THE PRUDENTIAL SERIES FUND

STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION • May 1, 2023 (as reissued May 31, 2023)

This Statement of Additional Information (SAI) of The Prudential Series Fund (the Trust) is not a prospectus and should be read in conjunction with the Prospectus of the Trust dated May 1, 2023 and can be obtained, without charge, by calling (800) 778-2255 or by writing to the Trust at 655 Broad Street, Newark, New Jersey 07102. This SAI has been incorporated by reference into the Trust's Prospectus.

The Trust's audited financial statements are incorporated into this SAI by reference to the Trust's 2022 Annual Report (File No. 811-03623). You may request a copy of the Annual Report at no charge by calling the telephone number or writing to the address indicated above. The portfolios of the Trust which are discussed in this SAI are noted on this front cover (each, a Portfolio and together, the Portfolios).

PSF Global Portfolio (Class I & Class III Shares)

PSF Mid-Cap Growth Portfolio (Class I, Class II & Class III Shares)

PSF Natural Resources Portfolio (Class I, Class II & Class III Shares)

PSF PGIM 50/50 Balanced Portfolio (Class I & Class III Shares)

PSF PGIM Flexible Managed Portfolio (Class I & Class III Shares)

PSF PGIM Government Income Portfolio (Class I & Class III Shares)

PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio (Class I & Class III Shares)

PSF PGIM High Yield Bond Portfolio (Class I & Class III Shares)

PSF PGIM Jennison Blend Portfolio (Class I, Class II & Class III Shares)

PSF PGIM Jennison Focused Blend Portfolio (Class I, Class II & Class III Shares)

PSF PGIM Jennison Growth Portfolio (Class I, Class II & Class III Shares)

PSF PGIM Jennison Value Portfolio (Class I, Class II & Class III Shares)

PSF PGIM Total Return Bond Portfolio (Class I & Class III Shares)

PSF Small-Cap Stock Index Portfolio (Class I & Class III Shares)

PSF Small-Cap Value Portfolio (Class I Shares)

PSF Stock Index Portfolio (Class I & Class III Shares)

 

Table of Contents 

3	PART I
3	INTRODUCTION
4	Trust PORTFOLIOS, INVESTMENT POLICIES & STRATEGIES
4	INVESTMENT RESTRICTIONS
7	INFORMATION ABOUT BOARD MEMBERS AND OFFICERS
16	MANAGEMENT AND ADVISORY ARRANGEMENTS
26	PORTFOLIO MANAGERS: OTHER ACCOUNTS
30	PORTFOLIO MANAGERS: COMPENSATION & CONFLICTS POLICIES
49	OTHER SERVICE PROVIDERS
51	INFORMATIOn ON DISTRIBUTION ARRANGEMENTS
52	PORTFOLIO TRANSACTIONS & BROKERAGE
55	ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
57	PRINCIPAL SHAREHOLDERS
65	FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
66	PART II
66	INVESTMENT RISKS & CONSIDERATIONS
100	NET ASSET VALUES
102	TAXATION
102	DISCLOSURE OF PORTFOLIO HOLDINGS
104	PROXY VOTING
104	CODES OF ETHICS
104	LICENSES & MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION
105	APPENDIX I: DESCRIPTIONS OF SECURITY RATINGS
109	APPENDIX II: PROXY VOTING POLICIES OF THE SUBADVISERS

PART I

INTRODUCTION

This SAI sets forth information about The Prudential Series Fund (the Trust). Part I provides additional information about the Trust's Board of Trustees, certain investment restrictions that apply to the Trust's Portfolios, the advisory services provided to and the management fees paid by the Trust, and information about other fees paid by and services provided to the Trust. Part II provides additional information and explanations about certain investments and investment strategies which may be used by the Trust's Portfolios, and should be read in conjunction with Part I.

Before reading the SAI, you should consult the Glossary below, which defines certain of the terms used in the SAI: 

Glossary
Term	Definition
1933 Act	Securities Act of 1933, as amended
1934 Act	Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended
1940 Act	Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended
ADR	American Depositary Receipt
ADS	American Depositary Share
ASTIS	AST Investment Services, Inc.
Board	Trust’s Board of Directors or Trustees
Board Member	A trustee or director of the Trust’s Board
CFTC	Commodity Futures Trading Commission
Code	Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended
EDR	European Depositary Receipt
ETF	Exchange-Traded Fund
Fannie Mae or FNMA	Federal National Mortgage Association
Fitch	Fitch, Inc.
Freddie Mac or FHLMC	The Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation
Global Depositary Receipt	GDR
Ginnie Mae	Government National Mortgage Association
PGIM Investments, the Manager, or the Investment Manager	PGIM Investments LLC
IPO	Initial Public Offering
IRS	Internal Revenue Service
LIBOR	London Interbank Offered Rate
Moody’s	Moody’s Investor Services, Inc.
NASDAQ	National Association of Securities Dealers Automated Quotations System
NAV	Net Asset Value
NYSE	New York Stock Exchange
OTC	Over the Counter
PGIM Investments	PGIM Investments LLC
PMFS	Prudential Mutual Fund Services LLC
REIT	Real Estate Investment Trust
RIC	Regulated Investment Company, as the term is used in the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended
S&P	S&P Global Ratings
SEC	US Securities & Exchange Commission
World Bank	International Bank for Reconstruction and Development

3

Trust PORTFOLIOS, INVESTMENT POLICIES & STRATEGIES

The Trust is an open-end management investment company (commonly known as a mutual fund) that is intended to provide a range of investment alternatives through its separate Portfolio’s, each of which is, for investment purposes, in effect a separate fund (the Portfolios). The Portfolios currently offered by the Trust are set forth below:

◾

PSF Global Portfolio (Class I & Class III Shares)

◾

PSF Mid-Cap Growth Portfolio (Class I, Class II & Class III Shares)

◾

PSF Natural Resources Portfolio (Class I, Class II & Class III Shares)

◾

PSF PGIM 50/50 Balanced Portfolio (Class I & Class III Shares)

◾

PSF PGIM Flexible Managed Portfolio (Class I & Class III Shares)

◾

PSF PGIM Government Income Portfolio (Class I & Class III Shares)

◾

PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio (Class I & Class III Shares)

◾

PSF PGIM High Yield Bond Portfolio (Class I & Class III Shares)

◾

PSF PGIM Jennison Blend Portfolio (Class I, Class II & Class III Shares)

◾

PSF PGIM Jennison Focused Blend Portfolio (Class I, Class II & Class III Shares)

◾

PSF PGIM Jennison Growth Portfolio (Class I, Class II & Class III Shares)

◾

PSF PGIM Jennison Value Portfolio (Class I, Class II & Class III Shares)

◾

PSF PGIM Total Return Bond Portfolio (Class I & Class III Shares)

◾

PSF Small-Cap Stock Index Portfolio (Class I & Class III Shares)

◾

PSF Small-Cap Value Portfolio (Class I Shares)

◾

PSF Stock Index Portfolio (Class I & Class III Shares)

Each Portfolio of the Trust offers Class I shares and certain Portfolios of the Trust also offer Class II and/or Class III shares, as noted above. Class I and Class III shares are sold to separate accounts of insurance companies affiliated with Prudential Financial, Inc., including but not limited to The Prudential Insurance Company of America, Pruco Life Insurance Company, and Pruco Life Insurance Company of New Jersey (collectively, Prudential) as investment options under variable life insurance and variable annuity contracts (the Contracts). Class I shares may also be sold to separate accounts of insurance companies not affiliated with Prudential Financial, Inc. Class II shares are offered only to separate accounts of non-Prudential insurance companies for the same types of Contracts. The Prudential insurance companies, and insurance companies not affiliated with Prudential Financial, Inc., identified above are referred to herein as the Participating Insurance Companies. The separate accounts invest in shares of the Trust through subaccounts that correspond to the Portfolios. The separate accounts will redeem shares of the Trust to the extent necessary to provide benefits under the Contracts or for such other purposes as may be consistent with the Contracts.

Not every Portfolio is available under each Contract. The prospectus for each Contract lists the Portfolios currently available under that particular Contract.

In order to sell shares to both Prudential and non-Prudential insurance companies, the Trust has obtained an exemptive order (the Order) from the SEC. The Trust and its Portfolios are managed in compliance with the terms and conditions of that Order.

The Portfolios are managed by PGIM Investments LLC (the Investment Manager) as discussed in the Trust's Prospectus. Each of the Portfolios has a different investment objective and principal investment strategies. For this reason, each Portfolio will have different investment results and be subject to different financial and market risks. As discussed in the Prospectus, several of the Portfolios may invest in money market instruments and comparable securities as part of assuming a temporary defensive position. The investment objective and principal investment strategies of each Portfolio are discussed in the Prospectus.

The Prospectus and SAI do not purport to create any contractual obligations between the Trust or any Portfolio and its shareholders. In addition, shareholders are not intended third-party beneficiaries of any contracts entered into by (or on behalf of) the Portfolios, including contracts with the Investment Manager or other parties who provide services to the Portfolios.

INVESTMENT RESTRICTIONS

Set forth below are certain investment restrictions applicable to the Portfolios. Fundamental restrictions may not be changed without a majority vote of shareholders as required by the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the 1940 Act). Non-fundamental restrictions may be changed by the Board of Trustees without shareholder approval.

Restrictions 1, 4, 7, 8 and 9 are fundamental. Restrictions 2, 3, 5, 6 and 10 are not fundamental.

FUNDAMENTAL AND NON-FUNDAMENTAL INVESTMENT RESTRICTIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL PORTFOLIOS (EXCEPT FUNDAMENTAL RESTRICTIONS DO NOT APPLY TO PSF SMALL-CAP VALUE PORTFOLIO)

 4

With respect to each Portfolio, none of the Portfolios will:

1. Buy or sell real estate, except that investments in securities of issuers that invest in real estate and investments in mortgage-backed securities, mortgage participations or other instruments supported or secured by interests in real estate are not subject to this limitation, and except that the Portfolios may exercise rights relating to such securities, including the right to enforce security interests and to hold real estate acquired by reason of such enforcement until that real estate can be liquidated in an orderly manner. None of the Portfolios will buy or sell commodities or commodity contracts, except that a Portfolio may, consistent with its investment style, purchase and sell financial futures contracts and options thereon. For purposes of this restriction, futures contracts on currencies and on securities indices and forward foreign currency exchange contracts are not deemed to be commodities or commodity contracts.

2. No Portfolio will, except as part of a merger, consolidation, acquisition, or reorganization, invest more than 5% of the value of its total assets in the securities of any one investment company or more than 10% of the value of its total assets, in the aggregate, in the securities of two or more investment companies, or acquire more than 3% of the total outstanding voting securities of any one investment company. Provided, however, that any Portfolio may invest in the securities of one or more investment companies to the extent permitted by the 1940 Act and rules thereunder, or by exemptive order, SEC release, no-action letter or similar relief or interpretations.

3. Make short sales of securities or maintain a short position, except that PSF PGIM Total Return Bond Portfolio, PSF PGIM Jennison Focused Blend Portfolio, PSF PGIM High Yield Bond Portfolio, PSF PGIM Government Income Portfolio, PSF PGIM 50/50 Balanced Portfolio, PSF PGIM Flexible Managed Portfolio, and PSF Mid-Cap Growth Portfolio may sell securities short up to 25% of their net assets (the PSF Small-Cap Stock Index Portfolio and PSF Stock Index Portfolio may sell securities short up to 5% of their total assets) and except that the Portfolios (other than the PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio) may make short sales against-the-box. Collateral arrangements entered into with respect to options, futures contracts, forward contracts and swap agreements are not deemed to be short sales.

4. Purchase securities on margin (but a Portfolio may obtain such short-term credits as may be necessary for the clearance of transactions); provided that the deposit or payment by a Portfolio of initial or maintenance margin in connection with otherwise permissible futures or options is not considered the purchase of a security on margin. None of the Portfolios will issue senior securities, borrow money or pledge assets, except as permitted by the 1940 Act and rules thereunder, or by exemptive order, SEC release, no-action letter, or similar relief or interpretations. For purposes of this restriction, the purchase or sale of securities on a when-issued or delayed-delivery basis, reverse repurchase agreements, short sales, derivative and hedging transactions and collateral arrangements with respect thereto, and obligations of the Trust to Trustees pursuant to deferred compensation agreements are not deemed to be a pledge of assets or the issuance of a senior security.

5. Enter into reverse repurchase agreements if, as a result, the Portfolio's obligations with respect to reverse repurchase agreements would exceed 10% of the Portfolio's net assets (defined to mean total assets at market value less liabilities other than reverse repurchase agreements); except that the PSF PGIM Total Return Bond Portfolio, PSF PGIM High Yield Bond Portfolio, and PSF PGIM Government Income Portfolios, as well as the fixed income portions of the PSF PGIM 50/50 Balanced Portfolio and the PSF PGIM Flexible Managed Portfolio, may enter into reverse repurchase agreements and dollar rolls provided that the Portfolio's obligations with respect to those instruments do not exceed 30% of the Portfolio's net assets (defined to mean total assets at market value less liabilities other than reverse repurchase agreements and dollar rolls).

6. Pledge or mortgage assets, except that no more than 10% of the value of any Portfolio may be pledged (taken at the time the pledge is made) to secure authorized borrowing and except that a Portfolio may enter into reverse repurchase agreements. Collateral arrangements entered into with respect to futures and forward contracts and the writing of options are not deemed to be the pledge of assets. Collateral arrangements entered into with respect to interest rate swap agreements are not deemed to be the pledge of assets.

7. Make loans, except through loans of assets of a Portfolio, repurchase agreements, trade claims, loan participations or similar investments, or as permitted by the 1940 Act and rules thereunder, or by exemptive order, SEC release, no-action letter or similar relief or interpretations. Provided that for purposes of this limitation, the acquisition of bonds, debentures, other debt securities or instruments, or participations or other interests therein and investments in government obligations, commercial paper, certificates of deposit, bankers' acceptances or instruments similar to any of the foregoing will not be considered the making of a loan.

8. Act as underwriter except to the extent that, in connection with the disposition of portfolio securities, it may be deemed to be an underwriter under certain federal securities laws.

9. Purchase securities of a company in any industry if, as a result of the purchase, a Portfolio's holdings of securities issued by companies in that industry would exceed 25% of the value of the Portfolio, except that this restriction does not apply to purchases of obligations issued or guaranteed by the US Government, its agencies and instrumentalities or issued by domestic banks. For purposes of

5

this restriction, neither finance companies as a group nor utility companies as a group are considered to be a single industry and will be grouped instead according to their services; for example, gas, electric, and telephone utilities will each be considered a separate industry. For purposes of this exception, domestic banks shall include all banks which are organized under the laws of the United States or a state (as defined in the 1940 Act), US branches of foreign banks that are subject to the same regulations as US banks and foreign branches of domestic banks (as permitted by the SEC). For purposes of this limitation, investments in other investment companies shall not be considered an investment in any particular industry.

10. Invest more than 15% of its net assets in illiquid securities. (The PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio will not invest more than 5% of its net assets in illiquid securities.) For purposes of this restriction, illiquid securities are those deemed illiquid pursuant to SEC regulations and guidelines, as they may be revised from time to time.

Consistent with item 4 above, the Trust has entered into a joint revolving credit facility with other Prudential mutual funds to facilitate redemptions, if necessary.

Whenever any fundamental investment policy or restriction states a maximum percentage of a Portfolio's assets, it is intended that if the percentage limitation is set at the time the investment is made, a later change in percentage resulting from changing total or net asset values will not be considered a violation of such policy.

ADDITIONAL NON-FUNDAMENTAL INVESTMENT POLICIES. Certain additional non-fundamental investment policies are applicable only to certain Portfolios, as noted below:

PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio. The PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio will not:

1. Invest in oil and gas interests, common stock, preferred stock, warrants or other equity securities.

2. Write or purchase any put or call option or combination of them, except that it may purchase putable or callable securities.

3. Invest in any security with a remaining maturity in excess of 397 days.

For purposes of item 3 above, with respect to floating rate and variable rate securities with maturities longer than 397 calendar days but which afford the holder the right to demand payment at dates earlier than the final maturity date, such floating rate and variable rate securities will be treated as having maturities equal to the demand date or the period of adjustment of the interest rate, whichever is longer, and as consistent with the requirements of Rule 2a-7 under the 1940 Act.

PSF PGIM High Yield Bond Portfolio. The PSF PGIM High Yield Bond Portfolio will not:

1. Invest in any non-fixed income equity securities, including warrants, except when attached to or included in a unit with fixed income securities, but not including preferred stock.

2. Invest more than 30% of the market or other fair value of its total assets in United States currency denominated issues of foreign governments and other foreign issuers; or invest more than 10% of the market or other fair value of its total assets in securities which are payable in currencies other than United States dollars.

FUNDAMENTAL INVESTMENT RESTRICTIONS APPLICABLE TO PSF SMALL-CAP VALUE PORTFOLIO:

The Portfolio may not:

1. Issue senior securities, except as permitted under the 1940 Act.

2. Borrow money, except that the Portfolio may borrow money for temporary or emergency purposes (not for leveraging or investment) in an amount not exceeding 33% of its total assets (including the amount borrowed) less liabilities (other than borrowings). Any borrowings that come to exceed this amount will be reduced within three days (not including Sundays and holidays) to the extent necessary to comply with the 33% limitation. For the avoidance of doubt, notwithstanding the foregoing, if a Portfolio elects to treat reverse repurchase agreements as derivative transactions, it shall comply with the requirements of Rule 18f-4 under the 1940 Act rather than being subject to the 33 1∕3% limit.

3. Underwrite securities issued by others, except to the extent that the Portfolio may be considered an underwriter within the meaning of the Securities Act of 1933 (the 1933 Act) in the disposition of restricted securities or in connection with investments in other investment companies.

 6

4. Purchase the securities of any issuer (other than securities issued or guaranteed by the US Government or any of its agencies or instrumentalities, or securities of other investment companies), if, as a result, more than 25% of the Portfolio's total assets would be invested in companies whose principal business activities are in the same industry. For purposes of this limitation, investments in other investment companies shall not be considered an investment in any particular industry.

5. Purchase or sell real estate unless acquired as a result of ownership of securities or other instruments (but this will not prevent the Portfolio from investing in securities or other instruments backed by real estate or securities of companies engaged in the real estate business).

6. Purchase or sell physical commodities unless acquired as a result of ownership of securities or other instruments (but this shall not prevent the Portfolio from purchasing or selling options and futures contracts or from investing in securities or other instruments backed by physical commodities).

7. Lend any security or make any loan if, as a result, more than 33% of its total assets would be lent to other parties, but this limitation does not apply to purchases of debt securities or to repurchase agreements.

INFORMATION ABOUT BOARD MEMBERS AND OFFICERS

Information about the Board Members and the officers of the Trust is set forth below. Board members who are not deemed to be “interested persons” of the Trust, as defined in the 1940 Act, are referred to as “Independent Board Members.” Board Members who are deemed to be “interested persons” of the Trust are referred to as “Interested Board Members.” The Board Members oversee the operations of the Trust and appoint officers who are responsible for day-to-day business decisions based on policies set by the Board. 

Independent Board Members
Name Year of Birth No. of Portfolios Overseen	Principal Occupation(s) During Past Five Years	Other Directorships Held	Length of Board Service
Susan Davenport Austin 1967 No. of Portfolios Overseen: 63	Chief Financial Officer of Grace Church School (since September 2019); President, Candide Business Advisors, Inc. (since 2011); formerly Senior Managing Director of Brock Capital (2014-2019); formerly Vice Chairman (2013-2017), Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (2007-2012) and Vice President of Strategic Planning and Treasurer (2002-2007) of Sheridan Broadcasting Corporation; formerly President of Sheridan Gospel Network (2004-2014).	Director of NextEra Energy Partners, LP (NYSE: NEP) (since February 2015); Member of the Board of Directors, Hubbard Radio, LLC (since 2011); formerly Chairman (2011-2014), formerly Presiding Director (2014-2017) and currently a Member (2007-present) of the Board of Directors, Broadcast Music, Inc.; formerly Member of the Board of Directors, The MacDowell Colony (2010-2021).	Since February 2011
Sherry S. Barrat 1949 No. of Portfolios Overseen: 63	Formerly Vice Chairman of Northern Trust Corporation (financial services and banking institution) (2011-June 2012); formerly President, Personal Financial Services, Northern Trust Corporation (2006-2010); formerly Chairman & CEO, Western US Region, Northern Trust Corporation (1999-2005); formerly President & CEO, Palm Beach/Martin County Region, Northern Trust.	Lead Director of NextEra Energy, Inc. (NYSE: NEE) (since May 2020); Director of NextEra Energy, Inc. (since 1998); Director of Arthur J. Gallagher & Company (since July 2013).	Since January 2013
Jessica M. Bibliowicz 1959 No. of Portfolios Overseen: 63	Chairman of the Board of Fellows of Weill Cornell Medicine (since 2014); Director of Apollo Global Management, Inc. (since 2022); formerly Chief Executive Officer (1999-2013) of National Financial Partners (independent distributor of financial services products).	Formerly Director of the Asia-Pacific Fund, Inc. (2006-2019); formerly Director of Sotheby’s (2014-2019) auction house and art-related finance.	Since September 2014

7

Independent Board Members
Name Year of Birth No. of Portfolios Overseen	Principal Occupation(s) During Past Five Years	Other Directorships Held	Length of Board Service
Kay Ryan Booth 1950 No. of Portfolios Overseen: 63	Trinity Investors (since September 2014); formerly, Managing Director of Cappello Waterfield & Co. LLC (2011-2014); formerly Vice Chair, Global Research, J.P. Morgan (financial services and investment banking institution) (June 2008-January 2009); formerly Global Director of Equity Research, Bear Stearns & Co., Inc. (financial services and investment banking institution) (1995-2008); formerly Associate Director of Equity Research, Bear Stearns & Co., Inc. (1987-1995).	None.	Since January 2013
Stephen M. Chipman 1961 No. of Portfolios Overseen: 63	Formerly Group Managing Director, International Expansion and Regional Managing Director, Americas of Vistra (June 2018-June 2019); formerly Chief Executive Officer and Director of Radius (2016-2018); formerly Senior Vice Chairman (January 2015-October 2015) and Chief Executive Officer (January 2010-December 2014) of Grant Thornton LLP.	Board of Directors of Willis Towers Watson Public Limited Company (WTW) (since April 2023); Chairman of the Board of Auxadi Holdco, S.L. (since February 2022); Non-Executive Director of Auxadi Holdco, S.L (since November 2020); Non-Executive Director of Stout (since January 2020); formerly Non-Executive Director of Clyde & Co. (January 2020-June 2021); Formerly Non-Executive Chairman (September 2019-January 2021) of Litera Microsystems.	Since January 2018
Robert F. Gunia 1946 No. of Portfolios Overseen: 63	Director of ICI Mutual Insurance Company (June 2020-present; June 2016-June 2019); formerly Chief Administrative Officer (September 1999-September 2009) and Executive Vice President (December 1996-September 2009) of PGIM Investments LLC; formerly Executive Vice President (March 1999-September 2009) and Treasurer (May 2000-September 2009) of Prudential Mutual Fund Services LLC; formerly President (April 1999-December 2008) and Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer (December 2008-December 2009) of Prudential Investment Management Services LLC; formerly Chief Administrative Officer, Executive Vice President and Director (May 2003-September 2009) of AST Investment Services, Inc.	Formerly Director (1989-2019) of The Asia Pacific Fund, Inc.	Since July 2003

 8

Independent Board Members
Name Year of Birth No. of Portfolios Overseen	Principal Occupation(s) During Past Five Years	Other Directorships Held	Length of Board Service
Thomas M. O'Brien 1950 No. of Portfolios Overseen: 63	Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President of Sterling Bancorp (since June 2020); Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President of Sterling Bank and Trust, F.S.B.; formerly Vice Chairman of Emigrant Bank and President of its Naples Commercial Finance Division (October 2018-March 2020); formerly Director, President and CEO Sun Bancorp, Inc. N.A. (NASDAQ: SNBC) and Sun National Bank (July 2014-February 2018); formerly Consultant, Valley National Bancorp, Inc. and Valley National Bank (January 2012-June 2012); formerly President and COO (November 2006-April 2017) and CEO (April 2007-December 2011) of State Bancorp, Inc. and State Bank; formerly Vice Chairman (January 1997-April 2000) of North Fork Bank; formerly President and Chief Executive Officer (December 1984-December 1996) of North Side Savings Bank; formerly President and Chief Executive Officer (May 2000-June 2006) Atlantic Bank of New York.	Formerly Director, Sun Bancorp, Inc. N.A. (NASDAQ: SNBC) and Sun National Bank (July 2014-February 2018); formerly Director, BankUnited, Inc. and BankUnited N.A. (NYSE: BKU) (May 2012-April 2014); formerly Director (April 2008-January 2012) of Federal Home Loan Bank of New York; formerly Director (December 1996-May 2000) of North Fork Bancorporation, Inc.; formerly Director (May 2000-April 2006) of Atlantic Bank of New York; Director (November 2006-January 2012) of State Bancorp, Inc. (NASDAQ: STBC) and State Bank of Long Island.	Since July 2003

 

Interested Board Member
Timothy S. Cronin 1965 Number of Portfolios Overseen: 63	Vice President of Prudential Annuities (since May 2003); Senior Vice President of PGIM Investments LLC (since May 2009); Chief Investment Officer and Strategist of Prudential Annuities (since January 2004); Director of Investment & Research Strategy (since February 1998); President of AST Investment Services, Inc. (since March 2006).	None.	Since October 2009

 

Officers(a)
Name Year of Birth Position	Principal Occupation(s) During the Past Five Years	Length of Service as Officer
Ken Allen 1969 Vice President	Vice President of Investment Management (since December 2009).	Since June 2019
Claudia DiGiacomo 1974 Chief Legal Officer and Assistant Secretary	Chief Legal Officer (since September 2022) of the PGIM Private Credit Fund; Chief Legal Officer (since July 2022) of the PGIM Private Real Estate Fund, Inc.; Chief Legal Officer, Executive Vice President and Secretary of PGIM Investments LLC (since August 2020); Chief Legal Officer of Prudential Mutual Fund Services LLC (since August 2020); Chief Legal Officer of PIFM Holdco, LLC (since August 2020); Vice President and Corporate Counsel (since January 2005) of Prudential; and Corporate Counsel of AST Investment Services, Inc. (since August 2020); formerly Vice President and Assistant Secretary of PGIM Investments LLC (2005-2020); formerly Associate at Sidley Austin Brown & Wood LLP (1999-2004).	Since December 2005

9

Officers(a)
Name Year of Birth Position	Principal Occupation(s) During the Past Five Years	Length of Service as Officer
Andrew R. French 1962 Secretary	Vice President (since December 2018) of PGIM Investments LLC; Secretary (since September 2022) of the PGIM Private Credit Fund; Secretary (since March 2022) of the PGIM Private Real Estate Fund, Inc.; formerly Vice President and Corporate Counsel (2010-2018) of Prudential; formerly Director and Corporate Counsel (2006-2010) of Prudential; Vice President and Assistant Secretary (since January 2007) of PGIM Investments LLC; Vice President and Assistant Secretary (since January 2007) of Prudential Mutual Fund Services LLC.	Since October 2006
Melissa Gonzalez 1980 Assistant Secretary	Vice President and Corporate Counsel (since September 2018) of Prudential; Vice President and Assistant Secretary (since August 2020) of PGIM Investments LLC; Assistant Secretary (since September 2022) of the PGIM Private Credit Fund; Assistant Secretary (since March 2022) of the PGIM Private Real Estate Fund, Inc.; formerly Director and Corporate Counsel (March 2014-September 2018) of Prudential.	Since March 2019
Patrick E. McGuinness 1986 Assistant Secretary	Vice President and Assistant Secretary (since August 2020) of PGIM Investments LLC; Director and Corporate Counsel (since February 2017) of Prudential; Assistant Secretary (since September 2022) of the PGIM Private Credit Fund; Assistant Secretary (since March 2022) of the PGIM Private Real Estate Fund, Inc.	Since June 2020
Debra Rubano 1975 Assistant Secretary	Vice President and Corporate Counsel (since November 2020) of Prudential; Assistant Secretary (since September 2022) of the PGIM Private Credit Fund; Assistant Secretary (since March 2022) of the PGIM Private Real Estate Fund, Inc; formerly Director and Senior Counsel of Allianz Global Investors US Holdings LLC (2010-2020) and Assistant Secretary of numerous funds in the Allianz fund complex (2015-2020).	Since March 2021
Drew Donohue 1972 Chief Compliance Officer	Chief Compliance Officer (since May 2023) of the PGIM Funds, Target Funds, PGIM ETF Trust, PGIM Global High Yield Fund, Inc., PGIM High Yield Bond Fund, Inc., PGIM Short Duration High Yield Opportunities Fund, Advanced Series Trust, The Prudential Series Fund, Prudential’s Gibraltar Fund, Inc., PGIM Private Credit Fund, PGIM Private Real Estate Fund, Inc.; Vice President, Chief Compliance Officer (since September 2022) of PGIM Investments LLC; Chief Compliance Officer (since October 2022) of AST Investment Services, Inc.; formerly various senior compliance roles within Principal Global Investors, LLC., global asset management for Principal Financial (2011-2022), most recently as Global Chief Compliance Officer (2016-2022).	Since May 2023
Kelly Florio 1978 Anti-Money Laundering Compliance Officer	Vice President, Corporate Compliance, Global Compliance Programs and Compliance Risk Management (since December 2021) of Prudential; formerly, Head of Fraud Risk Management (October 2019-December 2021) at New York Life Insurance Company; formerly, Head of Key Risk Area Operations (November 2018-October 2019), Director of the US Anti-Money Laundering Compliance Unit (2009-2018) and Bank Loss Prevention Associate (2006 -2009) at MetLife.	Since June 2022

 10

Officers(a)
Name Year of Birth Position	Principal Occupation(s) During the Past Five Years	Length of Service as Officer
Christian J. Kelly 1975 Chief Financial Officer	Vice President, Global Head of Fund Administration of PGIM Investments LLC (since November 2018); Chief Financial Officer (since March 2023) of PGIM Investments mutual funds, closed end funds and ETFs, Advanced Series Trust Portfolios, Prudential Series Funds and Prudential Gibraltar Fund;  Chief Financial Officer of PGIM Private Credit Fund (since September 2022); Chief Financial Officer of PGIM Private Real Estate Fund (since July 2022); formerly, Treasurer and Principal Financial Officer (January 2019- March 2023) of PGIM Investments mutual funds, closed end funds and ETFs, Advanced Series Trust Portfolios, Prudential Series Funds and Prudential Gibraltar Fund; formerly Treasurer and Principal Financial Officer (March 2022 – July 2022) of the PGIM Real Estate Fund, Inc.; formerly Director of Fund Administration of Lord Abbett & Co. LLC (2009-2018), Treasurer and Principal Accounting Officer of the Lord Abbett Family of Funds (2017-2018); Director of Accounting, Avenue Capital Group (2008-2009); Senior Manager, Investment Management Practice of Deloitte & Touche LLP (1998-2007).	Since January 2019
Elyse M. McLaughlin 1974 Treasurer and Principal Accounting Officer	Vice President (since 2017) within PGIM Investments Fund Administration; Treasurer and Principal Accounting Officer of the Advanced Series Trust, the Prudential Series Fund and the Prudential Gibraltar Fund (since March 2023); Treasurer and Principal Accounting Officer (since September 2022) of the PGIM Private Credit Fund; Assistant Treasurer (since March 2022) of the PGIM Private Real Estate Fund, Inc.; Assistant Treasurer of PGIM Investments mutual funds, closed end funds and ETFs (since October 2019); formerly Director (2011-2017) within PGIM Investments Fund Administration.	Since October 2019
Lana Lomuti 1967 Assistant Treasurer	Vice President (since 2007) within PGIM Investments Fund Administration; formerly Assistant Treasurer (December 2007-February 2014) of The Greater China Fund, Inc.; formerly Director (2005-2007) within PGIM Investments Fund Administration.	Since April 2014
Russ Shupak 1973 Assistant Treasurer	Vice President (since 2017) within PGIM Investments Fund Administration; Treasurer and Principal Accounting Officer of PGIM Investments mutual funds, closed end funds and ETFs (since March 2023); Treasurer and Principal Accounting Officer (since July 2022) of the PGIM Private Real Estate Fund, Inc.; Assistant Treasurer (since September 2022) of the PGIM Private Credit Fund; formerly Assistant Treasurer (March 2022 – July 2022) of the PGIM Private Real Estate Fund, Inc.; Assistant Treasurer of Advanced Series Trust Portfolios, Prudential Series Funds and Prudential Gibraltar Fund (since October 2019);  formerly Director (2013-2017) within PGIM Investments Fund Administration.	Since October 2019
Deborah Conway 1969 Assistant Treasurer	Vice President (since 2017) within PGIM Investments Fund Administration; Assistant Treasurer (since September 2022) of the PGIM Private Credit Fund; Assistant Treasurer (since March 2022) of the PGIM Private Real Estate Fund, Inc.; formerly Director (2007-2017) within PGIM Investments Fund Administration.	Since October 2019
Robert W. McCormack 1973 Assistant Treasurer	Vice President (since 2019) within PGIM Investments Fund Administration; Assistant Treasurer (since September 2022) of the PGIM Private Credit Fund; Assistant Treasurer (since March 2022) of the PGIM Private Real Estate Fund, Inc.; formerly Director (2016-2019) within PGIM Investments Fund Administration; formerly Vice President within Goldman, Sachs & Co. Investment Management Controllers (2008- 2016), Assistant Treasurer of Goldman Sachs Family of Funds (2015-2016).	Since March 2023

11

Officers(a)
Name Year of Birth Position	Principal Occupation(s) During the Past Five Years	Length of Service as Officer
Alina Srodecka, CPA 1966 Assistant Treasurer	Vice President of Tax at Prudential Financial, Inc. (Since August 2007); formerly Director of Tax at MetLife (January 2003 – May 2006); formerly Tax Manager at Deloitte & Touché (October 1997 – January 2003); formerly Staff Accountant at Marsh & McLennan (May 1994 – May 1997).	Since June 2017

(a) Excludes Mr. Cronin, an Interested Board Member who also serves as President and Principal Executive Officer.

Explanatory Notes to Tables:

Timothy Cronin is an Interested Board Member because he is an officer of the Portfolios and an officer of the Manager.

Unless otherwise noted, the address of all Board Members and Officers is c/o PGIM Investments, 655 Broad Street, 6th floor, Newark, New Jersey 07102.

There is no set term of office for Board Members or Officers. The Independent Board Members have adopted a retirement policy, which calls for the retirement of Board Members on December 31 of the year in which they reach the age of 78, provided that the Board may extend the retirement age on a year-by-year basis for a Board Member.

“Other Directorships Held” includes all directorships of companies required to register or file reports with the SEC under the 1934 Act (that is, “public companies”) or other investment companies registered under the 1940 Act.

“No. of Portfolios Overseen” includes all investment companies managed by PGIM Investments and/or AST Investment Services, Inc. (ASTIS) that are overseen by the Board Member. The investment companies for which PGIM Investments and/or ASTIS serves as manager include The Prudential Series Fund, Advanced Series Trust, Prudential's Gibraltar Fund, Inc., the PGIM Funds, PGIM High Yield Bond Fund, Inc., PGIM Global High Yield Fund, Inc., PGIM Short Duration High Yield Opportunities Fund, PGIM Private Real Estate Fund, Inc. and PGIM Private Credit Fund.

COMPENSATION OF BOARD MEMBERS AND OFFICERS. Pursuant to a Management Agreement with the Trust, the Investment Manager pays all compensation of Board Members, officers and employees of the Trust, other than the fees and expenses of Board Members who are not affiliated persons of the Investment Manager or any Subadviser (Independent Board Members). The Trust pays each of its Independent Board Members annual compensation in addition to certain out-of-pocket expenses. Board Members who serve on Board Committees may receive additional compensation.

Independent Board Members may defer receipt of their compensation pursuant to a deferred fee agreement with the Trust. Under the terms of the agreement, the Trust accrues deferred Board Members' compensation daily which, in turn, accrue interest at a rate equivalent to the prevailing rate to 90-day US Treasury Bills at the beginning of each calendar quarter or, at the daily rate of return of one or more funds managed by the Investment Manager chosen by the Trustee. Payment of the interest so accrued is also deferred and becomes payable at the option of the Trustee. The Trust's obligation to make payments of deferred Board Members' compensation, together with interest thereon, is a general obligation of the Trust. The Trust does not have a retirement or pension plan for its Board Members.

The following table sets forth the aggregate compensation paid by the Trust for the Trust's most recently completed fiscal year to the Independent Board Members for service on the Trust's Board, and the Board of any other investment company in the Fund Complex for the most recently completed calendar year. Board Members and officers who are “interested persons” of the Trust (as defined in the 1940 Act) do not receive compensation from the Fund Complex. 

Name	Aggregate Fiscal Year Compensation from the Fund	Pension or Retirement Benefits Accrued as Part of Fund Expenses	Estimated Annual Benefits Upon Retirement	Total Compensation from Fund and Fund Complex* for Most Recent Calendar Year(1)
Compensation Received by Independent Board Members
Susan Davenport Austin	$80,690	None	None	$440,000 (3/78)**
Sherry S. Barrat	$80,690	None	None	$440,000 (3/78)**
Jessica M. Bibliowicz	$80,690	None	None	$440,000 (3/78)**
Kay Ryan Booth	$80,690	None	None	$440,000 (3/78)**
Stephen M. Chipman	$80,690	None	None	$440,000 (3/78)**
Robert F. Gunia	$80,690	None	None	$440,000 (3/78)**
Thomas M. O'Brien	$102,500	None	None	$565,000 (3/78)**

Explanatory Notes to Compensation Table

(1) Compensation relates to portfolios that were in existence and having investment operations during 2022.

* “Fund Complex” includes Advanced Series Trust, The Prudential Series Fund, Prudential’s Gibraltar Fund, Inc., the PGIM Funds, and any other funds that are managed by PGIM Investments LLC and /or ASTIS.

** Number of funds and portfolios represents those in existence as of December 31, 2022, and excludes funds that have merged or liquidated during the year. Additionally, the number of funds and portfolios includes those which were approved as of December 31, 2022, however, may commence operations after that date. No compensation is paid out from such funds/portfolios.

 12

*** Under the deferred fee agreement for the PGIM Investments-managed funds, certain Board Members have elected to defer all or part of their total compensation. The amount of compensation deferred during the calendar year ended December 31, 2022, amounted to $400,000 and $140,000 for Messrs. Chipman and Gunia, respectively. Under the deferred fee arrangement, these amounts are deposited into a trust held for the benefit of participating Board Members and are not continuing obligations of the Fund.

BOARD COMMITTEES. The Board has established four standing committees in connection with governance of the Trust—Audit, Compliance, Governance, and Investment Review and Risk. Information on the membership of each standing committee and its functions is set forth below.

Audit Committee. The Board has determined that each member of the Audit Committee is not an “interested person” as defined in the 1940 Act. The responsibilities of the Audit Committee are to assist the Board in overseeing the Trust's independent registered public accounting firm, accounting policies and procedures, and other areas relating to the Trust's auditing processes. The Audit Committee is responsible for pre-approving all audit services and any permitted non-audit services to be provided by the independent registered public accounting firm directly to the Trust. The Audit Committee is also responsible for pre-approving permitted non-audit services to be provided by the independent registered public accounting firm to (1) the Investment Manager and (2) any entity in a control relationship with the Investment Manager that provides ongoing services to the Trust, provided that the engagement of the independent registered public accounting firm relates directly to the operation and financial reporting of the Trust. The scope of the Audit Committee's responsibilities is oversight. It is management's responsibility to maintain appropriate systems for accounting and internal control and the independent registered public accounting firm's responsibility to plan and carry out an audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). The Audit Committee Charter is available at www.prudential.com/variableinsuranceportfolios. The number of Audit Committee meetings held during the Trust's most recently completed fiscal year is set forth in the table below.

The membership of the Audit Committee is set forth below:
Stephen M. Chipman (Chair)
Susan Davenport Austin
Robert F. Gunia
Thomas M. O’Brien (ex officio)

Compliance Committee. The Compliance Committee serves as a liaison between the Board and the Trust’s Chief Compliance Officer (CCO). The Compliance Committee is responsible for considering, in consultation with the Board's Chair and outside counsel, any material compliance matters that are identified and reported by the CCO to the Compliance Committee between Board meetings. The Compliance Committee is also responsible for considering, when requested by the CCO, the CCO's recommendations regarding the materiality of compliance matters to be reported to the Board. The Compliance Committee reviews compliance matters that it determines warrant review between Board meetings. Further, when the CCO wishes to engage an independent third party to perform compliance-related work at the Trust’s expense, the Compliance Committee will evaluate with the CCO which third party to recommend to the Board as well as the appropriate scope of the work. The number of Compliance Committee meetings held during the Trust's most recently completed fiscal year is set forth in the table below. The Compliance Committee Charter is available on the Trust's website at www.prudential.com/variableinsuranceportfolios.

The membership of the Compliance Committee is set forth below:
Robert F. Gunia (Chair)
Sherry S. Barrat
Jessica M. Bibliowicz
Kay Ryan Booth
Thomas M. O’Brien (ex officio)

Governance Committee. The Governance Committee of the Board is responsible for nominating Trustees and making recommendations to the Board concerning Board composition, committee structure and governance, director compensation and expenses, director education, and governance practices. The Board has determined that each member of the Governance Committee is not an “interested person” as defined in the 1940 Act. The number of Governance Committee meetings held during the Trust's most recently completed fiscal year is set forth in the table below. The Governance Committee Charter is available on the Trust's website at www.prudential.com/variableinsuranceportfolios.

The membership of the Governance Committee is set forth below:
Susan Davenport Austin (Chair)
Sherry S. Barrat
Jessica M. Bibliowicz

13

Kay Ryan Booth
Stephen M. Chipman
Thomas M. O’Brien (ex officio)

Investment Review and Risk Committee (IRRC). The IRRC consists of all members of the Board and is chaired by Ms. Bibliowicz. Ms. Barrat and Ms. Booth serve as Vice Chairs of the IRRC. The Board created the IRRC to help the Board in reviewing certain types of risk, especially those risks related to portfolio investments, the subadvisers for the Portfolios and other related risks. The responsibilities of the IRRC include, but are not limited to: reviewing written materials and reports pertaining to Portfolio performance, investments and risk from subadvisers, the Strategic Investment Review Group (SIRG) of PGIM Investments and others; considering presentations from subadvisers, the Investment Manager, SIRG or other service providers on matters relating to Portfolio performance, investments and risk; and periodically reviewing management’s evaluation of various types of risks to the Portfolios. The number of IRRC meetings held during the Trust’s most recently completed fiscal year is set forth in the table below.

LEADERSHIP STRUCTURE AND QUALIFICATIONS OF BOARD OF TRUSTEES. The Board is responsible for oversight of the Trust. The Trust has engaged the Investment Manager to manage the Trust on a day-to-day basis. The Board oversees the Investment Manager and certain other principal service providers in the operations of the Trust. The Board is currently composed of eight members, seven of whom are Independent Trustees. Under normal circumstances, the Board meets at regularly scheduled meetings twelve times throughout the year. In addition, the Board Members may meet at special meetings. As described above, the Board has established four standing committees—Audit, Compliance, Governance, and Investment Review and Risk—and may establish ad hoc committees or working groups from time to time, to assist the Board in fulfilling its oversight responsibilities. The Independent Trustees have also engaged independent legal counsel to assist them in fulfilling their responsibilities.

The Board is chaired by an Independent Trustee. As Chair, this Independent Trustee leads the Board in its activities. Also, the Chair acts as a member or an ex-officio member of each standing committee and any ad hoc committee of the Board. The Trustees have determined that the Board's leadership and committee structure is appropriate because the Board believes it sets the proper tone to the relationships between the Trust, on the one hand, and the Investment Manager, the subadviser(s) and certain other principal service providers, on the other, and facilitates the exercise of the Board's independent judgment in evaluating and managing the relationships. In addition, the structure efficiently allocates responsibility among committees.

The Board has concluded that, based on each Trustee's experience, qualifications, attributes or skills on an individual basis and in combination with those of the other Trustees, each Trustee should serve as a Trustee. Among other attributes common to all Trustees are their ability to review critically, evaluate, question and discuss information provided to them, to interact effectively with the various service providers to the Trust, and to exercise reasonable business judgment in the performance of their duties as Trustees. In addition, the Board has taken into account the actual service and commitment of the Trustees during their tenure in concluding that each should continue to serve. A Trustee's ability to perform his or her duties effectively may have been attained through a Trustee's educational background or professional training; business, consulting, public service or academic positions; experience from service as a Trustee of the Trust, other funds in the Fund Complex, public companies, or non-profit entities or other organizations; or other experiences. Set forth below is a brief discussion of the specific experience qualifications, attributes or skills of each Trustee that led the Board to conclude that he or she should serve as a Trustee.

Susan Davenport Austin. Ms. Austin currently serves as Chief Financial Officer of Grace Church School. In addition to her experience in senior leadership positions with private companies, Ms. Austin has more than 10 years of experience in the investment banking industry, and has experience serving on boards of other public companies, private companies and non-profit entities.

Sherry S. Barrat. Ms. Barrat has more than 35 years of experience in senior leadership positions in the financial services and banking industries. In addition, Ms. Barrat has over 10 years of experience serving on boards of other public companies and non-profit entities.

Jessica M. Bibliowicz. Ms. Bibliowicz has more than 25 years of experience in senior leadership positions in the financial services and investment management industries. In addition, Ms. Bibliowicz also has experience in serving on the boards of other public companies, investment companies, and non-profit organizations.

Kay Ryan Booth. Ms. Booth has more than 35 years of experience in senior leadership positions in the investment management and investment banking industries. Ms. Booth is currently an Advisory Partner of Trinity Private Equity Group. In addition to her experience in senior leadership positions with private companies, Ms. Booth has experience serving on the boards of other entities.

Stephen M. Chipman. Mr. Chipman has more than 34 years of experience with a public accounting firm, serving in various senior leadership positions in Europe, North America and Asia. Mr. Chipman also has experience serving on boards of other entities.

 14

Robert F. Gunia. Mr. Gunia has served for more than 10 years as a Trustee of mutual funds advised by the Investment Manager or its predecessors. In addition, Mr. Gunia served in senior leadership positions for more than 28 years with the Investment Manager and its affiliates and predecessors.

Thomas M. O’Brien. Mr. O’Brien has served for more than 10 years as a Trustee of mutual funds advised by the Investment Manager or its predecessors, including some or all of the following funds: Advanced Series Trust, The Prudential Series Fund, Prudential’s Gibraltar Fund, Inc., and/or other mutual funds advised by the Investment Manager or its predecessors. Mr. O’Brien has more than 25 years of experience in senior leadership positions in the banking industry, and has experience serving on the boards of other entities.

Timothy S. Cronin. Mr. Cronin, an Interested Trustee of the Trust and other funds advised by the Investment Manager since 2009, served as Vice President of the Trust and other funds advised by the Investment Manager from 2009-2015, as President of the Trust and other funds advised by the Investment Manager since 2015, and has held senior positions with Prudential Financial (and American Skandia, which was purchased by Prudential Financial) since 1998.

Specific details about each Trustee's professional experience is set forth in the professional biography tables, above.

Risk Oversight. Investing in general and the operation of a mutual fund involve a variety of risks, such as investment risk, liquidity risk, compliance risk, and operational risk, among others. The Board oversees risk as part of its oversight of the Trust. Risk oversight is addressed as part of various regular Board and committee activities. The Board, directly or through its committees, reviews reports from among others, the Investment Manager, the administrator to the Trust’s Liquidity Risk Management Program, sub-advisers, the Trust's Chief Compliance Officer, the Trust's independent registered public accounting firm, counsel, and internal auditors of the Investment Manager or its affiliates, as appropriate, regarding risks faced by the Trust and the risk management programs of the Investment Manager and certain service providers. The actual day-to-day risk management with respect to the Trust resides with the Investment Manager and other service providers to the Trust, including pursuant to the Board-approved Liquidity Risk Management Program for the Trust. Although the risk management policies of the Investment Manager and the service providers are designed to be effective, those policies and their implementation vary among service providers and over time, and there is no guarantee that they will be effective. Not all risks that may affect the Trust can be identified or processes and controls developed to eliminate or mitigate their occurrence or effects, and some risks are simply beyond any control of the Trust or the Investment Manager, its affiliates, or other service providers.

Selection of Trustee Nominees. The Governance Committee is responsible for considering Trustee nominees for Trustees at such times as it considers electing new members to the Board. The Governance Committee may consider recommendations by business and personal contacts of current Board members, and by executive search firms which the Committee may engage from time to time and will also consider shareholder recommendations. The Governance Committee has not established specific, minimum qualifications that it believes must be met by a nominee. In evaluating nominees, the Governance Committee considers, among other things, an individual's background, skills, and experience; whether the individual is an “interested person” as defined in the 1940 Act; and whether the individual would be deemed an “audit committee financial expert” within the meaning of applicable SEC rules. The Governance Committee also considers whether the individual's background, skills, and experience will complement the background, skills, and experience of other nominees and will contribute to the diversity of the Board. There are no differences in the manner in which the Governance Committee evaluates nominees for the Board based on whether the nominee is recommended by a shareholder.

A shareholder who wishes to recommend a director for nomination should submit his or her recommendation in writing to the Chair of the Board (Thomas M. O’Brien) or the Chair of the Governance Committee (Susan Davenport Austin), in either case in care of the Trust, at 655 Broad Street, 6th Floor, Newark, New Jersey 07102. At a minimum, the recommendation should include: the name, address, and business, educational, and/or other pertinent background of the person being recommended; a statement concerning whether the person is an “interested person” as defined in the 1940 Act; any other information that the Trust would be required to include in a proxy statement concerning the person if he or she was nominated; and the name and address of the person submitting the recommendation, together with the number of shares held by such person and the period for which the shares have been held. The recommendation also can include any additional information which the person submitting it believes would assist the Governance Committee in evaluating the recommendation.

Shareholders should note that a person who owns securities issued by Prudential Financial, Inc. (the parent company of the Trust's Investment Manager) would be deemed an “interested person” under the 1940 Act. In addition, certain other relationships with Prudential Financial, Inc. or its subsidiaries, with registered broker-dealers, or with the Trust's outside legal counsel may cause a person to be deemed an “interested person.” Before the Governance Committee decides to nominate an individual to the Board, Committee members and other Board members customarily interview the individual in person. In addition, the individual customarily is asked to complete a detailed questionnaire which is designed to elicit information which must be disclosed under SEC and stock exchange rules and to determine whether the individual is subject to any statutory disqualification from serving on the board of a registered investment company.

15

Shareholder Communications with the Board of Trustees. Shareholders of the Trust can communicate directly with the Board by writing to the Chair of the Board, c/o the Trust, 1 Corporate Drive, Shelton, Connecticut 06484. Shareholders can communicate directly with an individual Trustee by writing to that Trustee, c/o the Trust, 1 Corporate Drive, Shelton, Connecticut 06484. Such communications to the Board or individual Trustees are not screened before being delivered to the addressee. 

Board Committee Meetings (for most recently completed fiscal year)
Audit Committee	Governance Committee	Compliance Committee	Investment Review and Risk Committee
4	3	4	5

Share Ownership. Information relating to each Trustee's share ownership in the Trust, other funds that are overseen by the respective Trustee as well as any other funds that are managed by the Investment Manager as of the most recently completed calendar year is set forth in the chart below. 

Name	Dollar Range of Equity Securities in the Trust	Aggregate Dollar Range of Equity Securities Owned by Trustee in All Registered Investment Companies in Fund Complex*
Trustee Share Ownership
Susan Davenport Austin	None	Over $100,000
Sherry S. Barrat	None	Over $100,000
Jessica M. Bibliowicz	None	Over $100,000
Kay Ryan Booth	None	Over $100,000
Stephen M. Chipman	None	Over $100,000
Timothy S. Cronin	None	Over $100,000
Robert F. Gunia	Over $100,000	Over $100,000
Thomas M. O'Brien	None	Over $100,000

*“Fund Complex” includes Advanced Series Trust, The Prudential Series Fund, Prudential’s Gibraltar Fund, Inc., the PGIM Funds, and any other funds that are managed by PGIM Investments and /or ASTIS. The above share ownership information relates to Portfolios and other registered investment companies in the Fund Complex that were in existence during 2022.

Because the Portfolios of the Trust serve as investment options under variable annuity and life insurance contracts, federal tax law prohibits the sale of Portfolio shares directly to individuals, including the Trustees.  Individuals, including a Trustee, may, however, have an interest in a Portfolio if he or she purchases a variable contract and selects the Portfolio as an investment option. 

Other than as set forth in the following paragraph, none of the Independent Trustees, or any member of his/her immediate family, owned beneficially or of record any securities in an investment adviser or principal underwriter of the Trust, or a person (other than a registered investment company) directly or indirectly controlling, controlled by, or under common control with an investment adviser or principal underwriter of a Portfolio as of the most recently completed calendar year.

MANAGEMENT AND ADVISORY ARRANGEMENTS

TRUST MANAGEMENT. PGIM Investments, 655 Broad Street, 6th Floor, Newark, New Jersey 07102-4077, serves as the investment manager of the Portfolios. As of December 31, 2022, PGIM Investments served as the investment manager to all of the Prudential US and offshore open-end investment companies, and as administrator to closed-end investment companies, with aggregate assets of approximately $283.5 billion. PGIM Investments is a wholly-owned subsidiary of PIFM Holdco, LLC, which is a wholly-owned subsidiary of PGIM Holding Company LLC, which is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Prudential Financial, Inc. (Prudential). PGIM Investments has been in the business of providing advisory services since 1996.

Services Provided by the Investment Manager. Pursuant to Management Agreements with the Trust (collectively, the Management Agreement), the Investment Manager, subject to the oversight of the Trust's Board and in conformity with the stated policies of the Portfolios, manages both the investment operations and composition of each Portfolio, including the purchase, retention, disposition and loan of securities and other assets. In connection therewith, the Investment Manager is obligated to keep certain books and records of the Portfolios. The Investment Manager is authorized to enter into subadvisory agreements for investment advisory services in connection with the management of the Portfolios. The Investment Manager continues to have the ultimate responsibility for all investment advisory services performed pursuant to any such subadvisory agreements.

 16

The Investment Manager is specifically responsible for supervising and managing the Portfolios and the subadvisers. In this capacity, the Investment Manager reviews the performance of the Portfolios and the subadvisers and make recommendations to the Board with respect to the retention of investment subadvisers, the renewal of contracts, and the reorganization and merger of Portfolios, and other legal and compliance matters. The Investment Manager takes on the entrepreneurial and other risks associated with the launch of each new Portfolio and its ongoing operations. The Investment Manager utilizes the Strategic Investment Research Group (SIRG), a unit of PGIM Investments, to assist the Investment Manager in regularly evaluating and supervising the Portfolios and the subadvisers, including with respect to investment performance. SIRG is a centralized research department of PGIM Investments that is comprised of a group of highly experienced analysts. SIRG utilizes proprietary processes to analyze large quantities of industry data, both on a qualitative and quantitative level, in order to effectively manage the Portfolios and the subadvisers. The Investment Manager utilizes this data in directly supervising the Portfolios and the subadvisers. SIRG provides reports to the Board and presents to the Board at special and regularly scheduled Board meetings. The Investment Manager bears the cost of the oversight program maintained by SIRG.

In addition, the Investment Manager provides or supervises all of the administrative functions necessary for the organization, operation and management of the Trust and its Portfolios. The Investment Manager administers the Trust's corporate affairs and, in connection therewith, furnish the Trust with office facilities, together with those ordinary clerical and bookkeeping services which are not being furnished by, the Trust's custodian (the Custodian), and the Trust's transfer agent. The Investment Manager is also responsible for the staffing and management of dedicated groups of legal, marketing, compliance and related personnel necessary for the operation of the Trust. The legal, marketing, compliance and related personnel are also responsible for the management and oversight of the various service providers to the Trust, including, but not limited to, the custodian, transfer agent, and accounting agent. The management services of the Investment Manager to the Trust are not exclusive under the terms of the Management Agreement and the Investment Manager is free to, and does, render management services to others.

The primary administrative services furnished by the Investment Manager are more specifically detailed below:

◾

furnishing of office facilities;

◾

paying salaries of all officers and other employees of the Investment Manager who are responsible for managing the Trust and the Portfolios;

◾

monitoring financial and shareholder accounting services provided by the Trust’s custodian and transfer agent;

◾

providing assistance to the service providers of the Trust and the Portfolios, including, but not limited to, the custodian, transfer agent, and accounting agent;

◾

monitoring, together with each subadviser, each Portfolio’s compliance with its investment policies, restrictions, and with federal and state laws and regulations, including federal and state securities laws, the Internal Revenue Code and other relevant federal and state laws and regulations;

◾

preparing and filing all required federal, state and local tax returns for the Trust and the Portfolios;

◾

preparing and filing with the SEC on Form N-CSR the Trust’s annual and semi-annual reports to shareholders, including supervising financial printers who provide related support services;

◾

preparing and filing with the SEC required monthly reports of portfolio holdings on Form N-PORT;

◾

preparing and filing the Trust’s registration statement with the SEC on Form N-1A, as well as preparing and filing with the SEC supplements and other documents, as applicable;

◾

preparing compliance, operations and other reports required to be received by the Trust’s Board and/or its committees in support of the Board’s oversight of the Trust; and

◾

organizing the regular and any special meetings of the Board of the Trust, including the preparing Board materials and agendas, preparing minutes, and related functions.

Expenses Borne by the Investment Manager. In connection with its management of the corporate affairs of the Trust, the Investment Manager bears certain expenses, including, but not limited to:

◾

the salaries and expenses of all of its and the Trust's personnel except the fees and expenses of Trustees who are not affiliated persons of the Investment Manager or any subadviser;

◾

all expenses incurred by the Investment Manager or the Trust in connection with managing the ordinary course of a Trust's business, other than those assumed by the Trust as described below;

◾

the fees, costs and expenses payable to any investment subadvisers pursuant to Subadvisory Agreements between the Investment Manager and such investment subadvisers; and

◾

with respect to the compliance services provided by the Investment Manager, the cost of the Trust’s Chief Compliance Officer, the Trust’s Deputy Chief Compliance Officer, and all personnel who provide compliance services for the Trust, and all of the other costs associated with the Trust’s compliance program, which includes the management and operation of the compliance program responsible for compliance oversight of the Portfolios and the subadvisers.

Expenses Borne by the Trust. Under the terms of the Management Agreement, the Trust is responsible for the payment of Trust expenses not paid by the Investment Manager, including:

17

◾

the fees and expenses incurred by the Trust in connection with the management of the investment and reinvestment of the Trust's assets payable to the Investment Manager;

◾

the fees and expenses of Trustees who are not affiliated persons of the Investment Manager or any subadviser;

◾

the fees and certain expenses of the custodian and transfer and dividend disbursing agent, including the cost of providing records to the Investment Manager in connection with their obligation of maintaining required records of the Trust and of pricing the Trust's shares;

◾

the charges and expenses of the Trust's legal counsel and independent auditors;

◾

brokerage commissions and any issue or transfer taxes chargeable to the Trust in connection with its securities (and futures, if applicable) transactions;

◾

all taxes and corporate fees payable by the Trust to governmental agencies;

◾

the fees of any trade associations of which the Trust may be a member;

◾

the cost of share certificates representing and/or non-negotiable share deposit receipts evidencing shares of the Trust;

◾

the cost of fidelity, directors and officers and errors and omissions insurance;

◾

the fees and expenses involved in registering and maintaining registration of the Trust and of its shares with the SEC and paying notice filing fees under state securities laws, including the preparation and printing of the Trust's registration statements and prospectuses for such purposes;

◾

allocable communications expenses with respect to investor services and all expenses of shareholders' and Trustees' meetings and of preparing, printing and mailing reports and notices to shareholders; and

◾

litigation and indemnification expenses and other extraordinary expenses not incurred in the ordinary course of the Trust's business and distribution and service (12b-1) fees.

Terms of the Management Agreement. The Management Agreement provides that the Investment Manager will not be liable for any error of judgment by PGIM Investments or for any loss suffered by the Trust in connection with the matters to which the Management Agreement relates, except a loss resulting from a breach of fiduciary duty with respect to the receipt of compensation for services (in which case any award of damages shall be limited to the period and the amount set forth in Section 36(b)(3) of the 1940 Act) or loss resulting from willful misfeasance, bad faith or gross negligence or reckless disregard of duties. The Management Agreement provides that it will terminate automatically, if assigned (as defined in the 1940 Act), and that it may be terminated without penalty by either the Investment Manager or the Trust by the Board or vote of a majority of the outstanding voting securities of the Trust, (as defined in the 1940 Act) upon not more than 60 days nor less than 30 days written notice. The Management Agreement will continue in effect for a period of more than two years from the date of execution only so long as such continuance is specifically approved at least annually in accordance with the requirements of the 1940 Act.

Fees payable under the Management Agreement are computed daily and paid monthly. The Investment Manager may from time to time waive all or a portion of its management fee and subsidize all or a portion of the operating expenses of a Portfolio. Management fee waivers and subsidies will increase a Portfolio's total return. These voluntary waivers may be terminated at any time without notice.

SEC Manager-of-Managers Order. The manager-of-managers structure operates under exemptive orders issued by the SEC. The orders permit the Investment Manager to hire subadvisers or amend subadvisory agreements, without shareholder approval.

The most recent order imposes the following conditions:

1. Before a Portfolio may rely on the order requested in the application, the operation of the Portfolio in the manner described in the application, including the hiring of wholly-owned subadvisers, will be, or has been, approved by a majority of the Portfolio’s outstanding voting securities as defined in the 1940 Act, which in the case of a master fund will include voting instructions provided by shareholders of the feeder funds investing in such master fund or other voting arrangements that comply with section 12(d)(1)(E)(iii)(aa) of the 1940 Act (or, in the case on an insurance-related Portfolio, pursuant to the voting instructions provided by contract owners with assets allocated to any registered separate account for which the Portfolio serves as a funding medium), or, in the case of a new Portfolio whose public shareholders purchase shares on the basis of a prospectus containing the disclosure contemplated by condition 2 below, by the sole initial shareholder before offering the Portfolio’s shares to the public.

2. The prospectus for each Portfolio, and in the case of a master fund relying on the requested relief, the prospectus for each feeder fund investing in such master fund, will disclose the existence, substance and effect of any order granted pursuant to the application. Each Portfolio (and any such feeder fund) will hold itself out to the public as employing the Multi-Manager Structure described in the application. Each prospectus will prominently disclose that the Investment Manager have the ultimate responsibility, subject to oversight by the Board, to oversee the subadvisers and recommend their hiring, termination, and replacement.

3. The Investment Manager will provide general management services to a Portfolio, including overall supervisory responsibility for the general management and investment of the Portfolio’s assets. Subject to review and approval of the Board, the Investment Manager will (a) set a Portfolio’s overall investment strategies, (b) evaluate, select, and recommend subadvisers to manage all or a portion of a

 18

Portfolio’s assets, and (c) implement procedures reasonably designed to ensure that subadvisers comply with a Portfolio’s investment objective, policies and restrictions. Subject to review by the Board, the Investment Manager will (a) when appropriate, allocate and reallocate a Portfolio’s assets among subadvisers; and (b) monitor and evaluate the performance of subadvisers.

4. A Portfolio will not make any ineligible subadviser changes without the approval of the shareholders of the applicable Portfolio, which in the case of a master fund will include voting instructions provided by shareholders of the feeder fund investing in such master fund or other voting arrangements that comply with section 12(d)(1)(E)(iii)(aa) of the 1940 Act.

5. A Portfolio will inform shareholders, and if the Portfolio is a master fund, shareholders of any feeder funds, of the hiring of a new subadviser within 90 days after the hiring of the new subadviser pursuant to the Modified Notice and Access Procedures.

6. At all times, at least a majority of the Board will be Independent Trustees, and the selection and nomination of new or additional Independent Trustees will be placed within the discretion of the then-existing Independent Trustees.

7. Independent legal counsel, as defined in rule 0-1(a)(6) under the 1940 Act, will be engaged to represent the Independent Trustees. The selection of such counsel will be within the discretion of the then-existing Independent Trustees.

8. The Investment Manager will provide the Board, no less frequently than quarterly, information about the profitability of the Investment Manager on a per Portfolio basis. The information will reflect the impact on profitability of the hiring or termination of any subadviser during the applicable quarter.

9. Whenever a subadviser is hired or terminated, the Investment Manager will provide the Board with information showing the expected impact on the profitability of the Investment Manager.

10. Whenever a subadviser change is proposed for a Portfolio with an affiliated subadviser or a wholly-owned subadviser, the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, will make a separate finding, reflected in the Board minutes, that such change is in the best interests of the Portfolio and its shareholders, and if the Portfolio is a master fund, the best interests of any applicable feeder funds and their respective shareholders, and does not involve a conflict of interest from which the Investment Manager or the affiliated subadviser or wholly-owned subadviser derives an inappropriate advantage.

11. No Board member or officer of a Prudential investment company, a Portfolio, or a feeder fund that invests in a Portfolio that is a master fund, or director, manager or officer of the Investment Manager, will own directly or indirectly (other than through a pooled investment vehicle that is not controlled by such person) any interest in a subadviser except for (a) ownership of interests in the Investment Manager or any entity, other than a Wholly-Owned subadviser, that controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with the Investment Manager, or (b) ownership of less than 1% of the outstanding securities of any class of equity or debt of any publicly traded company that is either a subadviser or an entity that controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with, a subadviser.

12. Each Portfolio and any feeder fund that invests in a Portfolio that is a master fund will disclose an aggregate fee disclosure in its registration statement.

13. In the event the SEC adopts a rule under the 1940 Act providing substantially similar relief to that requested in the application, the requested order will expire on the effective date of that rule.

14. Any new Subadvisory Agreement or any amendment to a Portfolio’s existing Investment Management Agreement or Subadvisory Agreement that directly or indirectly results in an increase in the aggregate advisory fee rate payable by the Portfolio will be submitted to the Portfolio’s shareholders for approval.

Potential Conflicts. Under the manager-of-managers structure, the Investment Manager recommends the hiring and firing of subadvisers, determines the allocation of Portfolio assets among subadvisers for Portfolios with more than one subadviser, and reports to the Board regarding subadviser performance. The Investment Manager also directly manages the assets for certain Portfolio sleeves or segments.

The Investment Manager may face potential conflicts inherent in serving as a manager-of-managers including, but not limited to: (i) an incentive to recommend that a Portfolio retain an affiliated subadviser; (ii) an incentive to recommend that a Portfolio retain a subadviser because the subadviser may provide distribution support or other services that benefit the Investment Manager or its affiliates or because of other relationships between the subadviser or its affiliates and the Investment Manager or its affiliates; (iii) an incentive to recommend that the Investment Manager provide direct management of assets for certain sleeves or segments; and (iv) an incentive to allocate assets among subadvisers of a single Portfolio based on profitability or other benefit to the Investment Manager or their affiliates.

19

To mitigate potential conflicts presented by these issues, the Investment Manager utilizes the services of SIRG, a unit of PGIM Investments, which provides investment manager oversight, analysis and recommendations. SIRG provides its input to both the Investment Manager and the Board. SIRG representatives meet with the Board in connection with its quarterly meetings and any special meetings at which subadviser recommendations are made, and the Board makes the decision as to the retention of any subadviser. For recommendations involving a new subadviser or a replacement subadviser for a single asset class Portfolio or sleeve, SIRG conducts a search of qualified subadvisers and provides a recommendation. SIRG reviews with the Board the search process, finalists and the reasons for the recommendation. SIRG’s investment analysis process is applied in the same manner to both affiliated and unaffiliated subadvisers. The Board makes the final decision with respect to the retention of a new or replacement subadviser. For some Portfolios, the Investment Manager makes a recommendation for a subadviser based on the design of a Portfolio, such as a Portfolio designed in consultation with a specific subadviser. In those cases, SIRG reviews the proposed subadviser and reports to the Board regarding its assessment of the subadviser.

To the extent a subadviser’s affiliation or other business relationship with Prudential is a factor in any subadviser recommendation, the Investment Manager discusses the relevant factors with the Board, which makes the final decision on any new or replacement subadviser. SIRG personnel are not involved in subadvisory fee negotiations.

Management Fees. The tables below set forth the applicable contractual management fee rate and the management fees received by the Investment Manager from the Trust for each Portfolio for the indicated fiscal years. 

Management Fee Rates
Portfolio	Fee Rate
PSF Global Portfolio	0.75% of average daily net assets
PSF Mid-Cap Growth Portfolio	0.60% of average daily net assets
PSF Natural Resources Portfolio	0.45% of average daily net assets
PSF PGIM 50/50 Balanced Portfolio	0.55% of average daily net assets
PSF PGIM Flexible Managed Portfolio	0.60% of average daily net assets
PSF PGIM Government Income Portfolio	0.40% of average daily net assets
PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio	0.30% of average daily net assets
PSF PGIM High Yield Bond Portfolio	0.55% of average daily net assets
PSF PGIM Jennison Blend Portfolio	0.45% of average daily net assets
PSF PGIM Jennison Focused Blend Portfolio	0.75% of average daily net assets
PSF PGIM Jennison Growth Portfolio	0.60% of average daily net assets
PSF PGIM Jennison Value Portfolio	0.40% of average daily net assets
PSF PGIM Total Return Bond Portfolio	0.40% of average daily net assets
PSF Small-Cap Stock Index Portfolio	0.35% of average daily net assets
PSF Small-Cap Value Portfolio	0.90% of average daily net assets
PSF Stock Index Portfolio	0.30% of average daily net assets up to $4 billion; 0.25% of average daily net assets over $4 billion

 

Management Fees Paid by the Trust
Portfolio	2022	2021	2020
PSF Global Portfolio	$8,927,003	$10,507,948	$8,505,743
PSF Mid-Cap Growth Portfolio	$1,981,624	$2,448,239	$1,814,768
PSF Natural Resources Portfolio	$2,276,057	$1,904,086	$1,425,494
PSF PGIM 50/50 Balanced Portfolio	$13,850,406	$15,404,639	$13,971,305
PSF PGIM Flexible Managed Portfolio	$26,029,490	$28,599,867	$25,024,560
PSF PGIM Government Income Portfolio	$793,826	$926,396	$986,502
PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio	$2,248,164*	$309,310	$1,179,678
PSF PGIM High Yield Bond Portfolio	$2,636,022	$2,914,899	$2,514,795
PSF PGIM Jennison Blend Portfolio	$22,712,835	$27,389,058	$21,503,309
PSF PGIM Jennison Focused Blend Portfolio	$1,342,293	$1,689,476	$1,431,524
PSF PGIM Jennison Growth Portfolio	$15,589,309	$21,132,272	$16,070,545

 20

Management Fees Paid by the Trust
Portfolio	2022	2021	2020
PSF PGIM Jennison Value Portfolio	$5,962,257	$6,216,657	$4,979,027
PSF PGIM Total Return Bond Portfolio	$4,649,183	$5,173,336	$4,939,610
PSF Small-Cap Stock Index Portfolio	$3,073,687	$3,512,565	$2,453,539
PSF Small-Cap Value Portfolio	$2,607,711	$2,652,012	$1,681,906
PSF Stock Index Portfolio	$17,684,332	$18,080,511	$14,003,989

*In order to support the income yield, PGIM Investments has voluntarily agreed to limit the management fee of the PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio such that the 1-day annualized yield of the Portfolio (excluding capital gain or loss) does not fall below 0.00%. During the year ended December 31, 2022, PGIM Investments reimbursed the Portfolio $503,442 as a result of this voluntary agreement.

FEE WAIVERS/SUBSIDIES. PGIM Investments may from time to time waive all or a portion of its management fee and subsidize all or a portion of the operating expenses of the Trust. Fee waivers and expense subsidies will increase the Trust's total return. These voluntary waivers may be terminated at any time without notice. To the extent that PGIM Investments agrees to waive its fee or subsidize the Trust's expenses, it may enter into a relationship agreement with the subadviser to share the economic impact of the fee waiver or expense subsidy.

PGIM Investments has voluntarily agreed to waive a portion of its management fee and/or limit total expenses (expressed as a percentage of average daily net assets) for certain Portfolios of the Trust, as set forth in the table below. These expense limitations do not include the administration fee applicable to Class II shares or the Rule 12b-1 fee applicable to Class II and Class III shares. Voluntary expense limitations may be discontinued or otherwise modified at any time. PGIM Investments has also contractually agreed to waive a portion of its management fee and/or limit total expenses (expressed as a percentage of average daily net assets) for certain Portfolios of the Trust, as set forth in the table below. These expense limitations do not include the administration fee applicable to Class II shares or the Rule 12b-1 fee applicable to Class II and Class III shares. Contractual expense limitations may not be terminated or modified prior to their contractual expiration date, without the prior approval of the Trust’s Board of Trustees, but may be discontinued or modified thereafter. 

Fee Waivers & Expense Limitations
Portfolio	Fee Waiver and/or Expense Limitation
PSF Global Portfolio	The Manager has contractually agreed to waive 0.0345% of its management fee through June 30, 2024. In addition, the Manager has contractually agreed to waive 0.012% of its management fee through June 30, 2024. These arrangements may not be terminated or modified without the prior approval of the Trust’s Board of Trustees.
PSF Mid-Cap Growth Portfolio	The Manager has contractually agreed to waive 0.013% of its management fee through June 30, 2024. This arrangement may not be terminated or modified without the prior approval of the Trust’s Board of Trustees.
PSF Natural Resources Portfolio	The Manager has contractually agreed to waive 0.008% of its management fee through June 30, 2024. This arrangement may not be terminated or modified without the prior approval of the Trust’s Board of Trustees.
PSF PGIM Flexible Managed Portfolio	The Manager has contractually agreed to waive a portion of its management fee and/or reimburse certain expenses of the Portfolio so that the Portfolio’s management fee plus other expenses (exclusive in all cases of distribution and/or service (12b-1) fees, administration fees, interest, brokerage, taxes (such as income and foreign withholding taxes, stamp duty and deferred tax expenses), extraordinary expenses, and certain other Portfolio expenses such as dividend and interest expense and broker charges on short sales) do not exceed 0.61% of the Portfolio's average daily net assets through June 30, 2024. Where applicable, the Manager agrees to waive management fees or shared operating expenses on any share class to the same extent that it waives such expenses on any other share class. Expenses waived/reimbursed by the Manager for the purpose of preventing the expenses from exceeding a certain expense ratio limit may be recouped by the Manager within the same fiscal year during which such waiver/reimbursement is made if such recoupment can be realized without exceeding the expense limit in effect at the time of the recoupment for that fiscal year. These arrangements may not be terminated or modified without the prior approval of the Trust's Board of Trustees.
PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio	In order to support the income yield, PGIM Investments has voluntarily agreed to limit the management fees of the Portfolio such that the 1-day annualized yield of the Portfolio (excluding capital gain or loss) does not fall below 0.00%. The waiver is voluntary and may be modified or terminated by PGIM Investments at any time without notice.

21

Fee Waivers & Expense Limitations
Portfolio	Fee Waiver and/or Expense Limitation
PSF PGIM High Yield Bond Portfolio	The Manager has contractually agreed to waive a portion of its management fee and/or reimburse certain expenses of the Portfolio so that the Portfolio’s management fee plus other expenses (exclusive in all cases of distribution and/or service (12b-1) fees, administration fees, interest, brokerage, taxes (such as income and foreign withholding taxes, stamp duty and deferred tax expenses), extraordinary expenses, and certain other Portfolio expenses such as dividend and interest expense and broker charges on short sales) do not exceed 0.57% of the Portfolio's average daily net assets through June 30, 2024. Where applicable, the Manager agrees to waive management fees or shared operating expenses on any share class to the same extent that it waives such expenses on any other share class. Expenses waived/reimbursed by the Manager for the purpose of preventing the expenses from exceeding a certain expense ratio limit may be recouped by the Manager within the same fiscal year during which such waiver/reimbursement is made if such recoupment can be realized without exceeding the expense limit in effect at the time of the recoupment for that fiscal year. These arrangements may not be terminated or modified without the prior approval of the Trust's Board of Trustees.

SUBADVISERS. The Investment Manager has entered into subadvisory agreements with each of the subadvisers named in the table appearing below. The subadvisory agreements provide that the subadvisers will furnish investment advisory services in connection with the management of each Portfolio. In connection therewith, each subadviser is obligated to keep certain books and records of the Trust. Under each subadvisory agreement, each subadviser, subject to the supervision of the Investment Manager, is responsible for managing the assets of a Portfolio in accordance with the Portfolio's investment objectives, investment program and policies. The subadvisers determine what securities and other instruments are purchased and sold for each Portfolio and are responsible for obtaining and evaluating financial data relevant to the Portfolio. The Investment Manager continues to have the ultimate responsibility for all investment advisory services pursuant to the Management Agreement and supervises the subadvisers' performance of such services.

Pursuant to each subadvisory agreement, the Investment Manager pays each subadviser a fee. The tables below set forth the current fee rates and fees paid by the Investment Manager to each subadviser for the three most recent fiscal years. The fee rates represent the fees as a percentage of average daily net assets.

As discussed in the Prospectus, the Investment Manager employs each subadviser under a “manager of managers” structure that allows the Investment Manager to replace the subadvisers or amend a subadvisory agreement without seeking shareholder approval. The Investment Manager is authorized to select (with approval of the Board's independent trustees) one or more subadvisers to handle the actual day-to-day investment management of each Portfolio. The Investment Manager monitors each subadviser's performance through quantitative and qualitative analysis and periodically reports to the Board as to whether each subadviser's agreement should be renewed, terminated or modified. It is possible that the Investment Manager will continue to be satisfied with the performance record of the existing subadvisers and not recommend any additional subadvisers. The Investment Manager is also responsible for allocating assets among the subadvisers if a Portfolio has more than one subadviser. In those circumstances, the allocation for each subadviser can range from 0% to 100% of the Portfolio's assets, and the Investment Manager can change the allocations without Board or shareholder approval. The Investment Manager will review the allocations periodically and may adjust them without prior notice. The annual update to the Trust's prospectus will reflect these adjustments. Shareholders will be notified of any new subadvisers or materially amended subadvisory agreements. 

Portfolio Subadvisers and Fee Rates
Portfolio	Subadviser	Fee*
PSF Global Portfolio	William Blair Investment Management, LLC (William Blair)	0.30% to $500 million in assets; 0.25% over $500 million to $1 billion in assets; 0.20% over $1 billion in assets
	LSV Asset Management (LSV)	Under $1.25 billion 0.450% of average daily net assets to $150 million; 0.425% of average daily net assets over $150 million to $300 million; 0.400% of average daily net assets over $300 million to $450 million; 0.375% of average daily net assets over $450 million to $750 million; 0.350% of average daily net assets over $750 million Over $1.25 billion 0.350% on all assets
	Massachusetts Financial Services Company (MFS)	0.30% on first $500 million; 0.285% on next $500 million; 0.27% on next $500 million; 0.19% over $1.5 billion

 22

Portfolio Subadvisers and Fee Rates
Portfolio	Subadviser	Fee*
	T. Rowe Price Associates, Inc. (T. Rowe Price)	Portfolio daily net assets up to $100 million: 0.475% of average daily net assets to $50 million; 0.425% of average daily net assets over $50 million to $100 million When Portfolio average daily net assets exceed $100 million: 0.375% of average daily net assets When Portfolio average daily net assets exceed $200 million: 0.325% of average daily net assets When Portfolio average daily net assets exceed $500 million: 0.30% on all assets up to $500 million; 0.275% of average daily net assets over $500 million When Portfolio average daily net assets exceed $1 billion: 0.275% of average daily net assets When Portfolio average daily net assets exceed $1.5 billion: 0.25% of average daily net assets When Portfolio average daily net assets exceed $2 billion: 0.245% of average daily net assets When Portfolio average daily net assets exceed $3 billion: 0.24% of average daily net assets When Portfolio average daily net assets exceed $4 billion: 0.23% of average daily net assets When Portfolio average daily net assets exceed $5.5 billion: 0.225% of average daily net assets When Portfolio average daily net assets exceed $7.5 billion: 0.22% of average daily net assets
	PGIM Quantitative Solutions (1)	0.025%
	PGIM Fixed Income*(1)	0.025%
	Jennison(1)	0.025%
PSF Mid-Cap Growth Portfolio	J.P. Morgan Investment Management, Inc. (J.P. Morgan)	0.40% of average daily net assets to $100 million; 0.35% of average daily net assets over $100 million
PSF Natural Resources Portfolio	T. Rowe Price	0.55% of average daily net assets to $50 million; When Portfolio average daily net assets exceed $50 million: 0.50% of average daily net assets to $500 million; When Portfolio average daily net assets exceed $500 million: 0.425% of average daily net assets up to $500 million; 0.375% of average daily net assets above $500 million to $1 billion; When Portfolio average daily net assets exceed $1 billion: 0.375% of average daily net assets
PSF PGIM 50/50 Balanced Portfolio	PGIM Fixed Income*, PGIM Limited	0.24% of average daily net assets managed by PGIM Fixed Income (Core Fixed-Income/Futures Assets Only) 0.15% of average daily net assets managed by PGIM Fixed Income (Money Market Assets Only)
	PGIM Quantitative Solutions LLC (PGIM Quantitative Solutions)	0.315%
PSF PGIM Flexible Managed Portfolio	PGIM Fixed Income*, PGIM Limited	0.24% of average daily net assets managed by PGIM Fixed Income (Core Fixed-Income/Futures Assets Only) 0.15% of average daily net assets managed by PGIM Fixed Income (Money Market Assets Only)
	PGIM Quantitative Solutions	0.34%
PSF PGIM Government Income Portfolio	PGIM Fixed Income*	0.20%
PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio	PGIM Fixed Income*	0.06% to $500 million in assets; 0.05% above $500 million to $1 billion in assets; 0.03% above $1 billion to $2.5 billion in assets; 0.02% over $2.5 billion in assets
PSF PGIM High Yield Bond Portfolio	PGIM Fixed Income*, PGIM Limited	0.25%
PSF PGIM Jennison Blend Portfolio	Jennison Associates LLC (Jennison)	0.225% to $1.2 billion in assets; 0.19% over $1.2 billion in assets

23

Portfolio Subadvisers and Fee Rates
Portfolio	Subadviser	Fee*
PSF PGIM Jennison Focused Blend Portfolio	Jennison	Growth Portion: 0.30% for first $300 million in assets; 0.25% above $300 million in assets Value Portion: 0.375%
PSF PGIM Jennison Growth Portfolio	Jennison	0.75% for first $10 million in assets; 0.50% for next $30 million in assets; 0.35% for next $25 million in assets; 0.25% for next $335 million in assets; 0.22% for next $600 million in assets; 0.20% for above $1 billion in assets
PSF PGIM Jennison Value Portfolio	Jennison	0.20%
PSF PGIM Total Return Bond Portfolio	PGIM Fixed Income*, PGIM Limited	0.20%
PSF Small-Cap Stock Index Portfolio	PGIM Quantitative Solutions	0.26%
PSF Small-Cap Value Portfolio	Goldman Sachs Asset Management, L.P. (GSAM)	0.50% for first $500 million in assets; 0.45% over $500 million in assets
PSF Stock Index Portfolio	PGIM Quantitative Solutions	0.175%

* PGIM Fixed Income is a business unit of PGIM, Inc.

(1) Currently, only PGIM Quantitative Solutions is providing Additional Services for the Portfolio. In the event that Jennison and/or PGIM Fixed Income provide Additional Services along with or instead of PGIM Quantitative Solutions, each subadviser would receive 0.025% of the average daily net assets allocated to each subadviser, respectively.

Aggregation Notes to Subadviser Fee Rate Table:

* For purposes of calculating the fee payable to certain subadvisers, the assets managed by the subadviser will be aggregated with one or more other Portfolios or Funds. Each such aggregation arrangement is set out below:

J.P. Morgan: Assets managed by J.P. Morgan in the PSF Mid-Cap Growth Portfolio will be aggregated with assets managed by J.P. Morgan in the AST Mid-Cap Growth Portfolio for the purpose of calculating the subadvisory fee.

LSV: The assets managed by LSV in the PSF Global Portfolio will be aggregated with the assets managed by LSV in: (i) the AST International Equity Portfolio of Advanced Series Trust; (ii) the AST Advanced Strategies Portfolio of Advanced Series Trust; and (iii) any other portfolio subadvised by LSV on behalf of ASTIS and/or PGIM Investments pursuant to substantially the same investment strategy.

Massachusetts Financial Services Company (MFS): For purposes of calculating the advisory fee payable to MFS, the assets managed by MFS in the (i) AST Large-Cap Growth Portfolio, (ii) AST Advanced Strategies Portfolio, and (iii) PSF Global Portfolio will be aggregated.

PGIM Fixed Income: The assets of the PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio will be combined with the assets of the Advanced Series Trust AST Government Money Market Portfolio.

T. Rowe Price: For purposes of calculating the subadvisory fee payable to T. Rowe Price, the large cap value strategy assets managed by T. Rowe Price will be aggregated with the large cap value strategy assets managed by T. Rowe Price for all other Prudential entities.

For purposes of calculating the subadvisory fee payable to T. Rowe Price, assets of the PSF Natural Resources Portfolio will be aggregated with assets of the AST T. Rowe Price Natural Resources for purposes of calculating the effective subadvisory fee rate.

Fee Waiver Notes to Subadviser Fee Rate Table:

T. Rowe Price:

—Advanced Series Trust AST Advanced Strategies Portfolio (T. Rowe Price Sleeves)

—Advanced Series Trust AST T. Rowe Price Asset Allocation Portfolio

—Advanced Series Trust AST T. Rowe Price Growth Opportunities Portfolio

—Advanced Series Trust AST Large-Cap Growth Portfolio (T. Rowe Price Sleeve)

—Advanced Series Trust AST Large-Cap Value Portfolio (T. Rowe Price Sleeve)

—Advanced Series Trust AST T. Rowe Price Natural Resources Portfolio

—PSF Natural Resources Portfolio

—PSF Global Portfolio (T. Rowe Price Sleeve)

T. Rowe Price has agreed to reduce the monthly subadvisory fee for each Portfolio listed above (or the portion thereof subadvised by T. Rowe Price) by the following percentages based on the combined average daily net assets of the Portfolios listed above (or the portion thereof subadvised by T. Rowe Price):

Combined Average Daily Net Assets up to $20 billion:

—2.5% fee reduction on combined assets up to $1 billion

—5.0% fee reduction on combined assets on the next $1.5 billion

—7.5% fee reduction on combined assets on the next $2.5 billion

—10.0% fee reduction on combined assets on the next $5.0 billion

—12.5% fee reduction on combined assets above $10.0 billion

Combined Average Daily Net Assets above $20 billion:

—12.5% fee reduction on combined assets up to $20 billion

—15.0% fee reduction on combined assets on the next $10.0 billion

—17.5% fee reduction on combined assets over $30 billion

PGIM Quantitative Solutions: With respect to the PSF Stock Index Portfolio: PGIM Quantitative Solutions has voluntarily agreed to reduce its subadvisory fee rate by 0.025%.

In addition, the Investment Manager will pay PGIM Quantitative Solutions a fee for providing additional advisory services to the PSF Global Portfolio, including but not limited to asset allocation advice (Additional Services).

 24

GSAM: GSAM has agreed to a voluntary subadvisory fee waiver arrangement that will apply across each of the portfolios or sleeves of portfolios subadvised by GSAM that are managed by the Investment Manager and ASTIS. The waiver is based on the following percentages based on the combined average daily net assets of each of the portfolios or sleeves of portfolios subadvised by GSAM:

—Combined assets up to $1 billion: 2.5% fee reduction
—Combined assets between $1 billion and $2.5 billion: 5.0% fee reduction
—Combined assets between $2.5 billion and $5.0 billion: 7.5% fee reduction
—Combined assets above $5.0 billion: 10.0% fee reduction

MFS: MFS has agreed to a voluntary subadvisory fee waiver arrangement that applies across each of the following portfolios or sleeves of portfolios managed by MFS:

-AST Academic Strategies Asset Allocation Portfolio (sleeve managed by MFS)

-AST Advanced Strategies Portfolio (sleeve managed by MFS)

-AST Balanced Asset Allocation Portfolio (sleeve managed by MFS)

-AST Capital Growth Asset Allocation Portfolio (sleeve managed by MFS)

-AST International Equity Portfolio (sleeve managed by MFS)

-AST Large-Cap Core Portfolio (sleeve managed by MFS)

-AST Large-Cap Growth Portfolio (sleeve managed by MFS)

-AST Large-Cap Value Portfolio (sleeve managed by MFS)

-AST MFS Global Equity Portfolio

-AST Mid-Cap Growth Portfolio (sleeve managed by MFS)

-AST Mid-Cap Value Portfolio (sleeve managed by MFS);

-AST Preservation Asset Allocation Portfolio (sleeve managed by MFS)

-AST Small-Cap Growth Portfolio (sleeve managed by MFS);

-PSF Global Portfolio (sleeve managed by MFS)

MFS has agreed to reduce the monthly subadvisory fee for each Portfolio listed above (or the sleeve thereof subadvised by MFS) by the following percentages based on the combined average daily net assets of the Portfolios listed above (or the sleeve thereof subadvised by MFS):

—Combined assets up to $5 billion: No fee reduction.

—Combined assets between $5 billion and $7.5 billion: 5% fee reduction.

—Combined assets between $7.5 billion and $10 billion: 7.5% fee reduction.

—Combined assets between $10 billion and $20 billion: 10% fee reduction.

—Combined assets between $20 billion and $30 billion: 15% fee reduction.

—Combined assets over $30 billion: 20% fee reduction. 

Subadvisory Fees Paid by PGIM Investments
Portfolio	Subadviser	2022	2021	2020
PSF Global Portfolio	William Blair	$498,543	$592,502	$519,195
	Brown Advisory*	$384,091	$1,324,825	$1,187,248
	LSV	$812,305	$902,689	$728,560
	T. Rowe Price	$986,854	$985,565	$708,604
	PGIM Quantitative Solutions	$315,823	$368,080	$297,656
	Massachusetts Financial Services Company	$705,687	N/A	N/A
PSF Mid-Cap Growth Portfolio	J.P. Morgan	$1,227,486	$1,508,943	$1,128,864
PSF Natural Resources Portfolio	AllianzGI US*	$508,396	$968,104	$816,511
	T. Rowe Price	$977,171	N/A	N/A
PSF PGIM 50/50 Balanced Portfolio	PGIM Fixed Income**, PGIM Limited	$2,561,832	$2,709,974	$2,652,920
	PGIM Quantitative Solutions	$4,248,908	$5,001,397	$4,339,064
PSF PGIM Flexible Managed Portfolio	PGIM Fixed Income**, PGIM Limited	$3,550,988	$3,629,024	$3,589,262
	PGIM Quantitative Solutions	$9,334,581	$10,865,237	$8,999,724
PSF PGIM Government Income Portfolio	PGIM Fixed Income**	$396,908	$463,198	$493,241
PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio	PGIM Fixed Income**	$398,588	$382,968	$314,386
PSF PGIM High Yield Bond Portfolio	PGIM Fixed Income**, PGIM Limited	$1,273,763	$1,378,397	$1,242,055
PSF PGIM Jennison Blend Portfolio	Jennison	$10,009,817	$11,984,269	$9,499,193
PSF PGIM Jennison Focused Blend Portfolio	Jennison	$610,095	$756,618	$635,312
PSF PGIM Jennison Growth Portfolio	Jennison	$5,666,414	$7,514,091	$5,826,878
PSF PGIM Jennison Value Portfolio	Jennison	$2,981,110	$3,108,328	$2,489,516
PSF PGIM Total Return Bond Portfolio	PGIM Fixed Income**, PGIM Limited	$2,324,573	$2,586,668	$2,469,734
PSF Small-Cap Stock Index Portfolio	PGIM Quantitative Solutions	$2,283,284	$2,609,334	$1,822,653
PSF Small-Cap Value Portfolio	GSAM	$1,386,315	$1,335,113	$846,853

25

Subadvisory Fees Paid by PGIM Investments
Portfolio	Subadviser	2022	2021	2020
PSF Stock Index Portfolio	PGIM Quantitative Solutions	$9,410,541	$9,648,307	$7,202,401

* No longer a subadviser to the Portfolio.

** * PGIM Fixed Income is a business unit of PGIM, Inc.

PORTFOLIO MANAGERS: OTHER ACCOUNTS

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE PORTFOLIO MANAGERS—Other Accounts and Portfolio Ownership. The following tables set forth information about each Portfolio and accounts other than the Portfolio for which each Portfolio's portfolio managers (the Portfolio Managers) are primarily responsible for day-to-day portfolio management as of the Trust's most recently completed fiscal year. The table shows, for each portfolio manager, the number of accounts managed and the total assets in such accounts, within each of the following categories: registered investment companies, other pooled investment vehicles, and other accounts. For each category, the number of accounts and total assets in the accounts whose fees are based on performance is indicated in italics typeface. The tables also set forth the dollar range of equity securities of each Portfolio of the Trust beneficially owned by the Portfolio Managers as of the Trust's most recently completed fiscal year. 

PSF Global Portfolio
Subadvisers	Portfolio Managers	Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts	Ownership of Portfolio Securities
PGIM Investments LLC	Brian Ahrens	8/$ 60,518,872,205	None	None	None
	Andrei O. Marinich, CFA	8/$ 60,518,872,205	None	None	None
	Todd L. Kerin	8/41,338,677,005	None	None	None
	Saleem Z. Banatwala	1/8,325,992,857	None	None	None
LSV	Menno Vermeulen, CFA	34/$16,001,043,976	63/$21,382,073,412 7**/ $1,746,486,102	318/$53,515,794,854 68/$12,095,653,398	None
	Josef Lakonishok, PhD	34/$16,001,043,976	63/$21,382,073,412 7**/$1,746,486,102	318/$53,515,794,854 68/$12,095,653,398	None
	Puneet Mansharamani, CFA	34/$16,001,043,976	63/$21,382,073,412 7**/$1,746,486,102	318/$53,515,794,854 68/$12,095,653,398	None
	Greg Sleight	34/$16,001,043,976	63/$21,382,073,412 7**/$1,746,486,102	318/$53,515,794,854 68/$12,095,653,398	None
	Guy Lakonishok, CFA	34/$16,001,043,976	63/$21,382,073,412 7**/$1,746,486,102	318/$53,515,794,854 68/$12,095,653,398	None
MFS	Eric B. Fischman, CFA	11/50,535,734,769	7/2,900,025,495	28/8,167,172,776	None
	Bradford Mak	6/37,017,060,217	4/1,943,364,035	17/6,780,676,155	None
T. Rowe Price	Gabriel Solomon	5/$9,206,064,90	18/$5,890,496,374	9/$2,117,622,094	None
	John D. Linehan, CFA	17/$35,551,555,894	31/$18,803,106,060	13/$2,302,490,340	None
William Blair	Alaina Anderson	6/$3,263,162,771	13/$2,593,689,933	24/$2,521,399,856	None
	Simon Fennell	10/$6,470,021,157	17/$4,254,097,106	26/$8,780,920,328	None
	Kenneth J. McAtamney	13/$7,066,998,736	33$6,912,009,086	52/$10,503,702,920	None
PGIM Quantitative Solutions*	Marcus Perl	32/$48,103,922,980	1/$$68,121,275	None	None
	Marco Aiolfi, PhD	29/$47,556,035,683	None	1/$196,225,275	None
	Edward Campbell, CFA	28/$47,394,128,145	1/$49,967,789	11/$838,717,078	None

* Accounts are managed on a team basis. If a portfolio manager is a member of a team, any account managed by that team is included in the number of accounts and total assets for such portfolio manager (even if such portfolio manager is not primarily involved in the day-to-day management of the account).
“PGIM Quantitative Solutions LLC Other Pooled Investment Vehicles” includes commingled insurance company separate accounts, commingled trust funds and other commingled investment vehicles. “PGIM Quantitative Solutions LLC Other Accounts” includes single client accounts, managed accounts (which are counted as one account per managed account platform), asset allocation clients, and accounts of affiliates.

** These accounts are Limited Partnerships to which LSV acts as General Partner and are an aggregation of underlying investors who have negotiated a performance fee. 

PSF Mid-Cap Growth Portfolio
Subadviser	Portfolio Managers	Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts	Ownership of Portfolio Securities
J.P. Morgan	Timothy Parton	18/$27,392,509,000	09/$14,450,249,000	26/$5,092,672,000	None

 26

PSF Mid-Cap Growth Portfolio
Subadviser	Portfolio Managers	Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts	Ownership of Portfolio Securities
	Felise L. Agranoff	12/$27,957,692,000	06/$9,278,100,000	15/$2,744,187,000	None
	Daniel Bloomgarden	03/$13,312,934,000	01/$128,086,000	None	None

 

PSF Natural Resources Portfolio
Subadviser	Portfolio Manager	Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts	Ownership of Portfolio Securities
T. Rowe Price	Shinwoo Kim	2/$3,494,643,883	3/$184,119,184	1/1,465,141	None

 

PSF PGIM 50/50 Balanced Portfolio
Subadvisers	Portfolio Managers	Registered Investment Companies*	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles*	Other Accounts*	Ownership of Portfolio Securities
PGIM Fixed Income*, PGIM Limited	Richard Piccirillo	40/$84,059,245,102	16/$24,420,415,611 1/ $53,932,449	103/$52,952,488,271 4/$1,150,354,527	None
	Michael J. Collins, CFA	27/$68,015,707,186	15/$24,309,619,380	103/$52,952,488,271 4/$1,150,354,527	None
	Gregory Peters	52/$91,885,187,699	23/$36,028,159,953 1/$53,932,449	143/$74,404,379,741 10/$3,715,062,520	None
	Lindsay Rosner, CFA	40/$84,059,245,102	16/$24,420,415,611	103/$52,952,488,271 4/$1,150,354,527	None
PGIM Quantitative Solutions**	Marco Aiolfi, PhD	28/$47,582,460,523	None	1/$196,225,275	None
	Edward Campbell, CFA	27/$47,420,552,986	1/$49,967,789	11/$$838,717,078	None
	Rory Cummings, CFA	25/$47,355,265,631	1/$49,967,789	10/$642,491,804	None
	Stacie Mintz, CFA	47/$13,514,758,957	17/$2,924,335,179	46/$14,302,660,083 8/$1,695,236,531	None

* PGIM Fixed Income is a business unit of PGIM, Inc.

** Accounts are managed on a team basis. If a portfolio manager is a member of a team, any account managed by that team is included in the number of accounts and total assets for such portfolio manager (even if such portfolio manager is not primarily involved in the day-to-day management of the account).

“PGIM Quantitative Solutions Other Pooled Investment Vehicles” includes commingled insurance company separate accounts, commingled trust funds and other commingled investment vehicles. “PGIM Quantitative Solutions Other Accounts” includes single client accounts, managed accounts (which are counted as one account per managed account platform), asset allocation clients, and accounts of affiliates. 

PSF PGIM Flexible Managed Portfolio
Subadvisers	Portfolio Managers	Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts	Ownership of Portfolio Securities
PGIM Fixed Income*, PGIM Limited	Richard Piccirillo	40/$83,580,123,103	16/$24,420,415,611 1/$53,932,449	103/$52,952,488,271 4/$1,150,354,527	None
	Michael J. Collins, CFA	27/$67,536,585,187	15/$24,309,619,380	103/$52,952,488,271 4/$1,150,354,527	None
	Gregory Peters	52/$91,406,065,700	23/$36,028,159,953 1/$53,932,449	143/$74,404,379,741 10/$3,715,062,520	None
	Lindsay Rosner, CFA	40/$83,580,123,103	16/$24,420,415,611	103/$52,952,488,271 4/$1,150,354,527	None
PGIM Quantitative Solutions**	Marco Aiolfi, PhD	28/$$47,147,740,682	None	1/$196,225,275	None
	Edward Campbell, CFA	27/$46,985,833,145	1/$49,967,789	11/$838,717,078	None
	Rory Cummings, CFA	25/$46,920,545,789	1/$49,967,789	10/$642,491,804	None
	Stacie Mintz, CFA	47/$12,287,832,620	17/$2,924,335,179	46/$14,302,660,083 8/$1,695,236,531	None

*PGIM Fixed Income, is a business unit of PGIM, Inc.

** Accounts are managed on a team basis. If a portfolio manager is a member of a team, any account managed by that team is included in the number of accounts and total assets for such portfolio manager (even if such portfolio manager is not primarily involved in the day-to-day management of the account).
“PGIM Quantitative Solutions LLC Other Pooled Investment Vehicles” includes commingled insurance company separate accounts, commingled trust funds and other commingled investment vehicles. “PGIM Quantitative Solutions LLC Other Accounts” includes single client accounts, managed accounts (which are counted as one account per managed account platform), asset allocation clients, and accounts of affiliates. 

27

PSF PGIM Government Income Portfolio
Subadviser	Portfolio Managers	Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts	Ownership of Portfolio Securities
PGIM Fixed Income*	Robert Tipp, CFA	45/$77,143,085,052	19/$24,866,649,650	101/$54,997,764,317 10/$3,715,062,520	None
	Craig Dewling	44/$85,780,260,648	17/$25,253,585,034 4/$1,679,930,176	153/$205,316,440,382 4/$1,150,354,527	None
	Mick Meyler	48/$24,587,480,326	19/$7,180,683,397 5/$1,358,921,705	134/$15,625,776,273 10/$978,408,239	None
	Scott Donnelly, CFA	45/$24,319,249,012	17/$7,083,190,384 4/$1,304,989,255	115/$13,752,436,712 4/$98,886,010	None
	Gary Wu, CFA	32/$8,275,711,097	16/$7,083,190,384 4/$1,304,989,255	116/$13,752,436,712 4/$98,886,010	None

* PGIM Fixed Income, is a business unit of PGIM, Inc 

PSF PGIM High Yield Bond Portfolio
Subadviser	Portfolio Managers	Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts	Ownership of Portfolio Securities
PGIM Fixed Income*, PGIM Limited	Robert Cignarella, CFA	12/$29,499,470,026	8/$6,377,404,060 5/$1,411,487,880	38/$14,128,218,500 4/$1,009,805,452	None
	Robert Spano, CFA, CPA	11/$26,607,705,318	8/$6,377,404,060 5/$1,411,487,880	38/$14,128,218,500 4/$1,009,805,452	None
	Ryan Kelly, CFA	11/$26,607,705,318	8/$6,377,404,060 6/$1,465,420,330	38/$14,128,218,500 4/$1,009,805,452	None
	Brian Clapp, CFA	11/$26,607,705,318	8/$6,377,404,060 5/$1,411,487,880	38/$14,128,218,500 4/$1,009,805,452	None
	Michael Gormally	11/$26,607,705,318	8/$6,377,404,060 5/$1,411,487,880	38/$14,128,218,500 4/$1,009,805,452	None
	Brian Lalli	11/$26,607,705,318	8/$6,377,404,060 5/$1,411,487,880	38/$14,128,218,500 4/$1,009,805,452	None

*PGIM Fixed Income is a business unit of PGIM, Inc. 

PSF PGIM Jennison Blend Portfolio
Subadviser	Portfolio Managers	Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts*	Ownership of Portfolio Securities
Jennison	Blair A. Boyer	16/$45,008,225,000 1/$8,824,449,000	8/$8,479,224,000	25/$5,976,953,000	None
	Kathleen A. McCarragher	21/$46,253,263,000 1/$8,824,449,000	9/$8,825,131,000	10/$1,270,702,000	None
	Natasha Kuhlkin, CFA	17/$33,524,967,000	11/$8,734,397,000	29/$2,113,434,000	None
	Warren N. Koontz, Jr., CFA	13/$4,097,982,000	1/$197,518,000	1/$5,102,000	None
	Joseph C. Esposito, CFA	12/$3,303,084,000	1/$197,518,000	1/$5,102,000	None

* Other Accounts excludes the assets and number of accounts that are managed using model portfolios. 

PSF PGIM Jennison Focused Blend Portfolio
Subadviser	Portfolio Managers	Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts*	Ownership of Portfolio Securities
Jennison	Blair A. Boyer**	17/$46,935,279,000 1/$8,824,449,000	8/$8,479,224,000	25/$5,976,953,000	None
	Kathleen A. McCarragher	21/$48,111,141,000 1/$8,824,449,000	9/$8,825,131,000	10/$1,270,702,000	None
	Natasha Kuhlkin, CFA	17/$35,382,846,000	11/$8,734,397,000	29/$2,113,434,000	None
	Warren N. Koontz, Jr., CFA	13/$6,566,334,000	1/$197,518,000	1/$5,102,000	None
	Joseph C. Esposito, CFA	12/$5,771,436,000	1/$197,518,000	1/$5,102,000	None

* Other Accounts excludes the assets and number of accounts in that are managed using model portfolios.

 28

** Blair A. Boyer was added as a portfolio manager of the Portfolio as of March 30, 2023. 

PSF PGIM Jennison Growth Portfolio
Subadviser	Portfolio Managers	Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts*	Ownership of Portfolio Securities
Jennison	Michael A. Del Balso	7/$9,983,327,000	6/$2,979,816,000	2/$292,365,000	None
	Kathleen A. McCarragher	21/$46,019,472,000 1/$8,824,449,000	9/$8,825,131,000	10/$1,270,702,000	None
	Blair Boyer	16/$44,774,434,000 1/$8,824,449,000	8/$8,479,224,000	25/$5,976,953,000	None
	Natasha Kuhlkin, CFA	17/$33,291,176,000	11/$8,734,397,000	29/$2,113,434,000	None

* Other Accounts excludes the assets and number of accounts that are managed using model portfolios. 

PSF PGIM Jennison Value Portfolio
Subadviser	Portfolio Managers	Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts*	Ownership of Portfolio Securities
Jennison	Warren N. Koontz, Jr., CFA	13/$5,213,672,000	1/$197,518,000	1/$5,102,000	None
	Joseph C. Esposito, CFA	12/$4,418,774,000	1/$197,518,000	1/$5,102,000	None

* Other Accounts excludes the assets and number of accounts in that are managed using model portfolios. 

PSF PGIM Total Return Bond Portfolio
Subadviser	Portfolio Managers	Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles*	Other Accounts*	Ownership of Portfolio Securities
PGIM Fixed Income*, PGIM Limited	Robert Tipp, CFA	45/$76,240,364,229	19/$24,866,649,650	101/$54,997,764,317 10/$3,715,062,520	None
	Michael J. Collins, CFA	27/$67,862,830,512	15/$24,309,619,380	103/$52,952,488,271 4/$1,150,354,527	None
	Richard Piccirillo	40/$83,906,368,427	16/$24,420,415,611 1/$53,932,449	103/$52,952,488,271 4/$1,150,354,527	None
	Gregory Peters	52/$91,732,311,024	23/$36,028,159,953 1/$53,932,449	143/$74,404,379,741 10/$3,715,062,520	None
	Lindsay Rosner, CFA	40/$83,906,368,427	16/$24,420,415,611	103/$52,952,488,271 4/$1,150,354,527	None

*PGIM Fixed Income is a business unit of PGIM, Inc. 

PSF Small-Cap Stock Index Portfolio
Subadviser	Portfolio Manager	Registered Investment Companies*	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles*	Other Accounts*	Ownership of Portfolio Securities
PGIM Quantitative Solutions*	Edward Louie	12/$8,793,273,231	6/ $2,081,772,259	11/$7,425,491,713	None
	Edward J. Lithgow, CFA	27/$12,527,762,704	8/$2,379,404,841	37/$12,681,844,958 4/$536,550,788	None
	Stacie Mintz, CFA	48/$13,880,496,902	17/$2,924,335,179	46/$14,302,660,083 8/$1,695,236,531	None

* Accounts are managed on a team basis. If a portfolio manager is a member of a team, any account managed by that team is included in the number of accounts and total assets for such portfolio manager (even if such portfolio manager is not primarily involved in the day-to-day management of the account).

“PGIM Quantitative Solutions Other Pooled Investment Vehicles” includes commingled insurance company separate accounts, commingled trust funds and other commingled investment vehicles. “PGIM Quantitative Solutions Other Accounts” includes single client accounts, managed accounts (which are counted as one account per managed account platform), asset allocation clients, and accounts of affiliates. 

PSF Small-Cap Value Portfolio
Subadviser	Portfolio Managers	Registered Investment Companies	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles	Other Accounts	Ownership of Portfolio Securities
GSAM	Sally Pope Davis	5/$3,841	1/$79	17/$1,747	None
	Robert Crystal	5/$3,841	None	9/$1,326	None

 

29

PSF Stock Index Portfolio
Subadviser	Portfolio Manager	Registered Investment Companies*	Other Pooled Investment Vehicles*	Other Accounts*	Ownership of Portfolio Securities
PGIM Quantitative Solutions*	Edward Louie	12/$3,719,492,949	6/$2,081,772,259	11/$7,425,491,713	None
	Edward J. Lithgow, CFA	27/$7,453,982,422	8/$2,379,404,841	37/$12,681,844,958	None
	Stacie Mintz, CFA	48/$8,806,716,621	17/$2,924,335,179	46/$14,302,660,083 8/$1,695,236,531	None

Notes to Portfolio Manager Other Account Tables:

Jennison

*Other Accounts excludes the assets and number of accounts that are managed using model portfolios.

PGIM Quantitative Solutions

*Accounts are managed on a team basis. If a portfolio manager is a member of a team, any account managed by that team is included in the number of accounts and total assets for such portfolio manager (even if such portfolio manager is not primarily involved in the day-to-day management of the account).

“PGIM Quantitative Solutions Other Pooled Investment Vehicles” includes commingled insurance company separate accounts, commingled trust funds and other commingled investment vehicles. “ PGIM Quantitative Solutions Other Accounts” includes single client accounts, managed accounts (which are counted as one account per managed account platform), asset allocation clients, and accounts of affiliates. The assets in certain accounts have been estimated due to the availability of information only at the end of calendar quarters.

PGIM Fixed Income

“Other Pooled Investment Vehicles” includes commingled insurance company separate accounts, commingled trust funds, non-US mutual funds, and collateralized debt obligation vehicles. For PGIM Fixed Income, “Other Accounts” includes single client accounts, managed accounts, and non-commingled, affiliated insurance accounts.

—Accounts are managed on a team basis. If a portfolio manager is a member of a team, any account managed by that team is included in the number of accounts and total assets for such portfolio manager (even if such portfolio manager is not primarily involved in the day-to-day management of the account).

PORTFOLIO MANAGERS: COMPENSATION & CONFLICTS POLICIES

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE PORTFOLIO MANAGERS—COMPENSATION AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. Set forth below, for each portfolio manager, is an explanation of the structure of and method(s) used by each subadviser to determine, portfolio manager compensation. Also set forth below, for each portfolio manager, is an explanation of any material conflicts of interest that may arise between a portfolio manager's management of a Portfolio's investments and investments in other accounts.

Goldman Sachs Asset Management, L.P. (GSAM)

PORTFOLIO MANAGERS' COMPENSATION. Compensation for GSAM Portfolio Managers is comprised of a base salary and year-end discretionary variable compensation. The base salary is fixed from year to year. Year-end discretionary variable compensation is primarily a function of each Portfolio Manager’s individual performance and his or her contribution to overall team performance; the performance of GSAM and Goldman Sachs; the team’s net revenues for the past year which in part is derived from advisory fees, and for certain accounts, performance-based fees; and anticipated compensation levels among competitor firms. Portfolio Managers may be rewarded, in part, for their delivery of investment performance, which is reasonably expected to meet or exceed the expectations of clients and fund shareholders in terms of: excess return over an applicable benchmark, peer group ranking, risk management and factors specific to certain funds such as yield or regional focus. Performance is judged over one-, three- and five-year time horizons.

The benchmarks for the Portfolio is: AST Goldman Sachs Small-Cap Value Portfolio (Russell 2000® Index)

The discretionary variable compensation for Portfolio Managers is also significantly influenced by various factors, including: (1) effective participation in team research discussions and process; and (2) management of risk in alignment with the targeted risk parameters and investment objectives of the fund. Other factors may also be considered including: (a) general client/shareholder orientation, and (b) teamwork and leadership.

As part of their year-end discretionary variable compensation and subject to certain eligibility requirements, Portfolio Managers may receive deferred equity-based and similar awards, in the form of: (1) shares of The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (restricted stock units); and, (2) for certain Portfolio Managers, performance-tracking (or “phantom”) shares of the GSAM mutual funds that they oversee or service. Performance-tracking shares are designed to provide a rate of return (net of fees) equal to that of the fund(s) that a portfolio manager manages, or one or more other eligible funds, as determined by senior management, thereby aligning portfolio manager compensation with fund shareholder interests. The awards are subject to vesting requirements, deferred payment and clawback and forfeiture provisions. GSAM, Goldman Sachs or their affiliates expect, but are not required to, hedge the exposure of the performance-tracking shares of a fund by, among other things, purchasing shares of the relevant fund(s).

OTHER COMPENSATION. In addition to base salary and year-end discretionary variable compensation, the firm has a number of additional benefits in place including (1) a 401k program that enables employees to direct a percentage of their base salary and bonus income into a tax-qualified retirement plan; and (2) investment opportunity programs in which certain professionals may participate subject to certain eligibility requirements.

 30

General Disclosure

This material is provided at your request solely for your use.

Confidentiality

No part of this material may, without GSAM’s prior written consent, be (i) copied, photocopied or duplicated in any form, by any means, or (ii) distributed to any person that is not an employee, officer, director, or authorized agent of the recipient.

© 2019 Goldman Sachs. All rights reserved.

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. GSAM is part of The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (together with its affiliates, directors, partners, trustees, managers, members, officers and employees, “Goldman Sachs”), a financial holding company. The involvement of GSAM, Goldman Sachs and their affiliates in the management of, or their interest in, other accounts and other activities of Goldman Sachs will present conflicts of interest with respect to your Fund and will, under certain circumstances, limit your Fund’s investment activities. Goldman Sachs is a worldwide full service investment banking, broker dealer, asset management and financial services organization and a major participant in global financial markets that provides a wide range of financial services to a substantial and diversified client base that includes corporations, financial institutions, governments, and individuals. Goldman Sachs acts as a broker-dealer, investment adviser, investment banker, underwriter, research provider, administrator, financier, adviser, market maker, trader, prime broker, derivatives dealer, clearing agent, lender, counterparty, agent, principal, distributor, investor or in other commercial capacities for accounts or companies or affiliated or unaffiliated investment funds (including pooled investment vehicles and private funds). In those and other capacities, Goldman Sachs advises and deals with clients and third parties in all markets and transactions and purchases, sells, holds and recommends a broad array of investments, including securities, derivatives, loans, commodities, currencies, credit default swaps, indices, baskets and other financial instruments and products for its own account and for the accounts of clients and of its personnel. In addition, Goldman Sachs has direct and indirect interests in the global fixed income, currency, commodity, equities, bank loan and other markets and the securities and issuers in which your Fund may directly and indirectly invest. Thus, it is expected that your Fund will have multiple business relationships with and will invest in, engage in transactions with, make voting decisions with respect to, or obtain services from entities for which Goldman Sachs and affiliates perform or seek to perform investment banking or other services. As manager of your Fund, GSAM receives management fees from the Fund. In addition, GSAM’s affiliates may earn fees from relationships with your Fund. Although these fees are generally based on asset levels, the fees are not directly contingent on Fund performance, Goldman Sachs will still receive significant compensation from your Fund even if shareholders lose money. Goldman Sachs and its affiliates engage in proprietary trading and advise accounts and funds which have investment objectives similar to those of your Fund and/or which engage in and compete for transactions in the same types of securities, currencies and instruments as your Fund. Goldman Sachs and its affiliates will not have any obligation to make available any information regarding their activities or strategies, or the activities or strategies used for other accounts managed by them, for the benefit of the management of your Fund. The results of your Fund’s investment activities, therefore, will likely differ from those of Goldman Sachs, its affiliates, and other accounts managed by Goldman Sachs, and it is possible that your Fund could sustain losses during periods in which Goldman Sachs and its affiliates and other accounts achieve significant profits on their trading for proprietary or other accounts. In addition, your Fund may enter into transactions in which Goldman Sachs and its affiliates or their other clients have an adverse interest. For example, your Fund may take a long position in a security at the same time that Goldman Sachs and its affiliates or other accounts managed by GSAM take a short position in the same security (or vice versa). These and other transactions undertaken by Goldman Sachs, its affiliates or Goldman Sachs-advised clients may, individually or in the aggregate, adversely impact your Fund. In some cases, such adverse impacts may result from differences in timing of transactions by accounts relative to when your Fund executes transactions in the same securities. Transactions by one or more Goldman Sachs-advised clients or GSAM may have the effect of diluting or otherwise disadvantaging the values, prices or investment strategies of your Fund. Your Fund’s activities will, under certain circumstances, be limited because of regulatory restrictions applicable to Goldman Sachs and its affiliates, and/or their internal policies designed to comply with such restrictions. As a global financial services firm, Goldman Sachs and its affiliates provide a wide range of investment banking and financial services to issuers of securities and investors in securities. Goldman Sachs, its affiliates and others associated with it are expected to create markets or specialize in, have positions in and/or effect transactions in, securities of issuers held by your Fund, and will likely also perform or seek to perform investment banking and financial services for one or more of those issuers. Goldman Sachs and its affiliates are expected to have business relationships with and purchase or distribute or sell services or products from or to distributors, consultants or others who recommend your Fund or who engage in transactions with or for your Fund.

Jennison Associates LLC (Jennison)
COMPENSATION. Jennison seeks to maintain a highly competitive compensation program designed to attract and retain outstanding investment professionals, which include portfolio managers and research analysts, and to align the interests of its investment professionals with those of its clients and overall firm results. Jennison recognizes individuals for their achievements and contributions and continues to promote those who exemplify the same values and level of commitment that are hallmarks of the organization.

31

Jennison sponsors a profit sharing retirement plan for all eligible employees. The contribution to the profit sharing retirement plan for portfolio managers is based on a percentage of the portfolio manager’s total compensation, subject to a maximum determined by applicable law. In addition to eligibility to participate in retirement and welfare plans, senior investment professionals, including portfolio managers and senior research analysts, are eligible to participate in a voluntary deferred compensation program where all or a portion of the cash bonus can be deferred. Participants in the deferred compensation plan are permitted to allocate the deferred amounts among various options that track the gross-of-fee pre-tax performance of accounts or composites of accounts managed by Jennison.

Investment professionals are compensated with a combination of base salary and cash bonus. Overall firm profitability determines the size of the investment professional compensation pool. In general, the discretionary cash bonus represents the majority of an investment professional's compensation.

Investment professionals’ total compensation is determined through a process that evaluates numerous qualitative and quantitative factors. Not all factors are applicable to every investment professional, and there is no particular weighting or formula for considering the factors. 

The factors reviewed for the portfolio managers are listed below.

The quantitative factors reviewed for the portfolio managers may include:

◾

One-, three-, five-year and longer term pre-tax investment performance for groupings of accounts managed in the same strategy (composite) relative to market conditions, pre-determined passive indices and industry peer group data for the product strategy (e.g., large cap growth, large cap value).  Some portfolio managers may manage or contribute ideas to more than one product strategy, and the performance of the other product strategies is also considered in determining the portfolio manager’s overall compensation.

◾

The investment professional’s contribution to client portfolio’s pre-tax one-, three-, five-year and longer-term performance from the investment professional’s recommended stocks relative to market conditions, the strategy’s passive benchmarks, and the investment professional’s respective coverage universes.

The qualitative factors reviewed for the portfolio managers may include:

◾

The quality of the portfolio manager’s investment ideas and consistency of the portfolio manager’s judgment;

◾

Qualitative factors such as teamwork and responsiveness;

◾

Individual factors such as years of experience and responsibilities specific to the individual’s role such as being a team leader or supervisor are also factored into the determination of an investment professional’s total compensation; and

◾

Historical and long-term business potential of the product strategies.

POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. Jennison manages accounts with asset-based fees alongside accounts with performance-based fees. This side-by-side management can create an incentive for Jennison and its investment professionals to favor one account over another. Specifically, Jennison has the incentive to favor accounts for which it receives performance fees, and possibly take greater investment risks in those accounts, in order to bolster performance and increase its fees.

Other types of side-by-side management of multiple accounts can also create incentives for Jennison to favor one account over another. Examples are detailed below, followed by a discussion of how Jennison addresses these conflicts.

◾

Long only accounts/long-short accounts: Jennison manages accounts in strategies that hold only long securities positions as well as accounts in strategies that are permitted to sell securities short. As a result, Jennison may hold a long position in a security in some client accounts while selling the same security short in other client accounts. For example, Jennison permits quantitatively hedged strategies to short securities that are held long in other strategies. We also permit securities that are held long by one fundamental portfolio manager to be held short by another fundamental portfolio manager. Additionally, Jennison permits securities that are held long in quantitatively derived strategies to be shorted by other strategies. The strategies that sell a security short held long by another strategy could lower the price for the security held long. Similarly, if a strategy is purchasing a security that is held short in other strategies, the strategies purchasing the security could increase the price of the security held short. By the same token, sales in a long only account can increase the value of a short position while shorting could create an opportunity to purchase a long position at a lower price. As a result, we have conflicts of interest in determining the timing and direction of investments.

◾

Multiple strategies: Jennison may buy or sell, or may direct or recommend that one client buy or sell, securities of the same kind or class that are purchased or sold for another client, at prices that may be different. Jennison may also, at any time, execute trades of securities of the same kind or class in one direction for an account and in the opposite direction for another account, due to differences in investment strategy or client direction. Different strategies effecting trading in the same securities or types of securities may appear as inconsistencies in Jennison’s management of multiple accounts side-by-side.

◾

Investments at different levels of an issuer’s capital structure: To the extent different clients invest across multiple strategies or asset classes, Jennison may invest client assets in the same issuer, but at different levels in the capital structure. Interests in these positions could be inconsistent or in potential or actual conflict with each other.

◾

Affiliated accounts/unaffiliated accounts and seeded/nonseeded accounts and accounts receiving asset allocation assets from affiliated investment advisers: Jennison manages accounts for its affiliates and accounts in which it has an interest alongside

 32

unaffiliated accounts. Jennison could have an incentive to favor its affiliated accounts over unaffiliated accounts. Additionally, at times Jennison’s affiliates provide initial funding or otherwise invest in vehicles managed by Jennison. When an affiliate provides “seed capital” or other capital for a fund or account, it may do so with the intention of redeeming all or part of its interest at a particular future point in time or when it deems that sufficient additional capital has been invested in that fund or account. Jennison typically requests seed capital to start a track record for a new strategy or product. Managing “seeded” accounts alongside “non-seeded”accounts can create an incentive to favor the “seeded” accounts to establish a track record for a new strategy or product. Additionally, Jennison’s affiliated investment advisers could allocate their asset allocation clients’ assets to Jennison. Jennison could have an incentive to favor accounts used by its affiliate for their asset allocation clients to receive more assets from the affiliate.

◾

Non-discretionary accounts or models: Jennison provides non-discretionary model portfolios to some clients and manages other portfolios on a discretionary basis. Recommendations for some non-discretionary models that are derived from discretionary portfolios are communicated after the discretionary portfolio has traded. The non-discretionary clients could be disadvantaged if Jennison delivers the model investment portfolio to them after Jennison initiates trading for the discretionary clients. Discretionary clients could be disadvantaged if the non-discretionary clients receive their model investment portfolio and start trading before Jennison has started trading for the discretionary clients.

◾

Higher fee paying accounts or products or strategies: Jennison receives more revenues from (1) larger accounts or client relationships than smaller accounts or client relationships and from (2) managing discretionary accounts than advising non-discretionary models and from (3) non-wrap fee accounts than from wrap fee accounts and from (4) charging higher fees for some strategies than others. The differences in revenue that Jennison receives could create an incentive for Jennison to favor the higher fee paying or higher revenue generating account or product or strategy over another.

◾

Personal interests: The performance of one or more accounts managed by Jennison’s investment professionals is taken into consideration in determining their compensation. Jennison also manages accounts that are investment options in its employee benefit plans such as its defined contribution plans or deferred compensation arrangements and where its employees may have personally invested alongside other accounts where there is no personal interest. These factors could create an incentive for Jennison to favor the accounts where it has a personal interest over accounts where Jennison does not have a personal interest.

How Jennison Addresses These Conflicts of Interest

The conflicts of interest described above could create incentives for Jennison to favor one or more accounts or types of accounts over others in the allocation of investment opportunities, aggregation and timing of investments. Portfolios in a particular strategy with similar objectives are managed similarly to the extent possible. Accordingly, portfolio holdings and industry and sector exposure tend to be similar across a group of accounts in a strategy that have similar objectives, which tends to minimize the potential for conflicts of interest among accounts within a product strategy. While these accounts have many similarities, the investment performance of each account will be different primarily due to differences in guidelines, individual portfolio manager’s decisions, timing of investments, fees, expenses and cash flows.

Additionally, Jennison has developed policies and procedures that seek to address, mitigate and assess these conflicts of interest.

◾

Jennison has adopted trade aggregation and allocation procedures that seek to treat all clients (including affiliated accounts) fairly. These policies and procedures address the allocation of limited investment opportunities, such as initial public offerings (IPOs) and new issues, the allocation of transactions across multiple accounts.

◾

Jennison has policies that limit the ability to short securities in portfolios that primarily rely on its fundamental research and investment processes (fundamental portfolios) if the security is held long by the same portfolio manager.

◾

Jennison has adopted procedures to review allocations or performance dispersion between accounts with performance fees and non-performance fee based accounts and to review overlapping long and short positions among long accounts and long-short accounts.

◾

Jennison has adopted a code of ethics and policies relating to personal trading.

◾

Jennison has adopted a conflicts of interest policy and procedures.

◾

Jennison provides disclosure of these conflicts as described in its Form ADV brochure.

J.P. Morgan Investment Management Inc. (J.P. Morgan)

POTENTIAL CONFLICTS. The potential for conflicts of interest exists when portfolio managers manage other accounts with similar investment objectives and strategies as the Fund (“Similar Accounts”). Potential conflicts may include, for example, conflicts between investment strategies and conflicts in the allocation of investment opportunities. Responsibility for managing J.P. Morgan’s and its affiliates’ clients’ portfolios is organized according to investment strategies within asset classes. Generally, client portfolios with similar strategies are managed by portfolio managers in the same portfolio management group using the same objectives, approach and philosophy. Underlying sectors or strategy allocations within a larger portfolio are likewise managed by portfolio managers who use the same approach and philosophy as similarly managed portfolios. Therefore, portfolio holdings, relative position sizes and industry and sector exposures tend to be similar across similar portfolios and strategies, which minimizes the potential for conflicts of interest.

33

J.P. Morgan and/or its affiliates (“J.P. Morgan Chase”) perform investment services, including rendering investment advice, to varied clients. J.P. Morgan, J.P. Morgan Chase and its or their directors, officers, agents, and/or employees may render similar or differing investment advisory services to clients and may give advice or exercise investment responsibility and take such other action with respect to any of its other clients that differs from the advice given or the timing or nature of action taken with respect to another client or group of clients. It is J.P. Morgan’s policy, to the extent practicable, to allocate, within its reasonable discretion, investment opportunities among clients over a period of time on a fair and equitable basis. One or more of J.P. Morgan’s other client accounts may at any time hold, acquire, increase, decrease, dispose, or otherwise deal with positions in investments in which another client account may have an interest from time-to-time.

J.P. Morgan, J.P. Morgan Chase, and any of its or their directors, partners, officers, agents or employees, may also buy, sell, or trade securities for their own accounts or the proprietary accounts of J.P. Morgan and/or J.P. Morgan Chase. J.P. Morgan and/or J.P. Morgan Chase, within their discretion, may make different investment decisions and other actions with respect to their own proprietary accounts than those made for client accounts, including the timing or nature of such investment decisions or actions. Further, J.P. Morgan is not required to purchase or sell for any client account securities that it, J.P. Morgan Chase, and any of its or their employees, principals, or agents may purchase or sell for their own accounts or the proprietary accounts of J.P. Morgan, or J.P. Morgan Chase or its clients.

J.P. Morgan and/or its affiliates may receive more compensation with respect to certain Similar Accounts than that received with respect to the Fund or may receive compensation based in part on the performance of certain Similar Accounts. This may create a potential conflict of interest for J.P. Morgan and its affiliates or the portfolio managers by providing an incentive to favor these Similar Accounts when, for example, placing securities transactions. In addition, J.P. Morgan or its affiliates could be viewed as having a conflict of interest to the extent that J.P. Morgan or an affiliate has a proprietary investment in Similar Accounts, the portfolio managers have personal investments in Similar Accounts or the Similar Accounts are investment options in J.P. Morgan’s or its affiliates’ employee benefit plans. Potential conflicts of interest may arise with both the aggregation and allocation of securities transactions and allocation of investment opportunities because of market factors or investment restrictions imposed upon J.P. Morgan and its affiliates by law, regulation, contract or internal policies. Allocations of aggregated trades, particularly trade orders that were only partially completed due to limited availability and allocation of investment opportunities generally, could raise a potential conflict of interest, as J.P. Morgan or its affiliates may have an incentive to allocate securities that are expected to increase in value to favored accounts. Initial public offerings, in particular, are frequently of very limited availability. J.P. Morgan and its affiliates may be perceived as causing accounts they manage to participate in an offering to increase J.P. Morgan’s and its affiliates’ overall allocation of securities in that offering. A potential conflict of interest also may be perceived to arise if transactions in one account closely follow related transactions in a different account, such as when a purchase increases the value of securities previously purchased by another account, or when a sale in one account lowers the sale price received in a sale by a second account. If J.P. Morgan or its affiliates manage accounts that engage in short sales of securities of the type in which the Fund invests, J.P. Morgan or its affiliates could be seen as harming the performance of the Fund for the benefit of the accounts engaging in short sales if the short sales cause the market value of the securities to fall.

As an internal policy matter, J.P. Morgan or its affiliates may from time to time maintain certain overall investment limitations on the securities positions or positions in other financial instruments J.P. Morgan or its affiliates will take on behalf of its various clients due to, among other things, liquidity concerns and regulatory restrictions. Such policies may preclude the Fund from purchasing particular securities or financial instruments, even if such securities or financial instruments would otherwise meet the Fund’s objectives.

The goal of J.P. Morgan and its affiliates is to meet their fiduciary obligation with respect to all clients. J.P. Morgan and its affiliates have policies and procedures that seek to manage conflicts. J.P. Morgan and its affiliates monitor a variety of areas, including compliance with fund guidelines, review of allocation decisions and compliance with J.P. Morgan’s Codes of Ethics and J.P. Morgan Chase and Co.’s Code of Conduct. With respect to the allocation of investment opportunities, J.P. Morgan and its affiliates also have certain policies designed to achieve fair and equitable allocation of investment opportunities among its clients over time. For example: Orders for the same equity security traded through a single trading desk or system are aggregated on a continual basis throughout each trading day consistent with J.P. Morgan’s and its affiliates’ duty of best execution for their clients. If aggregated trades are fully executed, accounts participating in the trade will be allocated their pro rata share on an average price basis. Partially completed orders generally will be allocated among the participating accounts on a pro-rata average price basis, subject to certain limited exceptions. For example, accounts that would receive a de minimis allocation relative to their size may be excluded from the order. Another exception may occur when thin markets or price volatility require that an aggregated order be completed in multiple executions over several days. If partial completion of the order would result in an uneconomic allocation to an account due to fixed transaction or custody costs, J.P. Morgan and its affiliates may exclude small orders until 50% of the total order is completed. Then the small orders will be executed. Following this procedure, small orders will lag in the early execution of the order, but will be completed before completion of the total order.

 34

Purchases of money market instruments and fixed income securities cannot always be allocated pro-rata across the accounts with the same investment strategy and objective. However, the Adviser and its affiliates attempt to mitigate any potential unfairness by basing non-pro rata allocations traded through a single trading desk or system upon objective predetermined criteria for the selection of investments and a disciplined process for allocating securities with similar duration, credit quality and liquidity in the good faith judgment of the Adviser or its affiliates so that fair and equitable allocation will occur over time.

PORTFOLIO MANAGER COMPENSATION. J.P. Morgan’s compensation programs are designed to align the behavior of employees with the achievement of its short- and long-term strategic goals, which revolve around client investment objectives.  This is accomplished, in part, through a balanced performance assessment process and total compensation program, as well as a clearly defined culture that rigorously and consistently promotes adherence to the highest ethical standards.

The Firm’s disciplined pay-for-performance framework focuses on Total Compensation – base salary and incentive pay - so that pay is commensurate with the overall performance of the Firm, respective businesses and individual performance. This includes a balanced discretionary approach to assess the employee’s performance throughout the year against four broad dimensions - business results, client/customer/stakeholder, teamwork and leadership, and risk, controls and conduct. These performance dimensions appropriately consider short, medium and long-term priorities that drive sustained shareholder value, while accounting for risk, controls, and conduct objectives. To promote a proper pay-for-performance alignment, the Firm does not assign relative weightings to these dimensions and also considers other relevant factors, including market practices. When conducting this balanced assessment of performance, for select employees in the Portfolio Management population, regard is given to the performance of relevant funds/strategies. Each Portfolio Manager’s performance is evaluated annually based on a number of factors, including, but not limited to: 

The primary consideration which is blended investment performance relative to the competitive indices or peers over one, three, five and ten year periods, with investment performance generally weighted more to the long term;

individual contribution relative to the client’s risk and return objectives; and

adherence with the Firm’s compliance, risk, regulatory and client fiduciary responsibilities, including adherence to the Sustainability Risk Integration Policy – J.P. Morgan Asset Management, as applicable, which contains relevant Environmental, Social and Corporate Governance (“ESG”) factors that are intended to guide investment decision-making.

LSV Asset Management (LSV)
PORTFOLIO MANAGER COMPENSATION. The Portfolio Managers’ compensation consists of a salary and discretionary bonus. Each of the Portfolio Managers is a Partner of LSV and thereby receives a portion of the overall profit of the firm as part of his ownership interests. The bonus is based upon the profitability of the firm and individual performance. Individual performance is subjective and may be based on a number of factors, such as the individual’s leadership and contribution to the strategic planning and development of the investment group.

POTENTIAL CONFLICTS. The same team of Portfolio Managers is responsible for the day-to-day management of all of LSV's accounts. LSV uses a proprietary quantitative investment model to manage all of LSV’s accounts. LSV relies extensively on its quantitative investment model regarding the advisability of investing in a particular company. Any investment decisions are generally made based on whether a buy or sell signal is received from the proprietary quantitative investment model. Accounts or funds with performance-based fees and accounts or funds in which employees may be invested could create an incentive to favor those accounts or funds over other accounts or funds in the allocation of investment opportunities. In addition, it is possible that a short position may be taken on a security that is held long in another portfolio. LSV seeks to make allocations of investment opportunities in a manner that it considers fair, reasonable and equitable without favoring or disfavoring, consistently or consciously, any particular client. LSV has procedures designed to ensure that all clients are treated fairly and to prevent these potential conflicts from influencing the allocation of investment opportunities among clients. On a quarterly basis, LSV's Forensic Testing Committee, consisting of the Chief Compliance Officer, Compliance Officer, Chief Operating Officer and Compliance Analyst, reviews, among other things, allocations of investment opportunities among clients and the allocation of partially-filled block trades, including allocations to accounts or funds with performance-based fees or in which employees may be invested, to confirm consistency with LSV’s policies and procedures.

LSV provides model portfolios to a number of clients, (each a “Model Adviser” and collectively the “Model Advisers”). These model portfolios are currently utilized in relation to a managed account program and several registered investment company sub-advisory relationships and may be offered in additional ways in the future. The model portfolios utilize some of the same strategies that are offered to LSV’s other accounts. After LSV has provided the model portfolio to the Model Adviser, both initially and at each rebalance of the model portfolio, the Model Adviser or its delegates determine the timing and manner of purchase or sale with respect to the model portfolio recommendations. Some Model Advisers may generally implement the model portfolio recommendations as provided by LSV, while others may retain complete discretion as to the extent to which the model recommendations are implemented. The Portfolio

35

Management team maintains a calendar of rebalance dates for the model portfolios similar to other LSV portfolios. In order to seek to ensure the fair treatment of all clients, LSV provides model portfolios to the Model Advisers on a staggered schedule relative to our other portfolios, so that the Portfolio Management team delivers the model portfolios on a rebalance schedule that differs from the rebalance schedule of the other portfolios. As a result, the model portfolios may experience different account performance, including potentially less favorable prices, than LSV’s accounts that it trades directly. However, the same software and procedures that are used for other LSV portfolios are also used with respect to the model portfolios. In addition, the model portfolios are constructed based on the most up-to-date rankings in LSV’s quantitative investment model. LSV’s policies require that the Chief Compliance Officer be made aware of any changes to this process. On a quarterly basis, the Forensic Testing Committee reviews a report which shows the timing of the submission of the model portfolios with respect to the rebalancing of certain portfolios in applicable strategies actively managed by LSV and the timing of the submission of model portfolios in the same strategies sent to the Model Advisers to be used to rebalance the applicable model portfolios.

LSV or its funds may contract for services with an entity or person with whom LSV or its employees has a relationship or from which LSV or its employees otherwise derives financial or other benefits. The existence of and nature of such relationships raises conflicts of interest between LSV and/or its employees, on the one hand, and LSV’s clients and funds, on the other hand, in determining whether to engage such service providers and, if engaged, on what terms and conditions. LSV or its employees may, because of its or such person’s financial or other benefits, have an incentive to engage a service provider even if a different entity or person is more qualified to provide the applicable services and/or can provide such services at a lesser cost. These entities are subject to the same vendor management policies and procedures that apply to all third party vendors, which are designed to manage any such conflict, including an annual review by persons at LSV that do not have such a conflict. For example, LSV currently has a relationship with a data services provider in which certain of LSV’s employees have a minority investment. The services are provided directly to and paid for by LSV and not any client or fund. LSV believes the services offered by the provider are at least as good as or better than the services provided by the provider’s competitors and that the provider’s services have comparable (or in some cases, more desirable) terms and conditions.

Massachusetts Financial Services Company (MFS)

COMPENSATION. MFS’ philosophy is to align portfolio manager compensation with the goal to provide shareholders with long-term value through a collaborative investment process. Therefore, MFS uses long-term investment performance as well as contribution to the overall investment process and collaborative culture as key factors in determining portfolio manager compensation. In addition, MFS seeks to maintain total compensation programs that are competitive in the asset management industry in each geographic market where it has employees. MFS uses competitive compensation data to ensure that compensation practices are aligned with its goals of attracting, retaining, and motivating the highest-quality professionals.

MFS reviews portfolio manager compensation annually. In determining portfolio manager compensation, MFS uses quantitative means and qualitative means to help ensure a durable investment process. As of December 31, 2022, portfolio manager total cash compensation is a combination of base salary and performance bonus:

Base Salary – Base salary generally represents a smaller percentage of portfolio manager total cash compensation than performance bonus.

Performance Bonus – Generally, the performance bonus represents more than a majority of portfolio manager total cash compensation.

The performance bonus is based on a combination of quantitative and qualitative factors, generally with more weight given to the former and less weight given to the latter.

The quantitative portion is primarily based on the pre-tax performance of accounts managed by the portfolio manager over a range of fixed-length time periods, intended to provide the ability to assess performance over time periods consistent with a full market cycle and a strategy's investment horizon. The fixed-length time periods include the portfolio manager's full tenure on each fund and, when available, ten-, five-, and three-year periods. For portfolio managers who have served for less than three years, shorter-term periods, including the one-year period, will also be considered, as will performance in previous roles, if any, held at the firm. Emphasis is generally placed on longer performance periods when multiple performance periods are available. Performance is evaluated across the full set of strategies and portfolios managed by a given portfolio manager, relative to appropriate peer group universes and/or representative indices (“benchmarks”). As of December 31, 2022, the following benchmarks were used to measure the following portfolio managers' performance for the following Portfolio:

PSF Global Portfolio

Portfolio Manager: Eric B. Fischman, CFA

Benchmark: Russell 1000® Growth Index

 36

Portfolio Manager: Bradford Mak

Benchmark: Russell 1000® Growth Index

Benchmarks may include versions and components of indices, custom indices, and linked indices that combine performance of different indices for different portions of the time period, where appropriate.

The qualitative portion is based on the results of an annual internal peer review process (where portfolio managers are evaluated by other portfolio managers, analysts, and traders) and management’s assessment of overall portfolio manager contribution to the MFS investment process and the client experience (distinct from fund and other account performance).

The performance bonus is generally a combination of cash and a deferred cash award. A deferred cash award is issued for a cash value and becomes payable over a three-year vesting period if the portfolio manager remains in the continuous employ of MFS or its affiliates. During the vesting period, the value of the unfunded deferred cash award will fluctuate as though the portfolio manager had invested the cash value of the award in an MFS Fund(s) selected by the portfolio manager.

MFS Equity Plan – Portfolio managers also typically benefit from the opportunity to participate in the MFS Equity Plan. Equity interests are awarded by management, on a discretionary basis, taking into account tenure at MFS, contribution to the investment process, and other factors.

Finally, portfolio managers also participate in benefit plans (including a defined contribution plan and health and other insurance plans) and programs available generally to other employees of MFS. The percentage such benefits represent of any portfolio manager’s compensation depends upon the length of the individual’s tenure at MFS and salary level, as well as other factors.

POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. MFS seeks to identify potential conflicts of interest resulting from a portfolio manager's management of both the Portfolio and other accounts, and has adopted policies and procedures designed to address such potential conflicts. There is no guarantee that MFS will be successful in identifying or mitigating conflicts of interest.

The management of multiple funds and accounts (including accounts in which MFS or an affiliate has an interest) gives rise to conflicts of interest if the funds and accounts have different objectives and strategies, benchmarks, time horizons, and fees, as a portfolio manager must allocate his or her time and investment ideas across multiple funds and accounts. In certain instances, there are securities which are suitable for the Portfolio’s portfolio as well as for one or more other accounts advised by MFS or its subsidiaries (including accounts in which MFS or an affiliate has an interest) with similar investment objectives. MFS’ trade allocation policies could have a detrimental effect on the Portfolio if the Portfolio's orders do not get fully executed or are delayed in getting executed due to being aggregated with those of other accounts advised by MFS or its subsidiaries. A portfolio manager may execute transactions for another fund or account that may adversely affect the value of the Portfolio's investments. Investments selected for funds or accounts other than the Portfolio may outperform investments selected for the Portfolio.

When two or more accounts are simultaneously engaged in the purchase or sale of the same security, the securities are allocated among clients in a manner believed by MFS to be fair and equitable to each over time. Allocations may be based on many factors and may not always be pro rata based on assets managed. The allocation methodology could have a detrimental effect on the price or availability of a security with respect to the Portfolio.

MFS and/or a portfolio manager may have a financial incentive to allocate favorable or limited opportunity investments or structure the timing of investments to favor accounts other than the Portfolio, for instance, those that pay a higher advisory fee and/or have a performance adjustment, those that include an investment by the portfolio manager, and/or those in which MFS, its officers and/or employees, and/or its affiliates own or have an interest.

To the extent permitted by applicable law, certain accounts may invest their assets in other accounts advised by MFS or its affiliates, including accounts that are advised by one or more of the same portfolio manager(s), which could result in conflicts of interest relating to asset allocation, timing of purchases and redemptions, and increased profitability for MFS, its affiliates, and/or its personnel, including portfolio managers.

PGIM, Inc. (PGIM)

COMPENSATION. The base salary of an investment professional in the PGIM Fixed Income unit of PGIM is primarily based on market data relative to similar positions as well as the past performance, years of experience and scope of responsibility of the individual. PGIM Fixed Income is allocated an overall incentive pool based on the investment and financial performance of the business. Incentive compensation for investment professionals, including the annual cash bonus, the long-term equity grant and grants under PGIM Fixed

37

Income’s long-term incentive plans, is primarily based on such person’s contribution to PGIM Fixed Income’s goal of providing investment performance to clients consistent with portfolio objectives, guidelines, risk parameters and its compliance risk management and other policies, as well as market-based data such as compensation trends and levels of overall compensation for similar positions in the asset management industry. In addition, an investment professional’s qualitative contributions to the organization and its commercial success are considered in determining incentive compensation. Incentive compensation is not solely based on the performance of, or value of assets in, any single account or group of client accounts.

The PGIM Fixed Income unit within PGIM Limited (“PGIM Fixed Income (U.K.)”) has adopted a remuneration policy in relation to activities conducted through the entities authorized and regulated by the FCA in the United Kingdom. The remuneration policy is intended to be compliant with the United Kingdom’s Investment Firms Prudential Regime (“IFPR”) and governs the remuneration of PGIM Fixed Income (U.K.) staff and “material risk takers” of PGIM Fixed Income (U.K.) including those that are based outside the United Kingdom.

An investment professional’s annual cash bonus is paid from an annual incentive pool. The pool is developed as a percentage of PGIM Fixed Income’s operating income and the percentage used to calculate the pool may be refined by factors such as:

◾

business initiatives;

◾

the number of investment professionals receiving a bonus and related peer group compensation;

◾

financial metrics of the business relative to those of appropriate peer groups; and

◾

investment performance of portfolios: (i) relative to appropriate peer groups; and/or (ii) as measured against relevant investment indices.

Long-term compensation consists of Prudential Financial, Inc. restricted stock and grants under the long-term incentive plan and targeted long-term incentive plan. The long-term incentive plan is intended to align compensation with investment performance. The targeted long-term incentive plan is intended to align the interests of certain PGIM Fixed Income’s investment professionals with the performance of the particular alternative investment strategies or commingled investment vehicles they manage. Grants under the long-term incentive plan and targeted long-term incentive plan are participation interests in notional accounts with a beginning value of a specified dollar amount. For the long-term incentive plan, the value attributed to these notional accounts increases or decreases over a defined period of time based, on the performance of investment composites representing a number of PGIM Fixed Income’s investment strategies. With respect to targeted long-term incentive awards, the value attributed to the notional accounts increases or decreases over a defined period of time based (as applicable) on the performance of either (i) a composite of particular alternative investment strategies or (ii) a commingled investment vehicle. An investment composite is an aggregation of accounts with similar investment strategies. The head of PGIM Fixed Income also receives performance shares which represent the right to receive shares of Prudential Financial, Inc. common stock conditioned upon, and subject to, the achievement of specified financial performance goals by Prudential Financial, Inc. Each of the restricted stock, grants under the long-term incentive plans, and performance shares is subject to vesting requirements.

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. Like other investment advisers, PGIM Fixed Income is subject to various conflicts of interest in the ordinary course of its business. PGIM Fixed Income strives to identify potential risks, including conflicts of interest, that are inherent in its business, and PGIM Fixed Income conducts annual conflict of interest reviews. However, it is not possible to identify every potential conflict that can arise. When actual or potential conflicts of interest are identified, PGIM Fixed Income seeks to address such conflicts through one or more of the following methods:

◾

elimination of the conflict;

◾

disclosure of the conflict; or

◾

management of the conflict through the adoption of appropriate policies, procedures or other mitigants.

PGIM Fixed Income follows the policies of Prudential Financial, Inc. on business ethics, personal securities trading, and information barriers. PGIM Fixed Income has adopted a code of ethics, allocation policies and conflicts of interest policies, among others, and has adopted supervisory procedures to monitor compliance with its policies. PGIM Fixed Income cannot guarantee, however, that its policies and procedures will detect and prevent, or result in the disclosure of, each and every situation in which a conflict arises or could potentially arise.

Side-by-Side Management of Accounts and Related Conflicts of Interest. PGIM Fixed Income’s side-by-side management of multiple accounts can create conflicts of interest. Examples are detailed below, followed by a discussion of how PGIM Fixed Income addresses these conflicts.

◾

Performance Fees - PGIM Fixed Income manages accounts with asset-based fees alongside accounts with performance-based fees. This side-by-side management creates an incentive for PGIM Fixed Income and its investment professionals to favor one account over another. Specifically, PGIM Fixed Income or its affiliates have an incentive to favor accounts for which PGIM Fixed Income or an affiliate receives performance fees, and possibly take greater investment risks in those accounts, in order to bolster performance and increase its fees.

 38

◾

Affiliated accounts - PGIM Fixed Income manages accounts on behalf of its affiliates as well as unaffiliated accounts. PGIM Fixed Income have an incentive to favor accounts of affiliates over others. Additionally, at times, PGIM Fixed Income’s affiliates provide initial funding or otherwise invest in vehicles managed by it, for example by providing “seed capital” for a fund or account. Managing “seeded” accounts alongside “non-seeded” accounts creates an incentive to favor the “seeded” accounts to establish a track record for a new strategy or product. Additionally, PGIM Fixed Income’s affiliated investment advisers from time to time allocate their asset allocation clients’ assets to PGIM Fixed Income. PGIM Fixed Income has an incentive to favor accounts used by its affiliates for their asset allocation clients to receive more assets from its affiliates.

◾

Larger accounts/higher fee strategies - larger accounts and clients typically generate more revenue than do smaller accounts or clients and certain of PGIM Fixed Income’s strategies have higher fees than others. As a result, a portfolio manager could have an incentive when allocating scarce investment opportunities to favor accounts that pay a higher fee or generate more income for PGIM Fixed Income (or which it believes would generate more revenue in the future).

◾

Long only and long/short accounts - PGIM Fixed Income manages accounts that only allow it to hold securities long as well as accounts that permit short selling. As a result, there are times when PGIM Fixed Income sells a security short in some client accounts while holding the same security long in other client accounts. These short sales could reduce the value of the securities held in the long only accounts. Conversely, purchases for long only accounts could have a negative impact on the short positions in long/short accounts. Consequently, PGIM Fixed Income has conflicts of interest in determining the timing and direction of investments.

◾

Securities of the same kind or class - PGIM Fixed Income sometimes buys or sells, or direct or recommend that a client buy or sell, securities of the same kind or class that are purchased or sold for another client at prices that may be different. Although such pricing differences could appear as preferences for one client over another, PGIM Fixed Income’s trade execution in each case is driven by its consideration of a variety of factors consistent with its duty to seek best execution. There are times when PGIM Fixed Income executes trades of securities of the same kind or class in one direction for an account and in the opposite direction for another account, or determine not to trade such securities in one or more accounts while trading for others. While such trades (or a decision not to trade) could appear inconsistent in how PGIM Fixed Income views or treats a security for one client versus another, they generally result from differences in investment strategy, portfolio composition or client direction.

◾

Investment at different levels of an issuer’s capital structure — There are times when PGIM Fixed Income invests client assets in the same issuer, but at different levels in the issuer’s capital structure. This could occur, for instance, when a client holds private securities or loans of an issuer and other clients hold publicly traded securities of the same issuer. In addition, there are times when PGIM Fixed Income invests client assets in a class or tranche of securities of a securitized finance vehicle (such as a collateralized loan obligation, asset-backed security or mortgage-backed security) and also, at the same or different time, invests the assets of another client (including affiliated clients) in a different class or tranche of securities of the same vehicle. These different securities can have different voting rights, dividend or repayment priorities, rights in bankruptcy or other features that conflict with one another. For some of these securities (particularly private securitized product investments for which clients own all or a significant portion of the outstanding securities or obligations), PGIM Fixed Income has had, input regarding the characteristics and the relative rights and priorities of the various classes or tranches.

◾

When PGIM Fixed Income invests client assets in different levels of an issuer’s capital structure, it is permitted to take actions with respect to the assets held by one client (including affiliated clients) that are potentially adverse to other clients, for example, by foreclosing on loans or by putting an issuer into default. In negotiating the terms and conditions of any such investments, or any subsequent amendments or waivers, PGIM Fixed Income could find that the interests of a client and the interests of one or more other clients (including affiliated clients) could conflict. In these situations, decisions over proxy voting, corporate reorganizations, how to exit an investment, bankruptcy matters (including, for example, whether to trigger an event of default or the terms of any workout) or other actions or inactions can result in conflicts of interest. Similarly, if an issuer in which a client and one or more other clients directly or indirectly hold different classes of securities encounters financial problems, decisions over the terms of any workout will raise conflicts of interest (including potential conflicts over proposed waivers and amendments to debt covenants). For example, a senior bond holder or lender might prefer a liquidation of the issuer in which it could be paid in full, whereas an equity or junior bond holder might prefer a reorganization that holds the potential to create value for the equity holders or junior bond holders. There will be times where PGIM Fixed Income refrains from taking certain actions (including participating in workouts and restructurings) or making investments on behalf of certain clients or where PGIM Fixed Income determine to sell investments for certain clients, in each case in order to mitigate conflicts of interest or legal, regulatory or other risks to PGIM Fixed Income This could potentially disadvantage the clients on whose behalf the actions are not taken, investments are not made, or investments are sold. Conversely, in other cases, PGIM Fixed Income will not refrain from taking such actions or making investments on behalf of some clients (including affiliated clients), which could potentially disadvantage other clients. Any of the foregoing conflicts of interest will be resolved or managed on a case-by-case basis. Any such resolution will take into consideration the interests of the relevant clients, the circumstances giving rise to the conflict and applicable laws.

◾

Financial interests of investment professionals - PGIM Fixed Income investment professionals from time to time invest in certain investment vehicles that it manages, including exchanged-traded funds (“ETFs”), mutual funds and (through a retirement plan) collective investment trusts. Also, certain of these investment vehicles are options under the 401(k) and deferred compensation plans offered by Prudential Financial, Inc. In addition, the value of grants under PGIM Fixed Income’s long-term incentive plan and targeted long-term incentive plan is affected by the performance of certain client accounts. As a result, PGIM Fixed Income investment professionals have financial interests in accounts managed by PGIM Fixed Income and/or that are related to the performance of certain client accounts.

◾

Non-discretionary/limited discretion accounts - PGIM Fixed Income provides non-discretionary and limited discretion investment advice to some clients and manages others on a fully discretionary basis. Trades in non-discretionary accounts or accounts where

39

discretion is limited could occur before, in concert with, or after PGIM Fixed Income executes similar trades in its discretionary accounts. The non-discretionary/limited discretion clients may be disadvantaged if PGIM Fixed Income delivers investment advice to them after it initiates trading for the discretionary clients, or vice versa.

How PGIM Fixed Income Addresses These Conflicts of Interest. PGIM Fixed Income has developed policies and procedures reasonably designed to address the conflicts of interest with respect to its different types of side-by-side management described above.

◾

Each quarter, the head of PGIM Fixed Income holds a series of meetings with the senior portfolio manager and team responsible for the management of each of PGIM Fixed Income’s investment strategies. At each of these quarterly investment strategy review meetings, the head of PGIM Fixed Income and the strategy’s portfolio management team review and discuss the investment performance and performance attribution for client accounts managed in the strategy. These meetings generally are also attended by one or both of the co-chief investment officers, the head of quantitative analysis and risk management or his designee and a member of the compliance group, among others.

◾

In keeping with PGIM Fixed Income’s fiduciary obligations, its policy with respect to trade aggregation and allocation is to treat all of its client accounts fairly and equitably over time. PGIM Fixed Income’s trade management oversight committee, which generally meets quarterly, is responsible for providing oversight with respect to trade aggregation and allocation. Its compliance group periodically reviews a sampling of new issue allocations and related documentation to confirm compliance with the trade aggregation and allocation policy. In addition, the compliance and investment risk management groups review forensic reports regarding new issue and secondary trade activity on a quarterly basis. This forensic analysis includes such data as the: (i) number of new issues allocated in the strategy; (ii) size of new issue allocations to each portfolio in the strategy; (iii) profitability of new issue transactions; (iv) portfolio turnover; (v) and metrics related to large and block trade activity. The results of these analyses are reviewed and discussed at PGIM Fixed Income’s trade management oversight committee meetings. The procedures above are designed to detect patterns and anomalies in PGIM Fixed Income’s side-by-side management and trading so that it may assess and improve its processes.

◾

PGIM Fixed Income has procedures that specifically address its side-by-side management of certain long/short and long only portfolios. These procedures address potential conflicts that could arise from differing positions between long/short and long only portfolios. In addition, lending opportunities with respect to securities for which the market is demanding a slight premium rate over normal market rates are allocated to long only accounts prior to allocating the opportunities to long/short accounts.

Conflicts Related to PGIM Fixed Income’s Affiliations. As an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of Prudential Financial, Inc., PGIM Fixed Income is part of a diversified, global financial services organization. PGIM Fixed Income is affiliated with many types of US and non-US financial service providers, including insurance companies, broker-dealers, commodity trading advisors, commodity pool operators and other investment advisers. Some of its employees are officers of and/or provide services to some of these affiliates.

◾

Conflicts Related to Investment of Client Assets in Affiliated Funds. PGIM Fixed Income invests client assets in funds that it manages or subadvises for one or more affiliates. PGIM Fixed Income also invests cash collateral from securities lending transactions in some of these funds. These investments benefit PGIM Fixed Income and/or its affiliate through increasing assets under management and/or fees.

◾

Conflicts Related to Referral Fees to Affiliates. From time to time, PGIM Fixed Income has arrangements where PGIM Fixed Income compensates affiliated parties for client referrals. PGIM Fixed Income currently has arrangements with an affiliated entity which provide for payments to an affiliate if certain investments by others are made in certain of PGIM Fixed Income’s products or if PGIM Fixed Income establishes certain other advisory relationships. These investments benefit both PGIM Fixed Income and its affiliates through increasing assets under management and fees.

◾

Conflicts Related to Co-investment by Affiliates. PGIM Fixed Income affiliates provide initial funding to or otherwise invest in certain vehicles it manages. When certain of its affiliates provide “seed capital” or other capital for a fund, they generally do so with the intention of redeeming all or part of their interest at a future point in time or when they deem that sufficient additional capital has been invested in that fund.

◾

The timing of a redemption by an affiliate could benefit the affiliate. For example, the fund may be more liquid at the time of the affiliate’s redemption than it is at times when other investors may wish to withdraw all or part of their interests.

◾

In addition, a consequence of any withdrawal of a significant amount, including by an affiliate, is that investors remaining in the fund will bear a proportionately higher share of fund expenses following the redemption.

◾

PGIM Fixed Income could also face a conflict if the interests of an affiliated investor in a fund it manages diverge from those of the fund or other investors. For example, PGIM Fixed Income affiliates, from time to time, hedge some or all of the risks associated with their investments in certain funds PGIM Fixed Income manages. PGIM Fixed Income may provide assistance in connection with this hedging activity.

◾

Insurance Affiliate General Accounts. Because of the substantial size of the general accounts of PGIM Fixed Income’s affiliated insurance companies (the “Insurance Affiliates”), trading by these general accounts, including PGIM Fixed Income’s trades on behalf of the accounts, may affect the market prices or limit the availability of the securities or instruments transacted. Although PGIM Fixed Income does not expect that the general accounts of affiliated insurers will execute transactions that will move a market frequently, and generally only in response to unusual market or issuer events, the execution of these transactions could have an adverse effect on transactions for or positions held by other clients.

 40

PGIM Fixed Income believes that the conflicts related to its affiliations described above are mitigated by its allocation policies and procedures, its supervisory review of accounts and its procedures with respect to side-by-side management, including of long only and long/short accounts.

Conflicts Related to Financial Interests and the Financial Interests of Affiliates.

Prudential Financial, the general accounts of the Insurance Affiliates, PGIM Fixed Income and other affiliates of PGIM at times have financial interests in, or relationships with, companies whose securities or related instruments PGIM Fixed Income holds, purchases or sells in its client accounts. Certain of these interests and relationships are material to PGIM Fixed Income or to the Prudential enterprise. At any time, these interests and relationships could be inconsistent or in potential or actual conflict with positions held or actions taken by PGIM Fixed Income on behalf of PGIM Fixed Income’s client accounts. For example:

◾

PGIM Fixed Income invests in the securities of one or more clients for the accounts of other clients.

◾

PGIM Fixed Income’s affiliates sell various products and/or services to certain companies whose securities PGIM Fixed Income purchases and sells for PGIM Fixed Income clients.

◾

PGIM Fixed Income invests in the debt securities of companies whose equity is held by its affiliates.

◾

PGIM Fixed Income’s affiliates hold public and private debt and equity securities of a large number of issuers. PGIM Fixed Income invests in some of the same issuers for other client accounts but at different levels in the capital structure. For example:

◾

Affiliated accounts have held and can in the future hold the senior debt of an issuer whose subordinated debt is held by PGIM Fixed Income’s clients or hold secured debt of an issuer whose public unsecured debt is held in client accounts. See “Investment at different levels of an issuer’s capital structure” above for additional information regarding conflicts of interest resulting from investment at different levels of an issuer’s capital structure.

◾

To the extent permitted by applicable law, PGIM Fixed Income can also invest client assets in offerings of securities, the proceeds of which are used to repay debt obligations held in affiliated accounts or other client accounts. PGIM Fixed Income’s interest in having the debt repaid creates a conflict of interest. PGIM Fixed Income has adopted a refinancing policy to address this conflict.

◾

Certain of PGIM Fixed Income’s affiliates’ directors or officers are directors, or officers of issuers in which PGIM Fixed Income invests from time to time. These issuers could also be service providers to PGIM Fixed Income or its affiliates.

◾

In addition, PGIM Fixed Income can invest client assets in securities backed by commercial mortgage loans that were originated or are serviced by an affiliate.

In general, conflicts related to the financial interests described above are addressed by the fact that PGIM Fixed Income makes investment decisions for each client independently considering the best economic interests of such client, under the circumstances.

Conflicts Arising Out of Legal and Regulatory Restrictions.

◾

At times, PGIM Fixed Income is restricted by law, regulation, executive order, contract or other constraints as to how much, if any, of a particular security it can purchase or sell on behalf of a client, and as to the timing of such purchase or sale. Sometimes these restrictions apply as a result of its relationship with Prudential Financial and other affiliates. For example, PGIM Fixed Income does not purchase securities issued by Prudential Financial or other affiliates for client accounts.

◾

In certain instances, PGIM Fixed Income’s ability to buy or sell or transact for one or more client accounts will be constrained as a result of its receipt of material, non-public information, various insider trading laws and related legal requirements. For example, PGIM Fixed Income would generally be unable to (i) invest in, (ii) divest securities of, or (iii) share investment analyses regarding companies for which it possesses material, non-public information, and such inability (which could last for an uncertain period of time until the information is no longer deemed material or non-public) can result in it being unable to buy, sell or transact for one or more client accounts or to take other actions that would otherwise be to the benefit of one or more clients.

◾

PGIM Fixed Income faces conflicts of interest in determining whether to accept material, non-public information. For example, PGIM Fixed Income has sought with respect to the management of investments in certain loans for clients, to retain the ability to purchase and sell other securities in the borrower’s capital structure by remaining “public” on the loan. In such cases, PGIM Fixed Income will seek to avoid receiving material, non-public information about the borrowers to which an account can or expects to lend or has lent (through assignments, participations or otherwise), which could place an account at an information disadvantage relative to other accounts and lenders. Conversely, PGIM Fixed Income has chosen to receive material, non-public information about certain borrowers for its clients that invest in bank loans, which has restricted its ability to trade in other securities of the borrowers for its clients that invest in corporate bonds.

◾

PGIM Fixed Income’s holdings of a security on behalf of its clients are required, under certain regulations, to be aggregated with the holdings of that security by other Prudential Financial affiliates. These holdings could, on an aggregate basis, exceed certain reporting or ownership thresholds. These aggregated holdings are centrally tracked and PGIM Fixed Income or Prudential Financial can choose to restrict purchases, sell existing positions, or otherwise restrict, forgo, or limit the exercise of rights to avoid crossing such thresholds because of the potential consequences to PGIM Fixed Income or Prudential Financial if such thresholds are exceeded.

41

Conflicts Related to Investment Consultants. Many of PGIM Fixed Income’s clients and prospective clients retain investment consultants (including discretionary investment managers and OCIO providers) to advise them on the selection and review of investment managers (including with respect to the selection of investment funds). PGIM Fixed Income has dealings with these investment consultants in their roles as discretionary managers or non-discretionary advisers to their clients. PGIM Fixed Income also has independent business relationships with investment consultants.

PGIM Fixed Income provides investment consultants with information about accounts that it manages for the consultant’s clients (and similarly, PGIM Fixed Income provides information about funds in which such clients are invested), in each case pursuant to authorization from the clients. PGIM Fixed Income also provides information regarding its investment strategies to investment consultants, who use that information in connection with searches that they conduct for their clients. PGIM Fixed Income often responds to requests for proposals in connection with those searches.

Other interactions PGIM Fixed Income has with investment consultants include the following:

◾

it provides advisory services to the proprietary accounts of investment consultants and/or their affiliates, and advisory services to funds offered by investment consultants and/or their affiliates;

◾

it invites investment consultants to events or other entertainment hosted by PGIM Fixed Income;

◾

it purchases software applications, market data, access to databases, technology services and other products or services from certain investment consultants; and

◾

it sometimes pays for the opportunity to participate in conferences organized by investment consultants.

PGIM Fixed Income will provide clients with information about its relationship with the client’s investment consultant upon request. In general, PGIM Fixed Income relies on the investment consultant to make the appropriate disclosure to its clients of any conflict that the investment consultant believes to exist due to its business relationships with PGIM Fixed Income.

A client’s relationship with an investment consultant could result in restrictions in the eligible securities or trading counterparties for the client’s account. For example, accounts of certain clients (including clients that are subject to ERISA) can be restricted from investing in securities issued by the client’s consultant or its affiliates and from trading with, or participating in transactions involving, counterparties that are affiliated with the investment consultant. In some cases, these restrictions could have a material impact on account performance.

Conflicts Related to Service Providers. PGIM Fixed Income retains third party advisors and other service providers to provide various services for PGIM Fixed Income as well as for funds that PGIM Fixed Income manages or subadvises. Some service providers provide services to PGIM Fixed Income or one of PGIM Fixed Income’s funds while also providing services to other PGIM units, other PGIM-advised funds, or affiliates of PGIM, and negotiate rates in the context of the overall relationship. PGIM Fixed Income can benefit from negotiated fee rates offered to its funds and vice versa. There is no assurance, however, that PGIM Fixed Income will be able to obtain advantageous fee rates from a given service provider negotiated by its affiliates based on their relationship with the service provider, or that PGIM Fixed Income will know of such negotiated fee rates.

Conflicts Related to Valuation and Fees.

When client accounts hold illiquid or difficult to value investments, PGIM Fixed Income faces a conflict of interest when making recommendations regarding the value of such investments since its fees are generally based on the value of assets under management. PGIM Fixed Income could be viewed as having an incentive to value investments at higher valuations. PGIM Fixed Income believes that its valuation policies and procedures mitigate this conflict effectively and enable it to value client assets fairly and in a manner that is consistent with the client’s best interests. In addition, separately managed account clients often calculate fees based on the valuation of assets provided by their custodian or administrator.

Conflicts Related to Securities Lending and Reverse Repurchase Fees.

When PGIM Fixed Income manages a client account and also serves as securities lending agent and/or engages in reverse repurchase transactions for the account, PGIM Fixed Income is compensated for its securities lending and reverse repurchase services by receiving a portion of the proceeds generated from the securities lending and reverse repurchase activities of the account. PGIM Fixed Income could, therefore, be considered to have an incentive to invest in securities that would generate higher securities lending and reverse repurchase returns, even if these investments were not otherwise in the best interest of the client account. In addition, if PGIM Fixed Income is acting as securities lending agent and providing reverse repurchase services, PGIM Fixed Income may be incented to select the less costly alternative to increase its revenues.

 42

Conflicts Related to Long-Term Compensation. As a result of the long-term incentive plan and targeted long-term incentive plan, PGIM Fixed Income’s portfolio managers from time to time have financial interests related to the investment performance of some, but not all, of the accounts they manage. For example, the performance of some client accounts is not reflected in the calculation of changes in the value of participation interests under PGIM Fixed Income’s long-term incentive plan. This may be because the composite representing the strategy in which the account is managed is not one of the composites included in the calculation or because the account is excluded from a specified composite due to guideline restrictions or other factors. In addition, the performance of only a small number of its investment strategies is covered under PGIM Fixed Income’s targeted long-term incentive plan. Further, for certain PGIM Fixed Income investment professionals, participation interests in the targeted long-term incentive plan constitute a significant percentage of their total long-term compensation. To address potential conflicts related to these financial interests, PGIM Fixed Income has procedures, including trade allocation and supervisory review procedures, designed to confirm that each of its client accounts is managed in a manner that is consistent with PGIM Fixed Income’s fiduciary obligations, as well as with the account’s investment objectives, investment strategies and restrictions. For example, the head of PGIM Fixed Income reviews performance among similarly managed accounts on a quarterly basis during a series of meetings with the senior portfolio manager and team responsible for the management of each investment strategy. These quarterly investment strategy review meetings generally are also attended by one or both of our co-chief investment officers, the head of quantitative analysis and risk management or his designee and a member of the compliance group, among others.

Conflicts Related to the Offer and Sale of Securities. Certain of PGIM Fixed Income’s employees offer and sell securities of, and interests in, commingled funds that it manages or subadvises. Employees offer and sell securities in connection with their roles as registered representatives of an affiliated broker-dealer, officers of an affiliated trust company, agents of the Insurance Affiliates, approved persons of an affiliated investment adviser or other roles related to such commingled funds. There is an incentive for PGIM Fixed Income’s employees to offer these securities to investors regardless of whether the investment is appropriate for such investor since increased assets in these vehicles will result in increased advisory fees to it. In addition, such sales could result in increased compensation to the employee.

Conflicts Related to Employee/Investment Professional Trading. Personal trading by PGIM Fixed Income employees creates a conflict when they are trading the same securities or types of securities as PGIM Fixed Income trades on behalf of its clients. This conflict is mitigated by PGIM Fixed Income’s personal trading standards and procedures.

Conflicts Related to Outside Business Activity. From time to time, certain of PGIM Fixed Income employees or officers engage in outside business activity, including outside directorships. Any outside business activity is subject to prior approval pursuant to PGIM Fixed Income’s personal conflicts of interest and outside business activities policy. Actual and potential conflicts of interest are analyzed during such approval process. PGIM Fixed Income could be restricted in trading the securities of certain issuers in client portfolios in the unlikely event that an employee or officer, as a result of outside business activity, obtains material, non-public information regarding an issuer.

PGIM Investments LLC (PGIM Investments)
PORTFOLIO MANAGER COMPENSATION. Prudential provides compensation opportunities to eligible employees to motivate and reward the achievement of outstanding results by providing market-based programs that:

◾

Attract and reward highly qualified employees

◾

Align with critical business goals and objectives

◾

Link to the performance results relevant to the business segment and Prudential

◾

Retain top performers

◾

Pay for results and differentiate levels of performance

◾

Foster behaviors and contributions that promote Prudential's success

The components of compensation for a Vice President in PGIM Investments consists of base salary, annual incentive compensation and long term incentive compensation.

Base Pay Overview: The Prudential compensation structure is organized in grades, each with its own minimum and maximum base pay (i.e., salary). The grades reflect pay patterns in the market. Each job in the plan—from CEO through an entry-level job—is included in one of the grades. The main determinant of placement in the base pay structure is market data. On an annual basis, Corporate Compensation collects and analyzes market data to determine if any change to the placement of job in the structure is necessary to maintain market competitiveness. If necessary, structural compensation changes (e.g., increases to base pay minimum and maximums) will be effective on the plan's effective date for base pay increases.

43

Annual Incentive Compensation Overview: The plan provides an opportunity for all participants to share in the annual results of Prudential, as well as the results of their division or profit center. Results are reviewed and incentive payments are made as early as practicable after the close of the plan year. Incentive payments are awarded based on organizational performance—which determines the available dollar amounts—and individual performance. Individual performance will be evaluated on the basis of contributions relative to others in the organization. Incentive payments are granted from a budgeted amount of money that is made available by the Company. Initial budgets are developed by determining the competitive market rates for incentives as compared to our comparator companies. Each organization's budget pool may be increased or decreased based on organizational performance. Organizational performance is determined by a review of performance relative to our comparator group, as well as key measures indicated in our business plan, such as Return on Required Equity (RORE), earnings and revenue growth.

Long Term Incentive Compensation Overview: In addition, executives at the Vice President level and above are eligible to participate in a long term incentive program to provide an ownership stake in Prudential Financial. Long-Term incentives currently consist of restricted stock and stock options. The stock options vest  1∕3 per year over 3 years and the restricted stock vests 100% at the end of 3 years.

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. PGIM Investments follows Prudential Financial's policies on business ethics, personal securities trading by investment personnel, and information barriers and has adopted a code of ethics, allocation policies, supervisory procedures and conflicts of interest policies, among other policies and procedures, which are designed to ensure that clients are not harmed by these potential or actual conflicts of interests; however, there is no guarantee that such policies and procedures will detect and ensure avoidance, disclosure or mitigation of each and every situation in which a conflict may arise.

PGIM Quantitative Solutions LLC (PGIM Quantitative Solutions)
COMPENSATION. PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ investment professionals are compensated through a combination of base salary, a performance-based annual cash incentive bonus and an annual long-term incentive grant. PGIM Quantitative Solutions regularly utilizes third party surveys to compare its compensation program against leading asset management firms to monitor competitiveness.

An investment professional’s incentive compensation, including both the annual cash bonus and long-term incentive grant, is largely driven by a person’s contribution to PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ goal of providing investment performance to clients consistent with portfolio objectives, guidelines and risk parameters, as well as such person’s qualitative contributions to the organization. An investment professional’s long-term incentive grant is currently divided into two components: (i) 80% of the value of the grant is based on the performance of certain PGIM Quantitative Solutions strategies, and (ii) 20% of the value of the grant consists of restricted stock of Prudential Financial, Inc. (PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ ultimate parent company). Both such values are subject to increase or decrease. The long-term incentive grants are subject to vesting requirements. The incentive compensation of each investment professional is not based solely or directly on the performance of a fund (or any other individual account managed by PGIM Quantitative Solutions) or the value of the assets of a fund (or any other individual account managed by PGIM Quantitative Solutions).

The annual cash bonus pool is determined quantitatively based on two primary factors: 1) investment performance of composites representing PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ various investment strategies on a 1-year and 3-year basis relative to appropriate market peer groups and the indices against which PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ strategies are managed, and 2) business results as measured by PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ pretax income.

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. Like other investment advisers, PGIM Quantitative Solutions is subject to various conflicts of interest in the ordinary course of its business. PGIM Quantitative Solutions strives to identify potential risks, including conflicts of interest, that are inherent in its business, and conducts annual conflict of interest reviews. When actual or potential conflicts of interest are identified, PGIM Quantitative Solutions seeks to address such conflicts through one or more of the following methods:

◾

Elimination of the conflict;

◾

Disclosure of the conflict; or

◾

Management of the conflict through the adoption of appropriate policies and procedures.

PGIM Quantitative Solutions follows Prudential Financial’s policies on business ethics, personal securities trading, and information barriers. PGIM Quantitative Solutions has adopted a code of ethics, allocation policies and conflicts of interest policies, among others, and has adopted supervisory procedures to monitor compliance with its policies. PGIM Quantitative Solutions cannot guarantee, however, that its policies and procedures will detect and prevent, or result in the disclosure of, each and every situation in which a conflict may arise.

Side-by-Side Management of Accounts and Related Conflicts of Interest. Side-by-side management of multiple accounts can create incentives for PGIM Quantitative Solutions to favor one account over another. Examples are detailed below, followed by a discussion of how PGIM Quantitative Solutions addresses these conflicts.

 44

◾

Asset-Based Fees vs. Performance-Based Fees; Other Fee Considerations. PGIM Quantitative Solutions manages accounts with asset-based fees alongside accounts with performance-based fees. Asset-based fees are calculated based on the value of a client’s portfolio at periodic measurement dates or over specified periods of time. Performance-based fees are generally based on a share of the total return of a portfolio, and may offer greater upside potential to PGIM Quantitative Solutions than asset-based fees, depending on how the fees are structured. This side-by-side management could create an incentive for PGIM Quantitative Solutions to favor one account over another. Specifically, PGIM Quantitative Solutions could have the incentive to favor accounts for which it receives performance fees, and possibly take greater investment risks in those accounts, in order to bolster performance and increase its fees. In addition, since fees are negotiable, one client may be paying a higher fee than another client with similar investment objectives or goals. In negotiating fees, PGIM Quantitative Solutions takes into account a number of factors including, but not limited to, the investment strategy, the size of a portfolio being managed, the relationship with the client, and the required level of service. Fees may also differ based on account type. For example, fees for commingled vehicles, including those that PGIM Quantitative Solutions subadvises, may differ from fees charged for single client accounts.

◾

Long Only/Long-Short Accounts. PGIM Quantitative Solutions manages accounts that only allow it to hold securities long as well as accounts that permit short selling. PGIM Quantitative Solutions may, therefore, sell a security short in some client accounts while holding the same security long in other client accounts, creating the possibility that PGIM Quantitative Solutions is taking inconsistent positions with respect to a particular security in different client accounts.

◾

Compensation/Benefit Plan Accounts/Other Investments by Investment Professionals. PGIM Quantitative Solutions manages certain funds and strategies whose performance is considered in determining long-term incentive plan benefits for certain investment professionals. Investment professionals involved in the management of those accounts in these strategies have an incentive to favor them over other accounts they manage in order to increase their compensation. Additionally, PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ investment professionals may have an interest in funds in those strategies if the funds are chosen as options in their 401(k) or deferred compensation plans offered by Prudential or if they otherwise invest in those funds directly.

◾

Affiliated Accounts. PGIM Quantitative Solutions manages accounts on behalf of its affiliates as well as unaffiliated accounts. PGIM Quantitative Solutions could have an incentive to favor accounts of affiliates over others.

◾

Non-Discretionary Accounts or Model Portfolios. PGIM Quantitative Solutions provides non-discretionary model portfolios to some clients and manages other portfolios on a discretionary basis. When PGIM Quantitative Solutions manages accounts on a non-discretionary basis, the investment team will typically deliver a model portfolio to a non-discretionary client at or around the same time as executive discretionary trades in the same strategy. The non-discretionary clients may be disadvantaged if PGIM Quantitative Solutions delivers the model investment portfolio to them after it initiates trading for the discretionary clients, or vice versa.

◾

Large Accounts/Higher Fee Strategies. Large accounts typically generate more revenue than do smaller accounts and certain strategies have higher fees than others. As a result, a portfolio manager has an incentive when allocating investment opportunities to favor accounts that pay a higher fee or generate more income for PGIM Quantitative Solutions.

◾

Securities of the Same Kind or Class. PGIM Quantitative Solutions sometimes buys or sells or directs or recommends that one client buy or sell, securities of the same kind or class that are purchased or sold for another client, at prices that may be different. Although such pricing differences could appear as preferences for one client over another, PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ trade execution in each case is driven by its consideration of a variety of factors as we seek the most advantageous terms reasonably attainable in the circumstances. Although such pricing differences could appear as preferences for one client over another, PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ trade execution in each case is driven by its consideration of a variety of factors as we seek the most advantageous terms reasonably attainable in the circumstances. PGIM Quantitative Solutions may also, at any time, execute trades of securities of the same kind or class in one direction for an account and in the opposite direction for another account, or not trade in any other account. Opposite way trades are generally due to differences in investment strategy, portfolio composition, or client direction.

How PGIM Quantitative Solutions Addresses These Conflicts of Interest. The conflicts of interest described above with respect to different types of side-by-side management could influence PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ allocation of investment opportunities as well as its timing, aggregation and allocation of trades. PGIM Quantitative Solutions has developed policies and procedures designed to address these conflicts of interest. PGIM Quantitative Solutions' Conflicts of Interest and related policies stress that investment decisions are to be made in accordance with the fiduciary duties owed to each account without giving consideration to PGIM Quantitative Solutions or PGIM Quantitative Solutions personnel's pecuniary, investment or other financial interests.

In keeping with its fiduciary obligations, PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ policies with respect to allocation and aggregation are to treat all of its accounts fairly and equitably over time. PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ investment strategies generally require that PGIM Quantitative Solutions invest its clients’ assets in securities that are publicly traded. PGIM Quantitative Solutions generally does not participate in initial public offerings. PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ investment strategies are team managed, reducing the likelihood that one portfolio would be favored over other portfolios managed by the team. These factors reduce the risk that PGIM Quantitative Solutions could favor one client over another in the allocation of investment opportunities. PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ compliance procedures with respect to these policies include independent reviews by its compliance unit of the timing, allocation and aggregation of trades, the allocation of investment opportunities and the performance of similarly managed accounts. These procedures are designed to detect patterns and anomalies in PGIM Quantitative Solutions side-by-side management and trading so that PGIM Quantitative Solutions may take measures

45

to correct or improve its processes. PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ Trade Management Oversight Committee, which consists of senior members of PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ management team, reviews, among other things, trading patterns, execution impact on client accounts and broker performance, on a periodic basis.

PGIM Quantitative Solutions rebalances portfolios periodically with frequencies that vary with market conditions and investment objectives and may differ across portfolios in the same strategy based on variations in portfolio characteristics and constraints. PGIM Quantitative Solutions may choose to aggregate trades for all portfolios rebalanced on any given day, where appropriate and consistent with its duty of best execution. Orders are generally allocated at the time of the transaction or as soon as possible thereafter, on a pro rata basis equal to each account’s appetite for the issue when such appetite can be determined.

With respect to PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ management of long-short and long only accounts, the security weightings (positive or negative) in each account are always determined by a quantitative algorithm. An independent review is performed by the compliance unit to assess whether any such positions would represent a departure from the quantitative algorithm used to derive the positions in each portfolio. PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ review is intended to identify situations where PGIM Quantitative Solutions would seem to have conflicting views of the same security in different portfolios, although such views may actually be reasonable and consistent due to differing portfolio constraints.

PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ Relationships with Affiliates and Related Conflicts of Interest. As an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of Prudential Financial, PGIM Quantitative Solutions is part of a diversified, global financial services organization. It is affiliated with many types of US and non-US financial service providers, including insurance companies, broker-dealers, commodity trading advisors, commodity pool operators and other investment advisers. Some of its employees are officers of and/or provide services to some of these affiliates.

Conflicts Related to PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ Affiliations.

Conflicts Arising Out of Legal Restrictions. PGIM Quantitative Solutions may be restricted by law, regulation or contract as to how much, if any, of a particular security it may purchase or sell on behalf of a client, and as to the timing of such purchase or sale. Sometimes these restrictions apply as a result of PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ relationship with Prudential Financial and its other affiliates. For example, PGIM Quantitative Solutions holdings of a security on behalf of its clients are required under certain regulations, to be aggregated with the holdings of that security by other Prudential Financial affiliates. These holdings could, on an aggregate basis, exceed certain reporting thresholds. Prudential tracks these aggregate holdings and PGIM Quantitative Solutions may restrict purchases, sell existing investments, or otherwise restrict, forego or limit the exercise of rights to avoid crossing such thresholds because of the potential consequences to PGIM Quantitative Solutions, Prudential or PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ clients if such thresholds are exceeded. In addition, PGIM Quantitative Solutions could receive material, non-public information with respect to a particular issuer from an affiliate and, as a result, be unable to execute purchase or sale transactions in securities of that issuer for its clients. PGIM Quantitative Solutions is generally able to avoid receiving material, non-public information from its affiliates by maintaining information barriers to prevent the transfer of information between affiliates. PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ trading of Prudential Financial common stock for its clients’ portfolios also presents a conflict of interest and, consequently, PGIM Quantitative Solutions does so only when permitted by its clients.

The Fund may be prohibited from engaging in transactions with its affiliates even when such transactions may be beneficial for the Fund. Certain affiliated transactions are permitted in accordance with procedures adopted by the Fund and reviewed by the independent board members of the Fund.

Conflicts Related to PGIM Quantitative Solutions Multi-Asset Class Services. PGIM Quantitative Solutions performs asset allocation services as subadviser for affiliated mutual funds managed or co-managed by the Investment Manager, including for some Portfolios offered by the Fund. Where, in these arrangements, PGIM Quantitative Solutions also manages underlying funds or accounts within asset classes included in the mutual fund guidelines, PGIM Quantitative Solutions will allocate assets to such underlying funds, vehicles, or accounts. In these circumstances, PGIM Quantitative Solutions receives both an asset allocation fee and a management fee. As a result, PGIM Quantitative Solutions has an incentive to allocate assets to an asset class or vehicle that it manages in order to increase its fees. To help mitigate this conflict, the compliance group reviews the asset allocation to determine that the investments were made within the established guidelines for each asset class or fund.

PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ affiliates can have an incentive to seek to influence PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ asset allocation decisions, for example to facilitate hedging or improve profit margins. Through training and the establishment of communication barriers, however, PGIM Quantitative Solutions seeks to avoid any influence by its affiliates and implements its asset allocation decisions solely in what PGIM Quantitative Solutions believes to be the best interests of the funds and in compliance with applicable guidelines. PGIM Quantitative Solutions also believes that it makes such allocations in a manner consistent with its fiduciary obligations.

 46

In certain arrangements PGIM Quantitative Solutions subadvises mutual funds for the Investment Manager through a program where they have selected PGIM Quantitative Solutions as a manager, resulting in PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ collection of subadvisory fees from them. The Investment Manager also selects managers for some of PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ asset allocation products and, in certain cases, is compensated by PGIM Quantitative Solutions for these services under service agreements. The Investment Manager and PGIM Quantitative Solutions may have a mutual incentive to continue these types of arrangements that benefit both companies. These and other types of conflicts of interest are reviewed to verify that appropriate oversight is performed.

Conflicts Related to PGIM Quantitative Solutions Financial Interests and the Financial Interests of PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ Affiliates. PGIM Quantitative Solutions, Prudential Financial, Inc., The Prudential Insurance Company of America (PICA) and other affiliates of PGIM Quantitative Solutions have financial interests in, or relationships with, companies whose securities PGIM Quantitative Solutions holds, purchases or sells in its client accounts. Certain of these interests and relationships are material to PGIM Quantitative Solutions or to the Prudential enterprise. At any time, these interests and relationships could be inconsistent or in potential or actual conflict with positions held or actions taken by PGIM Quantitative Solutions on behalf of its client accounts. For example, PGIM Quantitative Solutions invests in the securities of one or more clients for the accounts of other clients. PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ affiliates sell various products and/or services to certain companies whose securities PGIM Quantitative Solutions purchases and sells for its clients. PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ affiliates hold public and private debt and equity securities of a large number of issuers. PGIM Quantitative Solutions invests in some of the same issuers for its client accounts but at different levels in the capital structure. For instance, PGIM Quantitative Solutions may invest client assets in the equity of companies whose debt is held by an affiliate. Certain of PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ affiliates (as well as directors of PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ affiliates) are officers or directors of issuers in which PGIM Quantitative Solutions invests from time to time. These issuers may also be service providers to PGIM Quantitative Solutions or its affiliates. In general, conflicts related to the financial interests described above are addressed by the fact that PGIM Quantitative Solutions makes investment decisions for each client independently considering the best economic interests of such client.

Certain of PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ employees may offer and sell securities of, and units in, commingled funds that PGIM Quantitative Solutions manages or subadvises. Employees may offer and sell securities in connection with their roles as registered representatives of Prudential Investment Management Services LLC (a broker-dealer affiliate), or as officers, agents, or approved persons of other affiliates. There is an incentive for PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ employees to offer these securities to investors regardless of whether the investment is appropriate for such investor since increased assets in these vehicles will result in increased advisory fees to PGIM Quantitative Solutions . In addition, although sales commissions are not paid for such activities, such sales could result in increased compensation to the employee. To mitigate this conflict, PGIM Quantitative Solutions performs suitability checks on new clients as well as on an annual basis with respect to all clients.

Conflicts Related to Long-Term Compensation. A portion of the long-term incentive grant of some of PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ investment professionals will increase or decrease based on the annual performance of several of PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ strategies over defined time periods. Consequently, some of PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ portfolio managers from time to time have financial interests in the accounts they advise. To address potential conflicts related to these financial interests, PGIM Quantitative Solutions has procedures, including supervisory review procedures, designed to verify that each of its accounts is managed in a manner that is consistent with PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ fiduciary obligations, as well as with the account’s investment objectives, investment strategies and restrictions. Specifically, PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ chief investment officer will perform a comparison of trading costs between the advised accounts whose performance is considered in connection with the long-term incentive grant and other accounts, to verify that such costs are consistent with each other or otherwise in line with expectations. The results of the analysis are discussed at a meeting of PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ Trade Management Oversight Committee.

Conflicts Related to Service Providers. PGIM Quantitative Solutions retains third party advisors and other service providers to provide various services for PGIM Quantitative Solutions as well as for funds that PGIM Quantitative Solutions manages or subadvises. A service provider may provide services to PGIM Quantitative Solutions or one of its funds while also providing services to PGIM, Inc. (PGIM) other PGIM-advised funds, or affiliates of PGIM, and may negotiate rates in the context of the overall relationship. PGIM Quantitative Solutions may benefit from negotiated fee rates offered to its funds and vice-versa. There is no assurance, however, that PGIM Quantitative Solutions will be able to obtain advantageous fee rates from a given service provider negotiated by its affiliates based on their relationship with the service provider, or that it will know of such negotiated fee rates.

Conflicts of Interest in the Voting Process. Occasionally, a conflict of interest may arise in connection with proxy voting. For example, the issuer of the securities being voted may also be a client or affiliate of PGIM Quantitative Solutions. When PGIM Quantitative Solutions identifies an actual or potential conflict of interest between PGIM Quantitative Solutions and its clients or affiliates, PGIM Quantitative Solutions votes in accordance with the policy of its proxy voting advisor rather than its own policy. In that manner, PGIM Quantitative Solutions seeks to maintain the independence and objectivity of the vote.

47

T. Rowe Price Associates, Inc.
T. Rowe Price International Ltd.
T. Rowe Price Japan, Inc.
T. Rowe Price Hong Kong Limited (collectively, T. Rowe Price)

PORTFOLIO MANAGER COMPENSATION STRUCTURE. Portfolio manager compensation consists primarily of a base salary, a cash bonus, and an equity incentive that usually comes in the form of restricted stock grants. Compensation is variable and is determined based on the following factors.

Investment performance over 1-, 3-, 5-, and 10-year periods is the most important input. The weightings for these time periods are generally balanced and are applied consistently across similar strategies. T. Rowe Price (and T. Rowe Price Hong Kong, T. Rowe Price Singapore, T. Rowe Price Japan, T. Rowe Price International, and T. Rowe Price Investment Management, as appropriate) evaluates performance in absolute, relative, and risk-adjusted terms. Relative performance and risk-adjusted performance are typically determined with reference to the broad-based index (e.g., S&P 500 Index) and the Lipper average or index (e.g., Large-Cap Growth Index) set forth in the total returns table in the fund’s prospectus, although other benchmarks may be used as well. Investment results are also measured against comparably managed funds of competitive investment management firms. The selection of comparable funds is approved by the applicable investment steering committee (as described under the “Disclosure of Fund Portfolio Information” section) and is the same as the selection presented to the directors of the T. Rowe Price funds in their regular review of fund performance. Performance is primarily measured on a pretax basis, although tax efficiency is considered.

Compensation is viewed with a long-term time horizon. The more consistent a portfolio manager’s performance over time, the higher the compensation opportunity. The increase or decrease in a fund’s assets due to the purchase or sale of fund shares is not considered a material factor. In reviewing relative performance for fixed income funds, a fund’s expense ratio is usually taken into account. Contribution to T. Rowe Price’s overall investment process is an important consideration as well. Leveraging ideas and investment insights across applicable investment platforms; working effectively with and mentoring others; and other contributions to our clients, the firm, or our culture are important components of T. Rowe Price’s long-term success and are generally taken into consideration.

All employees of T. Rowe Price, including portfolio managers, can participate in a 401(k) plan sponsored by T. Rowe Price Group. In addition, all employees are eligible to purchase T. Rowe Price common stock through an employee stock purchase plan that features a limited corporate matching contribution. Eligibility for and participation in these plans is on the same basis for all employees. Finally, all vice presidents of T. Rowe Price Group, including all portfolio managers, receive supplemental medical/hospital reimbursement benefits and are eligible to participate in a supplemental savings plan sponsored by T. Rowe Price Group.

This compensation structure is used when evaluating the performance of all portfolios managed by the portfolio manager.

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. Portfolio managers at T. Rowe Price and its affiliates may manage multiple accounts. These accounts may include, among others, mutual funds, exchange-traded funds, separate accounts (assets managed on behalf of institutions such as pension funds, colleges and universities, and foundations), offshore funds, and common trust funds. T. Rowe Price also provides non-discretionary advice to institutional investors in the form of delivery of model portfolios. Portfolio managers make investment decisions for each portfolio based on the investment objectives, policies, practices, and other relevant investment considerations that they believe are applicable to that portfolio. Consequently, portfolio managers may purchase (or sell) securities for one portfolio and not another portfolio. T. Rowe Price and its affiliates have adopted brokerage and trade allocation policies and procedures that they believe are reasonably designed to address any potential conflicts associated with managing multiple accounts.

