DISTRIBUTION DISCLOSURE | COMPOSITE PERFORMANCE HISTORY The information presented is a composite summary of performance of the Visium Balanced Fund, LP (from November 2005 to December 2015) and pro forma performance from accounts managed by Jacob Gottlieb for Balyasny Asset Management, LP (from January 1, 2002 to October 31, 2005) and Schonfeld Securities LLC (from April 16, 2001 to December 31, 2001). Other funds were under management during this time period, and this/other funds were managed beyond the time period presented. For the period November 1, 2005 onwards, the information presented is based on the actual result of a Class A, Limited Partner, new issue eligible investor in the Visium Balanced Fund, LP. As explained in greater detail below, the 2005 YTD returns link returns net of actual fees and expenses with returns, adjusted for model management fees, incentive allocations and expenses, from a portfolio in a master feeder hedge fund managed by Balyasny Asset Management, LP ("BAM"). For the period April 16, 2001 to October 31, 2005, all composite return data regarding Mr. Gottlieb’s investment performance presented here is hypothetical although the information is based on the actual dollar profit and loss (the “Gross Profit and Loss”) of Mr. Gottlieb’s accounts that he managed for BAM and that he managed while employed at Schonfeld Securities LLC (“Schonfeld”). The Gross Profit and Loss has been obtained from the brokerage account statements for the BAM accounts from January 1, 2002 – May 31, 2005 and from Schonfeld’s internal records for the Schonfeld account from April 16, 2001 – December 31, 2001. The Schonfeld account was a proprietary trading account; the BAM accounts were proprietary trading accounts until January 21, 2004, at which time they became a portfolio in a master‐feeder hedge fund. The pro forma net performance presented is calculated by applying model management fees, incentive allocations, and expenses to the Gross Profit and Loss. The model adjustments include a 2% management fee payable monthly, an operating expense assumption of 0.15% to 0.30% per annum and a 20% incentive allocation. These fees, allocations and expenses were not the actual fees, allocations and expenses charged to the investors in the BAM accounts or the Schonfeld account. The BAM accounts were charged an average annual implied fee of 57% of gross profits, consisting of a direct allocation of operating expenses, traders’ compensation and a performance fee from January 1, 2002 to January 20, 2004. The BAM accounts had their expenses passed through including portfolio manager compensation and a performance fee of 0% to 30% from January 21, 2004 to December 31, 2004 and 20% in 2005. For the period from January 1, 2002 to October 31, 2005 the pro forma net performance was calculated using Mr. Gottlieb’s estimated notional capital base that was allocated to the BAM accounts (the “Capital Base”). There are limited records in respect to the Capital Base in 2002 and for that time frame a good faith estimate of capital allocation was used. The Capital Base represents the notional or leverage capital that Mr. Gottlieb was allocated to manage the BAM accounts and this Capital Base exceeded the actual equity of the BAM accounts. For the period from April 16, 2001 to December 31, 2001, pro forma net performance was calculated using the monthly average gross market value of the Schonfeld account (the “Gross Market Value”). The Gross Market Value represents the value of all long and all short positions in the Schonfeld account and this Gross Market Value exceeded the actual equity of the Schonfeld account. Since the performance was being calculated using the Capital Base or Gross Market Value, as if it were equity, the interest charges associated with the BAM accounts and Schonfeld account have been reversed where that information is available. Furthermore, by utilizing the Gross Market Value or Capital Base rather than the equity base for calculating returns, the performance results may be unrepresentative; positive performance would have been better and negative performance would have been worse. The annual returns are presented using compounding which assumes the reinvestment of earnings and dividends whereas for these accounts the gross profit and loss was not reinvested and the Capital Base remained fixed excepting for changes in the allocation of the Capital Base. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Addendum P2: