including results that could be less favorable to the plaintiff(s) in any such action. Moreover, as the jury trial waiver relates to claims arising out of or relating to the ADSs or the deposit agreement, we believe that, as a matter of construction of the clause, the waiver would likely continue to apply to ADS holders who withdraw the Class A ordinary shares from the ADS facility with respect to claims arising before the cancelation of the ADSs and the withdrawal of the Class A ordinary shares, and the waiver would most likely not apply to ADS holders who subsequently withdraw the Class A ordinary shares represented by ADSs from the ADS facility with respect to claims arising after the withdrawal. However, to our knowledge, there has been no case law on the applicability of the jury trial waiver to ADS holders who withdraw the Class A ordinary shares represented by the ADSs from the ADS facility.

Our currently effective memorandum and articles of association provide that, unless we consent in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (or, if the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York lacks subject matter jurisdiction over a particular dispute, the state courts in New York County, New York) is the exclusive forum within the United States for the resolution of any complaint asserting a cause of action arising out of or relating in any way to the federal securities laws of the United States, including the Securities Act and the Exchange Act, regardless of whether such legal suit, action, or proceeding also involves parties other than our company. The deposit agreement provides that the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (or, if the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York lacks subject matter jurisdiction over a particular dispute, the state courts in New York County, New York) shall have exclusive jurisdiction over any suit, action or proceeding against or involving us or the depositary, arising out of or relating in any way to the deposit agreement, including, without limitation, claims under the Securities Act arising out of or relating in any way to the deposit agreement. Since the deposit agreement provides that such jurisdiction provision applies to any such legal suit, action or proceeding, including, without limitation, claims under the Securities Act, such provision would apply also to any such suit, action or proceeding under the Exchange Act. The enforceability of similar federal court choice of forum provisions in other companies' organizational documents has been challenged in legal proceedings in the United States, and it is possible that a court could find this type of provision to be inapplicable or unenforceable. If a court were to find the federal choice of forum provision contained in our currently effective memorandum and articles of association or the deposit agreement to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions. If upheld, the forum selection clause in our currently effective memorandum and articles of association, as well as the forum selection provision in the deposit agreement, may limit a security-holder's ability to bring a claim against us, our directors and officers, the depositary, and potentially others in his or her preferred judicial forum, and this limitation may discourage such lawsuits. Holders of our shares or the ADSs will not be deemed to have waived our compliance with the federal securities laws and the regulations promulgated thereunder pursuant to the exclusive forum provision in our currently effective memorandum and articles of association and deposit agreement.