The T. Rowe Price funds may, from time to time, own shares of Morningstar, Inc. Morningstar is a provider of investment research to individual and institutional investors, and publishes ratings on funds, including the T. Rowe Price funds. T. Rowe Price acts as subadviser to two mutual funds offered by Morningstar. T. Rowe Price and its affiliates pay Morningstar for a variety of products and services. Morningstar may provide investment consulting and investment management services to clients of T. Rowe Price or its affiliates. The T. Rowe Price funds may generally not purchase shares of stock issued by T. Rowe Price Group, Inc. However, a T. Rowe Price Index fund is permitted to make such purchases to the extent T. Rowe Price Group, Inc. is represented in the benchmark index the fund is designed to track.

Additional potential conflicts may be inherent in our use of multiple strategies. For example, conflicts will arise in cases where different clients invest in different parts of an issuer’s capital structure, including circumstances in which one or more clients may own private securities or obligations of an issuer and other clients may own or seek to acquire securities of the same issuer. For example, a client may acquire a loan, loan participation or a loan assignment of a particular borrower in which one or more other clients have an equity investment or may invest in senior debt obligations of an issuer for one client and junior debt obligations or equity of the same issuer for another client. Similarly, if an issuer in which a client and one or more other clients directly or indirectly hold different classes of securities (or other assets, instruments or obligations issued by such issuer or underlying investments of such issuer) encounters

 48

financial problems, is involved in a merger or acquisition or a going private transaction, decisions over the terms of any workout or transaction will raise conflicts of interests. While it is appropriate for different clients to hold investments in different parts of the same issuer’s capital structure under normal circumstances, the interests of stockholders and debt holders may conflict, as the securities they hold will likely have different voting rights, dividend or repayment priorities or other features that could be in conflict with one another. Clients should be aware that conflicts will not necessarily be resolved in favor of their interests.

In some cases, T. Rowe Price or its affiliates may refrain from taking certain actions or making certain investments on behalf of clients in order to avoid or mitigate certain conflicts of interest or to prevent adverse regulatory actions or other implications for T. Rowe Price or its affiliates, or may sell investments for certain clients, in such case potentially disadvantaging the clients on whose behalf the actions are not taken, investments not made, or investments sold. In other cases, T. Rowe Price or its affiliates may take actions in order to mitigate legal risks to T. Rowe Price or its affiliates, even if disadvantageous to a client.

Conflicts such as those described above may also occur between clients on the one hand, and T. Rowe Price or its affiliates, on the other. These conflicts will not always be resolved in the favor of the client. In addition, conflicts may exist between different clients of T. Rowe Price or its affiliates. T. Rowe Price and one or more of its affiliates may operate autonomously from each other and may take actions that are adverse to other clients managed by an affiliate. In some cases, T. Rowe Price or its affiliates will have limited or no ability to mitigate those actions or address those conflicts, which could adversely affect T. Rowe Price or its affiliates’ clients. In addition, certain regulatory restrictions may prohibit clients of T. Rowe Price or its affiliates from investing in certain companies because of the applicability of certain laws and regulations to T. Rowe Price, its affiliates, or the T. Rowe Price funds. T. Rowe Price or its affiliates’ willingness to negotiate terms or take actions with respect to an investment for its clients may be directly or indirectly, constrained or impacted to the extent that an affiliate or the T. Rowe Price funds and/or their respective directors, partners, managers, members, officers, or personnel are also invested therein or otherwise have a connection to the subject investments.

Investment personnel are mindful of potentially conflicting interests of our clients with investments in different parts of an Issuer’s capital structure and take appropriate measures to ensure that the interests of all clients are fairly represented.

William Blair Investment Management, LLC (William Blair)

COMPENSATION. The compensation of William Blair portfolio managers is based on the firm's mission: “to achieve success for its clients.” The Fund's portfolio managers are partners of William Blair, and their compensation consists of a base salary, a share of the firm's profits and, in some instances, a discretionary bonus. Each portfolio manager’s compensation is determined by the head of William Blair's Investment Management Department, subject to the approval of the firm's Executive Committee. The base salary is fixed and each portfolio manager’s ownership stake can vary over time based upon the portfolio manager’s sustained contribution to the firm's revenue, profitability, long-term investment performance, intellectual capital and brand reputation. In addition, the discretionary bonus (if any) is based, in part, on the long-term investment performance, profitability and assets under management of all accounts managed by each portfolio manager, including the Fund.

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. Since the portfolio managers manage other accounts in addition to the Fund, conflicts of interest may arise in connection with the portfolio managers' management of a Portfolio's investments on the one hand and the investments of such other accounts on the other hand. However, William Blair has adopted policies and procedures designed to address such conflicts, including, among others, policies and procedures relating to allocation of investment opportunities, soft dollars and aggregation of trades. William Blair also has adopted a Code of Ethics which requires employees to act solely in the best interest of clients and imposes certain restrictions on the ability of its employees to engage in personal securities transactions for their own accounts.

OTHER SERVICE PROVIDERS

CUSTODIAN. The Bank of New York Mellon Corp. (BNY), 240 Greenwich St, New York, New York 10007 serves as Custodian for the Trust's portfolio securities and cash, and in that capacity, maintains certain financial accounting books and records pursuant to an agreement with the Trust. Subcustodians provide custodial services for any foreign assets held outside the United States.

INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, 300 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10017-6204 serves as the independent registered public accounting firm for the Portfolios for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2022, and in that capacity will audit the annual financial statements for the Portfolios for the next fiscal year. 

TRANSFER AGENT. The transfer agent for the Trust is Prudential Mutual Fund Services LLC (PMFS), 655 Broad Street, Newark, New Jersey 07102. PMFS is an affiliate of PGIM Investments. PMFS provides customary transfer agency services to the Trust, including the handling of shareholder communications, the processing of shareholder transactions, the maintenance of shareholder account records, the payment of dividends and distributions, and related functions. For these services, PMFS receives compensation from the Trust and is reimbursed for its transfer agent expenses which include an annual fee and certain out-of-pocket expenses including, but not limited to, postage, stationery, printing, allocable communication expenses and other costs.

49

BNY Mellon Asset Servicing (U.S.) Inc. (BNYAS) serves as sub-transfer agent to the Trust. PMFS has contracted with BNYAS, 301 Bellevue Parkway, Wilmington, Delaware 19809, to provide certain administrative functions to the Transfer Agent. PMFS compensates BNYAS for such services.

SECURITIES LENDING ACTIVITIES. Goldman Sachs Bank USA, doing business as Goldman Sachs Agency Lending (GSAL), serves as the securities lending agent for the Trust, and in that role administers the Portfolios’ securities lending program pursuant to the terms of a securities lending agency agreement entered into between the Trust on behalf of each Portfolio and GSAL.

As securities lending agent, GSAL is responsible for marketing to approved borrowers available securities from each Portfolio’s portfolio. GSAL is responsible for the administration and management of each Portfolio’s securities lending program, including the preparation and execution of a participant agreement with each borrower governing the terms and conditions of any securities loan, ensuring that securities loans are properly coordinated and documented with the Portfolio’s custodian, ensuring that loaned securities are daily valued and that the corresponding required cash collateral is delivered by the borrower(s), and arranging for the investment of cash collateral received from borrowers in accordance with each Portfolio’s investment guidelines.

GSAL receives as compensation for its services a portion of the amount earned by each Portfolio for lending securities. 

The table below sets forth, for each Portfolio’s most recently completed fiscal year, the Portfolio’s gross income received from securities lending activities, the fees and/or other compensation paid by the Portfolio for securities lending activities, and the net income earned by the Portfolio for securities lending activities. The table below also discloses any other fees or payments incurred by each Portfolio resulting from lending securities. 

Securities Lending Activities
	PSF Global Portfolio	PSF Mid-Cap Growth Portfolio	PSF Natural Resources Portfolio	PSF PGIM 50/50 Balanced Portfolio	PSF PGIM Flexible Managed Portfolio	PSF PGIM Government Income Portfolio	PSF PGIM High Yield Bond Portfolio
Gross Income from securities lending activities	$845,912	$1,101,008	$68,963	$1,217,118	$1,501,738	$9,982	$2,818,089
Fees and/or compensation for securities lending activities and related services
Fees paid to securities lending agent from a revenue split	$(13,073)	$(7,940)	$(2,381)	$(8,838)	$(9,135)	$(98)	$(28,088)
Fees paid for any cash collateral management service (including fees deducted from a pooled cash collateral investment vehicle)	$(29,437)	$(41,210)	$(13,548)	$(45,036)	$(55,166)	$(910)	$(119,874)
Administrative fees not included in revenue split	$—	$—	$—	$—	$—	$—	$—
Indemnification fee not included in revenue split	$—	$—	$—	$—	$—	$—	$—
Rebate (paid to borrower)	$(676,254)	$(972,517)	$(31,476)	$(1,073,768)	$(1,346,778)	$(8,060)	$(2,392,579)
Other fees not included in revenue split (specify)	$—	$—	$—	$—	$—	$—	$—
Aggregate fees/compensation for securities lending activities	$(718,764)	$(1,021,667)	$(47,405)	$(1,127,642)	$(1,411,079)	$(9,068)	$(2,540,541)
Net Income from securities lending activities	$127,148	$79,341	$21,558	$89,476	$90,659	$914	$277,548

 

Securities Lending Activities
	PSF PGIM Jennison Blend Portfolio	PSF PGIM Jennison Focused Blend Portfolio	PSF PGIM Jennison Growth Portfolio	PSF PGIM Jennison Value Portfolio	PSF PGIM Total Return Bond Portfolio	PSF Small-Cap Stock Index Portfolio	PSF Small-Cap Value Portfolio
Gross Income from securities lending activities	$2,402,750	$39,964	$2,686,667	$766,249	$588,408	$5,031,223	$624,100
Fees and/or compensation for securities lending activities and related services
Fees paid to securities lending agent from a revenue split	$(15,350)	$(365)	$(15,579)	$(4,899)	$(7,365)	$(39,347)	$(6,118)

 50

Securities Lending Activities
	PSF PGIM Jennison Blend Portfolio	PSF PGIM Jennison Focused Blend Portfolio	PSF PGIM Jennison Growth Portfolio	PSF PGIM Jennison Value Portfolio	PSF PGIM Total Return Bond Portfolio	PSF Small-Cap Stock Index Portfolio	PSF Small-Cap Value Portfolio
Fees paid for any cash collateral management service (including fees deducted from a pooled cash collateral investment vehicle)	$(101,528)	$(1,696)	$(97,766)	$(27,097)	$(28,941)	$(195,233)	$(24,738)
Administrative fees not included in revenue split	$—	$—	$—	$—	$—	$—	$—
Indemnification fee not included in revenue split	$—	$—	$—	$—	$—	$—	$—
Rebate (paid to borrower)	$(2,134,299)	$(34,352)	$(2,415,168)	$(685,582)	$(480,429)	$(4,392,692)	$(533,184)
Other fees not included in revenue split (specify)	$—	$—	$—	$—	$—	$—	$—
Aggregate fees/compensation for securities lending activities	$(2,251,177)	$(36,413)	$(2,528,513)	$(717,578)	$(516,735)	$(4,627,272)	$(564,040)
Net Income from securities lending activities	$151,573	$3,551	$158,154	$48,671	$71,673	$403,951	$60,060

 

Securities Lending Activities
	PSF Stock Index Portfolio
Gross Income from securities lending activities	$7,767,724
Fees and/or compensation for securities lending activities and related services
Fees paid to securities lending agent from a revenue split	$(53,419)
Fees paid for any cash collateral management service (including fees deducted from a pooled cash collateral investment vehicle)	$(283,450)
Administrative fees not included in revenue split	$—
Indemnification fee not included in revenue split	$—
Rebate (paid to borrower)	$(6,890,486)
Other fees not included in revenue split (specify)	$—
Aggregate fees/compensation for securities lending activities	$(7,227,355)
Net Income from securities lending activities	$540,369

INFORMATIOn ON DISTRIBUTION ARRANGEMENTS

DISTRIBUTOR. Prudential Investment Management Services LLC (PIMS) distributes the Trust's shares under a Distribution Agreement with the Trust. PIMS' principal business address is 655 Broad Street, Newark, New Jersey 07102.

The Trust has adopted a distribution plan under Rule 12b-1 of the 1940 Act covering Class II and Class III shares (each a Plan, and together, the Plans). These 12b-1 fees do not apply to Class I shares. The expenses incurred under the Plan include commissions and account servicing fees paid to, or on account of, insurers or their agents who sell Class II and Class III shares, advertising expenses, indirect and overhead costs of the Trust's underwriter associated with the sale of the applicable Class. Under the Plans, the Trust pays PIMS 0.25% of the average net assets of the applicable Class.

The Class II Plan and the Class III Plan will continue in effect from year to year, upon annual approval by a vote of the Trust's Board of Trustees, including a majority vote of the Trustees who are not interested persons of the Trust and who have no direct or indirect financial interest in the operation of the Plan or in any agreement related to the Plans (the 12b-1 Trustees). Each Plan may be terminated at any time, without penalty, by the vote of a majority of the 12b-1 Trustees or by the vote of the holders of a majority of the outstanding shares of the applicable Class. Each Plan may not be amended to materially increase the amounts payable thereunder without shareholder approval.

51

The chart below shows, for the last fiscal year, the amounts received by PIMS in distributing Class II and Class III shares of the Portfolios. PIMS spent all of the amounts received in the form of account servicing fees or other fees paid to, or on account of, insurers or their agents who sell Class II and/or Class III shares. 

Amounts Received by PIMS
Portfolio	$ Amount
PSF Global Portfolio	1,298
PSF Mid-Cap Growth Portfolio	2,894
PSF Natural Resources Portfolio	93,188
PSF PGIM 50/50 Balanced Portfolio	13,243
PSF PGIM Flexible Managed Portfolio	7,703
PSF PGIM Government Income Portfolio	4,122
PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio	228,569
PSF PGIM High Yield Bond Portfolio	19,804
PSF PGIM Jennison Blend Portfolio	6,589
PSF PGIM Jennison Focused Blend Portfolio	254,227
PSF PGIM Jennison Growth Portfolio	152,027
PSF PGIM Jennison Value Portfolio	28,037
PSF PGIM Total Return Bond Portfolio	19,346
PSF Small-Cap Stock Index Portfolio	19,904
PSF Stock Index Portfolio	53,341

*In order to support the income yield, PIMS has voluntarily undertaken to waive the distribution and service (12b-1) fees of the PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio Class III shares such that the 1-day annualized yield of the Portfolio (excluding capital gain or loss) does not fall below 0.00%. During the year ended December 31, 2022, PIMS waived $113,784 as a result of this voluntary agreement.

ADMINISTRATION AGREEMENT. The Trust has entered into an administration agreement with PGIM Investments with respect to Class II shares of each Portfolio. Pursuant to the agreement PGIM Investments is responsible for establishing and maintaining compliance procedures for multiple classes, the negotiation of participation agreements with participating insurers, establishing procedures and monitoring compliance with the mixed and shared funding order issued by the SEC, and performing other related services as specified in the agreement. In consideration of the services rendered by PGIM Investments under the agreement, the Trust pays PGIM Investments a fee at an annual rate of 0.15% of the average daily net assets of Class II shares of each Portfolio. The chart below sets forth the amount of administration fees paid by each Portfolio for the last three fiscal years: 

Administration Fees Paid by the Trust
	2022	2021	2020
PSF Mid-Cap Growth Portfolio	$284	$448	$548
PSF Natural Resources Portfolio	$50,315	$41,757	$56,351
PSF PGIM Jennison Blend Portfolio	$2,735	$3,281	$2,542
PSF PGIM Jennison Focused Blend Portfolio	$151,943	$197,787	$176,148
PSF PGIM Jennison Growth Portfolio	$82,554	$127,959	$108,657
PSF PGIM Jennison Value Portfolio	$14,287	$15,200	$11,887

PORTFOLIO TRANSACTIONS & BROKERAGE

The Trust has adopted a policy pursuant to which the Trust and its Investment Manager, subadvisers, and principal underwriter are prohibited from directly or indirectly compensating a broker-dealer for promoting or selling Trust shares by directing brokerage transactions to that broker. The Trust has adopted procedures for the purpose of deterring and detecting any violations of the policy. The policy permits the Trust, the Investment Manager, and the subadvisers to use selling brokers to execute transactions in portfolio securities so long as the selection of such selling brokers is the result of a decision that executing such transactions is in the best interest of the Trust and is not influenced by considerations about the sale of the Trust’s shares.

The Investment Manager is responsible for decisions to buy and sell securities, futures contracts and options on such securities and futures for the Trust, the selection of brokers, dealers and futures commission merchants to effect the transactions and the negotiation of brokerage commissions, if any. On a national securities exchange, broker-dealers may receive negotiated brokerage commissions on

 52

Trust portfolio transactions, including options, futures, and options on futures transactions and the purchase and sale of underlying securities upon the exercise of options. On a foreign securities exchange, commissions may be fixed. For purposes of this section, the term “Investment Manager” includes the investment subadvisers. Orders may be directed to any broker or futures commission merchant including, to the extent and in the manner permitted by applicable laws, affiliates of the Investment Manager and/or subadvisers (an affiliated broker). Brokerage commissions on US securities, options and futures exchanges or boards of trade are subject to negotiation between the Investment Manager and the broker or futures commission merchant.

In the over-the-counter market, securities are generally traded on a “net” basis with dealers acting as principal for their own accounts without a stated commission, although the price of the security usually includes a profit to the dealer. In underwritten offerings, securities are purchased at a fixed price which includes an amount of compensation to the underwriter, generally referred to as the underwriter's concession or discount. On occasion, certain money market instruments and US government agency securities may be purchased directly from the issuer, in which case no commissions or discounts are paid. The Trust will not deal with an affiliated broker in any transaction in which an affiliated broker acts as principal except in accordance with the rules of the SEC.

In placing orders for portfolio securities of the Trust, the Investment Manager’s overriding objective is to obtain the best possible combination of favorable price and efficient execution. The Investment Manager seeks to effect such transaction at a price and commission that provides the most favorable total cost of proceeds reasonably attainable in the circumstances. The factors that the Investment Manager may consider in selecting a particular broker, dealer or futures commission merchant (firms) are the Investment Manager’s knowledge of negotiated commission rates currently available and other current transaction costs; the nature of the portfolio transaction; the size of the transaction; the desired timing of the trade; the activity existing and expected in the market for the particular transaction; confidentiality; the execution, clearance and settlement capabilities of the firms; the availability of research and research related services provided through such firms; the Investment Manager’s knowledge of the financial stability of the firms; the Investment Manager’s knowledge of actual or apparent operational problems of firms; and the amount of capital, if any, that would be contributed by firms executing the transaction. Given these factors, the Trust may pay transaction costs in excess of that which another firm might have charged for effecting the same transaction.

Unless prohibited by applicable law, such as the European Union’s Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID II) as described below, when the Investment Manager selects a firm that executes orders or is a party to portfolio transactions, relevant factors taken into consideration are whether that firm has furnished research and research-related products and/or services, such as research reports, research compilations, statistical and economic data, computer data bases, quotation equipment and services, research-oriented computer software, hardware and services, reports concerning the performance of accounts, valuations of securities, investment related periodicals, investment seminars and other economic services and consultations. Such services are used in connection with some or all of the Investment Manager’s investment activities; some of such services, obtained in connection with the execution of transactions for one investment account, may be used in managing other accounts, and not all of these services may be used in connection with the Trust. The Investment Manager maintains an internal allocation procedure to identify those firms who have provided it with research and research-related products and/or services, and the amount that was provided, and to endeavor to direct sufficient commissions to them to ensure the continued receipt of those services that the Investment Manager believes provide a benefit to the Trust and its other clients. The Investment Manager makes a good faith determination that the research and/or service is reasonable in light of the type of service provided and the price and execution of the related portfolio transactions.

Under MiFID II, which became effective January 3, 2018, investment managers that are regulated under MiFID II, including certain investment managers, are no longer able to use soft dollars to pay for research from brokers.  Investment managers that are regulated under MiFID II are required to either pay for research out of their own resources or agree with clients to have research costs paid by clients through “research payment accounts” that are funded out of execution commissions or by a specific client research charge, provided that the payments for research are unbundled from the payments for execution.  MiFID II limits the ability of certain investment managers to pay for research using soft dollars in various circumstances.  MiFID II’s research requirements present various compliance and operational considerations for investment managers and broker-dealers serving clients in both the United States and the European Union, and the investment managers have adopted a variety of approaches to complying with the MiFID II requirements.

When the Investment Manager deems the purchase or sale of equities to be in the best interests of the Trust or its other clients, including Prudential, the Investment Manager may, but is under no obligation to, aggregate the transactions in order to obtain the most favorable price or lower brokerage commissions and efficient execution. In such event, allocation of the transactions, as well as the expenses incurred in the transaction, will be made by the Investment Manager in the manner it considers to be most equitable and consistent with its fiduciary obligations to its clients. The allocation of orders among firms and the commission rates paid are reviewed periodically by the Trust's Board Members. Portfolio securities may not be purchased from any underwriting or selling syndicate of which any affiliated broker, during the existence of the syndicate, is a principal underwriter (as defined in the 1940 Act), except in accordance

53

with rules of the SEC. This limitation, in the opinion of the Trust, will not significantly affect the Trust's ability to pursue its present investment objective. However, in the future, in other circumstances, the Trust may be at a disadvantage because of this limitation in comparison to other funds with similar objectives but not subject to such limitations.

Subject to the above considerations, an affiliated broker may act as a broker or futures commission merchant for the Trust. In order for an affiliated broker to effect any portfolio transactions for the Trust, the commissions, fees or other remuneration received by the affiliated broker must be reasonable and fair compared to the commissions, fees or other remuneration paid to other firms in connection with comparable transactions involving similar securities or futures being purchased or sold on an exchange or board of trade during a comparable period of time. This standard would allow the affiliated broker to receive no more than the remuneration which would be expected to be received by an unaffiliated firm in a commensurate arm's-length transaction. Furthermore, the Board Members of the Trust, including a majority of the non-interested Board Members, have adopted procedures which are reasonably designed to provide that any commissions, fees or other remuneration paid to the affiliated broker (or any affiliate) are consistent with the foregoing standard. In accordance with Section 11-(a) of the 1934 Act, an affiliated broker may not retain compensation for effecting transactions on a national securities exchange for a Portfolio unless the Portfolio or the Trust has expressly authorized the retention of such compensation. The affiliated broker must furnish to the Trust at least annually a statement setting forth the total amount of all compensation retained by it from transactions effected for the Trust during the applicable period. Brokerage transactions with an affiliated broker are also subject to such fiduciary standards as may be imposed upon the broker by applicable law. Transactions in options by the Trust will be subject to limitations established by each of the exchanges governing the maximum number of options which may be written or held by a single investor or group of investors acting in concert, regardless of whether the options are written or held on the same or different exchanges or are written or held in one or more accounts or through one or more brokers. Thus, the number of options which the Trust may write, or hold may be affected by options written or held by the Investment Manager and other investment advisory clients of the Investment Manager. An exchange may order the liquidation of positions found to be in excess of these limits, and it may impose certain other sanctions.

Each Portfolio of the Trust participates in a voluntary commission recapture program available through Capital Institutional Services, Inc. (CAPIS). Subadvisers that choose to participate in the program retain the responsibility to seek best execution and are under no obligation to place any specific trades with a broker available through the program (each, a designated broker). A portion of commissions on trades executed through designated brokers is rebated to a Portfolio as a credit that can be used by the Portfolio to pay expenses of the Portfolio.

The tables below set forth information concerning the payment of brokerage commissions by the Portfolios, including the amount of brokerage commissions paid to any affiliated broker for the three most recently completed fiscal years as applicable: 

Total Brokerage Commissions Paid by the Portfolios
	2022	2021	2020
PSF Global Portfolio	$250,866	$189,328	$280,789
PSF Mid-Cap Growth Portfolio	$64,623	$71,125	$88,340
PSF Natural Resources Portfolio	$187,434	$420,219	$801,368
PSF PGIM 50/50 Balanced Portfolio	$43,690	$57,900	$75,387
PSF PGIM Flexible Managed Portfolio	$243,015	$1,230,371	$4,777,836
PSF PGIM Government Income Portfolio	$18,848	$17,970	$18,902
PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio	N/A	N/A	N/A
PSF PGIM High Yield Bond Portfolio	$8,496	$10,165	$6,042
PSF PGIM Jennison Blend Portfolio	$642,244	$1,056,092	$2,012,840
PSF PGIM Jennison Focused Blend Portfolio	$43,220	$53,621	$117,720
PSF PGIM Jennison Growth Portfolio	$414,120	$485,799	$756,023
PSF PGIM Jennison Value Portfolio	$226,811	$256,952	$464,658
PSF PGIM Total Return Bond Portfolio	$65,514	$92,741	$98,475
PSF Small-Cap Stock Index Portfolio	$10,436	$11,494	$18,351
PSF Small-Cap Value Portfolio	$284,928	$305,282	$238,518
PSF Stock Index Portfolio	$20,601	$24,193	$27,325

 

 54

Brokerage Commissions Paid to Other Affiliated Brokers: Fiscal Year 2022
	Affiliated Broker	Commissions Paid	% of Commissions Paid	% of Dollar Amount of Transactions Effected Through Affiliated Broker
PSF Global Portfolio	William Blair	$6	0.00%	0.00%
PSF Small-Cap Value Portfolio	GSAM	$2,002	0.70%	0.00%

 

Brokerage Commissions Paid to Other Affiliated Brokers: Fiscal Year 2021
	Affiliated Broker	Commissions Paid	% of Commissions Paid	% of Dollar Amount of Transactions Effected Through Affiliated Broker
PSF Global Portfolio	William Blair	$567	0.30%	0.00%
PSF Small-Cap Value Portfolio	GSAM	$21	0.01%	0.00%

 

Brokerage Commissions Paid to Other Affiliated Brokers: Fiscal Year 2020
	Affiliated Broker	Commissions Paid	% of Commissions Paid	% of Dollar Amount of Transactions Effected Through Affiliated Broker
PSF Global Portfolio	William Blair	$1,031	0.37%	0.00%

The below table shows the Portfolio's portfolio turnover rates over the two most recently completed fiscal years: 

Portfolio Turnover Rate
Portfolio Name	2022	2021
PSF Global Portfolio	52%	21%
PSF Mid-Cap Growth Portfolio	43%	46%
PSF Natural Resources Portfolio	109%	79%
PSF PGIM 50/50 Balanced Portfolio	96%	69%
PSF PGIM Flexible Managed Portfolio	139%	119%
PSF PGIM Government Income Portfolio	177%	222%
PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio	N/A	N/A
PSF PGIM High Yield Bond Portfolio	33%	48%
PSF PGIM Jennison Blend Portfolio	22%	29%
PSF PGIM Jennison Focused Blend Portfolio	44%	66%
PSF PGIM Jennison Growth Portfolio	32%	40%
PSF PGIM Jennison Value Portfolio	23%	17%
PSF PGIM Total Return Bond Portfolio	182%	49%
PSF Small-Cap Stock Index Portfolio	17%	18%
PSF Small-Cap Value Portfolio	57%	71%
PSF Stock Index Portfolio	3%	2%

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

TRUST HISTORY. The Trust is a managed, open-end investment company organized as a Delaware statutory trust under Delaware law. The Trust was incorporated under Maryland law on November 15, 1982, and then was reorganized into a Delaware statutory trust as of January 2, 2006. 

Portfolio	Approximate Date of First Offering or Commencement of Operations
PSF Global Portfolio (Class I and Class III Shares)	September 19, 1988
PSF Mid-Cap Growth Portfolio (Class I, Class II, and Class III Shares)	September 22, 2000
PSF Natural Resources Portfolio (Class I, Class II, and Class III Shares)	May 1, 1988
PSF PGIM 50/50 Balanced Portfolio (Class I and Class III Shares)	May 13, 1983
PSF PGIM Flexible Managed Portfolio (Class I and Class III Shares)	May 13, 1983
PSF PGIM Government Income Portfolio (Class I and Class III Shares)	May 1, 1989
PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio (Class I and Class III Shares)	May 13, 1983
PSF PGIM High Yield Bond Portfolio (Class I and Class III Shares)	February 23, 1987
PSF PGIM Jennison Blend Portfolio (Class I, Class II, and Class III Shares)	May 13, 1983

55

Portfolio	Approximate Date of First Offering or Commencement of Operations
PSF PGIM Jennison Focused Blend Portfolio (Class I, Class II, and Class III Shares)	May 3, 1999
PSF PGIM Jennison Growth Portfolio (Class I, Class II, and Class III Shares)	April 25, 1995
PSF PGIM Jennison Value Portfolio (Class I, Class II, and Class III Shares)	February 19, 1988
PSF PGIM Total Return Bond Portfolio (Class I and Class III Shares)	May 13, 1983
PSF Small-Cap Stock Index Portfolio (Class I and Class III Shares)	April 25, 1995
PSF Small-Cap Value Portfolio (Class I Shares)	September 22, 2000

Note: Although each Portfolio of the Trust may offer Class I, Class II, and/or Class III shares, at present only certain Portfolios of the Trust offer Class II shares and Class III shares, as identified in the Trust’s Prospectus. Effective on or about September 12, 2016, the Money Market Portfolio was renamed as the Government Money Market Portfolio.

The following Portfolios have changed their name within the past five years: 

Portfolio	Approximate Effective Date of Name Change	Previous Portfolio Name
PSF Global Portfolio	April 26, 2021	Global Portfolio
PSF International Growth Portfolio	April 26, 2021	SP International Growth Portfolio
PSF Mid-Cap Growth Portfolio	April 26, 2021	SP Prudential U.S. Emerging Growth Portfolio
PSF Natural Resources Portfolio	April 26, 2021	Natural Resources Portfolio
PSF PGIM 50/50 Balanced Portfolio	April 26, 2021	Conservative Balanced Portfolio
PSF PGIM Flexible Managed Portfolio	April 26, 2021	Flexible Managed Portfolio
PSF PGIM Government Income Portfolio	April 26, 2021	Government Income Portfolio
PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio	April 26, 2021	Government Money Market Portfolio
PSF PGIM High Yield Bond Portfolio	April 26, 2021	High Yield Bond Portfolio
PSF PGIM Jennison Blend Portfolio	April 26, 2021	Equity Portfolio
PSF PGIM Jennison Focused Blend Portfolio	April 26, 2021	Jennison 20/20 Focus Portfolio
PSF PGIM Jennison Growth Portfolio	April 26, 2021	Jennison Portfolio
PSF PGIM Jennison Value Portfolio	April 26, 2021	Value Portfolio
PSF PGIM Total Return Bond Portfolio	April 26, 2021	Diversified Bond Portfolio
PSF Small-Cap Stock Index Portfolio	April 26, 2021	Small Capitalization Stock Portfolio
PSF Small-Cap Value Portfolio	April 26, 2021	SP Small-Cap Value Portfolio
PSF Stock Index Portfolio	April 26, 2021	Stock Index Portfolio

The following reorganizations or liquidations occurred within the past five years: 

Acquiring Portfolio	Approximate Effective Date	Target Portfolio
AST International Equity Portfolio (formerly, AST International Growth Portfolio)*	March 13, 2023	PSF International Growth Portfolio

* The Portfolio is a series of the Advanced Series Trust.

DESCRIPTION OF SHARES AND ORGANIZATION.

The Trust’s Agreement and Declaration of Trust, which governs certain Trust matters, permits the Trust’s Board of Trustees to issue multiple classes of shares, and within each class, an unlimited number of shares of beneficial interest. Each class of shares of beneficial interest of each Portfolio represents an interest in the same assets of the Portfolio and is identical in all respects except that: (1) Class I shares are not subject to distribution fees or administration fees; (2) Class II shares are subject to distribution fees and administration fees; (3) Class III shares are subject to distribution fees; (4) each share class has exclusive voting rights on any matter submitted to shareholders that relates solely to its arrangement and has separate voting rights on any matter submitted to shareholders in which the interest of one class differs from the interests of any class; and (5) each share class is offered to a limited group of investors.

The shares of beneficial interest of each class, when issued, will be fully paid and non-assessable, will have no conversion or similar rights, and will be freely transferable. Each share of beneficial interest of each class is equal as to earnings, assets, and voting privileges. Class II bears the expenses related to the distribution and administration of its shares. In the event of liquidation, each share of a Portfolio is entitled to its portion of all of the Portfolio’s assets after all debts and expenses of the Portfolio have been paid. Since Class II shares bear distribution and administration expenses, the liquidation proceeds to Class II shareholders will be lower than the liquidation

 56

proceeds to Class I shareholders, whose shares are not subject to any distribution fees or administration fees. Class III bears the expenses related to the distribution of its shares. Since Class III shares bear distribution expenses, the liquidation proceeds to Class III shareholders will be lower than the liquidation proceeds to Class I shareholders, whose shares are not subject to any distribution fees.

From time to time, Prudential and/or its insurance company affiliates have purchased shares of the Trust to provide initial capital and to enable the Portfolios to avoid unrealistically poor investment performance that might otherwise result because the amounts available for investment are too small. Prudential will not redeem any of its shares until a Portfolio is large enough so that redemption will not have an adverse effect upon investment performance. Prudential will vote its shares in the same manner and in the same proportion as the shares held by the separate accounts that invest in the Trust, which in turn, are generally voted in accordance with instructions from Contract owners.

PRINCIPAL SHAREHOLDERS

To the knowledge of the Trust, as of March 20, 2023 the following persons/entities (i) owned beneficially or of record 5% or more of any class of a Portfolio’s outstanding shares (ii) or owned beneficially or of record of more than 25% of the voting securities of a Portfolio. As of March 20, 2023, the Trustees and Officers of the Trust, as a group, owned less than 1% of each class of a Portfolio’s outstanding shares of beneficial interest of the Trust. 

Portfolio Name	Shareholder Name and Address	Share Class	No. Shares	% of Portfolio
PSF Global Portfolio	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	4,848,334.778	18.98%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PRU LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	17,327,600.966	67.82%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	III	11,977.418	88.86%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLNJ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	III	1,501.022	11.14%
PSF Mid-Cap Growth Portfolio	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	1	2,860,516.261	20.70%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	1	9,601,118.573	69.47%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLNJ LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	1,086,304.415	7.86%
	MIDLAND NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE CO SEPERATE ACCOUNT C 4350 WESTOWN PKWY WEST DES MOINES IA 50266-1144	II	5,850.810	77.07%

57

Portfolio Name	Shareholder Name and Address	Share Class	No. Shares	% of Portfolio
	GE LIFE AND ANNUITY ASSURANCE COMP. ATTN VARIABLE ACCOUNTING 6610 W BROAD ST BLDG 3,5TH FLOOR RICHMOND VA 23230-1702	II	715.445	9.42%
	SEPARATE ACCOUNT A OF PACIFIC LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY 700 NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE PO BOX 9000 NEWPORT BEACH CA 926600000	II	1,025.642	13.51%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	III	39,346.994	76.47%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLNJ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	III	12,104.389	23.53%
PSF Natural Resources Portfolio	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	2,320,363.039	19.92%
	PRU ANNUITIES INC PRU ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	1,109,752.413	9.53%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PRU LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	7,718,596.113	66.25%
	TIAA-CREF LIFE SEPARATE ACCOUNT VA-1 OF TIAA-CREF LIFE INSUR. CO MAIL CODE E3/N6 8500 ANDREW CARNEGIE BLVD CHARLOTTE NC 28262-8500	II	80,523.965	9.83%
	AXA EQUITABLE LIFE SEPARATE ACCOUNT FP C/O BRIAN WALSH 1290 AVENUE OF THE AMERICAS NEW YORK NY 10104-0105	II	122,499.885	14.96%
	GE LIFE AND ANNUITY ASSURANCE COMP. ATTN VARIABLE ACCOUNTING 6610 W BROAD ST BLDG 3,5TH FLOOR RICHMOND VA 23230-1702	II	532,635.238	65.04%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	III	104,741.966	79.79%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLNJ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	III	26,529.150	20.21%

 58

Portfolio Name	Shareholder Name and Address	Share Class	No. Shares	% of Portfolio
PSF PGIM 50/50 Balanced Portfolio	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	23,144,817.478	34.16%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLNJ LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	4,832,653.891	7.13%
	PRU ANNUITIES INC PRU ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	5,438,449.003	8.03%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PRU LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	31,923,452.495	47.11%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	III	158,344.568	79.75%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLNJ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	III	40,211.214	20.25%
PSF PGIM Flexible Managed Portfolio	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	45,110,869.570	43.13%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLNJ LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	10,572,964.459	10.11%
	PRU ANNUITIES INC PRU ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	5,755,985.652	5.50%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PRU LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	40,631,330.380	38.85%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	III	5,010,138.058	85.52%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLNJ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	III	848,421.185	14.48%

59

Portfolio Name	Shareholder Name and Address	Share Class	No. Shares	% of Portfolio
PSF PGIM Government Income Portfolio	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	6,306,930.634	42.98%
	PRU ANNUITIES INC PRU ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	1,366,905.950	9.32%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PRU LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	5,753,502.107	39.21%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	III	116,272.060	45.61%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLNJ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	III	138,649.456	54.39%
PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	7,342,110.902	8.38%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	60,564,612.895	69.09%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLNJ LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	4,787,737.822	5.46%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PRU LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	9,549,479.590	10.89%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	III	12,131,549.141	84.45%
	FORTITUDE LIFE INSURANCE & ANNUITY TEN EXCHANGE PLACE SUITE 2210 JERSEY CITY NJ 07302	III	2,220,567.466	15.46%
PSF PGIM High Yield Bond Portfolio	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	13,265,327.924	16.67%

 60

Portfolio Name	Shareholder Name and Address	Share Class	No. Shares	% of Portfolio
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	31,518,810.025	39.61%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLNJ LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	4,844,746.753	6.09%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PRU LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	24,314,292.604	30.55%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	III	1,197,050.461	72.15%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLNJ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	III	462,002.485	27.85%
PSF PGIM Jennison Blend Portfolio	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	17,312,323.325	28.80%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLNJ LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	4,579,992.417	7.62%
	PRU ANNUITIES INC PRU ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	4,074,505.961	6.78%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PRU LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	30,304,643.033	50.41%
	GREAT WEST LIFE & ANNUITY INS CO FBO SCHWAB ANNUITIES 8515 E ORCHARD RD 2T2 GREENWOOD VILLAGE CO 80111	II	20,412.130	90.48%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	III	9,508.110	69.31%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLNJ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	III	4,210.846	30.69%

61

Portfolio Name	Shareholder Name and Address	Share Class	No. Shares	% of Portfolio
PSF PGIM Jennison Focused Blend Portfolio	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	597,773.031	37.08%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	790,015.061	49.00%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLNJ LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	101,236.157	6.28%
	TIAA-CREF LIFE SEPARATE ACCOUNT VA-1 OF TIAA-CREF LIFE INSUR. CO MAIL CODE E3/N6 8500 ANDREW CARNEGIE BLVD CHARLOTTE NC 28262-8500	II	515,421.695	24.01%
	THE OHIO NATIONAL LIFE INS CO FBO ITS SEPARATE ACCOUNTS PO BOX 237 CINCINNATI OH 452010237	II	1,439,373.153	67.06%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	III	8,760.106	85.59%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLNJ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	III	1,475.307	14.41%
PSF PGIM Jennison Growth Portfolio	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	2,220,730.128	9.81%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	7,156,580.782	31.62%
	PRU ANNUITIES INC PRU ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	1,367,707.290	6.04%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PRU LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	10,516,808.764	46.47%
	THE OHIO NATIONAL LIFE INS CO FBO ITS SEPARATE ACCOUNTS PO BOX 237 CINCINNATI OH 452010237	II	383,078.889	79.56%

 62

Portfolio Name	Shareholder Name and Address	Share Class	No. Shares	% of Portfolio
	GE LIFE AND ANNUITY ASSURANCE COMP. ATTN VARIABLE ACCOUNTING 6610 W BROAD ST BLDG 3,5TH FLOOR RICHMOND VA 23230-1702	II	71,998.774	14.95%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	III	48,503.804	69.48%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLNJ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	III	21,310.420	30.52%
PSF PGIM Jennison Value Portfolio	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	3,347,919.475	10.42%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	7,700,110.310	23.96%
	PRU ANNUITIES INC PRU ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	2,898,768.011	9.02%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PRU LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	16,529,824.500	51.43%
	TIAA-CREF LIFE SEPARATE ACCOUNT VA-1 OF TIAA-CREF LIFE INSUR. CO MAIL CODE E3/N6 8500 ANDREW CARNEGIE BLVD CHARLOTTE NC 28262-8500	II	189,327.278	87.83%
	TALCOTT RESOLUTION LIFE AND ANNUITY INSURANCE COMPANY PO BOX 5051 HARTFORD CT 06102-5051	II	12,124.026	5.62%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	III	36,448.863	68.08%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLNJ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	III	17,085.724	31.92%
PSF PGIM Total Return Bond Portfolio	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	6,732,103.272	8.30%

63

Portfolio Name	Shareholder Name and Address	Share Class	No. Shares	% of Portfolio
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	35,011,601.807	43.18%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLNJ LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	9,755,772.368	12.03%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PRU LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	23,066,758.051	28.45%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	III	504,960.525	67.75%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLNJ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	III	240,421.308	32.25%
PSF Small-Cap Stock Index Portfolio	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	1,180,695.374	7.49%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	3,571,631.795	22.67%
	PRU ANNUITIES INC PRU ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	1,601,391.556	10.16%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PRU LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	8,677,225.494	55.08%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	III	146,357.364	80.64%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLNJ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	III	35,146.043	19.36%
PSF Small-Cap Value Portfolio	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	1,584,303.895	17.29%

 64

Portfolio Name	Shareholder Name and Address	Share Class	No. Shares	% of Portfolio
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	6,632,393.586	72.36%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLNJ LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	747,390.992	8.15%
PSF Stock Index Portfolio	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	3,776,459.494	5.90%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	23,962,502.398	37.44%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLNJ LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	13,825,981.503	21.60%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PRU LIFE ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	I	17,011,726.944	26.58%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAZ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	III	220,988.525	77.73%
	PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLNJ ANNUITY ATTN SEPARATE ACCOUNTS 7TH FLOOR 213 WASHINGTON ST NEWARK NJ 07102-0000	III	63,331.070	22.27%

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

The financial statements of the Trust for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2022 have been incorporated into this SAI by reference to the annual reports to shareholders. Such financial statements have been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, whose reports thereon are included in the Trust’s annual reports to shareholders. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP’s principal business address is 300 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10017-6204.

The Trust's annual reports for the year ended December 31, 2022 can be obtained without charge by calling (800) 778-2255 or by writing to the Trust at 655 Broad Street, Newark, New Jersey 07102.

65

PART II

INVESTMENT RISKS & CONSIDERATIONS

Set forth below are descriptions of some of the types of investments and investment strategies that a Portfolio may use, and the risks and considerations associated with those investments and investment strategies. A Portfolio may invest in the types of investments and investment strategies that are consistent with its investment objective, policies and any limitations described in the prospectus and in the SAI.

With respect to the PSF PGIM Total Return Bond, PSF PGIM Government Income and PSF PGIM High Yield Bond Portfolios, investments in each of credit default swaps, total return and index swaps, or options on swaps are limited to 15% of such Portfolio's total assets.

Certain Portfolios may use up to 30% of their investable assets for reverse repurchase agreements and dollar rolls. The PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio and the money market sub-portion of any balanced Portfolio may use up to 10% of its investable assets for reverse repurchase agreements.

Certain Portfolios also are permitted to invest up to 15% of their assets in credit-related asset-backed securities.

No more than 25% of any Portfolio's net assets (5% of total assets for PSF Small-Cap Stock Index Portfolio and PSF Stock Index Portfolio) will be, when added together: (1) deposited as collateral for the obligation to replace securities borrowed in connection with short sales and (2) segregated in accounts in connection with short sales.

Each Portfolio, other than the PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio, may hold up to 15% of its net assets in illiquid investments. The PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio may hold up to 5% of its net assets in illiquid investments.

As explained in the prospectus, the PSF Stock Index Portfolio seeks to track the performance of the S&P 500 Index and the PSF Small-Cap Stock Index Portfolio seeks to track the performance of the S&P SmallCap Index. The Portfolios will be as fully invested in the S&P Index's stocks as is feasible in light of cash flow patterns and the cash requirements for efficiently investing in a unit of the basket of stocks comprising the S&P 500 and S&P SmallCap Indexes, respectively. When the Portfolios do have short-term investments, they may purchase stock index futures contracts in an effort to have the Portfolio better follow the performance of a fully invested portfolio. When a Portfolio purchases stock index futures contracts, an amount of cash and cash equivalents, equal to either the market value or the initial margin requirement of the futures contracts, will be deposited in a segregated account with the Portfolio's custodian and/or in a margin account with a broker to collateralize the position.

As an alternative to the purchase of a stock index futures contract, a Portfolio may construct synthetic positions involving options on stock indexes and options on stock index futures that are equivalent to such a long futures position. In particular, a Portfolio may utilize “put/call combinations” as synthetic long stock index futures positions. A put/call combination is the purchase of a call and the sale of a put at the same time with the same strike price and maturity. It is equivalent to a forward position and, if it settled every day, is equivalent to a long futures position. When a Portfolio purchases stock index futures contracts, an amount equal to the initial margin requirement of the futures contracts, will be deposited in a segregated account with the Portfolios' custodian and/or in a margin account with a broker, and the remaining cash and/or cash equivalents equal to the market value of the futures will be held in other accounts.

The PSF PGIM Jennison Blend Portfolio, the PSF Natural Resources Portfolio and the PSF PGIM Jennison Growth Portfolio may only engage in short sales against-the-box.

ASSET-BACKED SECURITIES. Certain Portfolios may invest in asset-backed securities. Asset-backed securities directly or indirectly represent a participation interest in, or are secured by and payable from, a stream of payments generated by particular assets such as motor vehicle or credit card receivables. Payments of principal and interest may be guaranteed up to certain amounts and for a certain time period by a letter of credit issued by a financial institution unaffiliated with the entities issuing the securities. Asset-backed securities may be classified as pass-through certificates or collateralized obligations.

Pass-through certificates are asset-backed securities which represent an undivided fractional ownership interest in an underlying pool of assets. Pass-through certificates usually provide for payments of principal and interest received to be passed through to their holders, usually after deduction for certain costs and expenses incurred in administering the pool. Because pass-through certificates represent an ownership interest in the underlying assets, the holders thereof bear directly the risk of any defaults by the obligors on the underlying assets not covered by any credit support.

 66

Asset-backed securities issued in the form of debt instruments, also known as collateralized obligations, are generally issued as the debt of a special purpose entity organized solely for the purpose of owning such assets and issuing such debt. Such assets are most often trade, credit card or automobile receivables. The assets collateralizing such asset-backed securities are pledged to a trustee or custodian for the benefit of the holders thereof. Such issuers generally hold no assets other than those underlying the asset-backed securities and any credit support provided. As a result, although payments on such asset-backed securities are obligations of the issuers, in the event of defaults on the underlying assets not covered by any credit support, the issuing entities are unlikely to have sufficient assets to satisfy their obligations on the related asset-backed securities.

Business Development Companies (BDCs). There are certain risks inherent in investing in BDCs, whose principal business is to invest in and lend capital to privately-held companies. The 1940 Act imposes certain restraints upon the operations of BDCs. For example, BDCs are required to invest at least 70% of their total assets primarily in securities of private companies or thinly-traded US public companies, cash, cash equivalents, US Government securities and high-quality debt instruments that will mature in one year or less. Generally, little public information exists for private and thinly-traded companies. With investments in debt instruments, there is a risk that the issuer may default on its payments or declare bankruptcy. Additionally, a BDC may incur indebtedness only in amounts such that the BDC’s asset coverage, subject to certain conditions, equals at least 150% after such incurrence. These limitations on asset mix and leverage may prohibit the way that the BDC raises capital. BDCs generally invest in less-mature private companies, which involve greater risk than well-established publicly-traded companies.

Investments made by BDCs generally are subject to legal and other restrictions on resale and, otherwise, are less liquid than publicly-traded securities. The illiquidity of these investments may make it difficult to sell such investments if the need arises, and if there is a need for a BDC in which a Portfolio invests to liquidate its portfolio quickly, it may realize a loss on its investments. BDCs may have relatively concentrated investment portfolios, consisting of a relatively small number of holdings. A consequence of this limited number of investments is that the aggregate returns realized may be disproportionately impacted by the poor performance of a small number of investments, or even a single investment, particularly if a company experiences the need to write down the value of an investment, which tends to increase volatility and result in higher risk. Since BDCs rely on access to short-term money markets, longer-term capital markets and the bank markets as a significant source of liquidity, to the extent that BDCs are not able to access capital at competitive rates, their ability to implement certain financial strategies will be negatively impacted. Market disruptions, including a downturn in capital markets in general, or a downgrade of the credit rating of a BDC held by a Portfolio may increase the cost of borrowing to that company, thereby adversely impacting the Portfolio’s returns. Credit downgrades also may result in requirements on a company to provide additional support in the form of letters of credit or cash or other collateral to various counterparties.

Since many of the assets of BDCs do not have readily ascertainable market values, such assets are most often recorded at fair value, in good faith, in accordance with valuation procedures adopted by such companies. Such determination requires that judgment be applied to the specific facts and circumstances. Due to the absence of a readily ascertainable market value, and because of the inherent uncertainty of fair valuation, fair value of a BDC’s investments may differ significantly from the values that would be reflected if the securities were traded in an established market, potentially resulting in material differences between a BDC’s NAV per share and its market value.

Investment advisers to BDCs may be entitled to compensation based on the BDC’s performance, which may result in riskier or more speculative investments in an effort to maximize incentive compensation and higher fees. In addition, to the extent that a Portfolio invests a portion of its assets in BDCs, a shareholder in the Portfolio not only will bear his or her proportionate share of the expenses of the Portfolio, but also will bear indirectly the expenses of the BDCs.

Credit-Related Asset-Backed Securities. This type of asset-backed security is collateralized by a basket of underlying corporate bonds or other securities, including junk bonds. Unlike the traditional asset-backed securities described above, these asset-backed securities often do have the benefit of a security interest or ownership interest in the related collateral. With a credit-related asset-backed security, the underlying bonds have the risk of being prepaid prior to maturity. Although generally not pre-payable at any time, some of the underlying bonds may have call options, while others may have maturity dates that are earlier than the asset-backed security itself. As with traditional asset-backed securities described above, the Portfolio bears the risk of loss of the resulting increase or decrease in yield to maturity after a prepayment of an underlying bond. However, the primary risk associated with credit-related asset-backed securities is the potential loss of principal associated with losses on the underlying bonds.

Collateralized Loan Obligations (CLOs). This type of asset-backed security is a trust typically collateralized by a pool of loans, which may include, among others, domestic and foreign senior secured loans, senior unsecured loans, and subordinate corporate loans, as well as loans rated below investment grade or equivalent unrated loans. The risks of an investment in a CLO depend largely on the quality of the underlying loans and may be classified by the Portfolio as illiquid investments.

67

For credit-related asset-backed securities and CLOs, the cash flows from the trust are split into two or more portions, called tranches, varying in risk and yield. The riskiest portion is the “equity” tranche, which bears the bulk of defaults from the bonds or loans in the trust and serves to protect the other, more senior tranches from default in all but the most severe circumstances. Since it is partially protected from defaults, a senior tranche from a trust typically has higher ratings and lower yields than their underlying securities, and can be rated investment grade. Despite the protection from the equity tranche, other tranches can experience substantial losses due to actual defaults, increased sensitivity to defaults due to collateral default and disappearance of protecting tranches, market anticipation of defaults, as well as aversion to particular underlying assets as a class.

BORROWING AND LEVERAGE. A Portfolio may borrow up to 33 1∕3% of the value of its total assets (calculated at the time of the borrowing). The Portfolio may pledge up to 33 1∕3% of its total assets to secure these borrowings. If a Portfolio's asset coverage for borrowings falls below 300%, the Portfolio will take prompt action to reduce its borrowings. If a Portfolio borrows to invest in securities, any investment gains made on the securities in excess of interest paid on the borrowing will cause the net asset value of the shares to rise faster than would otherwise be the case. On the other hand, if the investment performance of the additional securities purchased fails to cover their cost (including any interest paid on the money borrowed) to the Portfolio, the net asset value of the Portfolio's shares will decrease faster than would otherwise be the case. This is the speculative factor known as “leverage.”

A Portfolio may borrow from time to time, at the investment subadviser's discretion, to take advantage of investment opportunities, when yields on available investments exceed interest rates and other expenses of related borrowing, or when, in the investment subadviser's opinion, unusual market conditions otherwise make it advantageous for the Portfolio to increase its investment capacity. A Portfolio will only borrow when there is an expectation that it will benefit a Portfolio after taking into account considerations such as interest income and possible losses upon liquidation. Borrowing by a Portfolio creates an opportunity for increased net income but, at the same time, creates risks, including risks associated with leveraging such as the risks that leverage may exaggerate changes in the net asset value of Portfolio shares and in the yield on a Portfolio. A Portfolio may borrow through forward rolls, dollar rolls or reverse repurchase agreements, although no Portfolio currently has any intention of doing so. If a Portfolio elects to treat reverse repurchase agreements as derivative transactions, it shall comply with the requirements of Rule 18f-4 under the 1940 Act rather than being subject to the 33 1/3% limit.

CONVERTIBLE SECURITIES. Convertible securities entitle the holder to receive interest payments paid on corporate debt securities or the dividend preference on a preferred stock until such time as the convertible security matures or is redeemed or until the holder elects to exercise the conversion privilege. The characteristics of convertible securities make them appropriate investments for an investment company seeking a high total return from capital appreciation and investment income. These characteristics include the potential for capital appreciation as the value of the underlying common stock increases, the relatively high yield received from dividend or interest payments as compared to common stock dividends, and decreased risks of decline in value relative to the underlying common stock due to their fixed-income nature. As a result of the conversion feature, however, the interest rate or dividend preference on a convertible security is generally less than would be the case if the securities were issued in nonconvertible form.

In analyzing convertible securities, the subadviser will consider both the yield on the convertible security relative to its credit quality and the potential capital appreciation that is offered by the underlying common stock, among other things.

Convertible securities are issued and traded in a number of securities markets. Even in cases where a substantial portion of the convertible securities held by a Portfolio are denominated in US dollars, the underlying equity securities may be quoted in the currency of the country where the issuer is domiciled. With respect to convertible securities denominated in a currency different from that of the underlying equity securities, the conversion price may be based on a fixed exchange rate established at the time the security is issued. As a result, fluctuations in the exchange rate between the currency in which the debt security is denominated and the currency in which the share price is quoted will affect the value of the convertible security. As described below, a Portfolio is authorized to enter into foreign currency hedging transactions in which it may seek to reduce the effect of such fluctuations.

Apart from currency considerations, the value of convertible securities is influenced by both the yield of nonconvertible securities of comparable issuers and by the value of the underlying common stock. The value of a convertible security viewed without regard to its conversion feature (i.e., strictly on the basis of its yield) is sometimes referred to as its “investment value.” To the extent interest rates change, the investment value of the convertible security typically will fluctuate. However, at the same time, the value of the convertible security will be influenced by its “conversion value,” which is the market value of the underlying common stock that would be obtained if the convertible security were converted. Conversion value fluctuates directly with the price of the underlying common stock. If, because of a low price of the common stock the conversion value is substantially below the investment value of the convertible security, the price of the convertible security is governed principally by its investment value.

 68

To the extent the conversion value of a convertible security increases to a point that approximates or exceeds its investment value, the price of the convertible security will be influenced principally by its conversion value. A convertible security will sell at a premium over the conversion value to the extent investors place value on the right to acquire the underlying common stock while holding a fixed-income security. The yield and conversion premium of convertible securities issued in Japan and the Euromarket are frequently determined at levels that cause the conversion value to affect their market value more than the securities' investment value.

Holders of convertible securities generally have a claim on the assets of the issuer prior to the common stockholders but may be subordinated to other debt securities of the same issuer. A convertible security may be subject to redemption at the option of the issuer at a price established in the charter provision, indenture or other governing instrument pursuant to which the convertible security was issued. If a convertible security held by a Portfolio is called for redemption, the Portfolio will be required to redeem the security, convert it into the underlying common stock, or sell it to a third party. Certain convertible debt securities may provide a put option to the holder, which entitles the holder to cause the security to be redeemed by the issuer at a premium over the stated principal amount of the debt security under certain circumstances.

Synthetic convertible securities may be either (i) a debt security or preferred stock that may be convertible only under certain contingent circumstances or that may pay the holder a cash amount based on the value of shares of underlying common stock partly or wholly in lieu of a conversion right (a Cash-Settled Convertible), (ii) a combination of separate securities chosen by the subadviser in order to create the economic characteristics of a convertible security, i.e., a fixed income security paired with a security with equity conversion features, such as an option or warrant (a Manufactured Convertible) or (iii) a synthetic security manufactured by another party.

Synthetic convertible securities may include either Cash-Settled Convertibles or Manufactured Convertibles. Cash-Settled Convertibles are instruments that are created by the issuer and have the economic characteristics of traditional convertible securities but may not actually permit conversion into the underlying equity securities in all circumstances. As an example, a private company may issue a Cash-Settled Convertible that is convertible into common stock only if the company successfully completes a public offering of its common stock prior to maturity and otherwise pays a cash amount to reflect any equity appreciation. Manufactured Convertibles are created by the subadviser by combining separate securities that possess one of the two principal characteristics of a convertible security, i.e., fixed income (fixed income component) or a right to acquire equity securities (convertibility component). The fixed income component is achieved by investing in nonconvertible fixed income securities, such as nonconvertible bonds, preferred stocks and money market instruments. The convertibility component is achieved by investing in call options, warrants, or other securities with equity conversion features (equity features) granting the holder the right to purchase a specified quantity of the underlying stocks within a specified period of time at a specified price or, in the case of a stock index option, the right to receive a cash payment based on the value of the underlying stock index.

A Manufactured Convertible differs from traditional convertible securities in several respects. Unlike a traditional convertible security, which is a single security having a unitary market value, a Manufactured Convertible is comprised of two or more separate securities, each with its own market value. Therefore, the total “market value” of such a Manufactured Convertible is the sum of the values of its fixed-income component and its convertibility component.

More flexibility is possible in the creation of a Manufactured Convertible than in the purchase of a traditional convertible security. Because many corporations have not issued convertible securities, the subadviser may combine a fixed income instrument and an equity feature with respect to the stock of the issuer of the fixed income instrument to create a synthetic convertible security otherwise unavailable in the market. The subadviser may also combine a fixed income instrument of an issuer with an equity feature with respect to the stock of a different issuer when the subadviser believes such a Manufactured Convertible would better promote a Portfolio's objective than alternate investments. For example, the subadviser may combine an equity feature with respect to an issuer's stock with a fixed income security of a different issuer in the same industry to diversify the Portfolio's credit exposure, or with a US Treasury instrument to create a Manufactured Convertible with a higher credit profile than a traditional convertible security issued by that issuer. A Manufactured Convertible also is a more flexible investment in that its two components may be purchased separately and, upon purchasing the separate securities, “combined” to create a Manufactured Convertible. For example, a Portfolio may purchase a warrant for eventual inclusion in a Manufactured Convertible while postponing the purchase of a suitable bond to pair with the warrant pending development of more favorable market conditions.

The value of a Manufactured Convertible may respond differently to certain market fluctuations than would a traditional convertible security with similar characteristics. For example, in the event a Portfolio created a Manufactured Convertible by combining a short-term US Treasury instrument and a call option on a stock, the Manufactured Convertible would likely outperform a traditional convertible of similar maturity that is convertible into that stock during periods when Treasury instruments outperform corporate fixed income securities and underperform during periods when corporate fixed-income securities outperform Treasury instruments.

69

CORPORATE LOANS. Commercial banks and other financial institutions make corporate loans to companies that need capital to grow or restructure. Borrowers generally pay interest on corporate loans at rates that change in response to changes in market interest rates such as the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR), the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (SOFR), or the prime rate of US banks. These types of loans are sometimes called “floating rate loans” because the interest rates move up or down (i.e., they “float”) in response to changes in market interest rates. The interest rate payable on some floating rate loans may be subject to an upper limit (a “cap”) or lower (a “floor”) that prevents the relevant benchmark rate from adjusting above or below a specified level.

Because of their structure, the value of corporate loan investments is generally less responsive to shifts in market interest rates. Because the trading market for corporate loans is less developed than the secondary market for bonds and notes, a Portfolio may experience difficulties from time to time in selling its corporate loans. Borrowers frequently provide collateral to secure repayment of these obligations. Leading financial institutions often act as agent for a broader group of lenders, generally referred to as a “syndicate.” The syndicate’s agent arranges the corporate loans, holds collateral and accepts payments of principal and interest. If the agent develops financial problems, a Portfolio may not recover its investment, or there might be a delay in the Portfolio’s recovery. By investing in a corporate loan, a Portfolio becomes a member of the syndicate.

In market conditions where short-term interest rates are particularly low, certain floating rate loans may be issued with a floor that prevents the relevant benchmark rate from adjusting below a specified level. For these floating rate loans, if downward market movements of the benchmark rate would, absent this feature, cause the benchmark rate to fall below the floor, the benchmark rates of these floating rate loans become fixed at the applicable minimum floor level until short-term interest rates (and therefore the benchmark rate) rise above that level. Although this feature is intended to result in these floating rate loans yielding more than they otherwise would when short-term interest rates are low, the feature might also result in the secondary market prices of these floating rate loans becoming more sensitive to changes in interest rates should short-term interest rates rise.

As in the case of junk bonds, the corporate loans in which a Portfolio may invest can be expected to provide higher yields than higher-rated fixed income securities but may be subject to greater risk of loss of principal and income. There are, however, some significant differences between corporate loans and junk bonds. Corporate loans are frequently secured by pledges of liens and security interests in the assets of the borrower, and the holders of corporate loans are frequently the beneficiaries of debt service subordination provisions imposed on the borrower’s bondholders. These arrangements are designed to give corporate loan investors preferential treatment over junk bond investors in the event of a deterioration in the credit quality of the issuer. Even when these arrangements exist, however, there can be no assurance that the principal and interest owed on the corporate loans will be repaid in full. Corporate loans generally bear interest at rates set at a margin above a generally recognized base lending rate that may fluctuate on a day-to-day basis or that may be adjusted on set dates, typically 30 days but generally not more than one year. Consequently, the value of corporate loans held by a Portfolio may be expected to fluctuate significantly less than the value of fixed rate junk bond instruments as a result of changes in the interest rate environment. On the other hand, the secondary dealer market for corporate loans is not as well developed as the secondary dealer market for junk bonds, and therefore presents increased market risk relating to liquidity and pricing concerns.

A Portfolio may acquire interests in corporate loans by means of a novation, assignment, or participation. In a novation, a Portfolio would succeed to all the rights and obligations of the assigning institution and become a contracting party under the credit agreement with respect to the debt obligation. As an alternative, a Portfolio may purchase an assignment, in which case the Portfolio may be required to rely on the assigning institution to demand payment and enforce its rights against the borrower but would otherwise typically be entitled to all of such assigning institution’s rights under the credit agreement. Participation interests in a portion of a debt obligation typically result in a contractual relationship only with the institution selling the participation interest and not with the borrower. In purchasing a loan participation, a Portfolio generally will have no right to enforce compliance by the borrower with the terms of the loan agreement, nor any rights of set-off against the borrower, and the Portfolio may not directly benefit from the collateral supporting the debt obligation in which it has purchased the participation. As a result, a Portfolio will assume the credit risk of both the borrower and the institution selling the participation to the Portfolio.

CREDIT DEFAULT SWAP AGREEMENTS AND SIMILAR INSTRUMENTS. Certain Portfolios may enter into credit default swap agreements and similar agreements and may also buy credit linked securities. The credit default swap agreement or similar instrument may have as reference obligations one or more securities that are not currently held by a Portfolio. The protection “buyer” in a credit default contract may be obligated to pay the protection “seller” an upfront or a periodic stream of payments over the term of the contract provided generally that no credit event on a reference obligation has occurred. If a credit event occurs, the seller generally must pay the buyer the “par value” (full notional value) of the swap in exchange for an equal face amount of deliverable obligations of the reference entity described in the swap, or the seller may be required to deliver the related net cash amount, if the swap is cash settled. A Portfolio may be either the buyer or seller in the transaction. If a Portfolio is a buyer and no credit event occurs, the Portfolio recovers nothing if the swap is held through its termination date. However, if a credit event occurs, the buyer may elect to receive the full notional value of the swap in exchange for an equal face amount of deliverable obligations of the reference entity that may have little or no value. As a seller, a

 70

Portfolio generally receives an up- front payment or a fixed rate of income throughout the term of the swap, provided that there is no credit event. If a credit event occurs, generally the seller must pay the buyer the full notional value of the swap in exchange for an equal face amount of deliverable obligations of the reference entity that may have little or no value.

Credit default swaps and similar instruments involve greater risks than if a Portfolio had invested in the reference obligation directly, since, in addition to general market risks, they are subject to illiquidity risk, counterparty risk and credit risks. A Portfolio will enter into credit default swap agreements and similar instruments only with counterparties who are rated investment grade quality by at least one nationally recognized statistical rating organization at the time of entering into such transaction or whose creditworthiness is believed by the subadviser to be equivalent to such rating. A buyer also will lose its investment and recover nothing should no credit event occur and the swap is held to its termination date. If a credit event were to occur, the value of any deliverable obligation received by the seller, coupled with the up-front or periodic payments previously received, may be less than the full notional value it pays to the buyer, resulting in a loss of value to the Portfolio. When a Portfolio acts as a seller of a credit default swap or a similar instrument, it is exposed to many of the same risks of leverage since, if a credit event occurs, the seller may be required to pay the buyer the full notional value of the contract net of any amounts owed by the buyer related to its delivery of deliverable obligations.

CREDIT LINKED SECURITIES. Among the income producing securities in which a Portfolio may invest are credit linked securities, which are issued by a limited purpose trust or other vehicle that, in turn, invests in a derivative instrument or basket of derivative instruments, such a credit default swaps, interest rate swaps and other securities, in order to provide exposure to certain fixed income markets. For instance, a Portfolio may invest in credit linked securities as a cash management tool in order to gain exposure to a certain market and/or to remain fully invested when more traditional income producing securities are not available.

Like an investment in a bond, investments in these credit linked securities represent the right to receive periodic income payments (in the form of distributions) and payment of principal at the end of the term of the security. However, these payments are conditioned on the issuer's receipt of payments from, and the issuer's potential obligations to, the counterparties to the derivative instruments and other securities in which the issuer invests. For instance, the issuer may sell one or more credit default swaps, under which the issuer would receive a stream of payments over the term of the swap agreements provided that no event of default has occurred with respect to the referenced debt obligation upon which the swap is based. If a default occurs, the stream of payments may stop and the issuer would be obligated to pay the counterparty the par (or other agreed upon value) of the referenced debt obligation. This, in turn, would reduce the amount of income and principal that a Portfolio would receive. A Portfolio's investments in these instruments are indirectly subject to the risks associated with derivative instruments, including, among others, credit risk, default or similar event risk, counterparty risk, interest rate risk, leverage risk and management risk. It is also expected that the securities will be exempt from registration under the 1933 Act. Accordingly, there may be no established trading market for the securities and they may be classified as illiquid investments.

CURRENCY FUTURES. A Portfolio may also seek to enhance returns or hedge against the decline in the value of a currency against the US dollar through use of currency futures or options thereon. Currency futures are similar to forward foreign exchange transactions except that futures are standardized, exchange-traded contracts. See “Futures” below. Currency futures involve substantial currency risk, and also involve leverage risk.

CURRENCY OPTIONS. A Portfolio may also seek to enhance returns or hedge against the decline in the value of a currency against the US dollar through the use of currency options. Currency options are similar to options on securities, but in consideration for an option premium the writer of a currency option is obligated to sell (in the case of a call option) or purchase (in the case of a put option) a specified amount of a specified currency on or before the expiration date for a specified amount of another currency. A Portfolio may engage in transactions in options on currencies either on exchanges or OTC markets. See “Types of Options” above and “Additional Risk Factors of OTC Transactions; Limitations on the Use of OTC Derivatives” below. Currency options involve substantial currency risk, and may also involve credit, leverage or liquidity risk.

CYBERSECURITY AND OPERATIONAL RISK. With the increasing use of technology and computer systems in general and, in particular, the Internet to conduct necessary business functions, each Portfolio and its service providers is susceptible to operational, information security and related risks. These risks, which are often collectively referred to as “cybersecurity” risks, may include deliberate or malicious attacks, as well as unintentional events and occurrences. Cybersecurity is generally defined as the technology, operations and related protocol surrounding and protecting a user’s computer hardware, network, systems and applications and the data transmitted and stored therewith. These measures ensure the reliability of a user’s systems, as well as the security, availability, integrity, and confidentiality of data assets.

Deliberate cyber attacks can include, but are not limited to, gaining unauthorized access to computer systems in order to misappropriate and/or disclose sensitive or confidential information; deleting, corrupting or modifying data; and causing operational disruptions. Cyber attacks may also be carried out in a manner that does not require gaining unauthorized access, such as causing denial-of-service

71

attacks on websites (in order to prevent access to computer networks). In addition to deliberate breaches engineered by external actors, cybersecurity risks can also result from the conduct of malicious, exploited or careless insiders, whose actions may result in the destruction, release or disclosure of confidential or proprietary information stored on an organization’s systems.

Cybersecurity failures or breaches, whether deliberate or unintentional, arising from the Portfolios’ third-party service providers (e.g., custodians, financial intermediaries, transfer agents), subadvisers, shareholder usage of unsecure systems to access personal accounts, as well as breaches suffered by the issuers of securities in which the Portfolios invest, may cause significant disruptions in the business operations of the Portfolios. Potential impacts may include, but are not limited to, potential financial losses for the Portfolios and the issuers’ securities, the inability of shareholders to conduct transactions with the Portfolios, an inability of the Portfolios to calculate net asset value (NAV), and disclosures of personal or confidential shareholder information.

In addition to direct impacts on Portfolio shareholders, cybersecurity failures by the Portfolios and/or their service providers and others may result in regulatory inquiries, regulatory proceedings, regulatory and/or legal and litigation costs to the Portfolios, and reputational damage. The Portfolios may incur reimbursement and other expenses, including the costs of litigation and litigation settlements and additional compliance costs. The Portfolios may also incur considerable expenses in enhancing and upgrading computer systems and systems security following a cybersecurity failure.

The rapid proliferation of technologies, as well as the increased sophistication and activities of organized crime, hackers, terrorists, and others continue to pose new and significant cybersecurity threats. Although the Portfolios and their service providers and subadvisers may have established business continuity plans and risk management systems to mitigate cybersecurity risks, there can be no guarantee or assurance that such plans or systems will be effective, or that all risks that exist, or may develop in the future, have been completely anticipated and identified or can be protected against. Furthermore, the Portfolios cannot control or assure the efficacy of the cybersecurity plans and systems implemented by third-party service providers, the subadvisers, and the issuers in which the Portfolios invest.

A Portfolio’s investments or its service providers may be negatively impacted due to operational risks arising from factors such as processing errors and human errors, inadequate or failed internal or external processes, failures in systems and technology, changes in personnel, and errors caused by third-party service providers or trading counterparties. In particular, these errors or failures as well as other technological issues may adversely affect the Portfolios’ ability to calculate their NAVs in a timely manner, including over a potentially extended period. Although the Portfolios attempt to minimize such failures through controls and oversight, it is not possible to identify all of the operational risks that may affect a Portfolio or to develop processes and controls that completely eliminate or mitigate the occurrence of such failures. A Portfolio and its shareholders could be negatively impacted as a result.

DEBT SECURITIES. Debt securities, such as bonds, involve credit risk. This is the risk that the issuer will not make timely payments of principal and interest. The degree of credit risk depends on the issuer's financial condition and on the terms of the bonds. Changes in an issuer's credit rating or the market's perception of an issuer's creditworthiness may also affect the value of a Portfolio's investment in that issuer. Credit risk is reduced to the extent a Portfolio limits its debt investments to US Government securities. All debt securities, however, are subject to interest rate risk. This is the risk that the value of the security may fall when interest rates rise. In general, the market price of debt securities with longer maturities will go up or down more in response to changes in interest rates than the market price of shorter-term securities.

DEPOSITARY RECEIPTS. A Portfolio may invest in the securities of foreign issuers in the form of Depositary Receipts or other securities convertible into securities of foreign issuers. Depositary Receipts may not necessarily be denominated in the same currency as the underlying securities into which they may be converted. American Depositary Receipts (ADRs) and American Depositary Shares (ADSs) are receipts or shares typically issued by an American bank or trust company that evidence ownership of underlying securities issued by a foreign corporation. European Depositary Receipts (EDRs) are receipts issued in Europe that evidence a similar ownership arrangement. Global Depositary Receipts (GDRs) are receipts issued throughout the world that evidence a similar arrangement. Generally, ADRs and ADSs, in registered form, are designed for use in the US securities markets, and EDRs, in bearer form, are designed for use in European securities markets. GDRs are tradable both in the United States and in Europe and are designed for use throughout the world. A Portfolio may invest in unsponsored Depositary Receipts. The issuers of unsponsored Depositary Receipts are not obligated to disclose material information in the United States, and, therefore, there may be less information available regarding such issuers and there may not be a correlation between such information and the market value of the Depositary Receipts. Depositary Receipts are generally subject to the same risks as the foreign securities that they evidence or into or for which they may be converted or exchanged, as well as risks associated with foreign investments.

DERIVATIVES. A Portfolio may use instruments referred to as derivatives. Derivatives are financial instruments the value of which is derived from another security, a commodity (such as gold or oil), a currency or an index (a measure of value or rates, such as the S&P 500 Index or the prime lending rate). Derivatives allow a Portfolio to increase or decrease the level of risk to which the Portfolio is

 72

exposed more quickly and efficiently than transactions in other types of instruments. Each Portfolio may use derivatives for hedging purposes. Certain Portfolios may also use derivatives to seek to enhance returns. The use of a derivative is speculative if the Portfolio is primarily seeking to achieve gains, rather than offset the risk of other positions. When the Portfolio invests in a derivative for speculative purposes, the Portfolio will be fully exposed to the risks of loss of that derivative, which may sometimes be greater than the derivative's cost. No Portfolio may use any derivative to gain exposure to an asset or class of assets that it would be prohibited by its investment restrictions from purchasing directly.

The use of derivative instruments involves risks different from, and/or possibly greater than, the risks associated with investing directly in the underlying assets or references. The use of derivative instruments is a highly specialized activity that involves investment techniques and risks different from those associated with ordinary portfolio securities transactions. If the portfolio manager is incorrect in the forecasts of security or market values, interest rates or currency exchange rates, as applicable, the investment performance of a Portfolio would be less favorable than it would have been if derivative instruments were not used. Potential losses from certain derivative instruments are unlimited. Derivative instruments can be highly volatile, illiquid, subject to counterparty risk and difficult to value. There is also the risk that changes in the value of a derivative instrument held by a Portfolio for hedging purposes may not correlate with the Portfolio’s investments which are intended to be hedged, which could impact Portfolio performance. A Portfolio may choose not to invest in derivative instruments because of their cost, limited availability or other reasons.

The Portfolios are subject to Rule 18f-4 under the 1940 Act (the Derivatives Rule), which governs the use of derivatives by registered investment companies. The Derivatives Rule imposes limits on the amount of derivatives exposure a fund may take on and replaces the asset segregation framework previously used by funds to comply with Section 18 of the 1940 Act, among other requirements. The Derivatives Rule also requires the Portfolios to adopt and implement a comprehensive written derivatives risk management program (called a DRMP) and to comply with a relative or absolute limit on leverage risk calculated based on value-at-risk. The DRMP is administered by a “derivatives risk manager.” The derivatives risk manager is appointed by the Board of Trustees and periodically reviews the DRMP and reports to the Board. The Derivatives Rule may limit the ability of a Portfolio to use derivatives, short sales, and reverse repurchase agreements and similar financing transactions as part of its investment strategies. These requirements may increase the cost of a Portfolio’s investments and cost of doing business, which could adversely affect the Performance of the Portfolio’s investments. The Derivatives Rule provides an exception from the DRMP, value-at-risk limit, and certain other requirements if a Portfolio's “derivatives exposure” is limited to 10% of its net assets (as calculated in accordance with the Derivatives Rule) and the Portfolio adopts and implements written policies and procedures reasonably designed to manage its derivatives risks.

DISTRESSED SECURITIES. A Portfolio may invest in securities, including corporate loans purchased in the secondary market, which are the subject of bankruptcy proceedings or otherwise in default as to the repayment of principal and/or interest at the time of acquisition by the Portfolio or are rated in the lower rating categories (Ca or lower by Moody's and CC or lower by S&P or Fitch) or which, if unrated, are in the judgment of the Investment Manager of equivalent quality (Distressed Securities). Investment in Distressed Securities is speculative and involves significant risks. Distressed Securities frequently do not produce income while they are outstanding and may require a Portfolio to bear certain extraordinary expenses in order to protect and recover its investment.

A Portfolio will generally make such investments only when the Investment Manager believes it is reasonably likely that the issuer of the Distressed Securities will make an exchange offer or will be the subject of a plan of reorganization pursuant to which the Portfolio will receive new securities. However, there can be no assurance that such an exchange offer will be made or that such a plan of reorganization will be adopted. In addition, a significant period of time may pass between the time at which a Portfolio makes its investment in Distressed Securities and the time that any such exchange offer or plan of reorganization is completed. During this period, it is unlikely that a Portfolio will receive any interest payments on the Distressed Securities, the Portfolio will be subject to significant uncertainty as to whether or not the exchange offer or plan of reorganization will be completed and the Portfolio may be required to bear certain extraordinary expenses to protect and recover its investment. Even if an exchange offer is made or plan of reorganization is adopted with respect to Distressed Securities held by a Portfolio, there can be no assurance that the securities or other assets received by a Portfolio in connection with such exchange offer or plan of reorganization will not have a lower value or income potential than may have been anticipated when the investment was made. Moreover, any securities received by a Portfolio upon completion of an exchange offer or plan of reorganization may be restricted as to resale. As a result of a Portfolio's participation in negotiations with respect to any exchange offer or plan of reorganization with respect to an issuer of Distressed Securities, the Portfolio may be restricted from disposing of such securities.

DOLLAR ROLLS. Certain Portfolios may enter into dollar rolls. In a dollar roll, a Portfolio sells securities for delivery in the current month and simultaneously contracts to repurchase substantially similar (same type and coupon) securities on a specified future date from the same party. During the roll period, a Portfolio foregoes principal and interest paid on the securities. A Portfolio is compensated by the difference between the current sale price and the forward price for the future purchase (often referred to as the drop) as well as by the interest earned on the cash proceeds of the initial sale.

73

Dollar rolls involve the risk that the market value of the securities retained by the Portfolio may decline below the price of the securities, the Portfolio has sold but is obligated to repurchase under the agreement. In the event the buyer of securities under a dollar roll files for bankruptcy or becomes insolvent, the Portfolio's use of the proceeds of the agreement may be restricted pending a determination by the other party, or its trustee or receiver, whether to enforce the Portfolio's obligation to repurchase the securities. Cash proceeds from dollar rolls may be invested in cash or other liquid assets.

ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL AND GOVERNANCE (ESG) CONSIDERATIONS. Certain environmental, social and governance (“ESG”) factors may be considered by a Portfolio’s subadviser(s) in making investment decisions for a Portfolio. For these Portfolios, ESG factors are only one of many considerations a subadviser may evaluate for any potential investment and the extent to which ESG factors will affect a decision to invest in an issuer, if at all, will vary and depend on the analysis and judgment of the subadviser. ESG factors, either quantitative or qualitative, may be utilized by a subadviser as a component of its investment process to implement the Portfolio’s investment strategy in pursuit of its investment objective. ESG considerations may affect a Portfolio’s exposure to certain issuers, industries, sectors, and factors that may impact the performance of a Portfolio. A subadviser’s consideration of ESG factors may also impact a Portfolio’s performance relative to similar funds that do not consider ESG factors. Because ESG factors may be used as one part of an overall investment process, a subadviser may still invest in securities of issuers that are not considered ESG-focused or that may be viewed as having a high ESG risk profile. Investors can differ in their views of what constitutes positive or negative ESG factors. As a result, a Portfolio may invest in issuers that do not reflect the beliefs and values with respect to ESG of any particular investor. ESG factors are expected to evolve over time and one or more factors may not be relevant or material with respect to all issuers that are eligible for investment. In considering ESG factors, a subadviser may rely on proprietary research as well as third-party research, and such research may be incorrect, based on incomplete or inaccurate information, not sufficiently available, or subjective in nature, and thus could negatively affect the fund’s performance.

EXCHANGE-TRADED FUNDS. A Portfolio may invest in exchange-traded funds (ETFs). ETFs, which may be unit investment trusts or mutual funds, typically hold portfolios of securities designed to track the performance of various broad securities indexes or sectors of such indexes. ETFs provide another means, in addition to futures and options on indexes, of including stock index exposure in these Portfolios' investment strategies. A Portfolio will indirectly bear its proportionate share of any management fees and other expenses paid by such ETF. In addition, an investment in an ETF generally presents the same primary risks as an investment in a conventional fund (i.e., one that is not exchange-traded) that has the same investment objectives, strategies, and policies.

Moreover, to the extent an ETF holds securities traded in markets that close at a different time from the ETF's listing exchange, liquidity in such securities may be reduced after the applicable closing times. In addition, during the time when the ETF's listing exchange is open but after the applicable market closing, fixing or settlement times, bid/ask spreads and the resulting premium or discount to the ETF's shares' NAV may widen.

FOREIGN EXCHANGE TRANSACTIONS. A Portfolio may engage in spot and forward foreign exchange transactions and currency swaps, purchase and sell options on currencies and purchase and sell currency futures and related options thereon (collectively, Currency Instruments) for purposes of hedging against the decline in the value of currencies in which its portfolio holdings are denominated against the US dollar or, with respect to certain Portfolios, to seek to enhance returns. Such transactions could be effected with respect to hedges on non-US dollar denominated securities owned by a Portfolio, sold by a Portfolio but not yet delivered, or committed or anticipated to be purchased by a Portfolio. As an illustration, a Portfolio may use such techniques to hedge the stated value in US dollars of an investment in a yen-denominated security. In such circumstances, for example, the Portfolio may purchase a foreign currency put option enabling it to sell a specified amount of yen for dollars at a specified price by a future date. To the extent the hedge is successful, a loss in the value of the yen relative to the dollar will tend to be offset by an increase in the value of the put option. To offset, in whole or in part, the cost of acquiring such a put option, the Portfolio may also sell a call option which, if exercised, requires it to sell a specified amount of yen for dollars at a specified price by a future date (a technique called a straddle). By selling such a call option in this illustration, the Portfolio gives up the opportunity to profit without limit from increases in the relative value of the yen to the dollar. “Straddles” of the type that may be used by a Portfolio are considered to constitute hedging transactions and are consistent with the policies described above.

FOREIGN INVESTMENT RISKS. Certain Portfolios may invest in foreign equity and/or debt securities. Foreign debt securities include certain foreign bank obligations and US dollar or foreign currency-denominated obligations of foreign governments or their subdivisions, agencies and instrumentalities, international agencies and supranational entities.

Foreign Market Risk. Portfolios that may invest in foreign securities offer the potential for more diversification than Portfolios that invest only in the United States because securities traded on foreign markets have often (though not always) performed differently than securities in the United States. However, such investments involve special risks not present in US investments that can increase the

 74

chances that a Portfolio will lose money. In particular, a Portfolio is subject to the risk that, because there are generally fewer investors on foreign exchanges and a smaller number of shares traded each day, it may be difficult for the Portfolio to buy and sell securities on those exchanges. In addition, prices of foreign securities may fluctuate more than prices of securities traded in the United States.

Foreign Economy Risk. The economies of certain foreign markets often do not compare favorably with that of the United States with respect to such issues as growth of gross national product, reinvestment of capital, resources, and balance of payments position. Certain foreign economies may rely heavily on particular industries or foreign capital and are more vulnerable to diplomatic developments, the imposition of economic sanctions against a particular country or countries, changes in international trading patterns, trade barriers, and other protectionist or retaliatory measures. Investments in foreign markets may also be adversely affected by governmental actions such as the imposition of capital controls, nationalization of companies or industries, expropriation of assets, or the imposition of punitive taxes. In addition, the governments of certain countries may prohibit or impose substantial restrictions on foreign investing in their capital markets or in certain industries. Any of these actions could severely affect securities prices and impair a Portfolio's ability to purchase or sell foreign securities, transfer a Portfolio's assets or income back into the United States, or otherwise adversely affect a Portfolio's operations. Other foreign market risks include foreign exchange controls, difficulties in pricing securities, defaults on foreign government securities, difficulties in enforcing favorable legal judgments in foreign courts, and political and social instability. Legal remedies available to investors in certain foreign countries may be less extensive than those available to investors in the United States or other foreign countries.

Foreign Market Disruption and Geopolitical Risks. International wars or conflicts and geopolitical developments in foreign countries, along with instability in regions such as Asia, Eastern Europe, and the Middle East, possible terrorist attacks in the United States or around the world, public health epidemics such as the outbreak of infectious diseases like the global outbreak of the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) or the 2014–2016 outbreak in West Africa of the Ebola virus, and other similar events could adversely affect the US and foreign financial markets and may cause further long-term economic uncertainties in the United States and worldwide generally.

Currency Risk and Exchange Risk. Securities in which a Portfolio invests may be denominated or quoted in currencies other than the US dollar. Changes in foreign currency exchange rates will affect the value of a Portfolio's portfolio. Generally, when the US dollar rises in value against a foreign currency, a security denominated in that currency loses value because the currency is worth fewer US dollars. Conversely, when the US dollar decreases in value against a foreign currency, a security denominated in that currency gains value because the currency is worth more US dollars. This risk, generally known as “currency risk,” means that a stronger US dollar will reduce returns for US investors while a weak US dollar will increase those returns.

Governmental Supervision and Regulation/Accounting Standards. Many foreign governments supervise and regulate stock exchanges, brokers, and the sale of securities less than does the United States. Some countries may not have laws to protect investors comparable to the US securities laws. For example, some foreign countries may have no laws or rules against insider trading. Insider trading occurs when a person buys or sells a company's securities based on nonpublic information about that company. Accounting standards in other countries are not necessarily the same as in the United States. If the accounting standards in another country do not require as much detail as US accounting standards, it may be harder for Portfolio management to completely and accurately determine a company's financial condition.

Certain Risks of Holding Portfolio Assets Outside the United States. A Portfolio generally holds its foreign securities and cash in foreign banks and securities depositories. Some foreign banks and securities depositories may be recently organized or new to the foreign custody business. In addition, there may be limited or no regulatory oversight over their operations. Also, the laws of certain countries may put limits on a Portfolio's ability to recover its assets if a foreign bank or depository or issuer of a security or any of their agents goes bankrupt. In addition, it is often more expensive for a Portfolio to buy, sell and hold securities in certain foreign markets than in the United States. The increased expense of investing in foreign markets reduces the amount a Portfolio can earn on its investments and typically results in a higher operating expense ratio for the Portfolio as compared to investment companies that invest only in the United States.

Settlement Risk. Settlement and clearance procedures in certain foreign markets differ significantly from those in the United States. Foreign settlement procedures and trade regulations also may involve certain risks (such as delays in payment for or delivery of securities) not typically generated by the settlement of US investments. Communications between the United States and emerging market countries may be unreliable, increasing the risk of delayed settlements or losses of security certificates. Settlements in certain foreign countries at times have not kept pace with the number of securities transactions; these problems may make it difficult for a Portfolio to carry out transactions. If a Portfolio cannot settle or is delayed in settling a purchase of securities, it may miss attractive investment opportunities and certain of its assets may be uninvested with no return earned thereon for some period. If a Portfolio cannot settle or is delayed in settling a sale of securities, it may lose money if the value of the security then declines or, if it has contracted to sell the security to another party, the Portfolio could be liable to that party for any losses incurred.

75

Dividends or interest on, or proceeds from the sale of, foreign securities may be subject to foreign withholding taxes, thereby reducing the amount available for distribution to shareholders.

Certain transactions in derivatives (such as futures transactions or sales of put options) involve substantial leverage risk and may expose a Portfolio to potential losses, which exceed the amount originally invested by the Portfolio. When a Portfolio engages in such a transaction, the Portfolio intends that any such transactions will be conducted in compliance with the requirements of Rule 18f-4.

Additional Risk Factors of OTC Transactions; Limitations on the Use of OTC Derivatives. Certain derivatives traded in OTC markets, including indexed securities, swaps and OTC options, involve substantial liquidity risk. The absence of liquidity may make it difficult or impossible for a Portfolio to sell such instruments promptly at an acceptable price. The absence of liquidity may also make it more difficult for a Portfolio to ascertain a market value for such instruments. A Portfolio will, therefore, acquire illiquid OTC instruments (i) if the agreement pursuant to which the instrument is purchased contains a formula price at which the instrument may be terminated or sold, or (ii) for which the Investment Manager anticipates the Portfolio can receive on each business day at least two independent bids or offers, unless a quotation from only one dealer is available, in which case that dealer's quotation may be used.

Because derivatives traded in OTC markets are not guaranteed by an exchange or clearing corporation and generally do not require payment of margin, to the extent that a Portfolio has unrealized gains in such instruments or has deposited collateral with its counterparty the Portfolio is at risk that its counterparty will become bankrupt or otherwise fail to honor its obligations. A Portfolio will attempt to minimize the risk that a counterparty will become bankrupt or otherwise fail to honor its obligations by engaging in transactions in derivatives traded in OTC markets only with financial institutions that appear to have substantial capital or that have provided the Portfolio with a third-party guaranty or other credit enhancement.

FORWARD FOREIGN EXCHANGE TRANSACTIONS. Forward foreign exchange transactions are OTC contracts to purchase or sell a specified amount of a specified currency or multinational currency unit at a price and future date set at the time of the contract. Spot foreign exchange transactions are similar but require current, rather than future, settlement. A Portfolio will enter into foreign exchange transactions for purposes of hedging either a specific transaction or a portfolio position, or, with respect to certain Portfolios, to seek to enhance returns. A Portfolio may enter into a foreign exchange transaction for purposes of hedging a specific transaction by, for example, purchasing a currency needed to settle a security transaction or selling a currency in which the Portfolio has received or anticipates receiving a dividend or distribution. A Portfolio may enter into a foreign exchange transaction for purposes of hedging a portfolio position by selling forward a currency in which a portfolio position of the Portfolio is denominated or by purchasing a currency in which the Portfolio anticipates acquiring a portfolio position in the near future. A Portfolio may also hedge portfolio positions through currency swaps, which are transactions in which one currency is simultaneously bought for a second currency on a spot basis and sold for the second currency on a forward basis. Forward foreign exchange transactions involve substantial currency risk, and also involve credit and liquidity risk.

FUTURES. A Portfolio may engage in transactions in futures and options thereon. Futures are standardized, exchange-traded contracts which obligate a purchaser to take delivery, and a seller to make delivery, of a specific amount of an asset at a specified future date at a specified price. No price is paid upon entering into a futures contract. Rather, upon purchasing or selling a futures contract a Portfolio is required to deposit collateral (margin) equal to a percentage (generally less than 10%) of the contract value. Each day thereafter until the futures position is closed, the Portfolio will pay additional margin representing any loss experienced as a result of the futures position the prior day or be entitled to a payment representing any profit experienced as a result of the futures position the prior day. Futures involve substantial leverage risk.

The sale of a futures contract limits a Portfolio's risk of loss through a decline in the market value of portfolio holdings correlated with the futures contract prior to the futures contract's expiration date. In the event the market value of the portfolio holdings correlated with the futures contract increases rather than decreases, however, a Portfolio will realize a loss on the futures position and a lower return on the portfolio holdings than would have been realized without the purchase of the futures contract.

The purchase of a futures contract may protect a Portfolio from having to pay more for securities as a consequence of increases in the market value for such securities during a period when the Portfolio was attempting to identify specific securities in which to invest in a market the Portfolio believes to be attractive. In the event that such securities decline in value or a Portfolio determines not to complete an anticipatory hedge transaction relating to a futures contract, however, the Portfolio may realize a loss relating to the futures position.

A Portfolio is also authorized to purchase or sell call and put options on futures contracts including financial futures and stock indices in connection with its hedging activities. Generally, these strategies would be used under the same market and market sector conditions (i.e., conditions relating to specific types of investments) in which the Portfolio entered into futures transactions. A Portfolio may purchase put options or write (i.e., sell) call options on futures contracts and stock indices rather than selling the underlying futures

 76

contract in anticipation of a decrease in the market value of its securities. Similarly, a Portfolio can purchase call options, or write put options on futures contracts and stock indices, as a substitute for the purchase of such futures to hedge against the increased cost resulting from an increase in the market value of securities which the Portfolio intends to purchase.

A Portfolio may only write “covered” put and call options on futures contracts. A Portfolio will be considered “covered” with respect to a call option it writes on a futures contract if the Portfolio owns the assets that are deliverable under the futures contract or an option to purchase that futures contract having a strike price equal to or less than the strike price of the “covered” option and having an expiration date not earlier than the expiration date of the “covered” option. A Portfolio will be considered “covered” with respect to a put option it writes on a futures contract if it owns an option to sell that futures contract having a strike price equal to or greater than the strike price of the “covered” option.

Each Portfolio has filed a notice of exemption from regulation as a “commodity pool,” and the Investment Manager has filed a notice of exemption from registration as a “commodity pool operator” with respect to each Portfolio, under applicable rules issued by the CFTC under the Commodity Exchange Act (the CEA). In order to continue to claim the “commodity pool” exemption, a Portfolio is limited in its ability to use futures, options and swaps subject to regulation under the CEA for purposes other than bona fide hedging, which is narrowly defined. With respect to transactions other than for bona fide hedging purposes, either: (1) the aggregate initial margin and premiums required to establish a Portfolio’s positions in such investments may not exceed 5% of the liquidation value of the Portfolio’s assets, or (2) the aggregate net notional value of such instruments may not exceed 100% of the liquidation value of the Portfolio’s assets. In addition to meeting one of the foregoing trading limitations, a Portfolio may not market itself as a commodity pool or otherwise as a vehicle for trading in the futures, options or swaps markets.

HEDGING. Hedging is a strategy in which a derivative or security is used to offset the risks associated with other Portfolio holdings. Losses on the other investment may be substantially reduced by gains on a derivative that reacts in an opposite manner to market movements. While hedging can reduce losses, it can also reduce or eliminate gains or cause losses if the market moves in a different manner than anticipated by a Portfolio or if the cost of the derivative outweighs the benefit of the hedge. Hedging also involves the risk that changes in the value of the derivative will not match those of the holdings being hedged as expected by a Portfolio, in which case any losses on the holdings being hedged may not be reduced or may be increased. The inability to close options and futures positions also could have an adverse impact on a Portfolio's ability to hedge effectively its portfolio. There is also a risk of loss by the Portfolio of margin deposits or collateral in the event of bankruptcy of a broker with whom the Portfolio has an open position in an option, a futures contract or a related option. There can be no assurance that a Portfolio's hedging strategies will be effective or that hedging transactions will be available to a Portfolio. No Portfolio is required to engage in hedging transactions and each Portfolio may choose not to do so.

HONG KONG POLITICAL RISK. Hong Kong reverted to Chinese sovereignty on July 1, 1997, as a Special Administrative Region (SAR) of the PRC under the principle of “one country, two systems.” Although the PRC is obligated to maintain the current capitalist economic and social system of Hong Kong through June 30, 2047, the continuation of economic and social freedoms enjoyed in Hong Kong is dependent on the government of the PRC. Since 1997, there have been tensions between the Chinese government and many people in Hong Kong who perceive the PRC as tightening control over Hong Kong's semi-autonomous liberal political, economic, legal and social framework. Recent protests and unrest have increased tensions even further. Due to the interconnected nature of the Hong Kong and Chinese economies, this instability in Hong Kong may cause uncertainty in the Hong Kong and Chinese markets. In addition, the Hong Kong dollar trades at a fixed exchange rate in relation to (or, is “pegged” to) the US dollar, which has contributed to the growth and stability of the Hong Kong economy. However, it is uncertain how long the currency peg will continue, or what effect the establishment of an alternative exchange rate system would have on the Hong Kong economy. Because the Portfolios' NAVs are denominated in US dollars, the establishment of an alternative exchange rate system could result in a decline in the Portfolios' NAVs.

ILLIQUID INVESTMENTS. Pursuant to Rule 22e-4 under the 1940 Act, a Portfolio (other than the PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio) may not acquire any “illiquid investment” if, immediately after the acquisition, the Portfolio would have invested more than 15% of its net assets in illiquid investments that are assets. An “illiquid investment” is any investment that such a Portfolio reasonably expects cannot be sold or disposed of in current market conditions in seven calendar days or less without the sale or disposition significantly changing the market value of the investment. Illiquid investments include repurchase agreements with a notice or demand period of more than seven days, certain over-the-counter derivative instruments, and securities and other financial instruments that are not readily marketable, unless, based upon a review of the relevant market, trading and investment-specific considerations, those investments are determined not to be illiquid. The Trust has implemented a liquidity risk management program and related procedures to identify illiquid investments pursuant to Rule 22e-4, and the Board has approved the designation of the Investment Manager to administer the Trust’s liquidity risk management program and related procedures. The PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio may invest up to 5% of its net assets in illiquid investments. The 15% and 5% limits are applied as of the date a Portfolio purchases an illiquid investment. It is possible that a Portfolio's holding of illiquid investments could exceed the 15% limit (5% for the PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio), for example as a result of market developments or redemptions.

77

Each Portfolio may purchase certain restricted securities that can be resold to institutional investors and which may be classified as liquid investments pursuant to the Trust’s liquidity risk management program. In many cases, those securities are traded in the institutional market under Rule 144A under the 1933 Act and are called Rule 144A securities.

Investments in illiquid investments involve more risks than investments in similar securities that are readily marketable. Illiquid investments may trade at a discount from comparable, more liquid investments. Investment of a Portfolio's assets in illiquid investments may restrict the ability of the Portfolio to dispose of its investments in a timely fashion and for a fair price as well as its ability to take advantage of market opportunities. The risks associated with illiquidity will be particularly acute where a Portfolio's operations require cash, such as when a Portfolio has net redemptions, and could result in the Portfolio borrowing to meet short-term cash requirements or incurring losses on the sale of illiquid investments.

Illiquid investments are often restricted securities sold in private placement transactions between issuers and their purchasers and may be neither listed on an exchange nor traded in other established markets. In many cases, the privately placed securities may not be freely transferable under the laws of the applicable jurisdiction or due to contractual restrictions on resale. To the extent privately placed securities may be resold in privately negotiated transactions, the prices realized from the sales could be less than those originally paid by the Portfolio or less than the fair value of the securities. In addition, issuers whose securities are not publicly traded may not be subject to the disclosure and other investor protection requirements that may be applicable if their securities were publicly traded. If any privately placed securities held by a Portfolio are required to be registered under the securities laws of one or more jurisdictions before being resold, the Portfolio may be required to bear the expenses of registration. Private placement investments may involve investments in smaller, less seasoned issuers, which may involve greater risks than investments in more established companies. These issuers may have limited product lines, markets or financial resources, or they may be dependent on a limited management group. In making investments in private placement securities, a Portfolio may obtain access to material non-public information, which may restrict the Portfolio's ability to conduct transactions in those securities.

INDEXED AND INVERSE SECURITIES. A Portfolio may invest in securities the potential return of which is based on an index or interest rate. As an illustration, a Portfolio may invest in a security whose value is based on changes in a specific index or that pays interest based on the current value of an interest rate index, such as the prime rate. A Portfolio may also invest in a debt security that returns principal at maturity based on the level of a securities index or a basket of securities, or based on the relative changes of two indices. In addition, certain Portfolios may invest in securities the potential return of which is based inversely on the change in an index or interest rate (that is, a security the value of which will move in the opposite direction of changes to an index or interest rate). For example, a Portfolio may invest in securities that pay a higher rate of interest when a particular index decreases and pay a lower rate of interest (or do not fully return principal) when the value of the index increases. If a Portfolio invests in such securities, it may be subject to reduced or eliminated interest payments or loss of principal in the event of an adverse movement in the relevant interest rate, index or indices. Indexed and inverse securities may involve credit risk, and certain indexed and inverse securities may involve leverage risk, liquidity risk and currency risk. A Portfolio may invest in indexed and inverse securities for hedging purposes or to seek to increase returns. When used for hedging purposes, indexed and inverse securities involve correlation risk. (Furthermore, where such a security includes a contingent liability, in the event of such an adverse movement, a Portfolio may be required to pay substantial additional margin to maintain the position.)

INITIAL PUBLIC OFFERINGS. A Portfolio may invest in initial public offerings (IPOs). An IPO is the first sale of stock by a private company to the public. IPOs are often issued by smaller, younger companies seeking capital to expand, but can also be done by large privately owned companies looking to become publicly traded.

In an IPO, the issuer obtains the assistance of an underwriting firm, which helps it determine what type of security to issue (common or preferred), best offering price and time to bring it to market. The volume of IPOs and the levels at which the newly issued stocks trade in the secondary market are affected by the performance of the stock market overall. If IPOs are brought to the market, availability may be limited and a Portfolio may not be able to buy any shares at the offering price, or if it is able to buy shares, it may not be able to buy as many shares at the offering price as it would like.

Investing in IPOs entails risks. Importantly, the prices of securities involved in IPOs are often subject to greater and more unpredictable price changes than more established stocks. It is difficult to predict what the stock will do on its initial day of trading and in the near future since there is often little historical data with which to analyze the company. Also, most IPOs are of companies going through a transitory growth period, and they are therefore subject to additional uncertainty regarding their future value.

INVESTMENT IN EMERGING MARKETS. Certain Portfolios may invest in the securities of issuers domiciled in various countries with emerging capital markets. The Manager and the Subadvisers have broad discretion to identify or determine those countries that they consider to qualify as emerging markets. In exercising such discretion, they generally consider a country with an emerging capital market to be, but is not necessarily limited to, (i) any country that the is considered to be emerging or developing by supranational

 78

organizations such as the United Nations or other similar entities; or (ii) included in an emerging markets index by a recognized index provider. Emerging market countries generally will include countries with low gross national product per capita and the potential for rapid economic growth and are likely to be located in Africa, Asia, the Middle East, Eastern and Central Europe and Central and South America.

Such capital markets are emerging in a dynamic political and economic environment brought about by events over recent years that have reshaped political boundaries and traditional ideologies. In such a dynamic environment, there can be no assurance that these capital markets will continue to present viable investment opportunities for a Portfolio. In the past, governments of such nations have expropriated substantial amounts of private property, and most claims of the property owners have never been fully settled. There is no assurance that such expropriations will not reoccur. In such an event, it is possible that a Portfolio could lose the entire value of its investments in the affected markets.

Investments in the securities of issuers domiciled in countries with emerging capital markets involve certain additional risks not involved in investments in securities of issuers in more developed capital markets, such as (i) low or non-existent trading volume, resulting in a lack of liquidity and increased volatility in prices for such securities, as compared to securities of comparable issuers in more developed capital markets, (ii) uncertain national policies and social, political and economic instability, increasing the potential for expropriation of assets, confiscatory taxation, high rates of inflation or unfavorable diplomatic developments, (iii) possible fluctuations in exchange rates, differing legal systems and the existence or possible imposition of exchange controls, custodial restrictions or other foreign or US governmental laws or restrictions applicable to such investments, (iv) national policies that may limit a Portfolio’s investment opportunities such as restrictions on investment in issuers or industries deemed sensitive to national interests, and (v) the lack or relatively early development of legal structures governing private and foreign investments and private property. In addition to withholding taxes on investment income, some countries with emerging markets may impose differential capital gains taxes on foreign investors.

Also, there may be less publicly available information about issuers in emerging markets than would be available about issuers in more developed capital markets, and such issuers may not be subject to accounting, auditing and financial reporting standards and requirements comparable to those to which US companies are subject. In certain countries with emerging capital markets, reporting standards vary widely. As a result, traditional investment measurements used in the United States, such as price/earnings ratios, may not be applicable. Emerging market securities may be substantially less liquid and more volatile than those of mature markets, and companies may be held by a limited number of persons. This may adversely affect the timing and pricing of a Portfolio’s acquisition or disposal of securities.

Practices in relation to settlement of securities transactions in emerging markets involve higher risks than those in developed markets, in part because a Portfolio will need to use brokers and counterparties that are less well capitalized, and custody and registration of assets in some countries may be unreliable. The possibility of fraud, negligence, undue influence being exerted by the issuer or refusal to recognize ownership exists in some emerging markets, and, along with other factors, could result in ownership registration being completely lost. A Portfolio would absorb any loss resulting from such registration problems and may have no successful claim for compensation.

In December 2020, the Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act (the HFCAA) was signed into law. The HFCAA directs the SEC to prohibit securities of a registrant from being listed on any US stock exchanges if, for three consecutive years, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board determines it was unable to inspect the auditor of the registrant's financial statements. The HFCAA also requires a foreign registrant to provide certain disclosures if the registrant files an annual report that includes an audit report from an auditor that was not subject to Public Company Accounting Oversight Board inspection. In December 2021, the SEC adopted final amendments implementing the disclosure and submission requirements of the HFCAA. The potential impact of the HFCAA is unclear at this time, but it may limit the securities in which a Portfolio may invest.

Infectious Illness Risk. The Portfolios or the securities in which the Portfolios invest may be adversely affected by the spread of infectious illness or other public health issues like pandemics or epidemics. Such infectious illnesses or public health issues may have a greater adverse impact on emerging and less developed markets.

An outbreak of an infectious respiratory illness, the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) that was first detected in 2019 continues to spread globally. The COVID-19 pandemic and the related governmental and public responses have, resulted in numerous disruptions in the market and have had, and may continue to have an impact on the Portfolios' investments and net asset value(s). The COVID-19 pandemic and the related responses have led, and may continue to lead, to increased market volatility and the potential for illiquidity in certain classes of securities, sectors and markets.

79

Although vaccines have been developed and approved for use by various governments, the duration of the pandemic and its effects cannot be predicted with certainty. The occurrence, reoccurrence, and pendency of other epidemics and pandemics could adversely affect the economies (including through changes in business activity and increased unemployment) and financial markets either in specific countries or worldwide. Such impacts may be short term or may last for an extended period of time. Other infectious illnesses that may arise in the future could have similar or other unforeseen effects.

INVESTMENT IN OTHER INVESTMENT COMPANIES. Each Portfolio may invest in other investment companies, including exchange-traded funds. In accordance with the 1940 Act, a Portfolio may invest up to 10% of its total assets in securities of other investment companies. In addition, under the 1940 Act, a Portfolio may not own more than 3% of the total outstanding voting stock of any investment company and not more than 5% of the value of the Portfolio's total assets may be invested in securities of any investment company. (These limits do not restrict a Feeder Fund from investing all of its assets in shares of its Master Portfolio).

Notwithstanding the limits discussed above, a Portfolio may invest in other investment companies without regard to the limits set forth above, provided that the Portfolio complies with Rules 12d1-1, 12d1-3, 12d1-4 promulgated by the SEC under the 1940 Act or otherwise permitted by exemptive order, SEC releases, no-action letters or similar interpretation. As with other investments, investments in other investment companies are subject to market and selection risk. In addition, if the Portfolio acquires shares in investment companies, shareholders would bear both their proportionate share of expenses in the Portfolio (including management and advisory fees) and, indirectly, the expenses of such investment companies (including management and advisory fees). Investments by a Portfolio in wholly-owned investment companies created under the laws of certain countries will not be deemed an investment in other investment companies. The underlying investments companies in which the Portfolio invests may not meet their investment objectives.

In October 2020, the SEC adopted a new regulatory framework, including new Rule 12d1-4 under the 1940 Act, for fund-of-funds arrangements. Rule 12d1-4 permits a registered investment company to acquire the securities of any other registered investment company or BDC in excess of the limits of the 1940 Act, provided that the registered investment company complies with several conditions imposed by Rule 12d1-4, which include: (i) limits on ownership and voting of acquired fund shares; (ii) evaluations and findings by investment advisers of funds in fund-of-funds arrangements; (iii) investment agreements between funds in fund-of-funds arrangements; and (iv) limits on complex fund-of-funds structures. In connection with new Rule 12d1-4, the SEC also rescinded Rule 12d1-2 and certain exemptive orders permitting fund-of-funds arrangements. The Board has approved procedures to comply with the new Rule. The new Rule may limit the ability of a Portfolio to invest in other funds, including private funds and ETFs. These regulatory changes may adversely impact the Portfolios’ investment strategies and operations.

JUNK BONDS. Junk bonds are debt securities that are rated below investment grade by the major rating agencies or are unrated securities that the subadviser believes are of comparable quality. Although junk bonds generally pay higher rates of interest than investment grade bonds, they are high risk investments that may cause income and principal losses for a Portfolio. The major risks in junk bond investments include the following:

◾

Junk bonds are issued by less credit worthy companies. These securities are vulnerable to adverse changes in the issuer's industry and to general economic conditions. Issuers of junk bonds may be unable to meet their interest or principal payment obligations because of an economic downturn, specific issuer developments or the unavailability of additional financing.

◾

The issuers of junk bonds may have a larger amount of outstanding debt relative to their assets than issuers of investment grade bonds. If the issuer experiences financial stress, it may be unable to meet its debt obligations. The issuer's ability to pay its debt obligations also may be lessened by specific issuer developments, or the unavailability of additional financing.

◾

Junk bonds are frequently ranked junior to claims by other creditors. If the issuer cannot meet its obligations, the senior obligations are generally paid off before the junior obligations.

◾

Junk bonds frequently have redemption features that permit an issuer to repurchase the security from a Portfolio before it matures. If an issuer redeems the junk bonds, a Portfolio may have to invest the proceeds in bonds with lower yields and may lose income.

◾

Prices of junk bonds are subject to extreme price fluctuations. Negative economic developments may have a greater impact on the prices of junk bonds than on other higher rated fixed income securities.

◾

Junk bonds may be less liquid than higher rated fixed income securities even under normal economic conditions. There are fewer dealers in the junk bond market, and there may be significant differences in the prices quoted for junk bonds by the dealers. Because they are less liquid, judgment may play a greater role in valuing certain of a Portfolio's portfolio securities than in the case of securities trading in a more liquid market.

◾

A Portfolio may incur expenses to the extent necessary to seek recovery upon default or to negotiate new terms with a defaulting issuer.

LIBOR AND OTHER REFERENCE RATES. A Portfolio’s investments, payment obligations and financing terms may be based on floating rates, such as LIBOR, European Interbank Offer Rate (EURIBOR), Sterling Overnight Interbank Average Rate (SONIA), and other similar types of reference rates (Reference Rates). The elimination of a Reference Rate or any other changes or reforms to the determination or

 80

supervision of a Reference Rate could have an adverse impact on the market for, or value of, any securities or payments linked to those Reference Rates. In addition, any substitute Reference Rate and any pricing adjustments imposed by a regulator or by counterparties or otherwise may adversely affect the Portfolio’s performance and/or NAV.

Although the transition process away from LIBOR has become increasingly well-defined in advance of the cessation date, there remains uncertainty regarding the future utilization of LIBOR and the nature of any replacement rate. Markets continue to develop slowly and questions around liquidity in these new rates and how to appropriately mitigate any economic value transfer at the time of transition remain a significant concern. Neither the effect of the LIBOR transition process nor its ultimate success can yet be known. The transition process might lead to increased volatility and illiquidity in markets that currently rely on LIBOR to determine interest rates. It could also lead to a reduction in the value of some LIBOR-based investments and reduce the effectiveness of new hedges placed against existing LIBOR-based instruments. The termination of Reference Rates, such as LIBOR and any such effects of a termination as well as other unforeseen events, presents significant financial risks to the Portfolios.

LIMITATIONS ON CURRENCY HEDGING. Most Portfolios will not speculate in Currency Instruments although certain Portfolios may use such instruments to seek to enhance returns. Accordingly, except for portfolios managed by PGIM, a Portfolio will not hedge a currency in excess of the aggregate market value of the securities that it owns (including receivables for unsettled securities sales), or has committed to or anticipates purchasing, which are denominated in such currency. A Portfolio may, however, hedge a currency by entering into a transaction in a Currency Instrument denominated in a currency other than the currency being hedged (a cross-hedge). A Portfolio will only enter into a cross-hedge if the Investment Manager believes that (i) there is a demonstrable high correlation between the currency in which the cross-hedge is denominated and the currency being hedged, and (ii) executing a cross-hedge through the currency in which the cross-hedge is denominated will be significantly more cost-effective or provide substantially greater liquidity than executing a similar hedging transaction by means of the currency being hedged.

LIQUIDATION OF PORTFOLIOS. Each Portfolio reserves the right to discontinue offering shares at any time, to merge or reorganize itself, or to cease operations and liquidate at any time.

MONEY MARKET INSTRUMENTS. Certain Portfolios may invest in money market instruments. Money market instruments include cash equivalents and short-term obligations of US banks, certificates of deposit, short-term obligations issued or guaranteed by the US Government or its agencies. Money market instruments also include bankers' acceptances, commercial paper, certificates of deposit and Eurodollar obligations issued or guaranteed by bank holding companies in the US, their subsidiaries and foreign branches, by foreign banking institutions, and by the World Bank and other multinational instrumentalities, as well as commercial paper and other short-term obligations of, and variable amount master demand notes, variable rate notes and similar agreements issued by, US and foreign corporations.

MONEY MARKET FUND REFORM. In July 2014, the SEC adopted amendments to Rule 2a-7 under the 1940 Act. Rule 2a-7 imposes quality, liquidity and other requirements on any registered mutual fund that holds itself out to the public as a money market fund. The Government Money Market Portfolio is subject to Rule 2a-7. Compliance with the various provisions of the amendments took effect over the course of 2015 and 2016. The new regulations impact money market funds differently depending upon the types of investors that will be permitted to invest in a fund, and the types of securities in which a fund may invest.

“Retail” money market funds have policies and procedures reasonably designed to limit their beneficial owners to natural persons. All other money market funds are considered to be “institutional” money market funds. Retail and institutional money market funds are further classified by their investments. “Prime” money market funds are permitted to invest primarily in corporate or other non-government securities, “US government” money market funds are required to invest a very high percentage of their assets in US government securities and “municipal” money market funds are required to invest significantly in municipal securities.

Under the revised rule, institutional prime money market funds and institutional municipal money market funds are required to value their portfolio securities using market-based factors, and sell and redeem shares at prices based on a floating net asset value. A floating net asset value is calculated by rounding to the fourth decimal place in the case of a money market fund with a $1.0000 share price. Retail money market funds and institutional US government money market funds are not subject to the floating net asset value requirement.

Under the revised rule, any type of money market fund is permitted to impose a discretionary liquidity fee of up to 2% on redemptions or temporarily suspend redemptions (also known as “gate”) if the money market fund’s weekly liquid assets (as defined in Rule 2a-7) fall below 30% of the fund’s total assets and the money market fund’s board of trustees determines that the fee or gate is in the fund’s best interests. Once imposed, a discretionary liquidity fee or redemption gate will remain in effect until the fund’s board of trustees determines that the fee or gate is no longer in the fund’s best interests or the next business day after the fund’s weekly liquid assets

81

return to 30% of the fund’s total assets, whichever occurs first. Regardless, the redemption gate is required to be lifted no later than the 10th business day after the gate is imposed, and a money market fund may not impose a redemption gate for more than 10 business days in any rolling 90-calendar day period.

Under the revised rule, any type of money market fund (except for US government money market funds) is required to impose a liquidity fee of 1% on all redemptions if the money market fund’s weekly liquid assets (as defined in Rule 2a-7) fall below 10% of the fund’s total assets, unless the fund’s board of trustees determines that the fee is not in the fund’s best interests, or that a lower or higher (up to 2%) liquidity fee is in the fund’s best interests.

Other requirements of the revised rule include enhanced website disclosure obligations, the adoption of a new form for disclosure of certain material events (such as the imposition of liquidity fees or redemption gates), stronger diversification requirements and enhanced stress testing.

Pursuant to investment policy changes approved by the Board, effective September 12, 2016, the PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio (formerly known as the Money Market Portfolio) is managed as a US government money market fund under Rule 2a-7, which means that it invests at least 99.5% or more of its assets in cash, government securities, and/or repurchase agreements that are fully collateralized with cash or other government securities.  At the election of the Board, the Government Money Market Portfolio is not subject to a liquidity fee and/or a redemption gate on redemptions, which might apply to other types of money market funds should certain triggering events specified in Rule 2a-7 occur.  However, the Board reserves the right, with notice to shareholders, to change the policy with respect to liquidity fees and/or redemption gates, thereby permitting the Portfolio to impose such fees and gates in the future.

MORTGAGE-BACKED SECURITIES. Investing in mortgage-backed securities involves certain unique risks in addition to those generally associated with investing in fixed income securities and in the real estate industry in general. These unique risks include the failure of a party to meet its commitments under the related operative documents, adverse interest rate changes and the effects of prepayments on mortgage cash flows. Mortgage-backed securities are “pass-through” securities, meaning that principal and interest payments made by the borrower on the underlying mortgages are passed through to a Portfolio. The value of mortgage-backed securities, like that of traditional fixed income securities, typically increases when interest rates fall and decreases when interest rates rise. However, mortgage-backed securities differ from traditional fixed-income securities because of their potential for prepayment without penalty. The price paid by a Portfolio for its mortgage-backed securities, the yield the Portfolio expects to receive from such securities and the average life of the securities are based on a number of factors, including the anticipated rate of prepayment of the underlying mortgages. In a period of declining interest rates, borrowers may prepay the underlying mortgages more quickly than anticipated, thereby reducing the yield to maturity and the average life of the mortgage-backed securities. Moreover, when a Portfolio reinvests the proceeds of a prepayment in these circumstances, it will likely receive a rate of interest that is lower than the rate on the security that was prepaid.

To the extent that a Portfolio purchases mortgage-backed securities at a premium, mortgage foreclosures and principal prepayments may result in a loss to the extent of the premium paid. If a Portfolio buys such securities at a discount, both scheduled payments of principal and unscheduled prepayments will increase current and total returns and will accelerate the recognition of income which, when distributed to shareholders, will be taxable as ordinary income. In a period of rising interest rates, prepayments of the underlying mortgages may occur at a slower than expected rate, creating maturity extension risk. This particular risk may effectively change a security that was considered short or intermediate-term at the time of purchase into a long-term security. Since long-term securities generally fluctuate more widely in response to changes in interest rates than shorter-term securities, maturity extension risk could increase the inherent volatility of the Portfolio. Under certain interest rate and prepayment scenarios, a Portfolio may fail to recoup fully its investment in mortgage-backed securities notwithstanding any direct or indirect governmental or agency guarantee.

Most mortgage-backed securities are issued by Federal government agencies such as the Government National Mortgage Association (Ginnie Mae), or by government sponsored enterprises such as the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac) or the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae). Principal and interest payments on mortgage-backed securities issued by the Federal government and some Federal government agencies, such as Ginnie Mae, are guaranteed by the Federal government and backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. Mortgage-backed securities issued by other government agencies or government sponsored enterprises, such as Freddie Mac or Fannie Mae, are backed only by the credit of the government agency or enterprise and are not backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. While certain mortgage-related securities receive government or private support, there is no assurance that such support will remain in place in the future. Additionally, mortgage-backed securities issued by government agencies or sponsored enterprises like Freddie Mac or Fannie Mae generally have very little credit risk, but may be subject to substantial interest rate risks. Private mortgage-backed securities are issued by private corporations rather than government agencies and are subject to credit risk and interest rate risk. Some mortgage-backed securities, including those issued by government agencies and government-sponsored enterprises, may be based on pools of loans that are originated by an affiliate of the Investment Manager.

 82

In September 2008, the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) placed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac under conservatorship and was appointed to manage their daily operations. In addition, the US Treasury entered into stock purchase agreements (SPAs) with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to provide them with capital in exchange for senior preferred stock. Pass-through securities issued by Fannie Mae are guaranteed as to timely payment of principal and interest by Fannie Mae. Participation certificates representing interests in mortgages from Freddie Mac’s national portfolio are guaranteed as to the timely payment of interest and principal by Freddie Mac. Private, government, or government-related entities may create mortgage loan pools offering pass-through investments in addition to those described above. The mortgages underlying these securities may be alternative mortgage instruments (that is, mortgage instruments whose principal or interest payments may vary or whose terms to maturity may be shorter than customary).

Under the direction of the FHFA, FNMA and FHLMC have entered into a joint initiative to develop a common securitization platform for the issuance of a uniform mortgage-backed security (UMBS) (the “Single Security Initiative”) that aligns the characteristics of FNMA and FHLMC certificates. The Single Security Initiative was implemented in June 2019, and the effects it may have on the market for mortgage-backed securities are uncertain.

FHFA and the White House have made public statements regarding plans to consider ending the conservatorships of FNMA and FHLMC. In the event that FNMA and FHLMC are taken out of conservatorship, it is unclear how the capital structure of FNMA and FHLMC would be constructed and what effects, if any, there may be on FNMA's and FHLMC's creditworthiness and guarantees of certain mortgage-backed securities. It is also unclear whether the US Treasury would continue to enforce its rights or perform its obligations under the Senior Preferred Stock Programs. Should FNMA's and FHLMC's conservatorship end, there could be an adverse impact on the value of their securities, which could cause losses to a Portfolio.

In June 2019, under the Single Security Initiative, FNMA and FHLMC started issuing UMBS in place of their current offerings of TBA-eligible securities. The Single Security Initiative seeks to support the overall liquidity of the TBA market and aligns the characteristics of FNMA and FHLMC certificates. The effects that the Single Security Initiative may have on the market for TBA and other mortgage-backed securities are uncertain.

MUNICIPAL SECURITIES. Certain Portfolios may, from time to time, invest in municipal bonds including general obligation and revenue bonds. General obligation bonds are secured by the issuer's pledge of its faith, credit and taxing power for the payment of principal and interest, whereas revenue bonds are payable only from the revenues derived from a particular facility or class of facilities or, in some cases, from the proceeds of a special excise or other specific revenue source. A Portfolio may also invest in municipal notes including tax, revenue and bond anticipation notes which are issued to obtain Portfolios for various public purposes.

Municipal securities include notes and bonds issued by or on behalf of states, territories and possessions of the United States and their political subdivisions, agencies and instrumentalities and the District of Columbia, the interest on which is generally eligible for exclusion from federal income tax and, in certain instances, applicable state or local income and personal property taxes. Such securities are traded primarily in the over-the-counter market.

The interest rates payable on certain municipal bonds and municipal notes are not fixed and may fluctuate based upon changes in market rates. Municipal bonds and notes of this type are called “variable rate” obligations. The interest rate payable on a variable rate obligation is adjusted either at predesignated intervals or whenever there is a change in the market rate of interest on which the interest rate payable is based. Other features may include the right whereby a Portfolio may demand prepayment of the principal amount of the obligation prior to its stated maturity (a demand feature) and the right of the issuer to prepay the principal amount prior to maturity. The principal benefit of a variable rate obligation is that the interest rate adjustment minimizes changes in the market value of the obligation. As a result, the purchase of variable rate obligations should enhance the ability of a Portfolio to maintain a stable NAV per share and to sell an obligation prior to maturity at a price approximating the full principal amount of the obligation.

Variable or floating rate securities include participation interests therein and inverse floaters. Floating rate securities normally have a rate of interest that is set as a specific percentage of a designated base rate, such as the rate on Treasury Bonds or Bills. The interest rate on floating rate securities changes whenever there is a change in the designated base interest rate. Variable rate securities provide for a specific periodic adjustment in the interest rate based on prevailing market rates and generally would allow a Portfolio to demand payment of the obligation on short notice at par plus accrued interest, which amount may, at times, be more or less than the amount the Portfolio paid for them. Some floating rate and variable rate securities have maturities longer than 397 calendar days but afford the holder the right to demand payment at dates earlier than the final maturity date. Such floating rate and variable rate securities will be treated as having maturities equal to the demand date or the period of adjustment of the interest rate whichever is longer.

An inverse floater is a debt instrument with a floating or variable interest rate that moves in the opposite direction of the interest rate on another security or the value of an index. Changes in the interest rate on the other security or index inversely affect the residual interest rate paid on the inverse floater, with the result that the inverse floater's price will be considerably more volatile than that of a fixed rate

83

bond. Generally, income from inverse floating rate bonds will decrease when short-term interest rates increase, and will increase when short-term interest rates decrease. Such securities have the effect of providing a degree of investment leverage, since they may increase or decrease in value in response to changes, as an illustration, in market interest rates at a rate that is a multiple (typically two) of the rate at which fixed-rate, long-term, tax-exempt securities increase or decrease in response to such changes. As a result, the market values of such securities generally will be more volatile than the market values of fixed-rate tax-exempt securities. While inverse floaters may expose a Portfolio to leverage risk, they do not constitute borrowings for purposes of a Portfolio’s restrictions on borrowings. For additional information relating to inverse floaters, please see “Indexed and Inverse Securities.”

NON-STANDARD WARRANTS. From time to time, a Portfolio may use synthetic foreign equity securities derivatives in the form non-standard warrants, often referred to as low exercise price warrants or participatory notes or low exercise price options (LEPOs), to gain indirect exposure to issuers in certain countries, such as India. These securities are issued by banks and other financial institutions. The buyer of a low exercise price warrant effectively pays the full value of the underlying common stock at the outset. LEPOs are different from standard warrants in that they do not give their holders the right to receive a security of the issuer upon exercise. Rather, LEPOs pay the holder the difference in price of the underlying security between the date the LEPO was purchased and the date it is sold. LEPOs entail the same risks as other over-the counter derivatives. These include the risk that the counterparty or issuer of the LEPO may not be able to fulfill its obligations, that the holder and counterparty or issuer may disagree as to the meaning or application of contractual terms, or that the instrument may not perform as expected. Additionally, while LEPOs may be listed on an exchange, there is no guaranty that a liquid market will exist or that the counterparty or issuer of a LEPO will be willing to repurchase the LEPO when a Portfolio wishes to sell it. A discussion of the risk factors relating to derivatives is set out in the subsection entitled “Risk Factors in Derivatives.”

OPTIONS ON SECURITIES AND SECURITIES INDEXES. A Portfolio may invest in options on individual securities, baskets of securities or particular measurements of value or rate (an index), such as an index of the price of treasury securities or an index representative of short-term interest rates. Such investments may be made on exchanges and in the over-the-counter (OTC) markets. In general, exchange-traded options have standardized exercise prices and expiration dates and require the parties to post margin against their obligations, and the performance of the parties' obligations in connection with such options is guaranteed by the exchange or a related clearing corporation. OTC options have more flexible terms negotiated between the buyer and the seller, but generally do not require the parties to post margin and are subject to greater credit risk. OTC options also involve greater liquidity risk. See “Additional Risk Factors of OTC Transactions; Limitations on the Use of OTC Derivatives” below.

A Portfolio will write only “covered” options. A written option is covered if, so long as a Portfolio is obligated the option, it owns an offsetting position in the underlying security or currency.

CALL OPTIONS. A Portfolio may purchase call options on any of the types of securities or instruments in which it may invest. A call option gives a Portfolio the right to buy, and obligates the seller to sell, the underlying security at the exercise price at any time during the option period. A Portfolio also may purchase and sell call options on indices. Index options are similar to options on securities except that, rather than taking or making delivery of securities underlying the option at a specified price upon exercise, an index option gives the holder the right to receive cash upon exercise of the option if the level of the index upon which the option is based is greater than the exercise price of the option.

Each Portfolio may only write (i.e., sell) covered call options on the securities or instruments in which it may invest and to enter into closing purchase transactions with respect to certain of such options. A covered call option is an option in which a Portfolio either owns an offsetting position in the underlying security or currency. The principal reason for writing call options is the attempt to realize, through the receipt of premiums, a greater return than would be realized on the securities alone. By writing covered call options, a Portfolio gives up the opportunity, while the option is in effect, to profit from any price increase in the underlying security above the option exercise price. In addition, a Portfolio's ability to sell the underlying security will be limited while the option is in effect unless the Portfolio enters into a closing purchase transaction. A closing purchase transaction cancels out a Portfolio's position as the writer of an option by means of an offsetting purchase of an identical option prior to the expiration of the option it has written. Covered call options also serve as a partial hedge to the extent of the premium received against the price of the underlying security declining.

PUT OPTIONS. A Portfolio may purchase put options to seek to hedge against a decline in the value of its securities or to enhance its return. By buying a put option, a Portfolio acquires a right to sell such underlying securities or instruments at the exercise price, thus limiting the Portfolio's risk of loss through a decline in the market value of the securities or instruments until the put option expires. The amount of any appreciation in the value of the underlying securities or instruments will be partially offset by the amount of the premium paid for the put option and any related transaction costs. Prior to its expiration, a put option may be sold in a closing sale transaction and

 84

profit or loss from the sale will depend on whether the amount received is more or less than the premium paid for the put option plus the related transaction costs. A closing sale transaction cancels out a Portfolio's position as the purchaser of an option by means of an offsetting sale of an identical option prior to the expiration of the option it has purchased. A Portfolio also may purchase uncovered put options.

Each Portfolio may write (i.e., sell) put options on the types of securities or instruments that may be held by the Portfolio, provided that such put options are covered, liquid instruments. A Portfolio will receive a premium for writing a put option, which increases the Portfolio's return. A Portfolio will not sell puts if, as a result, more than 25% of the Portfolio's net assets would be required to cover its potential obligations under its hedging and other investment transactions.

PARTICIPATION NOTES. Participation Notes (P-Notes) are a type of equity-linked derivative which generally are traded over-the-counter. Even though a P-Note is intended to reflect the performance of the underlying equity securities, the performance of a P-Note will not replicate exactly the performance of the issuers or markets that the P-Note seeks to replicate due to transaction costs and other expenses. Investments in P-Notes involve risks normally associated with a direct investment in the underlying securities. In addition, P-Notes are subject to counterparty risk, which is the risk that the broker-dealer or bank that issues the P-Notes will not fulfill its contractual obligation to complete the transaction with a Portfolio.

PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio. The PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio may choose to invest in certain government-supported asset-backed notes in reliance on no-action relief issued by the SEC that such securities may be considered as government securities for purposes of compliance with the diversification requirements under Rule 2a-7.

PRIVATE INVESTMENT IN PUBLIC EQUITIES (PIPEs). PIPE transactions typically involve the purchase of securities directly from a publicly traded company or its affiliates in a private placement transaction, typically at a discount to the market price of the company’s common stock. In a PIPE transaction, a Portfolio may bear the price risk from the time of pricing until the time of closing. Equity issued in this manner is often subject to transfer restrictions and is therefore less liquid than equity issued through a registered public offering. A Portfolio may be subject to lock-up agreements that prohibit transfers for a fixed period of time. In addition, because the sale of the securities in a PIPE transaction is not registered under the 1933 Act, as amended, the securities are restricted and cannot be immediately resold into the public markets. A Portfolio may enter into a registration rights agreement with the issuer pursuant to which the issuer commits to file a resale registration statement allowing the Portfolio to publicly resell its securities. However, the ability of a Portfolio to freely transfer the shares is conditioned upon, among other things, the SEC’s preparedness to declare the resale registration statement effective and the issuer’s right to suspend the Portfolio’s use of the resale registration statement, if the issuer is pursuing a transaction or some other material non-public event is occurring. Accordingly, PIPE securities may be subject to risks associated with illiquid investments.

QUANTITATIVE INVESTING RISK. The Manager or a subadviser may employ and/or rely on algorithms, models or other systems in connection with certain investment activities, including research, forecasting, selection and execution processes (together, Systems). These Systems rely heavily on the use of proprietary and nonproprietary data, software, hardware and intellectual property, including data, software and hardware that may be licensed or otherwise obtained from third parties. The use of such Systems has inherent limitations and risks. Although they strive to do so, there can be no assurance that the Manager/subadviser will develop and use Systems appropriately and effectively. Errors may occur in the design, writing, testing, monitoring and/or implementation of Systems, including in the manner in which Systems function together. The effectiveness of Systems may diminish over time, including as a result of market changes and changes in the behavior of market participants. The quality of the resulting analyses, investment selections, portfolio construction, asset allocations, proposed trades, risk management and trading strategies depends on a number of factors, including the accuracy and quality of data inputs into the Systems, the mathematical and analytical assumptions and underpinnings of the Systems’ coding, the accuracy in translating those analytics into program code or interpreting the output of a System by another System in order to facilitate a transaction, changes in market conditions, the successful integration of the various Systems into the portfolio selection and trading process, and whether actual market events correspond to one or more assumptions underlying the Systems. Accordingly, Systems are subject to errors and/or mistakes (System Incidents) that may adversely impact a Portfolio. For example, System Incidents may result in Systems performing in a manner other than as intended, including, but not limited to, failure to achieve desired performance or investment objectives, execution of unanticipated trades or failure to execute intended trades, or failure to identify hedging or other risk management opportunities or targets. Further, if incorrect market data is entered into an otherwise properly functioning System, the System’s resulting output, including proposed trades or investment recommendations, may be inconsistent with the underlying investment strategy. Most Systems require continual monitoring and enhancements, and there is no guarantee that such enhancements will be successful, or that Systems will operate as intended. The successful deployment of an investment strategy, the portfolio construction process and/or the trading process could be severely compromised by software or hardware malfunctions, viruses, glitches, connectivity loss, system crashes or various other System Incidents, including, in particular, where multiple Systems contribute to the process (i.e., where one System develops a potential recommended signal or possible trade, and another System interprets or

85

optimizes that recommended signal or possible trade to facilitate a trade order). System Incidents may be difficult to detect and the Manager/subadviser may not immediately or ever detect certain System Incidents, which may have an increasing impact on a Portfolio over time. There is no guarantee that measures taken to address a System Incident will be successful.

REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUSTS (REITs). Investing in REITs involves certain unique risks in addition to those risks associated with investing in the real estate industry in general. Equity REITs may be affected by changes in the value of the underlying property owned by the REITs, while mortgage REITs may be affected by the quality of any credit extended. REITs are dependent upon management skills, may not be diversified geographically or by property type, and are subject to heavy cash flow dependency, default by borrowers and self-liquidation. REITs must also meet certain requirements under the Code to avoid entity level tax and be eligible to pass-through certain tax attributes of their income to shareholders. REITs are consequently subject to the risk of failing to meet these requirements for favorable tax treatment and of failing to maintain their exemptions from registration under the 1940 Act. REITs are also subject to the risks of changes in the Code, affecting their tax status.

REITs (especially mortgage REITs) are also subject to interest rate risks. When interest rates decline, the value of a REIT's investment in fixed rate obligations can be expected to rise. Conversely, when interest rates rise, the value of a REIT's investment in fixed rate obligations can be expected to decline. In contrast, as interest rates on adjustable rate mortgage loans are reset periodically, yields on a REIT's investments in such loans will gradually align themselves to reflect changes in market interest rates, causing the value of such investments to fluctuate less dramatically in response to interest rate fluctuations than would investments in fixed rate obligations.

Investing in certain REITs involves risks similar to those associated with investing in small capitalization companies. These REITs may have limited financial resources, may trade less frequently and in limited volume and may be subject to more abrupt or erratic price movements than larger company securities. Historically, small capitalization stocks, such as these REITs, have been more volatile in price than the larger capitalization stocks included in the S&P 500 Index. The management of a REIT may be subject to conflicts of interest with respect to the operation of the business of the REIT and may be involved in real estate activities competitive with the REIT. REITs may own properties through joint ventures or in other circumstances in which the REIT may not have control over its investments. REITs may incur significant amounts of leverage.

REAL ESTATE RELATED SECURITIES. Although no Portfolio may invest directly in real estate, certain Portfolios may invest in equity securities of issuers that are principally engaged in the real estate industry. Therefore, an investment in such a Portfolio is subject to certain risks associated with the ownership of real estate and with the real estate industry in general. These risks include, among others: possible declines in the value of real estate; risks related to general and local economic conditions; possible lack of availability of mortgage Portfolios or other limitations on access to capital; overbuilding; risks associated with leverage; market illiquidity; extended vacancies of properties; increase in competition, property taxes, capital expenditures and operating expenses; changes in zoning laws or other governmental regulation; costs resulting from the clean-up of, and liability to third parties for damages resulting from, environmental problems; tenant bankruptcies or other credit problems; casualty or condemnation losses; uninsured damages from floods, earthquakes or other natural disasters; limitations on and variations in rents, including decreases in market rates for rents; investment in developments that are not completed or that are subject to delays in completion; and changes in interest rates. To the extent that assets underlying a Portfolio's investments are concentrated geographically, by property type or in certain other respects, the Portfolio may be subject to certain of the foregoing risks to a greater extent. Investments by a Portfolio in securities of companies providing mortgage servicing will be subject to the risks associated with refinancings and their impact on servicing rights. In addition, if a Portfolio receives rental income or income from the disposition of real property acquired as a result of a default on securities the Portfolio owns, the receipt of such income may adversely affect the Portfolio's ability to retain its tax status as a regulated investment company because of certain income source requirements applicable to regulated investment companies under the Code.

RECENT EVENTS IN EUROPEAN COUNTRIES. A number of countries in Europe have experienced severe economic and financial difficulties. Many non-governmental issuers, and even certain governments, have defaulted on, or been forced to restructure, their debts; many other issuers have faced difficulties obtaining credit or refinancing existing obligations; financial institutions have in many cases required government or central bank support, have needed to raise capital, and/or have been impaired in their ability to extend credit; and financial markets in Europe and elsewhere have experienced extreme volatility and declines in asset values and liquidity. These difficulties may continue, worsen or spread within and beyond Europe. Responses to the financial problems by European governments, central banks and others, including austerity measures and reforms, may not work, may result in social unrest and may limit future growth and economic recovery or have other unintended consequences. Further defaults or restructurings by governments and others of their debt could have additional adverse effects on economies, financial markets and asset valuations around the world.

 86

The United Kingdom formally left the European Union (EU) on January 31, 2020 (a measure commonly referred to as “Brexit”). In December 2020, the United Kingdom and the EU entered into a new trading relationship. The agreement allows for continued trading free of tariffs, but institutes other new requirements for trading between the United Kingdom and the EU. Aspects of the EU-United Kingdom trade relationship remain subject to further negotiation. Due to political uncertainty, it is not possible to anticipate the form or nature of the future trading relationship between the EU and the United Kingdom.

Since the citizens of the United Kingdom voted via referendum to leave the EU in June 2016, global financial markets have experienced significant volatility due to the uncertainty around Brexit. Even with a new trading relationship having been established, there will likely continue to be considerable uncertainty about the potential impact of these developments on United Kingdom, European and global economies and markets. There is also the possibility of withdrawal movements within other EU countries and the possibility of additional political, economic and market uncertainty and instability. Brexit and any similar developments may have negative effects on economies and markets, such as increased volatility and illiquidity and potentially lower economic growth in the United Kingdom, EU and globally, which may adversely affect the value of a Portfolio’s investments. Whether or not a Portfolio invests in securities of issuers located in Europe or with significant exposure to European issuers or countries, these events could result in losses to the Portfolio, as there may be negative effects on the value and liquidity of the Portfolio’s investments and/or the Portfolio’s ability to enter into certain transactions.

A Portfolio may invest in securities issued by companies located in Russia, Ukraine or eastern Europe in general. Such securities markets suffers from a variety of problems described above in “FOREIGN INVESTMENT RISKS” not encountered in more developed markets. The inexperience of such securities markets and the limited volume of trading in securities in such markets may make obtaining accurate prices on portfolio securities from independent sources more difficult than in more developed markets.

Russia launched a large-scale invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022. The extent and duration of the military action, resulting sanctions and resulting future market disruptions, including declines in its stock markets and the value of the ruble against the US dollar, are impossible to predict, but are expected to be significant. Any disruptions caused by military or other actions in the region (including cyberattacks and espionage) or resulting actual and threatened responses to such activity, including purchasing and financing restrictions, boycotts or changes in consumer or purchaser preferences, sanctions, tariffs or cyberattacks on foreign governments in the region, companies headquartered or operating in the region, or individuals living and/or working in the region, including politicians, may impact the local economy and issuers of securities in which the Portfolio invests. Actual and threatened responses to such activity, including purchasing restrictions, sanctions, tariffs or cyberattacks on foreign governments or companies in the region may impact the local economy and issuers of securities in which the Portfolio invests. Actual and threatened responses to such military action may also impact the markets for certain commodities, such as oil and natural gas, as well as other sectors of the local economy in the region, and may likely have collateral impacts on such sectors globally. Additional information about risks related to investments in Russia is included in the section below labeled “RUSSIAN FEDERATION INVESTMENT RISK”.

REPURCHASE AGREEMENTS. A Portfolio may invest in securities pursuant to repurchase agreements. A Portfolio will enter into repurchase agreements only with parties meeting creditworthiness standards as set forth in the Portfolio's repurchase agreement procedures.

Under such agreements, the other party agrees, upon entering into the contract with a Portfolio, to repurchase the security at a mutually agreed-upon time and price in a specified currency, thereby determining the yield during the term of the agreement. This results in a fixed rate of return insulated from market fluctuations during such period, although such return may be affected by currency fluctuations. In the case of repurchase agreements, the prices at which the trades are conducted do not reflect accrued interest on the underlying obligation. Such agreements usually cover short periods, such as under one week. Repurchase agreements may be construed to be collateralized loans by the purchaser to the seller secured by the securities transferred to the purchaser.

In the case of a repurchase agreement, as a purchaser, a Portfolio will require all repurchase agreements to be fully collateralized at all times by cash or other liquid assets in an amount at least equal to the resale price. The seller is required to provide additional collateral if the market value of the securities falls below the repurchase price at any time during the term of the repurchase agreement. In the event of default by the seller under a repurchase agreement construed to be a collateralized loan, the underlying securities are not owned by the Portfolio but only constitute collateral for the seller's obligation to pay the repurchase price. Therefore, the Portfolio may suffer time delays and incur costs or possible losses in connection with disposition of the collateral.

A Portfolio may participate in a joint repurchase agreement account with other investment companies managed by PGIM Investments pursuant to an order of the SEC. On a daily basis, any uninvested cash balances of the Portfolio may be aggregated with those of such investment companies and invested in one or more repurchase agreements. Each Portfolio participates in the income earned or accrued in the joint account based on the percentage of its investment.

87

RESTRICTIONS ON CERTAIN INVESTMENTS. A number of publicly traded closed-end investment companies have been organized to facilitate indirect foreign investment in developing countries, and certain of such countries, such as Thailand, South Korea, Chile and Brazil have specifically authorized such Portfolios. There also are investment opportunities in certain of such countries in pooled vehicles that resemble open-end investment companies. In accordance with the 1940 Act, a Portfolio may invest up to 10% of its total assets in securities of other investment companies, not more than 5% of which may be invested in any one such company. In addition, under the 1940 Act, a Portfolio may not own more than 3% of the total outstanding voting stock of any investment company. These restrictions on investments in securities of investment companies may limit opportunities for a Portfolio to invest indirectly in certain developing countries. New shares of certain investment companies may at times be acquired only at market prices representing premiums to their net asset values. If a Portfolio acquires shares of other investment companies, shareholders would bear both their proportionate share of expenses of the Portfolio (including management and advisory fees) and, indirectly, the expenses of such other investment companies. See also “Investments in Other Investment Companies.”

RESTRICTIONS ON FOREIGN INVESTMENTS IN ASIA-PACIFIC COUNTRIES. Some developing Asia-Pacific countries prohibit or impose substantial restrictions on investments in their capital markets, particularly their equity markets, by foreign entities such as a Portfolio. As illustrations, certain countries may require governmental approval prior to investments by foreign persons or limit the amount of investment by foreign persons in a particular company or limit the investment by foreign persons to only a specific class of securities of a company which may have less advantageous terms (including price) than securities of the company available for purchase by nationals. There can be no assurance that a Portfolio will be able to obtain required governmental approvals in a timely manner. In addition, changes to restrictions on foreign ownership of securities subsequent to a Portfolio's purchase of such securities may have an adverse effect on the value of such shares. Certain countries may restrict investment opportunities in issuers or industries deemed important to national interests.

The manner in which foreign investors may invest in companies in certain developing Asia-Pacific countries, as well as limitations on such investments, also may have an adverse impact on the operations of a Portfolio. For example, a Portfolio may be required in certain of such countries to invest initially through a local broker or other entity and then have the shares purchased re-registered in the name of the Portfolio. Re-registration may in some instances not be able to occur on a timely basis, resulting in a delay during which a Portfolio may be denied certain of its rights as an investor, including rights as to dividends or to be made aware of certain corporate actions. There also may be instances where a Portfolio places a purchase order but is subsequently informed, at the time of re-registration, that the permissible allocation of the investment to foreign investors has been filled, depriving the Portfolio of the ability to make its desired investment at that time.

Substantial limitations may exist in certain countries with respect to a Portfolio's ability to repatriate investment income, capital or the proceeds of sales of securities by foreign investors, or by temporary market closures in such countries. A Portfolio could be adversely affected by delays in, or a refusal to grant, any required governmental approval for repatriation of capital, as well as by the application to the Portfolio of any restrictions on investments. For example, in September 1998, Malaysia imposed currency controls that limited a Portfolio's ability to repatriate proceeds of Malaysian investments. It is possible that Malaysia, or certain other countries may impose similar restrictions or other restrictions relating to their currencies or to securities of issuers in those countries. In addition, in 2020, Chinese exchanges were temporarily closed due to the outbreak of coronavirus, an infectious disease. To the extent that such restrictions, market closure, and other relevant market, trading and investment-specific considerations have the effect of making certain investments illiquid, securities may not be available to meet redemptions. Depending on a variety of financial factors, the percentage of a Portfolio's portfolio subject to currency controls may increase. In the event other countries impose similar controls, the portion of the Portfolio's assets that may be used to meet redemptions may be further decreased. Even where there is no outright restriction on repatriation of capital, the mechanics of repatriation may affect certain aspects of the operations of a Portfolio. For example, investments may be withdrawn from the People's Republic of China only in US or Hong Kong dollars and only at an exchange rate established by the government once each week. In certain countries, banks or other financial institutions may be among the leading companies or have actively traded securities. The 1940 Act restricts a Portfolio's investments in any equity securities of an issuer that, in its most recent fiscal year, derived more than 15% of its revenues from “securities related activities,” as defined by the rules thereunder. These provisions may restrict a Portfolio's investments in certain foreign banks and other financial institutions.

REVERSE REPURCHASE AGREEMENTS. Reverse repurchase agreements are transactions in which a Portfolio sells a security and simultaneously commits to repurchase that security from the buyer, such as a bank or broker-dealer, at an agreed upon price on an agreed-upon future date. The repurchase price consists of the sale price plus an incremental amount reflecting the interest cost to the Portfolio on the proceeds it has received from the initial sale. Reverse repurchase agreements involve the risk that the value of securities that the Portfolio is obligated to repurchase under the agreement may decline below the repurchase price. Additionally, such transactions are only advantageous if the interest cost to the Portfolio of the reverse repurchase transaction is less than the cost of obtaining the cash otherwise. Interest costs on the proceeds received in a reverse repurchase agreement may exceed the return received on the investments made by the Portfolio with those proceeds, resulting in reduced returns to shareholders. When a Portfolio enters into a reverse repurchase agreement, it is subject to the risk that the buyer (counterparty) may default on its obligations to the

 88

Portfolio. In the event of default, a Portfolio may experience delays, costs, and losses, all of which may reduce returns to shareholders. Investing reverse repurchase proceeds may also have a leveraging effect on a Portfolio. A Portfolio’s use of leverage can magnify the effect of any gains or losses, causing the Portfolio to be more volatile than if it had not been leveraged.

RISK FACTORS IN DERIVATIVES. Derivatives are volatile and involve significant risks, including: Use of derivatives for hedging purposes involves correlation risk. If the value of the derivative moves more or less than the value of the hedged instruments, a Portfolio will experience a gain or loss that will not be completely offset by movements in the value of the hedged instruments.

A Portfolio intends to enter into transactions involving derivatives only if there appears to be a liquid secondary market for such instruments or, in the case of illiquid instruments traded in OTC transactions, such instruments satisfy the criteria set forth below under “Additional Risk Factors of OTC Transactions; Limitations on the Use of OTC Derivatives.” However, there can be no assurance that, at any specific time, either a liquid secondary market will exist for a derivative or the Portfolio will otherwise be able to sell such instrument at an acceptable price. It may therefore not be possible to close a position in a derivative without incurring substantial losses, if at all.

RISK FACTORS IN HEDGING FOREIGN CURRENCY RISKS. Hedging transactions involving Currency Instruments involve substantial risks, including correlation risk. While a Portfolio's use of Currency Instruments to effect hedging strategies is intended to reduce the volatility of the net asset value of the Portfolio's shares, the net asset value of the Portfolio's shares will fluctuate. Moreover, although Currency Instruments will be used with the intention of hedging against adverse currency movements, transactions in Currency Instruments involve the risk that anticipated currency movements will not be accurately predicted and that the Portfolio's hedging strategies will be ineffective. To the extent that a Portfolio hedges against anticipated currency movements that do not occur, the Portfolio may realize losses and decrease its total return as the result of its hedging transactions. Furthermore, a Portfolio may only engage in hedging activities from time to time and may not be engaging in hedging activities when movements in currency exchange rates occur.

In connection with its trading in forward foreign currency contracts, a Portfolio will contract with a foreign or domestic bank, or foreign or domestic securities dealer, to make or take future delivery of a specified amount of a particular currency. There are no limitations on daily price moves in such forward contracts, and banks and dealers are not required to continue to make markets in such contracts. There have been periods during which certain banks or dealers have refused to quote prices for such forward contracts or have quoted prices with an unusually wide spread between the price at which the bank or dealer is prepared to buy and that at which it is prepared to sell. Governmental imposition of credit controls might limit any such forward contract trading. With respect to its trading of forward contracts, if any, a Portfolio will be subject to the risk of bank or dealer failure and the inability of, or refusal by, a bank or dealer to perform with respect to such contracts. Any such default would deprive the Portfolio of any profit potential or force the Portfolio to cover its commitments for resale, if any, at the current market price and could result in a loss to the Portfolio.

It may not be possible for a Portfolio to hedge against currency exchange rate movements, even if correctly anticipated, in the event that (i) the currency exchange rate movement is so generally anticipated that the Portfolio is not able to enter into a hedging transaction at an effective price, or (ii) the currency exchange rate movement relates to a market with respect to which Currency Instruments are not available and it is not possible to engage in effective foreign currency hedging. The cost to a Portfolio of engaging in foreign currency transactions varies with such factors as the currencies involved, the length of the contract period and prevailing market conditions. Since foreign currency exchange transactions usually are conducted on a principal basis, no fees or commissions are involved.

RISK OF INVESTING THROUGH BOND CONNECT. In addition to the risks described under “Foreign Securities” and “Investments in the People’s Republic of China,” there are risks associated with Portfolio investments in Chinese government bonds and other PRC-based debt instruments traded on the CIBM through the Bond Connect program. The Bond Connect refers to the arrangement between Hong Kong and the PRC that enables the PRC and overseas investors to trade various types of debt securities in each other’s bond markets through connection between the relevant respective financial infrastructure institutions. Trading through Bond Connect is subject to a number of restrictions that may affect a Portfolio’s investments and returns. Investments made through Bond Connect are subject to order, clearance and settlement procedures that are relatively untested in the PRC, which could pose risks to a Portfolio. Furthermore, securities purchased via Bond Connect will be held on behalf of ultimate investors (such as a Portfolio) via a book entry omnibus account in the name of the Hong Kong Monetary Authority Central Money Markets Unit maintained with a PRC-based custodian (either the China Central Depository & Clearing Co. (CCDC) or the Shanghai Clearing House (SCH)). A Portfolio’s ownership interest in Bond Connect securities will not be reflected directly in book entries with CCDC or SCH, and will instead only be reflected on the books of its Hong Kong sub-custodian. This recordkeeping system also subjects a Portfolio to various risks, including the risk that the Portfolio may have a limited ability to enforce its rights as a bondholder, as well as the risks of settlement delays and counterparty default of the Hong Kong sub-custodian. While the ultimate investors hold a beneficial interest in Bond Connect securities, the mechanisms that beneficial owners may use to enforce their rights are untested, and courts in the PRC have limited experience in applying the concept of beneficial ownership. As such, a Portfolio may not be able to participate in corporate actions affecting its rights as a bondholder, such as timely

89

payment of distributions, due to time constraints or other operational reasons. Bond Connect trades are settled in RMB, and investors must have timely access to a reliable supply of RMB in Hong Kong, which cannot be guaranteed. Moreover, securities purchased through Bond Connect generally may not be sold, purchased or otherwise transferred, other than through Bond Connect, in accordance with applicable rules.

A primary feature of Bond Connect is the application of the home market’s laws and rules applicable to investors in Chinese fixed-income instruments. Therefore, a Portfolio’s investments in securities via Bond Connect are generally subject to Chinese securities regulations and listing rules, among other restrictions. Such securities may lose their eligibility at any time, in which case, they could be sold, but could no longer be purchased through Bond Connect. A Portfolio will not benefit from access to Hong Kong investor compensation funds, which are set up to protect against defaults of trades, when investing through Bond Connect. Bond Connect is only available on days when markets in both the PRC and Hong Kong are open. As a result, prices of securities purchased through Bond Connect may fluctuate at times when a Portfolio is unable to add to, or exit, its position and, therefore, may limit the Portfolio’s ability to trade when it would be otherwise attractive to do so. Finally, uncertainties in the PRC tax rules governing taxation of income and gains from investments via Bond Connect could result in unexpected tax liabilities for a Portfolio. The withholding tax treatment of dividends and capital gains payable to overseas investors currently is unsettled.

The Bond Connect program is a relatively new program and may be subject to further interpretation and guidance. In addition, the trading, settlement and IT systems required for non-Chinese investors in Bond Connect are relatively new and continuing to evolve. In the event that the relevant systems do not function properly, trading through Bond Connect could be disrupted. There can be no assurance that further regulations will not affect the availability of securities in the program, the frequency of redemptions or other limitations. In addition, the application and interpretation of the laws and regulations of Hong Kong and the PRC, and the rules, policies or guidelines published or applied by relevant regulators and exchanges in respect of the Bond Connect program, are uncertain, and they may have a detrimental effect on a Portfolio’s investments and returns.

RISK OF INVESTING THROUGH CIBM DIRECT. To the extent permissible by the relevant PRC regulations or authorities, certain Portfolios may also directly invest in permissible products (which include cash bonds) traded on China inter-bank bond market (CIBM), in compliance with the relevant rules issued by the People’s Bank of China (PBOC, including its Shanghai Head Office) in 2016, including the Announcement 2016 No.3 and its implementing rules (CIBM Direct Rules). An onshore trading and settlement agent shall be engaged by the subadviser to make the filing on behalf of the relevant Portfolio and conduct trading and settlement agency services for such Portfolio. PBOC will exercise on-going supervision over the onshore settlement agent and the Portfolios’ trading activity under the CIBM Direct Rules and may take relevant administrative actions, such as suspension of trading and mandatory exit against a Portfolio and/or the subadviser in the event of any noncompliance with the CIBM Direct Rules. The CIBM Direct Rules are very new and have yet to be tested on the market. At this stage the CIBM Direct Rules are still subject to further clarification and/or changes, which may adversely affect the Portfolios’ ability to invest in the CIBM.

RISK OF INVESTING THROUGH STOCK CONNECT. China A-shares (A-shares) are equity securities of companies based in mainland China that trade on Chinese stock exchanges such as the Shanghai Stock Exchange (SSE) and the Shenzhen Stock Exchange (SZSE). Foreign investment in A-shares on the SSE and SZSE has historically not been permitted, other than through a license granted under regulations in the People’s Republic of China (PRC) known as the Qualified Foreign Institutional Investor and Renminbi (RMB) Qualified Foreign Institutional Investor systems. Each license permits investment in A-shares only up to a specified quota.

Investment in eligible A-shares listed and traded on the SSE is also permitted through the Shanghai-Hong Kong Stock Connect program (Stock Connect). Stock Connect is a securities trading and clearing program established by Hong Kong Securities Clearing Company Limited (HKSCC), the SSE and China Securities Depository and Clearing Corporation Limited (CSDCC) that aims to provide mutual stock market access between the PRC and Hong Kong by permitting investors to trade and settle shares on each market through their local exchanges. Certain Portfolios may invest in A-shares through Stock Connect or on such other stock exchanges in China which participate in Stock Connect from time to time. Under Stock Connect, a Portfolio’s trading of eligible A-shares listed on the SSE would be effectuated through its Hong Kong broker.

Although no individual investment quotas or licensing requirements apply to investors in Stock Connect, trading through Stock Connect’s Northbound Trading Link is subject to aggregate and daily investment quota limitations that require that buy orders for A-shares be rejected once the remaining balance of the relevant quota drops to zero or the daily quota is exceeded (although the Portfolio will be permitted to sell A-shares regardless of the quota balance). These limitations may restrict the Portfolio from investing in A-shares on a timely basis, which could affect the Portfolio’s ability to effectively pursue its investment strategy. Investment quotas are also subject to change.

 90

Investment in eligible A-shares through Stock Connect is subject to trading, clearance and settlement procedures that could pose risks to the Portfolio. A-shares purchased through Stock Connect generally may not be sold or otherwise transferred other than through Stock Connect in accordance with applicable rules. For example, PRC regulations require that in order for an investor to sell any A-shares on a certain trading day, there must be sufficient A-shares in the investor’s account before the market opens on that day. If there are insufficient A-shares in the investor’s account, the sell order will be rejected by the SSE. The Stock Exchange of Hong Kong (SEHK) carries out pre-trade checking on sell orders of certain stocks listed on the SSE market (SSE Securities) of its participants (i.e., stock brokers) to ensure that this requirement is satisfied. While shares must be designated as eligible to be traded under Stock Connect, those shares may also lose such designation, and if this occurs, such shares may be sold but cannot be purchased through Stock Connect. In addition, Stock Connect will only operate on days when both the Chinese and Hong Kong markets are open for trading and when banks in both markets are open on the corresponding settlement days. Therefore, an investment in A-shares through Stock Connect may subject the Portfolio to a risk of price fluctuations on days where the Chinese market is open, but Stock Connect is not trading. Moreover, day (turnaround) trading is not permitted on the A-shares market. If an investor buys A-shares on day “T,” the investor will only be able to sell the A-shares on or after day T+1. Further, since all trades of eligible Stock Connect A-shares must be settled in RMB, investors must have timely access to a reliable supply of offshore RMB, which cannot be guaranteed.

A-shares held through the nominee structure under Stock Connect will be held through HKSCC as nominee on behalf of investors. The precise nature and rights of the Portfolio as the beneficial owner of the SSE Securities through HKSCC as nominee is not well defined under PRC law. There is lack of a clear definition of, and distinction between, legal ownership and beneficial ownership under PRC law and there have been few cases involving a nominee account structure in the PRC courts. The exact nature and methods of enforcement of the rights and interests of the Portfolio under PRC law is also uncertain. In the unlikely event that HKSCC becomes subject to winding up proceedings in Hong Kong there is a risk that the SSE Securities may not be regarded as held for the beneficial ownership of the Portfolio or as part of the general assets of HKSCC available for general distribution to its creditors. Notwithstanding the fact that HKSCC does not claim proprietary interests in the SSE Securities held in its omnibus stock account in the CSDCC, the CSDCC as the share registrar for SSE listed companies will still treat HKSCC as one of the shareholders when it handles corporate actions in respect of such SSE Securities. HKSCC monitors the corporate actions affecting SSE Securities and keeps participants of Central Clearing and Settlement System (CCASS) informed of all such corporate actions that require CCASS participants to take steps in order to participate in them. Investors may only exercise their voting rights by providing their voting instructions to the HKSCC through participants of the CCASS. All voting instructions from CCASS participants will be consolidated by HKSCC, who will then submit a combined single voting instruction to the relevant SSE-listed company.

The Portfolio’s investments through Stock Connect’s Northbound Trading Link are not covered by Hong Kong’s Investor Compensation Portfolio. Hong Kong’s Investor Compensation Portfolio is established to pay compensation to investors of any nationality who suffer pecuniary losses as a result of default of a licensed intermediary or authorized financial institution in relation to exchange-traded products in Hong Kong. In addition, since the Portfolio is carrying out Northbound trading through securities brokers in Hong Kong but not PRC brokers, it is not protected by the China Securities Investor Protection Portfolio in the PRC.

Market participants are able to participate in Stock Connect subject to meeting certain information technology capability, risk management and other requirements as may be specified by the relevant exchange and/or clearing house. Further, the “connectivity” in Stock Connect requires the routing of orders across the border of Hong Kong and the PRC. This requires the development of new information technology systems on the part of the SEHK and exchange participants. There is no assurance that these systems will function properly or will continue to be adapted to changes and developments in both markets. In the event that the relevant systems fail to function properly, trading in A-shares through Stock Connect could be disrupted.

Stock Connect is subject to regulations promulgated by regulatory authorities for both exchanges. New regulations may be issued from time to time by the regulators and stock exchanges in PRC and Hong Kong in connection with operations, legal enforcement and cross-border trades under Stock Connect. The Portfolio may be adversely affected as a result of such changes. Furthermore, the securities regimes and legal systems of PRC and Hong Kong differ significantly, and issues may arise based on these differences. In addition, the Portfolios’ investments in A-shares through Stock Connect are generally subject to Chinese securities regulations and listing rules, among other restrictions. Further, different fees, costs and taxes are imposed on foreign investors acquiring A-shares obtained through Stock Connect, and these fees, costs and taxes may be higher than comparable fees, costs and taxes imposed on owners of other securities providing similar investment exposure.

A-Share Market Suspension Risk. A-shares may only be bought from, or sold to, the Portfolio at times when the relevant A-shares may be sold or purchased on the relevant Chinese stock exchange. The A-shares market has historically had a higher propensity for trading suspensions than many other global equity markets. Trading suspensions in certain stocks could lead to greater market execution risk

91

and costs for the Portfolio. The SSE currently applies a daily price limit, set at 10%, of the amount of fluctuation permitted in the prices of A-shares during a single trading day. The daily price limit refers to price movements only and does not restrict trading within the relevant limit. There can be no assurance that a liquid market on an exchange will exist for any particular A-share or for any particular time.

RISK OF INVESTMENTS IN THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA (PRC). Certain Portfolios may invest in securities and instruments that are economically tied to the People’s Republic of China (PRC). The risks of investing in foreign securities and emerging market countries apply to investments economically tied to the PRC. In addition, investments economically tied to the PRC are subject to: (i) inefficiencies resulting from erratic growth; (ii) the unavailability of consistently-reliable economic data; (iii) potentially high rates of inflation; (iv) dependence on exports and international trade; (v) relatively high levels of asset price volatility; (vi) small-market capitalization; (vii) less liquidity and limited accessibility by foreign investors; (viii) greater competition from regional economies; (ix) fluctuations in currency exchange rates or currency devaluation by the PRC government or central bank, particularly in light of the relative lack of currency hedging instruments and controls on the ability to exchange local currency for US dollars; (x) the relatively small size and absence of operating history of many Chinese companies; (xi) the developing nature of the legal and regulatory framework for securities markets, custody arrangements and commerce; (xii) uncertainty and potential changes with respect to the rules and regulations of PRC market access programs through which such investments are made; (xiii) the commitment of the government of the PRC to continue with its economic reforms; and (xiv) the risk that Chinese regulators may suspend trading in Chinese issuers (or permit such issuers to suspend trading) during market disruptions, natural disasters or health crises, such as the outbreak of an infectious disease and that such suspensions may be widespread. In addition, there is a lack of clarity in the laws and regulations of the PRC, and a lower level of regulation and enforcement activity in these securities markets relative to more developed international markets.

The PRC is ruled by the Communist Party. Investments in the PRC are subject to risks associated with greater governmental control over, and involvement in, the economy. The PRC manages its currency at artificial levels relative to the US dollar, rather than at levels determined by the market. This type of system can lead to sudden and large adjustments in the currency, which, in turn, can have a disruptive and negative effect on foreign investors. The PRC also may restrict the free conversion of its currency into foreign currencies, including the US dollar. Currency repatriation restrictions may have the effect of making securities and instruments tied to the PRC relatively illiquid, particularly in connection with redemption requests. In addition, the government of the PRC exercises significant control over economic growth through direct and heavy involvement in resource allocation and monetary policy, control over payment of foreign currency-denominated obligations and provision of preferential treatment to particular industries and/or companies. The PRC has historically been prone to natural disasters, such as droughts, floods, earthquakes and tsunamis, and the region’s economy may be affected by such environmental events in the future. A Portfolio’s investment in the PRC is, therefore, subject to the risk of such events.

The US President signed an executive order that prohibits US persons (which includes individuals and entities like the Portfolios) from purchasing or investing in publicly-traded securities of companies identified by the US government as “Communist Chinese military companies.” In January 2021, the US President signed another executive order that prohibits transactions identified by the US Secretary of Commerce with certain “Chinese connected software applications.” The orders could limit the Portfolios' ability to invest in certain Chinese companies' publicly-traded securities.

Furthermore, many Chinese companies have used complex organizational structures to address Chinese restrictions on foreign investment whereby foreign persons, through another entity domiciled outside of China, have limited contractual rights, including economic benefits, with respect to the Chinese company. While these structures are a longstanding practice in China, such arrangements are not formally recognized under Chinese law. There is a risk that the Chinese government may cease to tolerate these structures at any time or impose new restrictions. If Chinese regulators' tacit acceptance of these arrangements ceases, the value of such holdings would be negatively impacted. Moreover, since such arrangements are not recognized under Chinese law, remedies available to an investor would be limited. Foreign companies listed on US stock exchanges could also face delisting or other ramifications for failure to meet the expectations and/or requirements of the SEC, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, or other US regulators. Future regulatory action may prohibit the ability of these organizational structures to receive the economic benefits of a Chinese company, which would cause the market value of such holding to lose substantial value.

RISK OF INVESTMENTS IN VARIABLE INTEREST ENTITIES. A Fund's investments in emerging markets may also include investments in US- or Hong Kong-listed issuers that have entered into contractual relationships with a China-based business and/or individuals/entities affiliated with the business structured as a variable interest entity (VIE). Instead of directly owning the equity interests in a Chinese company, the listed company has contractual arrangements with the Chinese company, which are expected to provide the listed company with exposure to the China-based company. These arrangements are often used because of Chinese governmental restrictions on non-Chinese ownership of companies in certain industries in China. By entering into contracts with the listed company that sells shares to US investors, the China-based companies and/or related individuals/entities indirectly raise capital from US investors without distributing ownership of the China-based companies to US investors. To Fund Management’s knowledge, the Chinese government has never approved VIE structures. Even though the listed company does not own any equity in the China-based company, the listed

 92

company expects to exercise power over and obtain economic rights from the China-based company based on the contractual arrangements. All or most of the value of an investment in these companies depends on the enforceability of the contracts between the listed company and the China-based VIE. If the parties to the contractual arrangements do not meet their obligations as intended or there are effects on the enforceability of these arrangements from changes in Chinese law or practice, the listed company may lose control over the China-based company, and investments in the listed company's securities may suffer significant economic losses. The contractual arrangements permit the listed issuer to include the financial results of the China-based VIE as a consolidated subsidiary. The listed company often is organized in a jurisdiction other than the United States or China (e.g., the Cayman Islands), which likely will not have the same disclosure, reporting, and governance requirements as the United States. Risks associated with such investments include the risk that the Chinese government could determine at any time and without notice that the underlying contractual arrangements on which control of the VIE is based violate Chinese law, which may result in a significant loss in the value of an investment in a listed company that uses a VIE structure; that a breach of the contractual agreements between the listed company and the China-based VIE (or its officers, directors, or Chinese equity owners) will likely be subject to Chinese law and jurisdiction, which raises questions about whether and how the listed company or its investors could seek recourse in the event of an adverse ruling as to its contractual rights; and that investments in the listed company may be affected by conflicts of interest and duties between the legal owners of the China-based VIE and the stockholders of the listed company, which may adversely impact the value of investments of the listed company.

RUSSIAN FEDERATION INVESTMENT RISK. Investing in the Russian securities market involves a high degree of risk and special considerations not typically associated with investing in the US securities market, and should be considered highly speculative. Risks include: economic, political, and social instability; the absence of developed legal structures governing private and foreign investments and private property; the possibility of the loss of all or a substantial portion of a Portfolio’s assets invested in Russia as a result of expropriation; devaluation; certain national policies which may restrict a Portfolio’s investment opportunities, including, without limitation, restrictions on investing in issuers or industries deemed sensitive to relevant national interests; potentially greater price volatility in, significantly smaller capitalization of, and relative illiquidity of, the Russian market; and the imposition of sanctions and other similar measures. There can also be no assurance that a Portfolio’s investments in the Russian securities market would not be expropriated, nationalized, or otherwise confiscated. In the event of the settlement of any such claims or such expropriation, nationalization or other confiscation, a Portfolio could lose its entire investment. In addition, it may be difficult and more costly to obtain and enforce a judgment in the Russian court system.

Russia launched a large-scale invasion of Ukraine, significantly amplifying already existing geopolitical tensions. Actual and threatened responses to such military action may impact the markets for certain Russian commodities and may likely have collateral impacts on markets globally. The extent and duration of the military action, resulting sanctions imposed and other punitive action taken and resulting future market disruptions, including declines in its stock markets, the value of Russian sovereign debt and the value of the ruble against the US dollar, cannot be easily predicted, but could be significant. Any such disruptions caused by Russian military action or other actions (including terror attacks, cyberattacks and espionage) or resulting actual and threatened responses to such activity, including purchasing and financing restrictions, boycotts or changes in consumer or purchaser preferences, sanctions, tariffs or cyberattacks on the Russian government, Russian companies or Russian individuals, including politicians, may impact Russia’s economy and a Portfolio’s investments in Russian securities. As Russia produces and exports large amounts of crude oil and gas, any acts of terrorism, armed conflict or government interventions (such as the imposition of sanctions or other governmental restrictions on trade) causing disruptions of Russian oil and gas exports could negatively impact the Russian economy and, thus, adversely affect the financial condition, results of operations or prospects of related companies.

As a result of political and military actions undertaken by Russia, the United States and many other countries (Sanctioning Bodies) have instituted various economic sanctions against Russian individuals and entities (including corporate and banking). These sanctions include, but are not limited to: a prohibition on doing business with certain Russian companies, officials and oligarchs; a commitment by certain countries and the European Union to remove selected Russian banks from the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications “SWIFT,” the electronic banking network that connects banks globally; and restrictive measures to prevent the Russian Central Bank from undermining the impact of the sanctions. The Sanctioning Bodies, or others, could also institute broader sanctions on Russia. These sanctions, or even the threat of further sanctions, may result in the decline of the value and liquidity of Russian securities, a weakening of the ruble or other adverse consequences to the Russian economy, including continued weakening of the Russian currency, downgrades in Russia’s credit rating, and a significant decline in the value and liquidity of securities issued by Russian companies or the Russian government. These sanctions and the resulting market environment could result in the immediate freeze of Russian securities, commodities, resources, and/or funds invested in prohibited assets, impairing the ability of a Portfolio to buy, sell, receive or deliver those securities and/or assets. Sanctions could also result in Russia taking counter measures or retaliatory actions which may further impair the value and liquidity of Russian securities, including cyber actions.

93

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the responses of countries and political bodies to Russia’s actions, and the potential for wider conflict may increase financial market volatility and could have severe adverse effects on regional and global economic markets, including the markets for certain securities and commodities, such as oil and natural gas. Any of these events could negatively impact a Portfolio’s investment in Russian securities. These sanctions have the possibility of impairing a Portfolio’s ability to invest in accordance with its investment strategy and/or to meet its investment objective. For example, a Portfolio may be prohibited from investing in securities issued by companies subject to such sanctions. In addition, these sanctions may require a Portfolio to freeze its existing investments in Russian securities, thereby prohibiting the Portfolio from buying, selling, receiving or delivering those securities or other financial instruments. It is also possible that any counter measures or retaliatory action by Russia could further impair the value and liquidity of securities issued by Russian companies and may have an impact on the economies of other European countries and globally as well. Further, due to closures of certain markets and restrictions on trading certain securities, the value of certain securities held by the Portfolio could be significantly impacted, which could lead to such securities being valued at zero.

The Russian government may exercise substantial influence over many aspects of the Russian private sector and may own or control many companies. Future government actions could have a significant effect on the economic conditions in Russia, which could have a negative impact on private sector companies. There is also the possibility of diplomatic developments that could adversely affect investments in Russia. In recent years, the Russian government has taken bold steps, including military actions and alleged state sponsored cyberattacks against foreign companies and governments, to reassert its regional geopolitical influence. Such steps may increase tensions between Russia, its neighbors and Western countries, and may negatively affect its economic growth.

SECURITIES LENDING. Unless otherwise noted, a Portfolio may lend its portfolio securities to brokers, dealers and other financial institutions subject to applicable regulatory requirements and guidance, including the requirements that: (1) the aggregate market value of securities loaned will not at any time exceed 33 1/3% of the total assets of the Portfolio; (2) the borrower pledge and maintain with the Portfolio collateral consisting of cash, an irrevocable letter of credit, or securities issued or guaranteed by the US government having at all times a value of not less than 100% of the value of the securities lent; and (3) the loan be made subject to termination by the Portfolio at any time. Goldman Sachs Bank, USA, d/b/a Goldman Sachs Agency Lending (GSAL), serves as securities lending agent for each Portfolio, and in that role administers each Portfolio’s securities lending program. As compensation for these services, GSAL receives a portion of any amounts earned by the Portfolio through lending securities.

A Portfolio may invest the cash collateral and/or it may receive a fee from the borrower. To the extent that cash collateral is invested, it will be invested in an affiliated prime money market fund and will be subject to market depreciation or appreciation. The Portfolio will be responsible for any loss that results from this investment of collateral.

On termination of the loan, the borrower is required to return the securities to the Portfolio, and any gain or loss in the market price during the loan would inure to the Portfolio. If the borrower defaults on its obligation to return the securities lent because of insolvency or other reasons, the Portfolio could experience delays and costs in recovering the securities lent or in gaining access to the collateral. In such situations, the Portfolio may sell the collateral and purchase a replacement investment in the market. There is a risk that the value of the collateral could decrease below the value of the replacement investment by the time the replacement investment is purchased.

During the time portfolio securities are on loan, the borrower will pay the Portfolio an amount equivalent to any dividend or interest paid on such securities. Voting or consent rights which accompany loaned securities pass to the borrower. However, all loans may be terminated at any time to facilitate the exercise of voting or other consent rights with respect to matters considered to be material. The Portfolio bears the risk that there may be a delay in the return of the securities which may impair the Portfolio’s ability to exercise such rights.

SECURITIES OF SMALLER OR EMERGING GROWTH COMPANIES. Investment in smaller or emerging growth companies involves greater risk than is customarily associated with investments in more established companies. The securities of smaller or emerging growth companies may be subject to more abrupt or erratic market movements than larger, more established companies or the market average in general. These companies may have limited product lines, markets or financial resources, or they may be dependent on a limited management group.

While smaller or emerging growth company issuers may offer greater opportunities for capital appreciation than large cap issuers, investments in smaller or emerging growth companies may involve greater risks and thus may be considered speculative. The Investment Manager believes that properly selected companies of this type have the potential to increase their earnings or market valuation at a rate substantially in excess of the general growth of the economy. Full development of these companies and trends frequently takes time.

 94

Small cap and emerging growth securities will often be traded only in the over-the-counter market or on a regional securities exchange and may not be traded every day or in the volume typical of trading on a national securities exchange. As a result, the disposition by a Portfolio of portfolio securities to meet redemptions or otherwise may require a Portfolio to make many small sales over a lengthy period of time, or to sell these securities at a discount from market prices or during periods when, in the Investment Manager’s judgment, such disposition is not desirable.

While the process of selection and continuous supervision by the Investment Manager does not, of course, guarantee successful investment results, it does provide access to an asset class not available to the average individual due to the time and cost involved. Careful initial selection is particularly important in this area as many new enterprises have promise but lack certain of the factors necessary to prosper. Investing in small cap and emerging growth companies requires specialized research and analysis. In addition, many investors cannot invest sufficient assets in such companies to provide wide diversification.

Small companies are generally little known to most individual investors although some may be dominant in their respective industries. The Investment Manager believes that relatively small companies will continue to have the opportunity to develop into significant business enterprises. A Portfolio may invest in securities of small issuers in the relatively early stages of business development that have a new technology, a unique or proprietary product or service, or a favorable market position. Such companies may not be counted upon to develop into major industrial companies, but Portfolio management believes that eventual recognition of their special value characteristics by the investment community can provide above-average long-term growth to the portfolio.

Equity securities of specific small cap issuers may present different opportunities for long-term capital appreciation during varying portions of economic or securities markets cycles, as well as during varying stages of their business development. The market valuation of small cap issuers tends to fluctuate during economic or market cycles, presenting attractive investment opportunities at various points during these cycles.

Smaller companies, due to the size and kinds of markets that they serve, may be less susceptible than large companies to intervention from the Federal government by means of price controls, regulations or litigation.

SHORT SALES AND SHORT SALES AGAINST-THE-BOX. Certain Portfolios may make short sales of securities, either as a hedge against potential declines in value of a portfolio security or to realize appreciation when a security that the Portfolio does not own declines in value. When a Portfolio makes a short sale, it borrows the security sold short and delivers it to the broker-dealer through which it made the short sale. A Portfolio may have to pay a fee to borrow particular securities and is often obligated to turn over any payments received on such borrowed securities to the lender of the securities. A Portfolio may not be able to limit any losses resulting from share price volatility if the security indefinitely continues to increase in value at such specified time.

A Portfolio secures its obligation to replace the borrowed security by depositing collateral with the broker-dealer, usually in cash, US Government securities or other liquid securities similar to those borrowed. With respect to the uncovered short positions, a Portfolio is required to (1) deposit similar collateral with its custodian or otherwise segregate collateral on its records, to the extent that the value of the collateral in the aggregate is at all times equal to at least 100% of the current market value of the security sold short, or (2) a Portfolio must otherwise cover its short position. Depending on arrangements made with the broker-dealer from which the Portfolio borrowed the security, regarding payment over of any payments received by a Portfolio on such security, a Portfolio may not receive any payments (including interest) on its collateral deposited with such broker-dealer. Because making short sales in securities that it does not own exposes a Portfolio to the risks associated with those securities, such short sales involve speculative exposure risk. As a result, if a Portfolio makes short sales in securities that increase in value, it will likely underperform similar funds that do not make short sales in securities they do not own. A Portfolio will incur a loss as a result of a short sale if the price of the security increases between the date of the short sale and the date on which the Portfolio replaces the borrowed security. A Portfolio will realize a gain if the security declines in price between those dates. There can be no assurance that a Portfolio will be able to close out a short sale position at any particular time or at an acceptable price. Although a Portfolio’s gain is limited to the price at which it sold the security short, its potential loss is limited only by the maximum attainable price of the security, less the price at which the security was sold and may, theoretically, be unlimited.

Certain Portfolios may also make short sales against-the-box. A short sale against-the-box is a short sale in which the Portfolio owns an equal amount of the securities sold short, or securities convertible or exchangeable for, with or without payment of any further consideration, such securities. Short sale borrowings are considered to be “derivative transactions” under Rule 18f-4 of the Investment Company Act of 1940 and therefore the Portfolios intend that any transactions involving short sale borrowings will be conducted in compliance with the requirements of Rule 18f-4.

SOVEREIGN DEBT. Investment in sovereign debt can involve a high degree of risk. The governmental entity that controls the repayment of sovereign debt may not be able or willing to repay the principal and/or interest when due in accordance with the terms of such debt. A governmental entity's willingness or ability to repay principal and interest due in a timely manner may be affected by, among other

95

factors, its cash flow situation, the extent of its foreign reserves, the availability of sufficient foreign exchange on the date a payment is due, the relative size of the debt service burden to the economy as a whole, the government entity's policy towards the International Monetary Fund and the political constraints to which a government entity may be subject. Governmental entities may also be dependent on expected disbursements from foreign governments, multilateral agencies and others abroad to reduce principal and interest arrearages on their debt. The commitment on the part of these governments, agencies and others to make such disbursements may be conditioned on the implementation of economic reforms and/or economic performance and the timely service of such debtor's obligations. Failure to implement such reforms, achieve such levels of economic performance or repay principal or interest when due may result in the cancellation of such third parties' commitments to lend Portfolios to the governmental entity, which may further impair such debtor's ability or willingness to timely service its debts. Consequently, governmental entities may default on their sovereign debt. Holders of sovereign debt may be requested to participate in the rescheduling of such debt and to extend further loans to government entities. In the event of a default by a governmental entity, there may be few or no effective legal remedies for collecting on such debt.

SPECIAL PURPOSE ACQUISITION COMPANIES.  A Portfolio may invest in stock, warrants, and other securities of special purpose acquisition companies (SPACs) or similar special purpose entities that pool funds to seek potential acquisition or merger opportunities. A SPAC is typically a publicly traded company that raises funds through an initial public offering (IPO) for the purpose of acquiring or merging with an unaffiliated company to be identified subsequent to the SPAC's IPO. SPACs are often used as a vehicle to transition a company from private to publicly traded.  The securities of a SPAC are often issued in “units” that include one share of common stock and one right or warrant (or partial right or warrant) conveying the right to purchase additional shares or partial shares.  Unless and until a transaction is completed, a SPAC generally invests its assets (less a portion retained to cover expenses) in US Government securities, money market fund securities and cash. To the extent the SPAC is invested in cash or similar securities, this may impact a Portfolio's ability to meet its investment objective. If an acquisition or merger that meets the requirements for the SPAC is not completed within a pre-established period of time, the invested funds are returned to the SPAC's shareholders, less certain permitted expenses, and any rights or warrants issued by the SPAC will expire worthless. Because SPACs and similar entities have no operating history or ongoing business other than seeking acquisitions, the value of their securities is particularly dependent on the ability of the entity's management to identify and complete a suitable transaction. Some SPACs may pursue acquisitions or mergers only within certain industries or regions, which may further increase the volatility of their securities' prices. In addition to purchasing publicly traded SPAC securities, a Portfolio may invest in SPACs through additional financings via securities offerings that are exempt from registration under the federal securities laws (restricted securities).  No public market will exist for these restricted securities unless and until they are registered for resale with the SEC, and such securities may be considered illiquid and/or be subject to restrictions on resale. It may also be difficult to value restricted securities issued by SPACs.

An investment in a SPAC is subject to a variety of risks, including that: a significant portion of the funds raised by the SPAC for the purpose of identifying and effecting an acquisition or merger may be expended during the search for a target transaction; an attractive acquisition or merger target may not be identified and the SPAC will be required to return any remaining invested funds to shareholders; attractive acquisition or merger targets may become scarce if the number of SPACs seeking to acquire operating businesses increases; any proposed merger or acquisition may be unable to obtain the requisite approval, if any, of SPAC shareholders and/or antitrust and securities regulators; an acquisition or merger once effected may prove unsuccessful and an investment in the SPAC may lose value; the warrants or other rights with respect to the SPAC held by the Portfolio may expire worthless or may be repurchased or retired by the SPAC at an unfavorable price; the Portfolio may be delayed in receiving any redemption or liquidation proceeds from a SPAC to which it is entitled; an investment in a SPAC may be diluted by subsequent public or private  offerings of securities in the SPAC or by other investors exercising existing rights to purchase securities of the SPAC; SPAC sponsors generally purchase interests in the SPAC at more favorable terms than investors in the IPO or subsequent investors on the open market; no or only a thinly traded market for shares of or interests in a SPAC may develop, leaving the Portfolio unable to sell its interest in a SPAC or to sell its interest only at a price below what the Portfolio believes is the SPAC security's value; and the values of investments in SPACs may be highly volatile and may depreciate significantly over time. 

STANDBY COMMITMENT AGREEMENTS. A Portfolio may enter into standby commitment agreements. These agreements commit a Portfolio, for a stated period of time, to purchase a stated amount of securities that may be issued and sold to that Portfolio at the option of the issuer. The price of the security is fixed at the time of the commitment. At the time of entering into the agreement the Portfolio is paid a commitment fee, regardless of whether or not the security is ultimately issued. A Portfolio will enter into such agreements for the purpose of investing in the security underlying the commitment at a price that is considered advantageous to the Portfolio. A Portfolio will limit its investment in such commitments so that the aggregate purchase price of securities subject to such commitments, together with the value of portfolio securities subject to legal restrictions on resale that affect their marketability, will not exceed 15% of its net assets taken at the time of the commitment. There can be no assurance that the securities subject to a standby commitment will be issued, and the value of the security, if issued, on the delivery date may be more or less than its purchase price. Since the issuance of the security underlying the commitment is at the option of the issuer, the Portfolio may bear the risk of a decline in the value of such security and may not benefit from any appreciation in the value of the security during the commitment period. The purchase of a security subject to a standby commitment agreement and the related commitment fee will be recorded on the date on which the security can reasonably

 96

be expected to be issued, and the value of the security thereafter will be reflected in the calculation of a Portfolio's net asset value. The cost basis of the security will be adjusted by the amount of the commitment fee. In the event the security is not issued, the commitment fee will be recorded as income on the expiration date of the standby commitment.

STRIPPED SECURITIES. Stripped securities are created when the issuer separates the interest and principal components of an instrument and sells them as separate securities. In general, one security is entitled to receive the interest payments on the underlying assets (the interest only or “IO” security) and the other to receive the principal payments (the principal only or “PO” security). Some stripped securities may receive a combination of interest and principal payments. The yields to maturity on IOs and POs are sensitive to the expected or anticipated rate of principal payments (including prepayments) on the related underlying assets, and principal payments may have a material effect on yield to maturity. If the underlying assets experience greater than anticipated prepayments of principal, a Portfolio may not fully recoup its initial investment in IOs. Conversely, if the underlying assets experience less than anticipated prepayments of principal, the yield on POs could be adversely affected. Stripped securities may be highly sensitive to changes in interest rates and rates of prepayment.

STRUCTURED NOTES. Certain Portfolios may invest in structured notes. The values of the structured notes in which a Portfolio will invest may be linked to equity securities or equity indices or other instruments or indices (reference instruments). These notes differ from other types of debt securities in several respects. The interest rate or principal amount payable at maturity may vary based on changes in the value of the equity security, instrument, or index. A structured note may be positively or negatively indexed; that is, its value or interest rate may increase or decrease if the value of the reference instrument increases. Similarly, its value may increase or decrease if the value of the reference instrument decreases. Further, the change in the principal amount payable with respect to, or the interest rate of, a structured note may be a multiple of the percentage change (positive or negative) in the value of the underlying reference instrument(s).

Investments in structured notes involve certain risks, including the credit risk of the issuer and the normal risks of price changes in response to changes in interest rates. Further, in the case of certain structured notes, a decline or increase in the value of the reference instrument may cause the interest rate to be reduced to zero, and any further declines or increases in the reference instrument may then reduce the principal amount payable on maturity. The percentage by which the value of the structured note decreases may be far greater than the percentage by which the value of the reference instrument increases or decreases. Finally, these securities may be less liquid than other types of securities, and may be more volatile than their underlying reference instruments.

SUPRANATIONAL ENTITIES. A Portfolio may invest in debt securities of supranational entities . Examples include the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (the World Bank), the Asian Development Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank. The government members, or “stockholders,” usually make initial capital contributions to the supranational entity and in many cases are committed to make additional capital contributions if the supranational entity is unable to repay its borrowings.

SWAP AGREEMENTS. Certain Portfolios may enter into swap transactions, including but not limited to, interest rate, index, credit default, total return and, to the extent that it may invest in foreign currency-denominated securities, currency exchange rate swap agreements. In addition, certain Portfolios may enter into options on swap agreements (swap options). These swap transactions are entered into in an attempt to obtain a particular return when it is considered desirable to do so, possibly at a lower cost to a Portfolio than if the Portfolio had invested directly in an instrument that yielded that desired return.

Swap agreements are two party contracts entered into primarily by institutional investors for periods typically ranging from a few weeks to more than one year. In a standard “swap” transaction, two parties agree to exchange the returns (or differentials in rates of return) earned or realized on or calculated with respect to particular predetermined investments or instruments, which may be adjusted for an interest factor. The gross returns to be exchanged or “swapped” between the parties are generally calculated with respect to a “notional amount,” that is, the return on or increase in value of a particular dollar amount invested at a particular interest rate or in a “basket” of securities representing a particular index or other investments or instruments.

Most swap agreements entered into by a Portfolio would calculate the obligations of the parties to the agreement on a “net basis.”Consequently, a Portfolio's current obligations (or rights) under a swap agreement will generally be equal only to the net amount to be paid or received under the agreement based on the relative values of the positions held by each party to the agreement (the net amount). The Portfolio's current obligations under a swap agreement will be accrued daily (offset against any amounts owed to the Portfolio). Swap agreements are considered to be “derivative transactions” under Rule 18f-4 of the Investment Company Act of 1940 and therefore the Portfolios intend that any transactions involving swap agreements will be conducted in compliance with the requirements of Rule 18f-4. If there is a default by the other party to such a transaction, the Portfolio will have contractual remedies pursuant to the agreement related to the transaction. Since swaps are individually negotiated, the Portfolio expects to achieve an

97

acceptable degree of correlation between its rights to receive a return on its portfolio securities and its rights and obligations to receive and pay a return pursuant to swaps. The Portfolio will enter into swaps only with parties meeting creditworthiness standards of the investment subadviser. The investment subadviser will monitor the creditworthiness of such parties.

Certain standardized swap transactions are subject to mandatory central clearing and exchange trading. Although central clearing and exchange trading is expected to decrease counterparty risk and increase liquidity compared to bilaterally negotiated swaps, central clearing and exchange trading does not eliminate counterparty risk or illiquidity risk entirely. Depending on the size of a Portfolio and other factors, the margin required under the rules of a clearinghouse and by a clearing member may be in excess of the collateral required to be posted by the Portfolio to support its obligations under a similar bilateral, uncleared swap. However, certain applicable regulators have adopted rules imposing certain margin requirements, including minimums, on uncleared swaps, which may result in the Portfolio and its counterparties posting higher amounts for uncleared swaps.

TEMPORARY DEFENSIVE STRATEGY AND SHORT-TERM INVESTMENTS. Each Portfolio may temporarily invest without limit in money market instruments, including commercial paper of US corporations, certificates of deposit, bankers' acceptances and other obligations of domestic banks, and obligations issued or guaranteed by the US government, its agencies or its instrumentalities, as part of a temporary defensive strategy or to maintain liquidity to meet redemptions. Money market instruments typically have a maturity of one year or less as measured from the date of purchase.

A Portfolio also may temporarily hold cash or invest in money market instruments pending investment of proceeds from new sales of Portfolio shares or during periods of portfolio restructuring.

TOTAL RETURN SWAP AGREEMENTS. Certain Portfolios may enter into total return swap agreements. Total return swap agreements are contracts in which one party agrees to make periodic payments based on the change in market value of the underlying assets, which may include a specified security, basket of securities or securities indices during the specified period, in return for periodic payments based on a fixed or variable interest rate or the total return from other underlying assets. Total return swap agreements may be used to obtain exposure to a security or market without owning or taking physical custody of such security or market. Total return swap agreements may effectively add leverage to a Portfolio because, in addition to its total net assets, the Portfolio would be subject to investment exposure on the notional amount of the swap. Total return swap agreements entail the risk that a party will default on its payment obligations to a Portfolio thereunder. Swap agreements also bear the risk that a Portfolio will not be able to meet its obligation to the counterparty. Generally, a Portfolio will enter into total return swaps on a net basis (i.e., the two payment streams are netted out with a Portfolio receiving or paying, as the case may be, only the net amount of the two payments). The net amount of the excess, if any, of a Portfolio's obligations over its entitlements with respect to each total return swap will be accrued on a daily basis. If the total return swap transaction is entered into on other than a net basis, the full amount of a Portfolio's obligations will be accrued on a daily basis.

Unless otherwise noted, a Portfolio's net obligations in respect of all swap agreements (i.e., the aggregate net amount owed by the Portfolio) is limited to 15% of its net assets.

TRACERS AND TRAINS. Tradable Custodial Receipts or TRACERS represent an interest in a basket of investment grade corporate credits. Targeted Return Index Securities or TRAINS represent an interest in a basket of high yield securities of varying credit quality. Only the Jennison Value Portfolio may invest in TRAINS. Interests in TRACERS and TRAINS provide a cost-effective alternative to purchasing individual issues.

US GOVERNMENT SECURITIES. Certain Portfolios may invest in adjustable rate and fixed rate US Government securities. US Government securities are instruments issued or guaranteed by the US Treasury or by an agency or instrumentality of the US Government. US Government guarantees do not extend to the yield or value of the securities or a Portfolio's shares. Not all US Government securities are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. Some are supported only by the credit of the issuing agency.

US Treasury securities include bills, notes, bonds and other debt securities issued by the US Treasury. These instruments are direct obligations of the US Government and, as such, are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. They differ primarily in their interest rates, the lengths of their maturities and the dates of their issuances. US Government guarantees do not extend to the yield or value of the securities or a Portfolio's shares.

Securities issued by agencies of the US Government or instrumentalities of the US Government, including those which are guaranteed by Federal agencies or instrumentalities, may or may not be backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. Obligations of the Ginnie Mae, the Farmers Home Administration and the Small Business Administration are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. In the case of securities not backed by the full faith and credit of the United States, a Portfolio must look principally to the agency issuing or guaranteeing the obligation for ultimate repayment and may not be able to assert a claim against the United States if the agency or instrumentality does not meet its commitments.

 98

Certain Portfolios may also invest in component parts of US Government securities, namely either the corpus (principal) of such obligations or one or more of the interest payments scheduled to be paid on such obligations. These obligations may take the form of (1) obligations from which the interest coupons have been stripped; (2) the interest coupons that are stripped; (3) book-entries at a Federal Reserve member bank representing ownership of obligation components; or (4) receipts evidencing the component parts (corpus or coupons) of US Government obligations that have not actually been stripped. Such receipts evidence ownership of component parts of US Government obligations (corpus or coupons) purchased by a third party (typically an investment banking firm) and held on behalf of the third party in physical or book-entry form by a major commercial bank or trust company pursuant to a custody agreement with the third party. A Portfolio may also invest in custodial receipts held by a third party that are not US Government securities. US Government securities may be affected by changing interest rates.

WARRANTS AND RIGHTS. Warrants and rights are securities permitting, but not obligating, the warrant holder to subscribe for other securities. Buying a warrant does not make a Portfolio a shareholder of the underlying stock. The warrant holder has no right to dividends or votes on the underlying stock. A warrant does not carry any right to assets of the issuer, and for this reason investment in warrants may be more speculative than other equity-based investments.

WHEN ISSUED SECURITIES, DELAYED DELIVERY SECURITIES AND FORWARD COMMITMENTS. A Portfolio may purchase or sell securities that it is entitled to receive on a when issued basis. A Portfolio may also purchase or sell securities on a delayed delivery basis or through a forward commitment. These transactions involve the purchase or sale of securities by a Portfolio at an established price with payment and delivery taking place in the future. A Portfolio enters into these transactions to obtain what is considered an advantageous price to the Portfolio at the time of entering into the transaction. No Portfolio has established any limit on the percentage of its assets that may be committed in connection with these transactions. When issued securities, delayed delivery securities and forward commitments are considered to be “derivative transactions” under Rule 18f-4 of the Investment Company Act of 1940 and therefore the Portfolios intended that any transactions involving when issued securities, delayed delivery securities or forward commitments will be conducted in compliance with the requirements of Rule 18f-4.

There can be no assurance that a security purchased on a when issued basis will be issued or that a security purchased or sold through a forward commitment will be delivered. The value of securities in these transactions on the delivery date may be more or less than the Portfolio's purchase price. The Portfolio may bear the risk of a decline in the value of the security in these transactions and may not benefit from an appreciation in the value of the security during the commitment period.

ZERO COUPON SECURITIES, PAY-IN-KIND SECURITIES AND DEFERRED PAYMENT SECURITIES. Certain Portfolios may invest in zero coupon securities. Zero coupon securities are securities that are sold at a discount to par value and on which interest payments are not made during the life of the security. The discount approximates the total amount of interest the security will accrue and compound over the period until maturity on the particular interest payment date at a rate of interest reflecting the market rate of the security at the time of issuance. Upon maturity, the holder is entitled to receive the par value of the security. While interest payments are not made on such securities, holders of such securities are deemed to have received income (phantom income) annually, notwithstanding that cash may not be received currently. The effect of owning instruments that do not make current interest payments is that a fixed yield is earned not only on the original investment but also, in effect, on all discount accretion during the life of the obligations. This implicit reinvestment of earnings at the same rate eliminates the risk of being unable to invest distributions at a rate as high as the implicit yield on the zero coupon bond, but at the same time eliminates the holder's ability to reinvest at higher rates in the future. For this reason, some of these securities may be subject to substantially greater price fluctuations during periods of changing market interest rates than are comparable securities that pay interest currently, which fluctuation increases the longer the period to maturity. These investments benefit the issuer by mitigating its need for cash to meet debt service, but also require a higher rate of return to attract investors who are willing to defer receipt of cash.

A Portfolio accrues income with respect to these securities for Federal income tax and accounting purposes prior to the receipt of cash payments. Zero coupon securities may be subject to greater fluctuation in value and lesser liquidity in the event of adverse market conditions than comparable rated securities paying cash interest at regular intervals. In addition to the above-described risks, there are certain other risks related to investing in zero coupon securities. During a period of severe market conditions, the market for such securities may become even less liquid. In addition, as these securities do not pay cash interest, a Portfolio's investment exposure to these securities and their risks, including credit risk, will increase during the time these securities are held in the Portfolio's portfolio. Further, to maintain its qualification for pass-through treatment under the Federal tax laws, a Portfolio is required to distribute income to its shareholders and, consequently, may have to dispose of its portfolio securities under disadvantageous circumstances to generate the cash, or may have to leverage itself by borrowing the cash to satisfy these distributions, as they relate to the income accrued but not yet received. The required distributions will result in an increase in a Portfolio's exposure to such securities.

99

Pay-in-kind securities are securities that have interest payable by delivery of additional securities. Upon maturity, the holder is entitled to receive the aggregate par value of the securities. Deferred payment securities are securities that remain a zero coupon security until a predetermined date, at which time the stated coupon rate becomes effective and interest becomes payable at regular intervals. Holders of these types of securities are deemed to have received phantom income annually, notwithstanding that cash may not be received currently. The effect of owning instruments which do not make current interest payments is that a fixed yield is earned not only on the original investment but also, in effect, on all discount accretion during the life of the obligations. This implicit reinvestment of earnings at the same rate eliminates the risk of being unable to invest distributions at a rate as high as the implicit yield on the zero coupon bond, but at the same time eliminates the holder's ability to reinvest at higher rates in the future. For this reason, some of these securities may be subject to substantially greater price fluctuations during periods of changing market interest rates than are comparable securities which pay interest currently, which fluctuation increases the longer the period to maturity. These investments benefit the issuer by mitigating its need for cash to meet debt service, but also require a higher rate of return to attract investors who are willing to defer receipt of cash. Zero coupon, pay-in-kind and deferred payment securities may be subject to greater fluctuation in value and lesser liquidity in the event of adverse market conditions than comparable rated securities paying cash interest at regular intervals.

In addition to the above described risks, there are certain other risks related to investing in zero coupon, pay-in-kind and deferred payment securities. During a period of severe market conditions, the market for such securities may become even less liquid. In addition, as these securities do not pay cash interest, the Portfolio's investment exposure to these securities and their risks, including credit risk, will increase during the time these securities are held in the Portfolio's portfolio. Further, to maintain its qualification for pass-through treatment under the federal tax laws, the Portfolio is required to distribute income to its shareholders and, consequently, may have to dispose of its portfolio securities under disadvantageous circumstances to generate the cash, or may have to leverage itself by borrowing the cash to satisfy these distributions, as they relate to the distribution of phantom income and the value of the paid-in-kind interest. The required distributions will result in an increase in the Portfolio's exposure to such securities.

NET ASSET VALUES

Any purchase or sale of Portfolio shares is made at the net asset value (NAV), of such shares. The price at which a purchase or redemption is made is based on the next calculation of the NAV after the order is received in good order. The NAV of each Portfolio is typically determined on each day the NYSE is open for trading as of the close of the exchange's regular trading session (which is generally 4:00 p.m. New York time). The Trust will not treat an intraday unscheduled disruption in NYSE trading as a closure of the NYSE and will price its shares as of 4:00 p.m. if the particular disruption directly affects only the NYSE. The NYSE is closed on most national holidays and Good Friday. The Trust does not price, and shareholders will not be able to purchase or redeem, the Trust's shares on days when the NYSE is closed but the primary markets for the Trust's foreign securities are open, even though the value of these securities may have changed. Conversely, the Trust will ordinarily price its shares, and shareholders may purchase and redeem shares, on days that the NYSE is open but foreign securities markets are closed.

The securities held by each of the Trust's Portfolios are valued based upon market quotations or, if not readily available, at fair value as determined in good faith under policies and procedures adopted and implemented by the Manager, the Trust's valuation designee. Pursuant to Rule 2a-5 under the 1940 Act, the Board of Trustees has designated the Manager as the valuation designee for the respective Portfolios for which it serves as investment manager. The Manager may use fair value pricing if it determines that a market quotation is not reliable based, among other things, on market conditions that occur after the quotation is derived or after the closing of the primary market on which the security is traded, but before the time that the NAV is determined. This use of fair value pricing most commonly occurs with securities that are primarily traded outside of the US because such securities present time-zone arbitrage opportunities when events or conditions affecting the prices of specific securities or the prices of securities traded in such markets generally occur after the close of the foreign markets but prior to the time that a Portfolio determines its NAV.

The Manager may also use fair value pricing with respect to US traded securities if, for example, trading in a particular security is halted and does not resume before the Manager calculates its NAV or the exchange on which a security is traded closes early. In addition, fair value pricing is used for securities where the pricing agent or principal market maker does not provide a valuation or methodology or provides a valuation or methodology that, in the judgment of the Manager does not represent fair value. Different valuation methods may result in differing values for the same security. The fair value of a portfolio security that the Manager uses to determine its NAV may differ from the security's published or quoted price. If the Manager needs to implement fair value pricing after the NAV publishing deadline but before shares of a Portfolio are processed, the NAV you receive or pay may differ from the published NAV price. For purposes of computing each Portfolio’s NAV, the Manager will value each Portfolio’s futures contracts 15 minutes after the close of regular trading on the NYSE. Except when the Manager fair values securities, the Manager normally values each foreign security held by the Trust as of the close of the security's primary market.

 100

Fair value pricing procedures are designed to result in prices for a Portfolio's securities and its NAV that are reasonable in light of the circumstances which make or have made market quotations unavailable or unreliable, and to reduce arbitrage opportunities available to short-term traders. There is no assurance, however, that fair value pricing will more accurately reflect the market value of a security than the market price of such security on that day or that it will prevent dilution of a Portfolio's NAV by short-term traders.

The NAV for each of the Portfolios other than the PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio is determined by a simple calculation. It's the total value of a Portfolio (assets minus liabilities) divided by the total number of shares outstanding. As explained below, the PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio uses the amortized cost method of valuation, which is designed to permit the PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio to maintain a stable NAV of $10.00 per share. Although the price of each share is designed to remain the same, the PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio issues additional shares when dividends are declared.

To determine a Portfolio's NAV, its holdings are valued as follows:

Equity securities for which the primary market is on an exchange (whether domestic or foreign) shall be valued at the last sale price on such exchange or market on the day of valuation or, if there was no sale on such day, at the mean between the last bid and asked prices on such day or at the last bid price on such day in the absence of an asked price. Securities included within the NASDAQ market shall be valued at the NASDAQ official closing price (NOCP) on the day of valuation, or if there was no NOCP issued, at the last sale price on such day. Securities included within the NASDAQ market for which there is no NOCP and no last sale price on the day of valuation shall be valued at the mean between the last bid and asked prices on such day or at the last bid price on such day in the absence of an asked price. Equity securities that are not sold on an exchange or NASDAQ are generally valued by an independent pricing agent or principal market maker.

A Portfolio may own securities that are primarily listed on foreign exchanges that trade on weekends or other days when the Portfolios do not price their shares. Therefore, the value of a Portfolio's assets may change on days when shareholders cannot purchase or redeem Portfolio shares.

All Short-term Debt Securities held by the PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio are valued at amortized cost. The amortized cost valuation method is widely used by mutual funds. It means that the security is valued initially at its purchase price and then decreases in value by equal amounts each day until the security matures. It almost always results in a value that is extremely close to the actual market value. The Manager has adopted and implemented policies and procedures to monitor whether any material deviation between valuation and market value occurs and if so, will promptly consider what action, if any, should be taken to prevent unfair results to Contract owners.

For each Portfolio other than the PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio, short-term debt securities, including bonds, notes, debentures and other debt securities, and money market instruments such as certificates of deposit, commercial paper, bankers' acceptances and obligations of domestic and foreign banks for which market quotations are readily available, are valued by an independent pricing agent or principal market maker (if available, otherwise a primary market dealer).

Convertible debt securities that are traded in the over-the-counter market, including listed convertible debt securities for which the primary market is believed by PGIM Investments or a subadviser to be over-the-counter, are valued on the day of valuation at an evaluated bid price provided by an independent pricing agent or, in the absence of valuation provided by an independent pricing agent, at the bid price provided by a principal market maker or primary market dealer.

Other debt securities—those that are not valued on an amortized cost basis—are valued using an independent pricing service. Options on stock and stock indexes that are traded on a national securities exchange are valued at the last sale price on such exchange on the day of valuation or, if there was no such sale on such day, at the mean between the most recently quoted bid and asked prices on such exchange.

Futures contracts and options on futures contracts are valued at the last sale price at the close of the commodities exchange or board of trade on which they are traded. If there has been no sale that day, the securities will be valued at the mean between the most recently quoted bid and asked prices on that exchange or board of trade.

Forward currency exchange contracts are valued at the cost of covering or offsetting such contracts calculated on the day of valuation. Securities which are valued in accordance herewith in a currency other than US dollars shall be converted to US dollar equivalents at a rate obtained from a recognized bank, dealer or independent service on the day of valuation.

101

Over-the-counter (OTC) options are valued at the mean between bid and asked prices provided by a dealer (which may be the counterparty). A subadviser will monitor the market prices of the securities underlying the OTC options with a view to determining the necessity of obtaining additional bid and ask quotations from other dealers to assess the validity of the prices received from the primary pricing dealer.

TAXATION

This discussion of federal income tax consequences applies to the Participating Insurance Companies because they are the direct shareholders of the Trust. Contract owners should consult their Contract prospectus for information relating to the tax matters applicable to their Contracts. In addition, variable contract owners may wish to consult with their own tax advisors as to the tax consequences of investments in the Trust, including the application of state and local taxes.

Each Portfolio currently intends to be treated as a partnership for federal income tax purposes. As a result, each Portfolio's income, gains, losses, deductions, and credits will be “passed through” pro rata directly to the Participating Insurance Companies and retain the same character for federal income tax purposes. Distributions may be made to the various separate accounts of the Participating Insurance Companies in the form of additional shares (not in cash).

Under Code Section 817(h), a segregated asset account upon which a variable annuity contract or variable life insurance policy is based must be “adequately diversified.” A segregated asset account will be adequately diversified if it satisfies one of two alternative tests set forth in Treasury regulations. For purposes of these alternative diversification tests, a segregated asset account investing in shares of a regulated investment company will be entitled to “look-through” the regulated investment company to its pro rata portion of the regulated investment company's assets, provided the regulated investment company satisfies certain conditions relating to the ownership of its shares. The Trust intends to satisfy these ownership conditions. Further, the Trust intends that each Portfolio separately will be adequately diversified. Accordingly, a segregated asset account investing solely in shares of a Portfolio will be adequately diversified, and a segregated asset account investing in shares of one or more Portfolios and shares of other adequately diversified funds generally will be adequately diversified.

The foregoing discussion of federal income tax consequences is based on tax laws and regulations in effect on the date of this SAI, and is subject to change by legislative or administrative action. A description of other tax considerations generally affecting the Trust and its shareholders is found in the section of the Prospectus entitled “Federal Income Taxes.” No attempt is made to present a detailed explanation of the tax treatment of the Trust or its shareholders. No attempt is made to present a detailed explanation of state or local tax matters. The discussion herein and in the Prospectus is not intended as a substitute for careful tax planning.

DISCLOSURE OF PORTFOLIO HOLDINGS

PORTFOLIOS OTHER THAN THE PSF PGIM GOVERNMENT MONEY MARKET PORTFOLIO. Each Portfolio's portfolio holdings as of the end of the second and fourth fiscal quarters are made public, as required by law, in the Trust's annual and semi-annual reports. These reports are filed with the SEC on Form N-CSR and mailed to shareholders within 60 days after the end of the second and fourth fiscal quarters. The Trust's annual and semi-annual reports are posted on the Trust's website.

Each Portfolio's portfolio holdings as of the end of the first and third fiscal quarters are made public and filed with the SEC on Form N-PORT. The Trust files disclosure of each Portfolio’s complete holdings on Form N-PORT each month, with every third month made available to the public by the SEC 60 days after the end of the Portfolios’ first and third fiscal quarters.

In addition, the Trust may provide a full list of each Portfolio's portfolio holdings as of the end of each month on its website no sooner than approximately three business days prior to the end of the following month. The Trust may also release, at a sleeve-level and/or the composite level, each Portfolio's top ten holdings (or in the case of a fund of funds the complete list of portfolio funds and/or the top ten holdings of the portfolio funds), and summary statistics regarding sectors, countries and/or industries and other characteristics, as of each month end, with all such information posted on the Trust’s website approximately 15 days after the end of the month, unless noted otherwise herein.

PSF PGIM GOVERNMENT MONEY MARKET PORTFOLIO. The PSF PGIM Government Money Market Portfolio will release complete portfolio holdings and certain other portfolio information to the SEC as filed on Form N-MFP and to its website as required by Rules 2a-7 and 30b1-7 of the 1940 Act.

When authorized by the Trust's Chief Compliance Officer and another officer of the Trust, portfolio holdings information may be disseminated more frequently or at different periods than as described above. The Trust has entered into ongoing arrangements to make available information about the Trust's portfolio holdings. Parties receiving this information may include intermediaries that distribute the Trust's shares, third party providers of auditing, custody, proxy voting and other services for the Trust, rating and ranking organizations, and certain affiliated persons of the Trust, as described below. The procedures utilized to determine eligibility are set forth below:

 102

Procedures for Release of Portfolio Holdings Information:

1. A request for release of Portfolio holdings shall be provided by such third party setting forth a legitimate business purpose for such release which shall specify the Portfolio, the terms of such release, and frequency (e.g., level of detail staleness). The request shall address whether there are any conflicts of interest between the Portfolio and the investment adviser, subadviser, principal underwriter or any affiliated person thereof and how such conflicts shall be dealt with to demonstrate that the disclosure is in the best interest of the shareholders of the Portfolio.

2. The request shall be forwarded to the Chief Compliance Officer of the Trust, or his delegate, for review and approval.

3. A confidentiality agreement in the form approved by an officer of the Trust must be executed with the recipient of the Portfolio holdings information.

4. An officer of the Portfolio shall approve the release and agreement. Copies of the release and agreement shall be sent to PGIM Investments’ law department.

5. Written notification of the approval shall be sent by such officer to PGIM Investments' Fund Administration Department to arrange the release of Portfolio holdings information.

6. PGIM Investments' Fund Administration Department shall arrange for the release of portfolio holdings information by the Portfolio's custodian bank(s).

As of the date of this Statement of Additional Information, the Trust will provide:

Traditional External Recipients/Vendors

◾

Full holdings on a daily basis to the Portfolio’s proxy voting agents at the end of each day;

◾

Full holdings on a daily basis to ISS (securities class action claims services administrator) at the end of each day;

◾

Full holdings on a daily basis to each Portfolio's subadviser(s) (as identified in the Trust's Prospectus), custodian bank, sub-custodian (including foreign sub-custodians), if any, and accounting agents (which includes the custodian bank and any other accounting agent that may be appointed) at the end of each day. When a Portfolio has more than one subadviser, each subadviser receives holdings information only with respect to the “sleeve” or segment of the Portfolio for which the subadviser has responsibility;

◾

Full holdings on a daily basis to Goldman Sachs Bank USA, doing business as Goldman Sachs Agency Lending (securities lending agent) at the end of each day;

◾

Full holdings to a Portfolio's independent registered public accounting firm as soon as practicable following the Portfolio's fiscal year-end or on an as-needed basis;

◾

Full holdings to a Portfolio’s counsel on an as-needed basis;

◾

Full holdings to a Portfolio’s independent board members on an as-needed basis; and

◾

Full holdings to financial printers as soon as practicable following the end of a Portfolio's quarterly, semi-annual and annual period ends.

2.

Analytical Service Providers

◾

Portfolio trades on a quarterly basis to Abel/Noser Corp. (an agency-only broker and transaction cost analysis company) as soon as practicable following a Portfolio's fiscal quarter-end;

◾

Full holdings, on an as needed basis, to Zeno Consulting Group, LLC (an independent third-party transaction cost analysis company) as soon as practicable;

◾

Full holdings on a daily basis to FactSet Research Systems, Inc. (analytical services/investment research providers) at the end of each day; 

◾

Full holdings on a daily basis to Bloomberg BVAL, S&P Global, ICE, Refinitiv, Lipper, and J.P. Morgan Pricing Direct (securities valuation service providers) at the end of each day;

◾

Full holdings on a quarterly basis to Capital Institutional Services, Inc. (CAPIS) (investment research provider) when made available;

◾

Full holdings on a monthly basis to FX Transparency (foreign exchange/transaction analysis) when made available;

◾

Full holdings to ICE/HedgeMark (liquidity calculations) on a daily basis;

◾

Full holdings to Hedgemark (VaR calculations) on a daily basis (for funds that are full derivatives users pursuant to Rule 18f-4 under the 1940 Act).

In each case, the information disclosed must be for a legitimate business purpose and is subject to a confidentiality agreement intended to prohibit the recipient from trading on or further disseminating such information (except for legitimate business purposes). Such arrangements will be monitored on an ongoing basis and will be reviewed by the Trust's Chief Compliance Officer and PGIM Investments' Law Department on an annual basis.

103

In addition, certain authorized employees of PGIM Investments receive portfolio holdings information on a quarterly, monthly or daily basis or upon request, in order to perform their business functions. All PGIM Investments employees are subject to the requirements of the personal securities trading policy of Prudential Financial, Inc., which prohibits employees from trading on, or further disseminating confidential information, including portfolio holdings information.

In no instance may the Investment Manager or the Trust receive any compensation or consideration in exchange for the portfolio holdings information.

The Board of Trustees of the Trust has approved PGIM Investments' Policy for the Dissemination of Portfolio Holdings. The Board shall, on a quarterly basis, be advised of any revisions to the list of recipients of the portfolio holdings information and the reason for such disclosure. The Board has delegated oversight of the Trust's disclosure of portfolio holdings to the Chief Compliance Officer.

Arrangements pursuant to which the Trust discloses non-public information with respect to its portfolio holdings do not provide for any compensation in return for the disclosure of the information.

There can be no assurance that the Trust's policies and procedures on portfolio holdings information will protect the Trust from the potential misuse of such information by individuals or entities that come into possession of the information.

PROXY VOTING

The Board has delegated to the Trust's investment manager, PGIM Investments, the responsibility for voting any proxies and maintaining proxy recordkeeping with respect to each Portfolio. The Trust authorizes the Investment Manager to delegate, in whole or in part, its proxy voting authority to its investment subadviser or third party vendors consistent with the policies set forth below. The proxy voting process shall remain subject to the supervision of the Board, including any committee thereof established for that purpose.

The Investment Manager and the Board view the proxy voting process as a component of the investment process and, as such, seek to ensure that all proxy proposals are voted with the primary goal of seeking the optimal benefit for each Portfolio. Consistent with this goal, the Board views the proxy voting process as a means to encourage strong corporate governance practices and ethical conduct by corporate management. The Investment Manager and the Board maintain a policy of seeking to protect the best interests of each Portfolio should a proxy issue potentially implicate a conflict of interest between a Portfolio and the Investment Manager or its affiliates.

The Investment Manager delegates to each Portfolio's subadviser(s) the responsibility for voting each Portfolio's proxies. The subadviser is expected to identify and seek to obtain the optimal benefit for the Portfolio it manages, and to adopt written policies that meet certain minimum standards, including that the policies be reasonably designed to protect the best interests of a Portfolio and delineate procedures to be followed when a proxy vote presents a conflict between the interests of the Portfolio and the interests of the subadviser or its affiliates.

The Investment Manager and the Board expect that the subadviser will notify the Investment Manager and the Board at least annually of any such conflicts identified and confirm how the issue was resolved. In addition, the Investment Manager expects that the subadviser will deliver to the Investment Manager, or its appointed vendor, information required for filing the Form N-PX with the SEC. Information regarding how each Portfolio of the Trust voted proxies relating to its portfolio securities during the most recent twelve-month period ended June 30 is available on the Trust’s website and on the SEC's website at www.sec.gov.

CODES OF ETHICS

The Board of Trustees of the Trust has adopted a Code of Ethics. In addition, the Investment Manager, investment subadviser(s) and Distributor have each adopted a Code of Ethics (the Codes). The Codes apply to access persons (generally, persons who have access to information about a Portfolio's investment program) and permit personnel subject to the Codes to invest in securities, including securities that may be purchased or held by a Portfolio. However, the protective provisions of the Codes prohibit certain investments and limit such personnel from making investments during periods when the Portfolio is making such investments. The Codes are on public file with, and are available from, the SEC.

LICENSES & MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION

Each of the S&P 500 Index and S&P SmallCap 600 Index (collectively, the Index) is a product of S&P Dow Jones Indices LLC (SPDJI), and has been licensed for use by PGIM Quantitative Solutions LLC, Prudential Trust Company, The Prudential Insurance Company of America, Prudential Retirement Insurance and Annuity Company, PGIM, Inc. and PGIM Limited (collectively, Licensee). Standard & Poor’s®, S&P® and S&P 500® are registered trademarks of Standard & Poor’s Financial Services LLC (S&P); Dow Jones® is a registered trademark of Dow Jones Trademark Holdings LLC (Dow Jones); and these trademarks have been licensed for use by SPDJI and sublicensed for certain purposes by Licensee. Licensee’s product(s) are not sponsored, endorsed, sold or promoted by SPDJI, Dow Jones, S&P, any of their respective affiliates (collectively, S&P Dow Jones Indices). S&P Dow Jones Indices makes no representation or

 104

warranty, express or implied, to the owners of the Licensee’s product(s) or any member of the public regarding the advisability of investing in securities generally or in Licensee’s product(s) particularly or the ability of the Index to track general market performance. S&P Dow Jones Indices’ only relationship to Licensee with respect to the Index is the licensing of the Index and certain trademarks, service marks and/or trade names of S&P Dow Jones Indices or its licensors. The Index is determined, composed and calculated by S&P Dow Jones Indices without regard to Licensee or the Licensee’s product(s). S&P Dow Jones Indices have no obligation to take the needs of Licensee or the owners of Licensee’s product(s) into consideration in determining, composing or calculating the Index. S&P Dow Jones Indices is not responsible for and has not participated in the determination of the prices, and amount of Licensee’s product(s) or the timing of the issuance or sale of Licensee’s product(s) or in the determination or calculation of the equation by which Licensee’s product(s) is to be converted into cash, surrendered or redeemed, as the case may be. S&P Dow Jones Indices has no obligation or liability in connection with the administration, marketing or trading of Licensee’s product(s). There is no assurance that investment products based on the Index will accurately track index performance or provide positive investment returns. S&P Dow Jones Indices LLC is not an investment advisor. Inclusion of a security within an index is not a recommendation by S&P Dow Jones Indices to buy, sell, or hold such security, nor is it considered to be investment advice.

S&P DOW JONES INDICES DOES NOT GUARANTEE THE ADEQUACY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS AND/OR THE COMPLETENESS OF THE INDEX OR ANY DATA RELATED THERETO OR ANY COMMUNICATION, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ORAL OR WRITTEN COMMUNICATION (INCLUDING ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS) WITH RESPECT THERETO. S&P DOW JONES INDICES SHALL NOT BE SUBJECT TO ANY DAMAGES OR LIABILITY FOR ANY ERRORS, OMISSIONS, OR DELAYS THEREIN. S&P DOW JONES INDICES MAKES NO EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, AND EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR USE OR AS TO RESULTS TO BE OBTAINED BY LICENSEE, OWNERS OF THE LICENSEE’S PRODUCT(S), OR ANY OTHER PERSON OR ENTITY FROM THE USE OF THE INDEX OR WITH RESPECT TO ANY DATA RELATED THERETO. WITHOUT LIMITING ANY OF THE FOREGOING, IN NO EVENT WHATSOEVER SHALL S&P DOW JONES INDICES BE LIABLE FOR ANY INDIRECT, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, PUNITIVE, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, LOSS OF PROFITS, TRADING LOSSES, LOST TIME OR GOODWILL, EVEN IF THEY HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, TORT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR OTHERWISE. THERE ARE NO THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARIES OF ANY AGREEMENTS OR ARRANGEMENTS BETWEEN S&P DOW JONES INDICES AND LICENSEE, OTHER THAN THE LICENSORS OF S&P DOW JONES INDICES.

APPENDIX I: DESCRIPTIONS OF SECURITY RATINGS

MOODY’S INVESTORS SERVICE, INC. (MOODY’S)

Long Term Ratings

Aaa: Obligations rated Aaa are judged to be of the highest quality, subject to the lowest level of credit risk.

Aa: Obligations rated Aa are judged to be of high quality and are subject to very low credit risk.

A: Obligations rated A are judged to be upper-medium grade and are subject to low credit risk.

Baa: Obligations rated Baa are judged to be medium-grade and subject to moderate credit risk and as such may possess certain speculative characteristics.

Ba: Obligations rated Ba are judged to be speculative and are subject to substantial credit risk.

B: Obligations rated B are considered speculative and are subject to high credit risk.

Caa: Obligations rated Caa are judged to be speculative of poor standing and are subject to very high credit risk.

Ca: Obligations rated Ca are highly speculative and are likely in, or very near, default, with some prospect of recovery of principal and interest.

C: Obligations rated C are the lowest rated and are typically in default, with little prospect for recovery of principal or interest.

Moody’s appends numerical modifiers 1, 2, and 3 to each generic rating classification from Aa through Caa. The modifier 1 indicates that the obligation ranks in the higher end of its generic rating category; the modifier 2 indicates a mid-range ranking; and the modifier 3 indicates a ranking in the lower end of that generic rating category. Additionally, a “(hyb)” indicator is appended to all ratings of hybrid securities issued by banks, insurers, finance companies, and securities firms.

105

Short-Term Ratings

P-1: Issuers (or supporting institutions) rated Prime-1 have a superior ability to repay short-term debt obligations.

P-2: Issuers (or supporting institutions) rated Prime-2 have a strong ability to repay short-term debt obligations.

P-3: Issuers (or supporting institutions) rated Prime-3 have an acceptable ability to repay short-term obligations.

NP: Issuers (or supporting institutions) rated Not Prime do not fall within any of the Prime rating categories.

Short-Term Municipal Ratings

MIG 1: This designation denotes superior credit quality. Excellent protection is afforded by established cash flows, highly reliable liquidity support, or demonstrated broad-based access to the market for refinancing.

MIG 2: This designation denotes strong credit quality. Margins of protection are ample, although not as large as in the preceding group.

MIG 3: This designation denotes acceptable credit quality. Liquidity and cash-flow protection may be narrow, and market access for refinancing is likely to be less well-established.

SG: This designation denotes speculative-grade credit quality. Debt instruments in this category may lack sufficient margins of protection.

S&P Global Ratings (S&P)

Long-Term Issue Credit Ratings

AAA: An obligation rated AAA has the highest rating assigned by S&P. The obligor’s capacity to meet its financial commitment on the obligation is extremely strong.

AA: An obligation rated AA differs from the highest rated obligations only to a small degree. The obligor’s capacity to meet its financial commitment on the obligation is very strong.

A: An obligation rated A is somewhat more susceptible to the adverse effects of changes in circumstances and economic conditions than obligations in higher-rated categories. However, the obligor’s capacity to meet its financial commitment on the obligation is still strong.

BBB: An obligation rated BBB exhibits adequate protection parameters. However, adverse economic conditions or changing circumstances are more likely to weaken the obligor’s capacity to meet its financial commitment on the obligation.

Obligations rated BB, B, CCC, CC, and C are regarded as having significant speculative characteristics. BB indicates the least degree of speculation and C the highest. While such obligations will likely have some quality and protective characteristics, they may be outweighed by large uncertainties or major exposure to adverse conditions.

BB: An obligation rated BB is less vulnerable to nonpayment than other speculative issues. However, it faces major ongoing uncertainties or exposure to adverse business, financial, or economic conditions which could lead to the obligor’s inadequate capacity to meet its financial commitment on the obligation.

B: An obligation rated B is more vulnerable to nonpayment than obligations rated BB, but the obligor currently has the capacity to meet its financial commitment on the obligation. Adverse business, financial, or economic conditions will likely impair the obligor’s capacity or willingness to meet its financial commitment on the obligation.

CCC: An obligation rated CCC is currently vulnerable to nonpayment, and is dependent upon favorable business, financial, and economic conditions for the obligor to meet its financial commitment on the obligation. In the event of adverse business, financial, or economic conditions, the obligor is not likely to have the capacity to meet its financial commitment on the obligation.

CC: An obligation rated CC is currently highly vulnerable to nonpayment. The CC rating is used when a default has not yet occurred but S&P expects default to be a virtual certainty, regardless of the anticipated time to default.

C: The C rating may be used to cover a situation where a bankruptcy petition has been filed or similar action has been taken, but payments on this obligation are being continued.

D: An obligation rated 'D' is in default or in breach of an imputed promise. For non-hybrid capital instruments, the 'D' rating category is used when payments on an obligation are not made on the date due, unless S&P Global Ratings believes that such payments will be made within five business days in the absence of a stated grace period or within the earlier of the stated grace period or 30 calendar

 106

days. The 'D' rating also will be used upon the filing of a bankruptcy petition or the taking of similar action and where default on an obligation is a virtual certainty, for example due to automatic stay provisions. A rating on an obligation is lowered to 'D' if it is subject to a distressed exchange offer.

Plus (+) or Minus (–): Ratings from AA to CCC may be modified by the addition of a plus (+) or minus (-) sign to show relative standing within the rating categories.

Short-Term Issue Credit Ratings

A-1: A short-term obligation rated 'A-1' is rated in the highest category by S&P Global Ratings. The obligor's capacity to meet its financial commitments on the obligation is strong. Within this category, certain obligations are designated with a plus sign (+). This indicates that the obligor's capacity to meet its financial commitments on these obligations is extremely strong.

A-2: A short-term obligation rated 'A-2' is somewhat more susceptible to the adverse effects of changes in circumstances and economic conditions than obligations in higher rating categories. However, the obligor's capacity to meet its financial commitments on the obligation is satisfactory.

A-3: A short-term obligation rated 'A-3' exhibits adequate protection parameters. However, adverse economic conditions or changing circumstances are more likely to weaken an obligor's capacity to meet its financial commitments on the obligation.

B: A short-term obligation rated 'B' is regarded as vulnerable and has significant speculative characteristics. The obligor currently has the capacity to meet its financial commitments; however, it faces major ongoing uncertainties that could lead to the obligor's inadequate capacity to meet its financial commitments.

C: A short-term obligation rated 'C' is currently vulnerable to nonpayment and is dependent upon favorable business, financial, and economic conditions for the obligor to meet its financial commitments on the obligation.

D: A short-term obligation rated 'D' is in default or in breach of an imputed promise. For non-hybrid capital instruments, the 'D' rating category is used when payments on an obligation are not made on the date due, unless S&P Global Ratings believes that such payments will be made within any stated grace period. However, any stated grace period longer than five business days will be treated as five business days. The 'D' rating also will be used upon the filing of a bankruptcy petition or the taking of a similar action and where default on an obligation is a virtual certainty, for example due to automatic stay provisions. A rating on an obligation is lowered to 'D' if it is subject to a distressed exchange offer.

Notes Ratings

An S&P Notes rating reflects the liquidity factors and market access risks unique to notes. Notes due in three years or less will likely receive a notes rating. Notes maturing beyond three years will most likely receive a long-term debt rating. The following criteria will be used in making that assessment.

◾

Amortization schedule-the longer the final maturity relative to other maturities the more likely it will be treated as a note.

◾

Source of payment-the more dependent the issue is on the market for its refinancing, the more likely it will be treated as a note.

Note rating symbols are as follows:

SP-1: Strong capacity to pay principal and interest. An issue determined to possess a very strong capacity to pay debt service is given a plus (+) designation.

SP-2: Satisfactory capacity to pay principal and interest, with some vulnerability to adverse financial and economic changes over the term of the notes.

SP-3: Speculative capacity to pay principal and interest.

D: D is assigned upon failure to pay the note when due, completion of a distressed exchange offer, or the filing of a bankruptcy petition or the taking of similar action and where default on an obligation is a virtual certainty, for example due to automatic stay provisions.

FITCH RATINGS LTD.

International Long-Term Credit Ratings

AAA: Highest Credit Quality. AAA ratings denote the lowest expectation of credit risk. They are assigned only in cases of exceptionally strong capacity for payment of financial commitments. This capacity is highly unlikely to be adversely affected by foreseeable events.

AA: Very High Credit Quality. AA ratings denote a very low expectation of credit risk. They indicate very strong capacity for payment of financial commitments. This capacity is not significantly vulnerable to foreseeable events.

107

A: High Credit Quality. A ratings denote expectations of low credit risk. The capacity for payment of financial commitments is considered strong. This capacity may, nevertheless, be more vulnerable to adverse business or economic conditions than is the case for higher ratings.

BBB: Good Credit Quality. BBB ratings indicate that expectations of credit risk are currently low. The capacity for payment of financial commitments is considered adequate, but adverse business or economic conditions are more likely to impair this capacity.

BB: Speculative. BB ratings indicate an elevated vulnerability to credit risk, particularly in the event of adverse changes in business or economic conditions over time; however, business or financial alternatives may be available to allow financial commitments to be met.

B: Highly Speculative. B ratings indicate that material credit risk is present.

CCC: Substantial Credit Risk. CCC ratings indicate that substantial credit risk is present.

CC: Very High Levels of Credit Risk. CC ratings indicate very high levels of credit risk.

C: Exceptionally High Levels of Credit Risk. C indicates exceptionally high levels of credit risk.

International Short-Term Credit Ratings

F1: Highest Short-Term Credit Quality. Indicates the strongest intrinsic capacity for timely payment of financial commitments; may have an added “+” to denote any exceptionally strong credit feature.

F2: Good Short-Term Credit Quality. Good intrinsic capacity for timely payment of financial commitments.

F3: Fair Short-Term Credit Quality. The intrinsic capacity for timely payment of financial commitments is adequate.

B: Speculative Short-Term Credit Quality. Minimal capacity for timely payment of financial commitments, plus heightened vulnerability to near term adverse changes in financial and economic conditions.

C: High Short-Term Default Risk. Default is a real possibility.

D: Default. Indicates the default of a short-term obligation.

Plus (+) or Minus (–): The modifiers “+” or “-” may be appended to a rating to denote relative status within major rating categories. Such suffixes are not added to AAA ratings and ratings below CCC. For the short-term rating category of F1, a “+” may be appended.

 108

APPENDIX II: PROXY VOTING POLICIES OF THE SUBADVISERS

GOLDMAN SACHS ASSET MANAGEMENT (GSAM)*

Policy, Procedures and Guidelines for Goldman Sachs Asset Management’s Global Proxy Voting
2022 Edition
March 2022

Table of Contents

PART I:

GOLDMAN SACHS ASSET MANAGEMENT POLICY AND PROCEDURES ON PROXY VOTING FOR INVESTMENT ADVISORY CLIENTS

A: Our Approach to Proxy Voting

B: The Proxy Voting Process

C: Implementation

D. Conflicts of Interest

PART II

GOLDMAN SACHS ASSET MANAGEMENT’S PROXY VOTING GUIDELINES SUMMARY

Region: Americas

1.

Business Items

2.

Board of Directors

3.

Executive and Non- Executive Compensation

4.

Shareholders Rights and Defenses

5.

Strategic Transactions and Capital Structures

6.

Environmental and Social Issues

Region: Europe, Middle East and Africa (EMEA) Proxy Items

1.

Business Items

2.

Board of Directors

3.

Remuneration

4.

Shareholder Rights and Defences

5.

Strategic Transactions, Capital Structures and other Business Considerations

6.

Environmental and Social Issues

Region: Asia Pacific (APAC) Proxy Items

1.

Business Items

2.

Board of Directors

3.

Remuneration

4.

Shareholder Rights and Defences

109

5.

Strategic Transactions, Capital Structures and other Business Considerations

6.

Environmental and Social Issue

Region: Japan Proxy Items

1.

Operational Items

2.

Board of Directors

3.

Compensation

4.

Shareholder Rights and Defenses

5.

Strategic Transactions and Capital Structures

6.

Environmental and Social IssuesPart I

PART I:

GOLDMAN SACHS ASSET MANAGEMENT1 POLICY AND PROCEDURES ON PROXY VOTING FOR INVESTMENT ADVISORY CLIENTS

A: Our Approach to Proxy Voting

Proxy voting and the analysis of corporate governance issues in general are important elements of the portfolio management services we provide to our advisory clients who have authorized us to address these matters on their behalf. Our guiding principles in performing proxy voting are to make decisions that favor proposals that in our view maximize a company’s shareholder value and are not influenced by conflicts of interest. These principles reflect our belief that sound corporate governance will create a framework within which a company can be managed in the interests of its shareholders. We recognize that Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) factors can affect investment performance, expose potential investment risks and provide an indication of management excellence and leadership. When evaluating ESG proxy issues, we balance the purpose of a proposal with the overall benefit to shareholders.

To implement these guiding principles for investments in publicly traded equities for which we have voting power on any record date, we follow customized proxy voting guidelines that have been developed by our portfolio management and our Global Stewardship Team (the “Guidelines”). The Guidelines embody the positions and factors we generally consider important in casting proxy votes. They address a wide variety of individual topics, including, among other matters, shareholder voting rights, anti-takeover defenses, board structures, the election of directors, executive and director compensation, reorganizations, mergers, issues of corporate social responsibility and various shareholder proposals. Recognizing the complexity and fact-specific nature of many corporate governance issues, the Guidelines identify factors we consider in determining how the vote should be cast. A summary of the Guidelines is attached as Part II.

The principles and positions reflected in this Policy are designed to guide us in voting proxies, and not necessarily in making investment decisions. Our portfolio management teams (each, a “Portfolio Management Team”) base their determinations of whether to invest in a particular company on a variety of factors, and while corporate governance may be one such factor, it may not be the primary consideration.

Goldman Sachs Asset Management has adopted the policies and procedures set out below regarding the voting of proxies (the “Policy”). The Global Stewardship Team periodically reviews this Policy to ensure it continues to be consistent with our guiding principles.

B: The Proxy Voting Process

Public Equity Investments

Fundamental Equity Team

The Fundamental Equity Team views the analysis of corporate governance practices as an integral part of the investment research and stock valuation process. In forming their views on particular matters, these Portfolio Management Teams may consider applicable regional rules and practices, including codes of conduct and other guides, regarding proxy voting, in addition to the Guidelines and Recommendations (as defined below).

Quantitative Investment Strategies Portfolio Management Teams

 110

The Quantitative Investment Strategies Portfolio Management Teams have decided to generally follow the Guidelines and Recommendations based on such Portfolio Management Teams’ investment philosophy and approach to portfolio construction, as well as their participation in the creation of the Guidelines. The Quantitative Investment Strategies Portfolio Management Teams may from time to time, however, review and individually assess any specific shareholder vote.

Fixed Income and Private Investments

Voting decisions with respect to client investments in fixed income securities and the securities of privately held issuers generally will be made by the relevant Portfolio Management Teams based on their assessment of the particular transactions or other matters at issue. Those Portfolio Management Teams may also adopt policies related to the fixed income or private investments they make that supplement this Policy.

GS Investment Strategies Portfolio Management

Voting decisions with respect to client investments in the securities of privately held issuers generally will be made by the relevant Portfolio Management Teams based on their assessment of the particular transactions or other matters at issue. To the extent the portfolio managers assume proxy voting responsibility with respect to publicly traded equity securities they will generally follow the Guidelines and Recommendations as discussed below unless an override is requested.

Alternative Investment and Manager Selection (“AIMS”) and Externally Managed Strategies

Where we place client assets with managers outside of Asset Management, for example within our AIMS business unit, such external managers generally will be responsible for voting proxies in accordance with the managers’ own policies. AIMS may, however, retain proxy voting responsibilities where it deems appropriate or necessary under prevailing circumstances. To the extent AIMS portfolio managers assume proxy voting responsibility with respect to publicly traded equity securities they will follow the Guidelines and Recommendations as discussed below unless an override is requested. Any other voting decision will be conducted in accordance with AIMS’ policies governing voting decisions with respect to public and non-publicly traded equity securities held by their clients.

C: Implementation

We have retained a third-party proxy voting service (the “Proxy Service”) to assist in the implementation of certain proxy voting-related functions, including, without limitation, operational, recordkeeping and reporting services. Among its responsibilities, the Proxy Service prepares a written analysis and recommendation (a “Recommendation”) of each proxy vote that reflects the Proxy Service’s application of the Guidelines to the particular proxy issues. In addition, in order to facilitate the casting of votes in an efficient manner, the Proxy Service generally prepopulates and automatically submits votes for all proxy matters in accordance with such Recommendations, subject to our ability to recall such automatically submitted votes.  If the Proxy Service or Asset Management becomes aware that an issuer has filed, or will file, additional proxy solicitation materials sufficiently in advance of the voting deadline, we will generally endeavor to consider such information where such information is viewed as material in our discretion when casting its vote, which may, but need not, result in a change to the Recommendation, which may take the form of an override (as described below) or a revised Recommendation issued by the Proxy Service. We retain the responsibility for proxy voting decisions. We conduct an annual due diligence meeting with the Proxy Service to review the processes and procedures the Proxy Service follows when making proxy voting recommendations based on the Guidelines and to discuss any material changes in the services, operations, staffing or processes.

Our Portfolio Management Teams generally cast proxy votes consistently with the Guidelines and the Recommendations. Each Portfolio Management Team, however, may on certain proxy votes seek approval to diverge from the Guidelines or a Recommendation by following a process that seeks to ensure that override decisions are not influenced by any conflict of interest. As a result of the override process, different Portfolio Management Teams may vote differently for particular votes for the same company. In addition, the Global Stewardship Team may on certain proxy votes also seek approval to diverge from the Guidelines or a Recommendation and follow the override process described above that seeks to ensure these decisions are not influenced by any conflict of interest. In these instances, all shares voted are voted in the same manner.

Our clients who have delegated voting responsibility to us with respect to their account may from time to time contact their client representative if they would like to direct us to vote in a particular manner for a particular solicitation.  We will use commercially reasonable efforts to vote according to the client’s request in these circumstances, however, our ability to implement such voting instruction will be dependent on operational matters such as the timing of the request.

From time to time, our ability to vote proxies may be affected by regulatory requirements and compliance, legal or logistical considerations. As a result, from time to time, we may determine that it is not practicable or desirable to vote proxies. In certain circumstances, such as if a security is on loan through a securities lending program, the Portfolio Management Teams may not be able

111

to participate in certain proxy votes unless the shares of the particular issuer are recalled in time to cast the vote. A determination of whether to seek a recall will be based on whether the applicable Portfolio Management Team determines that the benefit of voting outweighs the costs, lost revenue, and/or other detriments of retrieving the securities, recognizing that the handling of such recall requests is beyond our control and may not be satisfied in time for us to vote the shares in question.

We disclose our voting publicly each year in a filing with the US Securities and Exchange Commission and on our website for all Goldman Sachs Asset Management US registered mutual funds. We also generally disclose our voting publicly on a quarterly basis on our website for company proxies voted according to the Guidelines and Recommendations.

D. Conflicts of Interest

Goldman Sachs Asset Management has implemented processes designed to prevent conflicts of interest from influencing its proxy voting decisions. These processes include information barriers as well as the use of the Guidelines and Recommendations and the override process described above in instances when a Portfolio Management Team is interested in voting in a manner that diverges from the initial Recommendation based on the Guidelines. To mitigate perceived or potential conflicts of interest when a proxy is for shares of The Goldman Sachs Group Inc. or a Goldman Sachs Asset Management managed fund, we will generally instruct that such shares be voted in the same proportion as other shares are voted with respect to a proposal, subject to applicable legal, regulatory and operational requirements.

PART II

GOLDMAN SACHS ASSET MANAGEMENT’S PROXY VOTING GUIDELINES SUMMARY

The following is a summary of the material Proxy Voting Guidelines (the “Guidelines”), which form the substantive basis of our Policy and Procedures on Proxy Voting for Investment Advisory Clients (the “Policy”). As described in the main body of the Policy, one or more Portfolio Management Teams and/or the Global Stewardship Team may diverge from the Guidelines and a related Recommendation on any particular proxy vote or in connection with any individual investment decision in accordance with the Policy.

Region: Americas

The following section is a summary of the Guidelines, which form the substantive basis of the Policy with respect to North, Central and South American public equity investments of operating and/or holding companies Applying these guidelines is subject to certain regional and country-specific exceptions and modifications and is not inclusive of all considerations in each market.

1.

Business Items

Auditor Ratification

Vote FOR proposals to ratify auditors, unless any of the following apply within the last year:

◾

An auditor has a financial interest in or association with the company, and is therefore not independent;

◾

There is reason to believe that the independent auditor has rendered an opinion that is neither accurate nor indicative of the company’s financial position;

◾

Poor accounting practices are identified that rise to a serious level of concern, such as: fraud; misapplication of GAAP; or material weaknesses identified in Section 404 disclosures; or

◾

Fees for non-audit services are excessive (generally over 50% or more of the audit fees).

Vote CASE-BY-CASE on shareholder proposals asking companies to prohibit or limit their auditors from engaging in non-audit services or asking for audit firm rotation. 

Reincorporation Proposals

We may support management proposals to reincorporate as long as the reincorporation would not substantially diminish shareholder rights. We may not support shareholder proposals for reincorporation unless the current state of incorporation is substantially less shareholder friendly than the proposed reincorporation, there is a strong economic case to reincorporate or the company has a history of making decisions that are not shareholder friendly.

Exclusive Venue for Shareholder Lawsuits

Generally, vote FOR on exclusive venue proposals, taking into account:

 112

Whether the company has been materially harmed by shareholder litigation outside its jurisdiction of incorporation, based on disclosure in the company's proxy statement;

◾

Whether the company has the following good governance features:

◾

Majority independent board;

◾

Independent key committees;

◾

An annually elected board;

◾

A majority vote standard in uncontested director elections;

◾

The absence of a poison pill, unless the pill was approved by shareholders; and/or

◾

Separate Chairman CEO role or, if combined, an independent chairman with clearly delineated duties.

Virtual Meetings

Generally, vote FOR proposals allowing for the convening of hybrid* shareholder meetings if it is clear that it is not the intention to hold virtual-only AGMs. Generally, vote AGAINST proposals allowing for the convening of virtual-only* shareholder meetings.

* The phrase “virtual-only shareholder meeting” refers to a meeting of shareholders that is held exclusively through the use of online technology without a corresponding in-person meeting. The term “hybrid shareholder meeting” refers to an in-person, or physical, meeting in which shareholders are permitted to participate online.

Public Benefit Corporation Proposals

Generally, vote FOR management proposals and CASE-BY-CASE on shareholder proposals related to the conversion of the company into a public benefit corporation.

Transact Other Business

Vote AGAINST other business when it appears as a voting item.

Administrative Requests

Generally, vote FOR non-contentious administrative management requests.

2.

Board of Directors

The board of directors should promote the interests of shareholders by acting in an oversight and/or advisory role; should consist of a majority of independent directors and/or meet local best practice expectations; and should be held accountable for actions and results related to their responsibilities. Vote on director nominees should be determined on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Voting on Director Nominees in Uncontested Elections

Board Composition

We generally believe diverse teams have the potential to outperform and we expect the companies that we invest in to focus on the importance of diversity. When evaluating board composition, we believe a diversity of ethnicity, gender and experience is an important consideration. We encourage companies to disclose the composition of their board in the proxy statement and may vote against members of the board without disclosure. See below how we execute our vote at companies that do not meet our diversity expectations.

Vote AGAINST or WITHHOLD from members of the Nominating Committee:

◾

At companies incorporated in the US if the board does not have at least 10% women directors and at least one other diverse board director;

◾

At companies within the S&P 500, if, in addition to our gender expectations, the board does not have at least one diverse director from an underrepresented ethnic group;

◾

At companies not incorporated in the US, if the board does not have at least 10% women directors or does not meet the requirements of local listing rules or corporate governance codes or national targets

Vote AGAINST or WITHHOLD from the full board at companies incorporated in the US that do not have at least one woman director.

Vote AGAINST or WITHHOLD from individual directors who:

◾

Sit on more than five public company boards;

113

◾

Are CEOs of public companies who sit on the boards of more than two public companies besides their own—withhold only at their outside boards.

Vote AGAINST or WITHHOLD from members of the Nominating Committee if the average board tenure exceeds 15 years, and there has not been a new nominee in the past 5 years.

Director Independence

At companies incorporated in the US, where applicable, the New York Stock Exchange or NASDAQ Listing Standards definition is to be used to classify directors as inside directors, affiliated outside directors, or independent outside directors.

Additionally, we will consider compensation committee interlocking directors to be affiliated (defined as CEOs who sit on each other’s compensation committees).

Vote AGAINST or WITHHOLD from inside directors and affiliated outside directors (as described above) when:

◾

The inside director or affiliated outside director serves on the Audit, Compensation or Nominating Committees; and

◾

The company lacks an Audit, Compensation or Nominating Committee so that the full board functions as such committees and inside directors or affiliated outside directors are participating in voting on matters that independent committees should be voting on.

Director Accountability

Vote AGAINST or WITHHOLD from individual directors who attend less than 75% of the board and committee meetings without a disclosed valid excuse.

Generally, vote FOR the bundled election of management nominees, unless adequate disclosures of the nominees have not been provided in a timely manner or if one or more of the nominees does not meet the expectation of our policy.

Other items considered for an AGAINST vote include specific concerns about the individual or the company, such as criminal wrongdoing or breach of fiduciary responsibilities, sanctions from government or authority, violations of laws and regulations, the presence of inappropriate related party transactions, or other issues related to improper business practices

Vote AGAINST or WITHHOLD from members of the full board or appropriate committee (or only the independent chairman or lead director as may be appropriate in situations such as where there is a classified board and members of the appropriate committee are not up for re-election or the appropriate committee is comprised of the entire board) for the below reasons. New nominees will be considered on a case-by-case basis. Extreme cases may warrant a vote against the entire board.

◾

Material failures of governance, stewardship, or fiduciary responsibilities at the company,

◾

including but not limited to violations of the United Nations Global Compact principles and/or other significant global standards and failure to disclose material environmental, social and governance information;

◾

Egregious actions related to the director(s)’ service on other boards that raise substantial doubt about his or her ability to effectively oversee management and serve the best interests of shareholders at any company;

◾

The board failed to act on a shareholder proposal that received approval of the majority of shares cast for the previous two consecutive years (a management proposal with other than a FOR recommendation by management will not be considered as sufficient action taken); an adopted proposal that is substantially similar to the original shareholder proposal will be deemed sufficient; (vote against members of the committee of the board that is responsible for the issue under consideration). If we did not support the shareholder proposal in both years, we will still vote against the committee member(s).

◾

The company’s poison pill has a dead-hand or modified dead-hand feature for two or more years. Vote against/withhold every year until this feature is removed; however, vote against the poison pill if there is one on the ballot with this feature rather than the director;

◾

The board adopts or renews a poison pill without shareholder approval, does not commit to putting it to shareholder vote within 12 months of adoption (or in the case of a newly public company, does not commit to put the pill to a shareholder vote within 12 months following the IPO), or reneges on a commitment to put the pill to a vote, and has not yet received a withhold/against recommendation for this issue;

◾

The board failed to act on takeover offers where the majority of the shareholders tendered their shares;

◾

The company does not disclose various components of current emissions, a proxy for a company’s dependency on fossil fuels and other sources of greenhouse gasses (Scope 1, Scope 2, Scope 3 emissions), material to the company’s business

◾

If in an extreme situation the board lacks accountability and oversight, coupled with sustained poor performance relative to peers.

Committee Responsibilities and Expectations

Companies should establish committees to oversee areas such as audit, executive and non-executive compensation, director nominations and ESG oversight. The responsibilities of the committees should be publicly disclosed.

 114

Audit Committee

Vote AGAINST or WITHHOLD from the members of the Audit Committee if:

◾

The non-audit fees paid to the auditor are excessive (generally over 50% or more of the audit fees);

◾

The company receives an adverse opinion on the company’s financial statements from its auditor and there is not clear evidence that the situation has been remedied;

◾

There is excessive pledging or hedging of stock by executives;

◾

There is persuasive evidence that the Audit Committee entered into an inappropriate indemnification agreement with its auditor that limits the ability of the company, or its shareholders, to pursue legitimate legal recourse against the audit firm; or

◾

No members of the Audit Committee hold sufficient financial expertise.

Vote CASE-BY-CASE on members of the Audit Committee and/or the full board if poor accounting practices, which rise to a level of serious concern are identified, such as fraud, misapplication of GAAP and material weaknesses identified in Section 404 disclosures.

Examine the severity, breadth, chronological sequence and duration, as well as the company’s efforts at remediation or corrective actions, in determining whether negative vote recommendations are warranted against the members of the Audit Committee who are responsible for the poor accounting practices, or the entire board.

Compensation Committee

See section 3 on Executive and Non-Executive compensation for reasons to withhold from members of the Compensation Committee.

Nominating/Governance Committee

Vote AGAINST or WITHHOLD from the members of the Nominating/Governance Committee if:

The company has opted into, or failed to opt out of, state laws requiring a classified board structure;

At the previous board election, any director received more than 50% withhold/against votes of the shares cast and the company has failed to address the underlying issue(s) that caused the high withhold/against vote;

The board does not meet our diversity expectations;

The board amends the company’s bylaws or charter without shareholder approval in a manner that materially diminishes shareholders’ rights or could adversely impact shareholders.

Voting on Director Nominees in Contested Elections

Vote on a CASE-BY-CASE basis in contested elections of directors, e.g., the election of shareholder nominees or the dismissal of incumbent directors, determining which directors are best suited to add value for shareholders.

The analysis will generally be based on, but not limited to, the following major decision factors:

◾

Company performance relative to its peers;

◾

Strategy of the incumbents versus the dissidents;

◾

Independence of board candidates;

◾

Experience and skills of board candidates;

◾

Governance profile of the company;

◾

Evidence of management entrenchment;

◾

Responsiveness to shareholders;

◾

Whether a takeover offer has been rebuffed; and

◾

Whether minority or majority representation is being sought.

Proxy Access

Vote CASE-BY-CASE on shareholder or management proposals asking for proxy access.

We may support proxy access as an important right for shareholders and as an alternative to costly proxy contests and as a method for us to vote for directors on an individual basis, as appropriate, rather than voting on one slate or the other. While this could be an important shareholder right, the following factors will be taken into account when evaluating the shareholder proposals:

115

◾

The ownership thresholds, percentage and duration proposed (we generally will not support if the ownership threshold is less than 3%);

◾

The maximum proportion of directors that shareholders may nominate each year (we generally will not support if the proportion of directors is greater than 25%); and

◾

Other restricting factors that when taken in combination could serve to materially limit the proxy access provision.

We will take the above factors into account when evaluating proposals proactively adopted by the company or in response to a shareholder proposal to adopt or amend the right. A vote against governance committee members could result if provisions exist that materially limit the right to proxy access.

Reimbursing Proxy Solicitation Expenses

Vote CASE-BY-CASE on proposals to reimburse proxy solicitation expenses. When voting in conjunction with support of a dissident slate, vote FOR the reimbursement of all appropriate proxy solicitation expenses associated with the election.

Other Board Related Proposals (Management and Shareholder)

Independent Board Chair (for applicable markets)

We will generally vote AGAINST shareholder proposals requiring that the chairman’s position be filled by an independent director, if the company satisfies 3 of the 4 following criteria:

Two-thirds independent board, or majority in countries where employee representation is common practice;

◾

A designated, or a rotating, lead director, elected by and from the independent board members with clearly delineated and comprehensive duties;

◾

Fully independent key committees; and/or

◾

Established, publicly disclosed, governance guidelines and director biographies/profiles.

Shareholder Proposals Regarding Board Declassification

We will generally vote FOR proposals requesting that the board adopt a declassified board structure.

Majority Vote Shareholder Proposals

We will vote FOR proposals requesting that the board adopt majority voting in the election of directors provided it does not conflict with the state law where the company is incorporated. We also look for companies to adopt a post-election policy outlining how the company will address the situation of a holdover director.

Cumulative Vote Shareholder Proposals

We will generally vote FOR shareholder proposals to restore or provide cumulative unless:

◾

The company has adopted (i) majority vote standard with a carve-out for plurality voting in situations where there are more nominees than seats and (ii) a director resignation policy to address failed elections.

3.

Executive and Non- Executive Compensation

Pay Practices

Good pay practices should align management’s interests with long-term shareholder value creation. Detailed disclosure of compensation criteria is preferred; proof that companies follow the criteria should be evident and retroactive performance target changes without proper disclosure is not viewed favorably. Compensation practices should allow a company to attract and retain proven talent. Some examples of poor pay practices include: abnormally large bonus payouts without justifiable performance linkage or proper disclosure, egregious employment contracts, excessive severance and/or change in control provisions, repricing or replacing of underwater stock options/stock appreciation rights without prior shareholder approval, and excessive perquisites. A company should also have an appropriate balance of short-term vs. long-term metrics and the metrics should be aligned with business goals and objectives.

If the company maintains problematic or poor pay practices, generally vote:

◾

AGAINST Management Say on Pay (MSOP) Proposals; or

◾

AGAINST an equity-based incentive plan proposal if excessive non-performance-based equity awards are the major contributor to a pay-for-performance misalignment.

 116

◾

If no MSOP or equity-based incentive plan proposal item is on the ballot, vote AGAINST/WITHHOLD from compensation committee members.

Equity Compensation Plans

Vote CASE-BY-CASE on equity-based compensation plans. Evaluation takes into account potential plan cost, plan features and grant practices. While a negative combination of these factors could cause a vote AGAINST, other reasons to vote AGAINST the equity plan could include the following factors:

◾

The plan permits the repricing of stock options/stock appreciation rights (SARs) without prior shareholder approval; or

◾

There is more than one problematic material feature of the plan, which could include one of the following: unfavorable change-in-control features, presence of gross ups and options reload.

Advisory Vote on Executive Compensation (Say-on-Pay, MSOP) Management Proposals

Vote FOR annual frequency and AGAINST all proposals asking for any frequency less than annual.

Vote CASE-BY-CASE on management proposals for an advisory vote on executive compensation considering the following factors in the context of each company’s specific circumstances and the board’s disclosed rationale for its practices.

Factors Considered Include:

◾

Pay for Performance Disconnect;

We will consider there to be a disconnect based on a quantitative assessment of the following: CEO pay vs. TSR (“Total Shareholder Return”) and peers, CEO pay as a percentage of the median peer group or CEO pay vs. shareholder return over time.

◾

Long-term equity-based compensation is 100% time-based;

◾

Board’s responsiveness if company received 70% or less shareholder support in the previous year’s MSOP vote;

◾

Abnormally large bonus payouts without justifiable performance linkage or proper disclosure;

◾

Egregious employment contracts;

◾

Excessive perquisites or excessive severance and/or change in control provisions;

◾

Repricing or replacing of underwater stock options without prior shareholder approval;

◾

Egregious pension/SERP (supplemental executive retirement plan) payouts;

◾

Extraordinary relocation benefits;

◾

Internal pay disparity; and

◾

Lack of transparent disclosure of compensation philosophy and goals and targets, including details on short-term and long-term performance incentives.

Other Compensation Proposals and Policies

Employee Stock Purchase Plans — Non-Qualified Plans

Vote CASE-BY-CASE on nonqualified employee stock purchase plans taking into account the following factors:

◾

Broad-based participation;

◾

Limits on employee contributions;

◾

Company matching contributions; and

◾

Presence of a discount on the stock price on the date of purchase.

Option Exchange Programs/Repricing Options

Vote CASE-BY-CASE on management proposals seeking approval to exchange/reprice options, taking into consideration:

◾

Historic trading patterns—the stock price should not be so volatile that the options are likely to be back “in-the-money” over the near term;

◾

Rationale for the re-pricing;

◾

If it is a value-for-value exchange;

◾

If surrendered stock options are added back to the plan reserve;

◾

Option vesting;

◾

Term of the option—the term should remain the same as that of the replaced option;

◾

Exercise price—should be set at fair market or a premium to market;

◾

Participants—executive officers and directors should be excluded.

Vote FOR shareholder proposals to put option repricings to a shareholder vote.

117

Stock Retention Holding Period

Vote FOR shareholder proposals asking for a policy requiring that senior executives retain a significant percentage of shares acquired through equity compensation programs if the policy requests retention for two years or less following the termination of their employment (through retirement or otherwise) and a holding threshold percentage of 50% or less.

Also consider whether the company has any holding period, retention ratio, or officer ownership requirements in place and the terms/provisions of awards already granted.

Elimination of Accelerated Vesting in the Event of a Change in Control

Vote AGAINST shareholder proposals seeking a policy eliminating the accelerated vesting of time-based equity awards in the event of a change-in-control.

Performance-based Equity Awards and Pay-for-Superior-Performance Proposals

Generally, vote FOR unless there is sufficient evidence that the current compensation structure is already substantially performance-based. We consider performance-based awards to include awards that are tied to shareholder return or other metrics that are relevant to the business.

Say on Supplemental Executive Retirement Plans (SERP)

Generally, vote AGAINST proposals asking for shareholder votes on SERP.

Compensation Committee

Vote AGAINST or WITHHOLD from the members of the Compensation Committee if:

◾

We voted against the company’s MSOP in the previous year, the company’s previous MSOP received significant opposition of votes cast and we are voting against this year’s MSOP;

◾

The board implements a MSOP on a less frequent basis than the frequency that received the plurality of votes cast

4.

Shareholders Rights and Defenses

Shareholder Ability to Act by Written Consent

Generally, vote FOR shareholder proposals that provide shareholders with the ability to act by written consent, unless:

◾

The company already gives shareholders the right to call special meetings at a threshold of 25% or lower; and

◾

The company has a history of strong governance practices.

Special Meetings Arrangements

Generally, vote FOR management proposals that provide shareholders with the ability to call special meetings.

Generally, vote FOR shareholder proposals that provide shareholders with the ability to call special meetings at a threshold of 25% or lower if the company currently does not give shareholders the right to call special meetings. However, if a company already gives shareholders the right to call special meetings at a threshold of at least 25%, vote AGAINST shareholder proposals to further reduce the threshold.

Generally, vote AGAINST management proposals seeking shareholder approval for the company to hold special meetings with 14 days notice unless the company offers shareholders the ability to vote by electronic means and a proposal to reduce the period of notice to not less than 14 days has received majority support.

Advance Notice Requirements for Shareholder Proposals/Nominations

Vote CASE-BY-CASE on advance notice proposals, giving support to proposals that allow shareholders to submit proposals/nominations reasonably close to the meeting date and within the broadest window possible, recognizing the need to allow sufficient notice for company, regulatory and shareholder review.

Shareholder Voting Requirements

 118

Vote AGAINST proposals to require a supermajority shareholder vote. Generally vote FOR management and shareholder proposals to reduce supermajority vote requirements.

Poison Pills

Vote FOR shareholder proposals requesting that the company submit its poison pill to a shareholder vote or redeem it, unless the company has:

◾

a shareholder-approved poison pill in place; or

◾

adopted a policy concerning the adoption of a pill in the future specifying certain shareholder friendly provisions.

Vote FOR shareholder proposals calling for poison pills to be put to a vote within a time period of less than one year after adoption.

Vote CASE-BY-CASE on management proposals on poison pill ratification, focusing on the features of the shareholder rights plan.

In addition, the rationale for adopting the pill should be thoroughly explained by the company. In examining the request for the pill, take into consideration the company’s existing governance structure, including: board independence, existing takeover defenses, and any problematic governance concerns.

5.

Strategic Transactions and Capital Structures

Reorganizations/Restructurings

Vote reorganizations and restructurings on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Mergers and Acquisitions

Vote CASE-BY-CASE on mergers and acquisitions taking into account the following based on publicly available information:

◾

Valuation;

◾

Market reaction;

◾

Strategic rationale;

◾

Management’s track record of successful integration of historical acquisitions;

◾

Presence of conflicts of interest; and

◾

Governance profile of the combined company.

Dual Class Structures

Vote FOR resolutions that seek to maintain or convert to a one-share, one-vote capital structure.

Vote AGAINST requests for the creation or continuation of dual-class capital structures or the creation of new or additional super voting shares.

Share Issuance Requests

General Issuances:

Vote FOR issuance requests with preemptive rights to a maximum of 100% over currently issued capital or any stricter limit set in local best practice recommendations or law.

Vote FOR issuance requests without preemptive rights to a maximum of 20% of currently issued capital or any stricter limit set in local best practice recommendations or law.

Specific Issuances:

Vote on a CASE-BY-CASE basis on all requests, with or without preemptive rights.

Increases in Authorized Capital

Vote FOR non-specific proposals to increase authorized capital up to 100% over the current authorization unless the increase would leave the company with less than 30% of its new authorization outstanding, or any stricter limit set in local best practice recommendations or law.

119

Vote FOR specific proposals to increase authorized capital to any amount, unless:

◾

The specific purpose of the increase (such as a share-based acquisition or merger) does not meet guidelines for the purpose being proposed; or

◾

The increase would leave the company with less than 30% of its new authorization outstanding after adjusting for all proposed issuances or any stricter limit set in local best practice recommendations or law.

Vote AGAINST proposals to adopt unlimited capital authorizations.

Reduction of Capital

Vote FOR proposals to reduce capital for routine accounting purposes unless the terms are unfavorable to shareholders.

Vote proposals to reduce capital in connection with corporate restructuring on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Preferred Stock

Vote FOR the creation of a new class of preferred stock or for issuances of preferred stock up to 50% of issued capital unless the terms of the preferred stock would adversely affect the rights of existing shareholders.

Vote FOR the creation/issuance of convertible preferred stock as long as the maximum number of common shares that could be issued upon conversion meets guidelines on equity issuance requests.

Vote AGAINST the creation of a new class of preference shares that would carry superior voting rights to the common shares.

Vote AGAINST the creation of blank check preferred stock unless the board clearly states that the authorization will not be used to thwart a takeover bid.

Vote proposals to increase blank check preferred authorizations on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Debt Issuance Requests

Vote non-convertible debt issuance requests on a CASE-BY-CASE basis, with or without preemptive rights.

Vote FOR the creation/issuance of convertible debt instruments as long as the maximum number of common shares that could be issued upon conversion meets guidelines on equity issuance requests.

Vote FOR proposals to restructure existing debt arrangements unless the terms of the restructuring would adversely affect the rights of shareholders.

Increase in Borrowing Powers

Vote proposals to approve increases in a company's borrowing powers on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Share Repurchase Plans

We will generally recommend FOR share repurchase programs taking into account whether:

◾

The share repurchase program can be used as a takeover defense;

◾

There is clear evidence of historical abuse;

◾

There is no safeguard in the share repurchase program against selective buybacks;

◾

Pricing provisions and safeguards in the share repurchase program are deemed to be unreasonable in light of market practice.

Reissuance of Repurchased Shares

Vote FOR requests to reissue any repurchased shares unless there is clear evidence of abuse of this authority in the past.

Capitalization of Reserves for Bonus Issues/Increase in Par Value

Vote FOR requests to capitalize reserves for bonus issues of shares or to increase par value.

Reorganizations/Restructurings

 120

Vote reorganizations and restructurings on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Reincorporation Proposals

Vote reincorporation proposals on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Related-Party Transactions

Vote related-party transactions on a CASE-BY-CASE basis, considering factors including, but not limited to, the following:

◾

The parties on either side of the transaction;

◾

The nature of the asset to be transferred/service to be provided;

◾

The pricing of the transaction (and any associated professional valuation);

◾

The views of independent directors (where provided);

◾

The views of an independent financial adviser (where appointed);

◾

Whether any entities party to the transaction (including advisers) is conflicted; and The stated rationale for the transaction, including discussions of timing

Common and Preferred Stock Authorization

Generally, vote FOR proposals to increase the number of shares of common stock authorized for issuance.

Generally, vote FOR proposals to increase the number of shares of preferred stock, as long as there is a commitment to not use the shares for anti-takeover purposes.

6.

Environmental and Social Issues

Overall Approach

Proposals considered under this category could include, among others, reports on:

1) employee labor and safety policies;

2) impact on the environment of the company’s production or manufacturing operations;

3) societal impact of products manufactured;

4) risks throughout the supply chain or operations including labor practices, animal treatment practices within food production and conflict minerals; and

5) overall board structure, including diversity.

When evaluating environmental and social shareholder proposals, the following factors are generally considered:

◾

The company’s current level of publicly available disclosure, including if the company already discloses similar information through existing reports or policies;

◾

If the company has implemented or formally committed to the implementation of a reporting program based on the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board’s (SASB) materiality standards, the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosure’s (TCFD) recommendations, or a similar standard;

◾

Whether adoption of the proposal is likely to enhance or protect shareholder value;

◾

Whether the information requested concerns business issues that relate to a meaningful percentage of the company’s business;

◾

The degree to which the company’s stated position on the issues raised in the proposal could affect its reputation or sales, or leave it vulnerable to a boycott or selective purchasing;

◾

Whether the company has already responded in some appropriate manner to the request embodied in the proposal;

◾

What other companies in the relevant industry have done in response to the issue addressed in the proposal;

◾

Whether the proposal itself is well framed and the cost of preparing the report is reasonable;

◾

Whether the subject of the proposal is best left to the discretion of the board;

◾

Whether the company has material fines or violations in the area and if so, if appropriate actions have already been taken to remedy going forward;

◾

Whether providing this information would reveal proprietary or confidential information that would place the company at a competitive disadvantage.

121

Environmental Issues

Climate Transition Plans

Generally, vote CASE-BY-CASE on management proposed climate transition plans. When evaluating management proposed plans, the following factors are generally considered:

◾

If the company has detailed disclosure of the governance, strategy, risk mitigation efforts, and metrics and targets based on the TCFD’s recommendations, or a similar standard;

◾

If the company has detailed disclosure of their current emissions data based on the SASB materiality framework; and

◾

If the company has detailed disclosure in line with Paris Agreement goals.

Generally, vote CASE-BY-CASE on shareholder proposals requesting climate transition plans. When evaluating these shareholder proposals, the following factors are generally considered:

◾

The company’s current level of publicly available disclosure including if the company already discloses similar information through existing reports or policies;

◾

If the proposal asks for detailed disclosure according to the TCFD’s recommendations;

◾

If the proposal asks for detailed disclosure of the company’s current emissions data based on the SASB materiality framework;

◾

If the proposal asks for long-term targets, as well as short and medium term milestones;

◾

If the proposal asks for targets to be aligned to a globally accepted framework, such as Paris Aligned or Net Zero;

◾

If the proposal asks for targets to be approved by the Science Based Target Initiative (“SBTi”);

◾

If the proposal seeks to add reasonable transparency and is not onerous or overly prescriptive; and

◾

Whether the proposal is binding or non-binding.

Environmental Sustainability Reporting

Generally vote FOR shareholders proposals requesting the company to report on its policies, initiatives and oversight mechanisms related to environmental sustainability, including the impacts of climate change and biodiversity loss. The following factors will be considered:

◾

The company’s current level of publicly available disclosure including if the company already discloses similar information through existing reports or policies;

◾

If the company has formally committed to the implementation of a reporting program based on the SASB materiality standards, the TCFD’s recommendations, or a similar standard within a specified time frame;

◾

If the company’s current level of disclosure is comparable to that of its industry peers; and

◾

If there are significant controversies, fines, penalties, or litigation associated with the company’s environmental performance.

Other Environmental Proposals

Vote CASE-BY-CASE on the following shareholder proposals if relevant to the company:

◾

Seeking information on the financial, physical, or regulatory risks a company faces related to climate change on its operations and investment, or on how the company identifies, measures and manages such risks;

◾

Calling for the reduction of Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions;

◾

Seeking reports on responses to regulatory and public pressures surrounding climate change, and for disclosure of research that aided in setting company policies around climate change;

◾

Requesting an action plan including science based targets and a commitment to net zero emissions by 2050 or earlier;

◾

Requesting a report/disclosure of goals on GHG emissions from company operations and/or products;

◾

Requesting a company report on its energy efficiency policies; and

◾

Requesting reports on the feasibility of developing renewable energy resources.

Social Issues

Board and Workforce Demographics

A company should have a clear, public Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) statement and/or diversity policy. Generally, vote FOR proposals seeking to amend a company’s EEO statement or diversity policies to additionally prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and/or gender identity.

Generally, vote FOR proposals requesting reports on a company’s efforts to diversify the board, unless:

The gender and racial minority representation of the company’s board is reasonably inclusive in relation to companies of similar size and business; and

 122

The board already reports on its nominating procedures and gender and racial minority initiatives on the board.

Gender Pay Gap

Generally, vote CASE-BY-CASE on proposals requesting reports on a company’s pay data by gender, or a report on a company’s policies and goals to reduce any gender pay gap, taking into account:

The company’s current policies and disclosure related to both its diversity and inclusion policies and practices and its compensation philosophy and fair and equitable compensation practices;

Whether the company has been the subject of recent controversy, litigation or regulatory actions related to gender pay gap issues; and

Whether the company’s reporting regarding gender pay gap policies or initiatives is lagging its peers.

Labor, Human and Animal Rights Standards

Generally, vote FOR proposals requesting a report on company or company supplier labor, human, and/or animal rights standards and policies, or on the impact of its operations on society, unless such information is already publicly disclosed considering:

◾

The degree to which existing relevant policies and practices are disclosed;

◾

Whether or not existing relevant policies are consistent with internationally recognized standards;

◾

Whether company facilities and those of its suppliers are monitored and how;

◾

Company participation in fair labor organizations or other internationally recognized human rights initiatives;

◾

Scope and nature of business conducted in markets known to have higher risk of workplace labor/human rights abuse;

◾

Recent, significant company controversies, fines, or litigation regarding human rights at the company or its suppliers;

◾

The scope of the request; and

◾

Deviation from industry sector peer company standards and practices.

Generally, vote CASE-BY-CASE on shareholder proposals requesting reports about a company’s use of mandatory arbitrations in employment claims, taking into account the company’s existing policies and disclosures of policies.

Generally, vote CASE-BY-CASE on shareholder proposals requesting reports on the actions taken by a company to prevent sexual and other forms of harassment or on the risks posed by the company’s failure to take such actions, taking into account the company’s existing policies and disclosures of policies.

Racial Equity Audit

Generally, vote CASE-BY-CASE on shareholder proposals requesting the board oversee a racial equity audit. While we believe the decision to initiate an independent audit is best left to management judgment under the oversight of the board of directors, the following factors are generally considered:

◾

The degree to which existing relevant policies and practices are disclosed;

◾

Recent, significant company controversies, fines, or litigation regarding human rights at the company or its suppliers; and

◾

Whether the gender and racial minority representation of the company’s board is reasonably inclusive in relation to companies of similar size and business.

Political Contributions and Trade Association Spending/Lobbying Expenditures and Initiatives

We generally believe that it is the role of boards and management to determine the appropriate level of disclosure of all types of corporate political activity.  When evaluating these proposals, we consider the prescriptive nature of the proposal and the overall benefit to shareholders along with a company’s current disclosure of policies, practices and oversight.

Generally, vote AGAINST proposals asking the company to affirm political nonpartisanship in the workplace so long as:

◾

There are no recent, significant controversies, fines or litigation regarding the company’s political contributions or trade association spending; and

◾

The company has procedures in place to ensure that employee contributions to company-sponsored political action committees (PACs) are strictly voluntary and prohibits coercion.

Generally, vote AGAINST proposals requesting increased disclosure of a company’s policies with respect to political contributions, lobbying and trade association spending as long as:

◾

There is no significant potential threat or actual harm to shareholders’ interests;

◾

There are no recent significant controversies or litigation related to the company’s political contributions or governmental affairs; and

123

◾

There is publicly available information to assess the company’s oversight related to such expenditures of corporate assets.

We generally will vote AGAINST proposals asking for detailed disclosure of political contributions or trade association or lobbying expenditures.

We generally will vote AGAINST proposals barring the company from making political contributions. Businesses are affected by legislation at the federal, state, and local level and barring political contributions can put the company at a competitive disadvantage.

Region: Europe, Middle East and Africa (EMEA) Proxy Items

The following section is a broad summary of the Guidelines, which form the basis of the Policy with respect to EMEA public equity investments of operating and/or holding companies.  Applying these guidelines is subject to certain regional and country-specific exceptions and modifications and is not inclusive of all considerations in each market.

1.

Business Items

Financial Results/Director and Auditor Reports

Vote FOR approval of financial statements and director and auditor reports, unless:

◾

There are serious concerns about the accounts presented, audit procedures used or audit opinion rendered; or

◾

The company is not responsive to shareholder questions about specific items that should be publicly disclosed.

Appointment of Auditors and Auditor Fees

Vote FOR the re-election of auditors and proposals authorizing the board to fix auditor fees unless:

◾

There are serious concerns about the accounts presented, audit procedures used or audit opinion rendered;

◾

There is reason to believe that the auditor has rendered an opinion that is neither accurate nor indicative of the company’s financial position;

◾

Name of the proposed auditor has not been published;

◾

The auditors are being changed without explanation;

◾

Non-audit-related fees are substantial, or are in excess of standard annual audit-related fees, or in excess of permitted local limits and guidelines; or

◾

The appointment of external auditors if they have previously served the company in an executive capacity or can otherwise be considered affiliated with the company.

Appointment of Internal Statutory Auditors

Vote FOR the appointment or re-election of statutory auditors, unless:

◾

There are serious concerns about the statutory reports presented or the audit procedures used;

◾

Questions exist concerning any of the statutory auditors being appointed; or

◾

The auditors have previously served the company in an executive capacity or can otherwise be considered affiliated with the company.

Reincorporation Proposals

Vote reincorporation proposals on a CASE-BY-CASE basis

Allocation of Income

Vote FOR approval of the allocation of income, unless:

◾

The dividend payout ratio has been consistently low without adequate explanation; or

◾

The payout is excessive given the company’s financial position.

Stock (Scrip) Dividend Alternative

Vote FOR most stock (scrip) dividend proposals.

Vote AGAINST proposals that do not allow for a cash option unless management demonstrates that the cash option is harmful to shareholder value.

Amendments to Articles of Association

 124

Vote amendments to the articles of association on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Change in Company Fiscal Term

Vote FOR resolutions to change a company’s fiscal term unless a company’s motivation for the change is to postpone its annual general meeting.

Lower Disclosure Threshold for Stock Ownership

Vote AGAINST resolutions to lower the stock ownership disclosure threshold below 5% unless specific reasons exist to implement a lower threshold.

Amend Quorum Requirements

Vote proposals to amend quorum requirements for shareholder meetings on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Virtual Meetings

Generally, vote FOR proposals allowing for the convening of hybrid* shareholder meetings if it is clear that it is not the intention to hold virtual-only AGMs. Generally, vote AGAINST proposals allowing for the convening of virtual-only* shareholder meetings.

* The phrase “virtual-only shareholder meeting” refers to a meeting of shareholders that is held exclusively through the use of online technology without a corresponding in-person meeting. The term “hybrid shareholder meeting” refers to an in-person, or physical, meeting in which shareholders are permitted to participate online.

Public Benefit Corporation Proposals

Generally, vote FOR management proposals and CASE-BY-CASE on shareholder proposals related to the conversion of the company into a public benefit corporation.

Transact Other Business

Vote AGAINST other business when it appears as a voting item.

Administrative Requests

Generally, vote FOR non-contentious administrative management requests.

2.

Board of Directors

The board of directors should promote the interests of shareholders by acting in an oversight and/or advisory role; should consist of a majority of independent directors and / or meet local best practice expectations; and should be held accountable for actions and results related to their responsibilities.

Voting on Director Nominees in Uncontested Elections

◾

Vote on director nominees should be determined on a CASE-BY-CASE basis taking into consideration the following:

◾

Adequate disclosure has not been provided in a timely manner; or

◾

There are clear concerns over questionable finances or restatements; or

◾

There have been questionable transactions or conflicts of interest; or

◾

There are any records of abuses against minority shareholder interests; or

◾

The board fails to meet minimum corporate governance standards; or

◾

There are reservations about:

◾

Director terms

◾

Bundling of proposals to elect directors

◾

Board independence

◾

Disclosure of named nominees

◾

Combined Chairman/CEO

◾

Election of former CEO as Chairman of the board

◾

Overboarded directors

◾

Composition of committees

125

◾

Director independence

◾

Number of directors on the board

◾

Lack of gender diversity on the board

◾

Specific concerns about the individual or company, such as criminal wrongdoing or breach of fiduciary responsibilities; or

◾

There are other considerations which may include sanction from government or authority, violations of laws and regulations, or other issues relate to improper business practice, failure to replace management, or egregious actions related to service on other boards.

Board Composition

We generally believe diverse teams have the potential to outperform and we expect the companies that we invest in to focus on the importance of diversity. When evaluating board composition, we believe a diversity of ethnicity, gender and experience is an important consideration. We encourage companies to disclose the composition of their board in the proxy statement and may vote against members of the board without disclosure. See below how we execute our vote at companies that do not meet our diversity expectations.

Vote AGAINST members of the Nominating Committee:

◾

At companies if the board does not have at least 10% women directors, or does not meet the requirements of local listing rules or corporate governance codes or national targets;

◾

At companies in the FTSE100 if the board does not have at least one director from an underrepresented minority ethnic background, in line with the Parker review guidelines.

Employee and /or Labor Representatives

Vote FOR employee and/or labor representatives if they sit on either the audit or compensation committee and are required by law to be on those committees.

Vote AGAINST employee and/or labor representatives if they sit on either the audit or compensation committee, if they are not required to be on those committees.

Director Independence

Classification of Directors

Executive Director

◾

Employee or executive of the company;

◾

Any director who is classified as a non-executive, but receives salary, fees, bonus, and/or other benefits that are in line with the highest-paid executives of the company.

Non-Independent Non-Executive Director (NED)

◾

Any director who is attested by the board to be a non-independent NED;

◾

Any director specifically designated as a representative of a significant shareholder of the company;

◾

Any director who is also an employee or executive of a significant shareholder of the company;

◾

Beneficial owner (direct or indirect) of at least 10% of the company’s stock, either in economic terms or in voting rights (this may be aggregated if voting power is distributed among more than one member of a defined group, e.g., family members who beneficially own less than 10% individually, but collectively own more than 10%), unless market best practice dictates a lower ownership and/or disclosure threshold (and in other special market-specific circumstances);

◾

Government representative;

◾

Currently provides (or a relative provides) professional services to the company, to an affiliate of the company, or to an individual officer of the company or of one of its affiliates in excess of $10,000 per year;

◾

Represents customer, supplier, creditor, banker, or other entity with which company maintains transactional/commercial relationship (unless company discloses information to apply a materiality test);

◾

Any director who has conflicting or cross-directorships with executive directors or the chairman of the company;

◾

Relative of a current employee of the company or its affiliates;

◾

Relative of a former executive of the company or its affiliates;

◾

A new appointee elected other than by a formal process through the General Meeting (such as a contractual appointment by a substantial shareholder);

◾

Founder/co-founder/member of founding family but not currently an employee;

◾

Former executive (a cooling off period may be applied);

◾

Years of service is generally not a determining factor unless it is recommended best practice in a market and/or in extreme circumstances, in which case it may be considered; and

 126

◾

Any additional relationship or principle considered to compromise independence under local corporate governance best practice guidance.

Independent NED

◾

No material connection, either directly or indirectly, to the company other than a board seat.

Employee Representative

◾

Represents employees or employee shareholders of the company (classified as “employee representative” but considered a non-independent NED).

Director Accountability

Vote AGAINST individual directors who attend less than 75% of the board and committee meetings without a disclosed valid excuse.

Generally, vote FOR the bundled election of management nominees, unless adequate disclosures of the nominees have not been provided in a timely manner or if one or more of the nominees does not meet the expectation of our policy.

Other items considered for an AGAINST vote include specific concerns about the individual or the company, such as criminal wrongdoing or breach of fiduciary responsibilities, sanctions from government or authority, violations of laws and regulations, the presence of inappropriate related party transactions, or other issues related to improper business practices

Vote AGAINST members of the full board or appropriate committee (or only the independent chairman or lead director as may be appropriate in situations such as where there is a classified board and members of the appropriate committee are not up for re-election or the appropriate committee is comprised of the entire board) for the below reasons. New nominees will be considered on a case-by-case basis. Extreme cases may warrant a vote against the entire board.

◾

Material failures of governance, stewardship, or fiduciary responsibilities at the company,

◾

including but not limited to violations of the United Nations Global Compact principles and/or other significant global standards and failure to disclose material environmental, social and governance information;

◾

Egregious actions related to the director(s)’ service on other boards that raise substantial doubt about his or her ability to effectively oversee management and serve the best interests of shareholders at any company;

◾

The board failed to act on a shareholder proposal that received approval of the majority of shares cast for the previous two consecutive years (a management proposal with other than a FOR recommendation by management will not be considered as sufficient action taken); an adopted proposal that is substantially similar to the original shareholder proposal will be deemed sufficient; (vote against members of the committee of the board that is responsible for the issue under consideration). If we did not support the shareholder proposal in both years, we will still vote against the committee member(s).

◾

The board failed to act on takeover offers where the majority of the shareholders tendered their shares;

◾

The company does not disclose various components of current emissions, a proxy for a company’s dependency on fossil fuels and other sources of greenhouse gasses (Scope 1, Scope 2, Scope 3 emissions), material to the company’s business;

◾

If in an extreme situation the board lacks accountability and oversight, coupled with sustained poor performance relative to peers.

Discharge of Directors

Generally, vote FOR the discharge of directors, including members of the management board and/or supervisory board, unless there is reliable information about significant and compelling controversies that the board is not fulfilling its fiduciary duties warranted by:

◾

A lack of oversight or actions by board members which invoke shareholder distrust related to

◾

malfeasance or poor supervision, such as operating in private or company interest rather than in

◾

shareholder interest; or

◾

Any legal issues (e.g., civil/criminal) aiming to hold the board responsible for breach of trust in the past or related to currently alleged actions yet to be confirmed (and not only the fiscal year in question), such as price fixing, insider trading, bribery, fraud, and other illegal actions; or

◾

Other egregious governance issues where shareholders may bring legal action against the company or its directors; or

◾

Vote on a CASE-BY-CASE basis where a vote against other agenda items are deemed inappropriate.

Committee Responsibilities and Expectations

Companies should establish committees to oversee areas such as audit, executive and non-executive compensation, director nominations and ESG oversight. The responsibilities of the committees should be publicly disclosed.

Audit Committee

127

Vote AGAINST members of the Audit Committee if:

◾

Non-audit-related fees are substantial, or are in excess of standard annual audit-related fees, or in excess of permitted local limits and guidelines.

◾

The company receives an adverse opinion on the company’s financial statements from its auditor and there is not clear evidence that the situation has been remedied;

◾

There is excessive pledging or hedging of stock by executives;

◾

There is persuasive evidence that the Audit Committee entered into an inappropriate indemnification agreement with its auditor that limits the ability of the company, or its shareholders, to pursue legitimate legal recourse against the audit firm; or

◾

No members of the Audit Committee hold sufficient financial expertise.

Vote CASE-BY-CASE on members of the Audit Committee and/or the full board if poor accounting practices, which rise to a level of serious concern are identified, such as fraud, misapplication of accounting principles and material weaknesses identified in audit-related disclosures.

Examine the severity, breadth, chronological sequence and duration, as well as the company’s efforts at remediation or corrective actions, in determining whether negative vote recommendations are warranted against the members of the Audit Committee who are responsible for the poor accounting practices, or the entire board.

Remuneration Committee

See section 3 on Remuneration for reasons to vote against members of the Remuneration Committee.

Nominating/Governance Committee

Vote AGAINST members of the Nominating/Governance Committee if:

◾

At the previous board election, any director received more than 50% withhold/against votes of the shares cast and the company has failed to address the underlying issue(s) that caused the high withhold/against vote;

◾

The board does not meet our diversity expectations;

◾

The board amends the company’s bylaws or charter without shareholder approval in a manner that materially diminishes shareholders’ rights or could adversely impact shareholders

Voting on Director Nominees in Contested Elections

Vote on a CASE-BY-CASE basis in contested elections of directors, e.g., the election of shareholder nominees or the dismissal of incumbent directors, determining which directors are best suited to add value for shareholders.

The analysis will generally be based on, but not limited to, the following major decision factors:

◾

Company performance relative to its peers;

◾

Strategy of the incumbents versus the dissidents;

◾

Independence of board candidates;

◾

Experience and skills of board candidates;

◾

Governance profile of the company;

◾

Evidence of management entrenchment;

◾

Responsiveness to shareholders;

◾

Whether a takeover offer has been rebuffed; and

◾

Whether minority or majority representation is being sought.

Other Board Related Proposals (Management and Shareholder)

Vote AGAINST the introduction of classified boards and mandatory retirement ages for directors.

Vote AGAINST proposals to alter board structure or size in the context of a fight for control of the company or the board.

Independent Board Chair (for applicable markets)

We will generally vote AGAINST shareholder proposals requiring that the chairman’s position be filled by an independent director, if the company satisfies 3 of the 4 following criteria:

◾

Two-thirds independent board, or majority in countries where employee representation is common practice;

◾

A designated, or a rotating, lead director, elected by and from the independent board members with clearly delineated and comprehensive duties;

 128

◾

Fully independent key committees; and/or

◾

Established, publicly disclosed, governance guidelines and director biographies/profiles.

3.

Remuneration

Pay Practices

Good pay practices should align management’s interests with long-term shareholder value creation. Detailed disclosure of remuneration criteria is preferred; proof that companies follow the criteria should be evident and retroactive performance target changes without proper disclosure is not viewed favorably. Remuneration practices should allow a company to attract and retain proven talent. Some examples of poor pay practices include: abnormally large bonus payouts without justifiable performance linkage or proper disclosure, egregious employment contracts, excessive severance and/or change in control provisions, repricing or replacing of underwater stock options/stock appreciation rights without prior shareholder approval, and excessive perquisites. A company should also have an appropriate balance of short-term vs. long-term metrics and the metrics should be aligned with business goals and objectives.

If the company maintains problematic or poor pay practices, generally vote:

◾

AGAINST Management Say on Pay (MSOP) Proposals, Remuneration Reports; or

◾

AGAINST an equity-based incentive plan proposal if excessive non-performance-based equity awards are the major contributor to a pay-for-performance misalignment.

◾

If no MSOP or equity-based incentive plan proposal item is on the ballot, vote AGAINST from Remuneration Committee members.

Remuneration Plans

Vote CASE-BY-CASE on management proposals for a vote on executive remuneration, considering the following factors in the context of each company’s specific circumstances and the board’s disclosed rationale for its practices.

Factors considered may include:

◾

Pay for Performance Disconnect;

◾

We will consider there to be a disconnect based on a quantitative assessment of the following: CEO pay vs. TSR (“Total Shareholder Return”) and peers, CEO pay as a percentage of the median peer group or CEO pay vs. shareholder return over time.

◾

Long-term equity-based compensation is 100% time-based;

◾

Board’s responsiveness if company received low shareholder support in the previous year’s MSOP or remuneration vote;

◾

Abnormally large bonus payouts without justifiable performance linkage or proper disclosure;

◾

Egregious employment contracts;

◾

Excessive perquisites or excessive severance and/or change in control provisions;

◾

Repricing or replacing of underwater stock options without prior shareholder approval;

◾

Egregious pension/SERP (supplemental executive retirement plan) payouts;

◾

Extraordinary relocation benefits;

◾

Internal pay disparity; and

◾

Lack of transparent disclosure of compensation philosophy and goals and targets, including details on short-term and long-term performance incentives.

Non-Executive Director Compensation

Vote FOR proposals to award cash fees to non-executive directors unless the amounts are excessive relative to other companies in the country or industry.

Vote non-executive director compensation proposals that include both cash and share-based components on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Vote proposals that bundle compensation for both non-executive and executive directors into a single resolution on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Vote AGAINST proposals to introduce retirement benefits for non-executive directors.

Director, Officer, and Auditor Indemnification and Liability Provisions

Vote proposals seeking indemnification and liability protection for directors and officers on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Vote AGAINST proposals to indemnify auditors.

129

Other Remuneration Related Proposals

Vote on other remuneration related proposals on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Remuneration Committee

When voting for members of the Remuneration Committee, factors considered may include:

◾

We voted against the company’s MSOP in the previous year, the company’s previous MSOP received significant opposition of votes cast and we are voting against this year’s MSOP; and

◾

The board implements a MSOP on a less frequent basis than the frequency that received the plurality of votes cast

◾

Remuneration structure is widely inconsistent with local market best practices or regulations

4.

Shareholder Rights and Defences

Antitakeover Mechanisms

Generally, vote AGAINST all antitakeover proposals, unless they are structured in such a way that they give shareholders the ultimate decision on any proposal or offer.

For the Netherlands, vote recommendations regarding management proposals to approve protective preference shares will be determined on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

For French companies listed on a regulated market, generally VOTE AGAINST any general authorities impacting the share capital (i.e. authorities for share repurchase plans and any general share issuances with or without preemptive rights) if they can be used for antitakeover purposes without shareholders' prior explicit approval.

5.

Strategic Transactions, Capital Structures and other Business Considerations

Reorganizations/Restructurings

Vote reorganizations and restructurings on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Mergers and Acquisitions

Vote CASE-BY-CASE on mergers and acquisitions taking into account the following based on publicly available information:

◾

Valuation;

◾

Market reaction;

◾

Strategic rationale;

◾

Management’s track record of successful integration of historical acquisitions;

◾

Presence of conflicts of interest; and

◾

Governance profile of the combined company.

Dual Class Structures

Vote FOR resolutions that seek to maintain or convert to a one-share, one-vote capital structure.

Vote AGAINST requests for the creation or continuation of dual-class capital structures or the creation of new or additional super voting shares.

Share Issuance Requests

General Issuances:

Vote FOR issuance requests with preemptive rights to a maximum of 100% over currently issued capital or any stricter limit set in local best practice recommendations or law.

Vote FOR issuance requests without preemptive rights to a maximum of 20% of currently issued capital or any stricter limit set in local best practice recommendations or law.

Specific Issuances:

 130

Vote on a CASE-BY-CASE basis on all requests, with or without preemptive rights.

Increases in Authorized Capital

Vote FOR non-specific proposals to increase authorized capital up to 100% over the current authorization unless the increase would leave the company with less than 30% of its new authorization outstanding, or any stricter limit set in local best practice recommendations or law.

Vote FOR specific proposals to increase authorized capital to any amount, unless:

◾

The specific purpose of the increase (such as a share-based acquisition or merger) does not meet

◾

guidelines for the purpose being proposed; or

◾

The increase would leave the company with less than 30% of its new authorization outstanding after adjusting for all proposed issuances or any stricter limit set in local best practice recommendations or law.

Vote AGAINST proposals to adopt unlimited capital authorizations.

Reduction of Capital

Vote FOR proposals to reduce capital for routine accounting purposes unless the terms are unfavorable to shareholders.

Vote proposals to reduce capital in connection with corporate restructuring on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Preferred Stock

Vote FOR the creation of a new class of preferred stock or for issuances of preferred stock up to 50% of issued capital unless the terms of the preferred stock would adversely affect the rights of existing shareholders.

Vote FOR the creation/issuance of convertible preferred stock as long as the maximum number of common shares that could be issued upon conversion meets guidelines on equity issuance requests.

Vote AGAINST the creation of a new class of preference shares that would carry superior voting rights to the common shares.

Vote AGAINST the creation of blank check preferred stock unless the board clearly states that the authorization will not be used to thwart a takeover bid.

Vote proposals to increase blank check preferred authorizations on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Debt Issuance Requests

Vote non-convertible debt issuance requests on a CASE-BY-CASE basis, with or without preemptive rights.

Vote FOR the creation/issuance of convertible debt instruments as long as the maximum number of common shares that could be issued upon conversion meets guidelines on equity issuance requests.

Vote FOR proposals to restructure existing debt arrangements unless the terms of the restructuring would adversely affect the rights of shareholders.

Increase in Borrowing Powers

Vote proposals to approve increases in a company's borrowing powers on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Share Repurchase Plans

◾

We will generally recommend FOR share repurchase programs taking into account whether:

◾

The share repurchase program can be used as a takeover defense;

◾

There is clear evidence of historical abuse;

◾

There is no safeguard in the share repurchase program against selective buybacks;

◾

Pricing provisions and safeguards in the share repurchase program are deemed to be unreasonable in light of market practice.

Reissuance of Repurchased Shares

Vote FOR requests to reissue any repurchased shares unless there is clear evidence of abuse of this authority in the past.

131

Capitalization of Reserves for Bonus Issues/Increase in Par Value

Vote FOR requests to capitalize reserves for bonus issues of shares or to increase par value.

Reorganizations/Restructurings

Vote reorganizations and restructurings on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Reincorporation Proposals

Vote reincorporation proposals on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Related-Party Transactions

Vote related-party transactions on a CASE-BY-CASE basis, considering factors including, but not limited to, the following:

◾

The parties on either side of the transaction;

◾

The nature of the asset to be transferred/service to be provided;

◾

The pricing of the transaction (and any associated professional valuation);

◾

The views of independent directors (where provided);

◾

The views of an independent financial adviser (where appointed);

◾

Whether any entities party to the transaction (including advisers) is conflicted; and

◾

The stated rationale for the transaction, including discussions of timing

6.

Environmental and Social Issues

Overall Approach

Proposals considered under this category could include, among others, reports on:

1) employee labor and safety policies;

2) impact on the environment of the company’s production or manufacturing operations;

3) societal impact of products manufactured;

4) risks throughout the supply chain or operations including labor practices, animal treatment practices within food production and conflict minerals; and

5) overall board structure, including diversity.

When evaluating environmental and social shareholder proposals, the following factors are generally considered:

◾

The company’s current level of publicly available disclosure, including if the company already discloses similar information through existing reports or policies;

◾

If the company has implemented or formally committed to the implementation of a reporting program based on the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board’s (SASB) materiality standards, the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosure’s (TCFD) recommendations, or a similar standard;

◾

Whether adoption of the proposal is likely to enhance or protect shareholder value;

◾

Whether the information requested concerns business issues that relate to a meaningful percentage of the company’s business;

◾

The degree to which the company’s stated position on the issues raised in the proposal could affect its reputation or sales, or leave it vulnerable to a boycott or selective purchasing;

◾

Whether the company has already responded in some appropriate manner to the request embodied in the proposal;

◾

What other companies in the relevant industry have done in response to the issue addressed in the proposal;

◾

Whether the proposal itself is well framed and the cost of preparing the report is reasonable;

◾

Whether the subject of the proposal is best left to the discretion of the board;

◾

Whether the company has material fines or violations in the area and if so, if appropriate actions have already been taken to remedy going forward;

◾

Whether providing this information would reveal proprietary or confidential information that would place the company at a competitive disadvantage.

Environmental Issues

 132

Climate Transition Plans

Generally, vote CASE-BY-CASE on management proposed climate transition plans. When evaluating management proposed plans, the following factors are generally considered:

◾

If the company has detailed disclosure of the governance, strategy, risk mitigation efforts, and metrics and targets based on the TCFD’s recommendations, or a similar standard;

◾

If the company has detailed disclosure of their current emissions data based on the SASB materiality framework; and

◾

If the company has detailed disclosure in line with Paris Agreement goals.

Generally, vote CASE-BY-CASE on shareholder proposals requesting climate transition plans. When evaluating these shareholder proposals, the following factors are generally considered:

◾

The company’s current level of publicly available disclosure including if the company already discloses similar information through existing reports or policies;

◾

If the proposal asks for detailed disclosure according to the TCFD’s recommendations;

◾

If the proposal asks for detailed disclosure of the company’s current emissions data based on the SASB materiality framework;

◾

If the proposal asks for long-term targets, as well as short and medium term milestones;

◾

If the proposal asks for targets to be aligned to a globally accepted framework, such as Paris Aligned or Net Zero;

◾

If the proposal asks for targets to be approved by the Science Based Target Initiative (“SBTi”);

◾

If the proposal seeks to add reasonable transparency and is not onerous or overly prescriptive; and

◾

Whether the proposal is binding or non-binding.

Environmental Sustainability Reporting

Generally, vote FOR shareholders proposals requesting the company to report on its policies, initiatives and oversight mechanisms related to environmental sustainability, including the impacts of climate change and biodiversity loss. The following factors will be considered:

◾

The company’s current level of publicly available disclosure including if the company already discloses similar information through existing reports or policies;

◾

If the company has formally committed to the implementation of a reporting program based on the SASB materiality standards, the TCFD’s recommendations, or a similar standard within a specified time frame;

◾

If the company’s current level of disclosure is comparable to that of its industry peers; and

◾

If there are significant controversies, fines, penalties, or litigation associated with the company’s environmental performance.

Other Environmental Proposals

Vote CASE-BY-CASE on the following shareholder proposals if relevant to the company:

◾

Seeking information on the financial, physical, or regulatory risks a company faces related to climate change on its operations and investment, or on how the company identifies, measures and manages such risks;

◾

Calling for the reduction of Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions;

◾

Seeking reports on responses to regulatory and public pressures surrounding climate change, and for disclosure of research that aided in setting company policies around climate change;

◾

Requesting an action plan including science based targets and a commitment to net zero emissions by 2050 or earlier;

◾

Requesting a report/disclosure of goals on GHG emissions from company operations and/or products;

◾

Requesting a company report on its energy efficiency policies; and

◾

Requesting reports on the feasibility of developing renewable energy resources.

Social Issues

Board and Workforce Demographics

A company should have a clear, public Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) statement and/or diversity policy. Generally vote FOR proposals seeking to amend a company’s EEO statement or diversity policies to additionally prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and/or gender identity.

Generally, vote FOR proposals requesting reports on a company’s efforts to diversify the board, unless:

The gender and racial minority representation of the company’s board is reasonably inclusive in relation to companies of similar size and business; and

The board already reports on its nominating procedures and gender and racial minority initiatives on the board.

133

Gender Pay Gap

Generally, vote CASE-BY-CASE on proposals requesting reports on a company’s pay data by gender, or a report on a company’s policies and goals to reduce any gender pay gap, taking into account:

◾

The company’s current policies and disclosure related to both its diversity and inclusion policies and practices and its compensation philosophy and fair and equitable compensation practices;

◾

Whether the company has been the subject of recent controversy, litigation or regulatory actions related to gender pay gap issues; and

◾

Whether the company’s reporting regarding gender pay gap policies or initiatives is lagging its peers.

Labor, Human and Animal Rights Standards

Generally, vote FOR proposals requesting a report on company or company supplier labor, human, and/or animal rights standards and policies, or on the impact of its operations on society, unless such information is already publicly disclosed considering:

◾

The degree to which existing relevant policies and practices are disclosed;

◾

Whether or not existing relevant policies are consistent with internationally recognized standards;

◾

Whether company facilities and those of its suppliers are monitored and how;

◾

Company participation in fair labor organizations or other internationally recognized human rights initiatives;

◾

Scope and nature of business conducted in markets known to have higher risk of workplace labor/human rights abuse;

◾

Recent, significant company controversies, fines, or litigation regarding human rights at the company or its suppliers;

◾

The scope of the request; and

◾

Deviation from industry sector peer company standards and practices.

Generally, vote CASE-BY-CASE on shareholder proposals requesting reports about a company’s use of mandatory arbitrations in employment claims, taking into account the company’s existing policies and disclosures of policies.

Generally, vote CASE-BY-CASE on shareholder proposals requesting reports on the actions taken by a company to prevent sexual and other forms of harassment or on the risks posed by the company’s failure to take such actions, taking into account the company’s existing policies and disclosures of policies.

Racial Equity Audit

Generally, vote CASE-BY-CASE on shareholder proposals requesting the board oversee a racial equity audit. While we believe the decision to initiate an independent audit is best left to management judgment under the oversight of the board of directors, the following factors are generally considered:

The degree to which existing relevant policies and practices are disclosed;

Recent, significant company controversies, fines, or litigation regarding human rights at the company or its suppliers; and

Whether the gender and racial minority representation of the company’s board is reasonably inclusive in relation to companies of similar size and business.

Political Contributions and Trade Association Spending/Lobbying Expenditures and Initiatives

We generally believe that it is the role of boards and management to determine the appropriate level of disclosure of all types of corporate political activity.  When evaluating these proposals, we consider the prescriptive nature of the proposal and the overall benefit to shareholders along with a company’s current disclosure of policies, practices and oversight.

Generally, vote AGAINST proposals asking the company to affirm political nonpartisanship in the workplace so long as:

◾

There are no recent, significant controversies, fines or litigation regarding the company’s political contributions or trade association spending; and

◾

The company has procedures in place to ensure that employee contributions to company-sponsored political action committees (PACs) are strictly voluntary and prohibits coercion.

Generally, vote AGAINST proposals requesting increased disclosure of a company’s policies with respect to political contributions, lobbying and trade association spending as long as:

◾

There is no significant potential threat or actual harm to shareholders’ interests;

◾

There are no recent significant controversies or litigation related to the company’s political contributions or governmental affairs; and

◾

There is publicly available information to assess the company’s oversight related to such expenditures of corporate assets.

 134

We generally will vote AGAINST proposals asking for detailed disclosure of political contributions or trade association or lobbying expenditures.

We generally will vote AGAINST proposals barring the company from making political contributions. Businesses are affected by legislation at the federal, state, and local level and barring political contributions can put the company at a competitive disadvantage.

Region: Asia Pacific (APAC) Proxy Items

The following section is a broad summary of the Guidelines, which form the basis of the Policy with respect to APAC public equity investments of operating and/or holding companies.  Applying these guidelines is subject to certain regional and country-specific exceptions and modifications and is not inclusive of all considerations in each market. For Japan-specific policies, see Japan Proxy Items from page 113.

1.

Business Items

Financial Results/Director and Auditor Reports

Vote FOR approval of financial statements and director and auditor reports, unless:

◾

There are serious concerns about the accounts presented, audit procedures used or audit opinion rendered; or

◾

The company is not responsive to shareholder questions about specific items that should be publicly disclosed.

Appointment of Auditors and Auditor Fees

Vote FOR the re-election of auditors and proposals authorizing the board to fix auditor fees unless:

◾

There are serious concerns about the accounts presented, audit procedures used or audit opinion rendered;

◾

There is reason to believe that the auditor has rendered an opinion that is neither accurate nor indicative of the company’s financial position;

◾

Name of the proposed auditor has not been published;

◾

The auditors are being changed without explanation;

◾

Non-audit-related fees are substantial, or are in excess of standard annual audit-related fees, or in excess of permitted local limits and guidelines; or

◾

The appointment of external auditors if they have previously served the company in an executive capacity or can otherwise be considered affiliated with the company.

Appointment of Internal Statutory Auditors

Vote FOR the appointment or re-election of statutory auditors, unless:

◾

There are serious concerns about the statutory reports presented or the audit procedures used;

◾

Questions exist concerning any of the statutory auditors being appointed; or

◾

The auditors have previously served the company in an executive capacity or can otherwise be considered affiliated with the company.

Reincorporation Proposals

Vote reincorporation proposals on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Allocation of Income

Vote FOR approval of the allocation of income, unless:

◾

The dividend payout ratio has been consistently low without adequate explanation; or

◾

The payout is excessive given the company’s financial position.

Stock (Scrip) Dividend Alternative

Vote FOR most stock (scrip) dividend proposals.

Vote AGAINST proposals that do not allow for a cash option unless management demonstrates that the cash option is harmful to shareholder value.

Amendments to Articles of Association

135

Vote amendments to the articles of association on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Change in Company Fiscal Term

Vote FOR resolutions to change a company’s fiscal term unless a company’s motivation for the change is to postpone its annual general meeting.

Lower Disclosure Threshold for Stock Ownership

Vote AGAINST resolutions to lower the stock ownership disclosure threshold below 5% unless specific reasons exist to implement a lower threshold.

Amend Quorum Requirements

Vote proposals to amend quorum requirements for shareholder meetings on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Virtual Meetings

Generally, vote FOR proposals allowing for the convening of hybrid* shareholder meetings if it is clear that it is not the intention to hold virtual-only AGMs. Generally, vote AGAINST proposals allowing for the convening of virtual-only* shareholder meetings.

* The phrase “virtual-only shareholder meeting” refers to a meeting of shareholders that is held exclusively through the use of online technology without a corresponding in-person meeting. The term “hybrid shareholder meeting” refers to an in-person, or physical, meeting in which shareholders are permitted to participate online.

Transact Other Business

Vote AGAINST other business when it appears as a voting item.

Administrative Requests

Generally, vote FOR non-contentious administrative management requests.

2.

Board of Directors

The board of directors should promote the interests of shareholders by acting in an oversight and/or advisory role; should consist of a majority of independent directors and / or meet local best practice expectations; and should be held accountable for actions and results related to their responsibilities.

Voting on Director Nominees in Uncontested Elections

Vote on director nominees should be determined on a CASE-BY-CASE basis taking into consideration the following:

◾

Adequate disclosure has not been provided in a timely manner; or

◾

There are clear concerns over questionable finances or restatements; or

◾

There have been questionable transactions or conflicts of interest; or

◾

There are any records of abuses against minority shareholder interests; or

◾

The board fails to meet minimum corporate governance standards; or

◾

There are reservations about:

◾

Director terms

◾

Bundling of proposals to elect directors

◾

Board independence

◾

Disclosure of named nominees

◾

Combined Chairman/CEO

◾

Election of former CEO as Chairman of the board

◾

Overboarded directors

◾

Composition of committees

◾

Director independence

◾

Number of directors on the board

◾

Lack of gender diversity on the board

◾

Specific concerns about the individual or company, such as criminal wrongdoing or breach of fiduciary responsibilities; or

 136

◾

There are other considerations which may include sanction from government or authority, violations of laws and regulations, or other issues relate to improper business practice, failure to replace management, or egregious actions related to service on other boards.

Board Composition

We generally believe diverse teams have the potential to outperform and we expect the companies that we invest in to focus on the importance of diversity. When evaluating board composition, we believe a diversity of ethnicity, gender and experience is an important consideration. We encourage companies to disclose the composition of their board in the proxy statement and may vote against members of the board without disclosure. See below how we execute our vote at companies that do not meet our diversity expectations.

Vote AGAINST members of the Nominating Committee:

At companies if the board does not have at least 10% women directors, or does not meet the requirements of local listing rules or corporate governance codes or national targets;

Employee and /or Labor Representatives

Vote FOR employee and/or labor representatives if they sit on either the audit or compensation committee and are required by law to be on those committees.

Vote AGAINST employee and/or labor representatives if they sit on either the audit or compensation committee, if they are not required to be on those committees.

Director Independence

Classification of Directors

Executive Director

◾

Employee or executive of the company;

◾

Any director who is classified as a non-executive, but receives salary, fees, bonus, and/or other benefits that are in line with the highest-paid executives of the company.

Non-Independent Non-Executive Director (NED)

◾

Any director who is attested by the board to be a non-independent NED;

◾

Any director specifically designated as a representative of a significant shareholder of the company;

◾

Any director who is also an employee or executive of a significant shareholder of the company;

◾

Beneficial owner (direct or indirect) of at least 10% of the company’s stock, either in economic terms or in voting rights (this may be aggregated if voting power is distributed among more than one member of a defined group, e.g., family members who beneficially own less than 10% individually, but collectively own more than 10%), unless market best practice dictates a lower ownership and/or disclosure threshold (and in other special market-specific circumstances);

◾

Government representative;

◾

Currently provides (or a relative provides) professional services to the company, to an affiliate of the company, or to an individual officer of the company or of one of its affiliates in excess of $10,000 per year;

◾

Represents customer, supplier, creditor, banker, or other entity with which company maintains transactional/commercial relationship (unless company discloses information to apply a materiality test);

◾

Any director who has conflicting or cross-directorships with executive directors or the chairman of the company;

◾

Relative of a current employee of the company or its affiliates;

◾

Relative of a former executive of the company or its affiliates;

◾

A new appointee elected other than by a formal process through the General Meeting (such as a contractual appointment by a substantial shareholder);

◾

Founder/co-founder/member of founding family but not currently an employee;

◾

Former executive (a cooling off period may be applied);

◾

Years of service is generally not a determining factor unless it is recommended best practice in a market and/or in extreme circumstances, in which case it may be considered; and

◾

Any additional relationship or principle considered to compromise independence under local corporate governance best practice guidance.

Independent NED

No material connection, either directly or indirectly, to the company other than a board seat.

137

Employee Representative

Represents employees or employee shareholders of the company (classified as “employee representative” but considered a non-independent NED).

Director Accountability

Vote AGAINST individual directors who attend less than 75% of the board and committee meetings without a disclosed valid excuse.

Generally, vote FOR the bundled election of management nominees, unless adequate disclosures of the nominees have not been provided in a timely manner or if one or more of the nominees does not meet the expectation of our policy.

Other items considered for an AGAINST vote include specific concerns about the individual or the company, such as criminal wrongdoing or breach of fiduciary responsibilities, sanctions from government or authority, violations of laws and regulations, the presence of inappropriate related party transactions, or other issues related to improper business practices

Vote AGAINST members of the full board or appropriate committee (or only the independent chairman or lead director as may be appropriate in situations such as where there is a classified board and members of the appropriate committee are not up for re-election or the appropriate committee is comprised of the entire board) for the below reasons. New nominees will be considered on a case-by-case basis. Extreme cases may warrant a vote against the entire board.

◾

Material failures of governance, stewardship, or fiduciary responsibilities at the company,

◾

including but not limited to violations of the United Nations Global Compact principles and/or other significant global standards and failure to disclose material environmental, social and governance information;

◾

Egregious actions related to the director(s)’ service on other boards that raise substantial doubt about his or her ability to effectively oversee management and serve the best interests of shareholders at any company;

◾

The board failed to act on a shareholder proposal that received approval of the majority of shares cast for the previous two consecutive years (a management proposal with other than a FOR recommendation by management will not be considered as sufficient action taken); an adopted proposal that is substantially similar to the original shareholder proposal will be deemed sufficient; (vote against members of the committee of the board that is responsible for the issue under consideration). If we did not support the shareholder proposal in both years, we will still vote against the committee member(s).

◾

The board failed to act on takeover offers where the majority of the shareholders tendered their shares;

◾

The company does not disclose various components of current emissions, a proxy for a company’s dependency on fossil fuels and other sources of greenhouse gasses (Scope 1, Scope 2, Scope 3 emissions), material to the company’s business;

◾

If in an extreme situation the board lacks accountability and oversight, coupled with sustained poor performance relative to peers.

Discharge of Directors

Generally, vote FOR the discharge of directors, including members of the management board and/or supervisory board, unless there is reliable information about significant and compelling controversies that the board is not fulfilling its fiduciary duties warranted by:

◾

A lack of oversight or actions by board members which invoke shareholder distrust related to

◾

malfeasance or poor supervision, such as operating in private or company interest rather than in

◾

shareholder interest; or

◾

Any legal issues (e.g., civil/criminal) aiming to hold the board responsible for breach of trust in the past or related to currently alleged actions yet to be confirmed (and not only the fiscal year in question), such as price fixing, insider trading, bribery, fraud, and other illegal actions; or

◾

Other egregious governance issues where shareholders may bring legal action against the company or its directors; or

◾

Vote on a CASE-BY-CASE basis where a vote against other agenda items are deemed inappropriate.

Committee Responsibilities and Expectations

Companies should establish committees to oversee areas such as audit, executive and non-executive compensation, director nominations and ESG oversight. The responsibilities of the committees should be publicly disclosed.

Audit Committee

Vote AGAINST members of the Audit Committee if:

◾

Non-audit-related fees are substantial, or are in excess of standard annual audit-related fees, or in excess of permitted local limits and guidelines.

◾

The company receives an adverse opinion on the company’s financial statements from its auditor and there is not clear evidence that the situation has been remedied;

 138

◾

There is excessive pledging or hedging of stock by executives;

◾

There is persuasive evidence that the Audit Committee entered into an inappropriate indemnification agreement with its auditor that limits the ability of the company, or its shareholders, to pursue legitimate legal recourse against the audit firm; or

◾

No members of the Audit Committee hold sufficient financial expertise.

Vote CASE-BY-CASE on members of the Audit Committee and/or the full board if poor accounting practices, which rise to a level of serious concern are identified, such as fraud, misapplication of accounting principles and material weaknesses identified in audit-related disclosures.

Examine the severity, breadth, chronological sequence and duration, as well as the company’s efforts at remediation or corrective actions, in determining whether negative vote recommendations are warranted against the members of the Audit Committee who are responsible for the poor accounting practices, or the entire board.

Remuneration Committee

See section 3 on Remuneration for reasons to vote against members of the Remuneration Committee.

Nominating/Governance Committee

Vote AGAINST members of the Nominating/Governance Committee if:

◾

At the previous board election, any director received more than 50% withhold/against votes of the shares cast and the company has failed to address the underlying issue(s) that caused the high withhold/against vote;

◾

The board does not meet our diversity expectations;

◾

The board amends the company’s bylaws or charter without shareholder approval in a manner that materially diminishes shareholders’ rights or could adversely impact shareholders

Voting on Director Nominees in Contested Elections

Vote on a CASE-BY-CASE basis in contested elections of directors, e.g., the election of shareholder nominees or the dismissal of incumbent directors, determining which directors are best suited to add value for shareholders.

The analysis will generally be based on, but not limited to, the following major decision factors:

◾

Company performance relative to its peers;

◾

Strategy of the incumbents versus the dissidents;

◾

Independence of board candidates;

◾

Experience and skills of board candidates;

◾

Governance profile of the company;

◾

Evidence of management entrenchment;

◾

Responsiveness to shareholders;

◾

Whether a takeover offer has been rebuffed; and

◾

Whether minority or majority representation is being sought.

Other Board Related Proposals (Management and Shareholder)

Vote AGAINST the introduction of classified boards and mandatory retirement ages for directors.

Vote AGAINST proposals to alter board structure or size in the context of a fight for control of the company or the board.

Independent Board Chair (for applicable markets)

We will generally vote AGAINST shareholder proposals requiring that the chairman’s position be filled by an independent director, if the company satisfies 3 of the 4 following criteria:

◾

Two-thirds independent board, or majority in countries where employee representation is common practice;

◾

A designated, or a rotating, lead director, elected by and from the independent board members with clearly delineated and comprehensive duties;

◾

Fully independent key committees; and/or

◾

Established, publicly disclosed, governance guidelines and director biographies/profiles.

3.

Remuneration

139

Pay Practices

Good pay practices should align management’s interests with long-term shareholder value creation. Detailed disclosure of remuneration criteria is preferred; proof that companies follow the criteria should be evident and retroactive performance target changes without proper disclosure is not viewed favorably. Remuneration practices should allow a company to attract and retain proven talent. Some examples of poor pay practices include: abnormally large bonus payouts without justifiable performance linkage or proper disclosure, egregious employment contracts, excessive severance and/or change in control provisions, repricing or replacing of underwater stock options/stock appreciation rights without prior shareholder approval, and excessive perquisites. A company should also have an appropriate balance of short-term vs. long-term metrics and the metrics should be aligned with business goals and objectives.

If the company maintains problematic or poor pay practices, generally vote:

◾

AGAINST Management Say on Pay (MSOP) Proposals, Remuneration Reports; or

◾

AGAINST an equity-based incentive plan proposal if excessive non-performance-based equity awards are the major contributor to a pay-for-performance misalignment.

◾

If no MSOP or equity-based incentive plan proposal item is on the ballot, vote AGAINST from Remuneration Committee members.

Remuneration Plans

Vote CASE-BY-CASE on management proposals for a vote on executive remuneration, considering the following factors in the context of each company’s specific circumstances and the board’s disclosed rationale for its practices.

Factors considered may include:

◾

Pay for Performance Disconnect;

◾

We will consider there to be a disconnect based on a quantitative assessment of the following: CEO pay vs. TSR (“Total Shareholder Return”) and peers, CEO pay as a percentage of the median peer group or CEO pay vs. shareholder return over time.

◾

Long-term equity-based compensation is 100% time-based;

◾

Board’s responsiveness if company received low shareholder support in the previous year’s MSOP or remuneration vote;

◾

Abnormally large bonus payouts without justifiable performance linkage or proper disclosure;

◾

Egregious employment contracts;

◾

Excessive perquisites or excessive severance and/or change in control provisions;

◾

Repricing or replacing of underwater stock options without prior shareholder approval;

◾

Egregious pension/SERP (supplemental executive retirement plan) payouts;

◾

Extraordinary relocation benefits;

◾

Internal pay disparity; and

◾

Lack of transparent disclosure of compensation philosophy and goals and targets, including details on short-term and long-term performance incentives.

Non-Executive Director Compensation

Vote FOR proposals to award cash fees to non-executive directors unless the amounts are excessive relative to other companies in the country or industry.

Vote non-executive director compensation proposals that include both cash and share-based components on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Vote proposals that bundle compensation for both non-executive and executive directors into a single resolution on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Vote AGAINST proposals to introduce retirement benefits for non-executive directors.

Director, Officer, and Auditor Indemnification and Liability Provisions

Vote proposals seeking indemnification and liability protection for directors and officers on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Vote AGAINST proposals to indemnify auditors.

Other Remuneration Related Proposals

Vote on other remuneration related proposals on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Remuneration Committee

 140

◾

When voting for members of the Remuneration Committee, factors considered may include:

◾

We voted against the company’s MSOP in the previous year, the company’s previous MSOP received significant opposition of votes cast and we are voting against this year’s MSOP; and

◾

The board implements a MSOP on a less frequent basis than the frequency that received the plurality of votes cast

◾

Remuneration structure is widely inconsistent with local market best practices or regulations

4.

Shareholder Rights and Defences

Antitakeover Mechanisms

Generally, vote AGAINST all antitakeover proposals, unless they are structured in such a way that they giveshareholders the ultimate decision on any proposal or offer.

5.

Strategic Transactions, Capital Structures and other Business Considerations

Reorganizations/Restructurings

Vote reorganizations and restructurings on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Mergers and Acquisitions

Vote CASE-BY-CASE on mergers and acquisitions taking into account the following based on publicly available information:

◾

Valuation;

◾

Market reaction;

◾

Strategic rationale;

◾

Management’s track record of successful integration of historical acquisitions;

◾

Presence of conflicts of interest; and

◾

Governance profile of the combined company.

Dual Class Structures

Vote FOR resolutions that seek to maintain or convert to a one-share, one-vote capital structure.

Vote AGAINST requests for the creation or continuation of dual-class capital structures or the creation of new or additional super voting shares.

Share Issuance Requests

General Issuances:

Vote FOR issuance requests with preemptive rights to a maximum of 100% over currently issued capital or any stricter limit set in local best practice recommendations or law.

Vote FOR issuance requests without preemptive rights to a maximum of 20% of currently issued capital or any stricter limit set in local best practice recommendations or law. At companies in India, vote FOR issuance requests without preemptive rights to a maximum of 25% of currently issued capital.

Specific Issuances:

Vote on a CASE-BY-CASE basis on all requests, with or without preemptive rights.

Increases in Authorized Capital

Vote FOR non-specific proposals to increase authorized capital up to 100% over the current authorization unless the increase would leave the company with less than 30% of its new authorization outstanding, or any stricter limit set in local best practice recommendations or law.

Vote FOR specific proposals to increase authorized capital to any amount, unless:

◾

The specific purpose of the increase (such as a share-based acquisition or merger) does not meet guidelines for the purpose being proposed; or

141

◾

The increase would leave the company with less than 30% of its new authorization outstanding after adjusting for all proposed issuances, or any stricter limit set in local best practice recommendations or law

Vote AGAINST proposals to adopt unlimited capital authorizations.

Reduction of Capital

Vote FOR proposals to reduce capital for routine accounting purposes unless the terms are unfavorable toshareholders.

Vote proposals to reduce capital in connection with corporate restructuring on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Preferred Stock

Vote FOR the creation of a new class of preferred stock or for issuances of preferred stock up to 50% of issued capital unless the terms of the preferred stock would adversely affect the rights of existing shareholders.

Vote FOR the creation/issuance of convertible preferred stock as long as the maximum number of common shares that could be issued upon conversion meets guidelines on equity issuance requests.

Vote AGAINST the creation of a new class of preference shares that would carry superior voting rights to the common shares.

Vote AGAINST the creation of blank check preferred stock unless the board clearly states that the authorization will not be used to thwart a takeover bid.

Vote proposals to increase blank check preferred authorizations on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Debt Issuance Requests

Vote non-convertible debt issuance requests on a CASE-BY-CASE basis, with or without preemptive rights.

Vote FOR the creation/issuance of convertible debt instruments as long as the maximum number of common shares that could be issued upon conversion meets guidelines on equity issuance requests.

Vote FOR proposals to restructure existing debt arrangements unless the terms of the restructuring would adversely affect the rights of shareholders.

Increase in Borrowing Powers

Vote proposals to approve increases in a company's borrowing powers on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Share Repurchase Plans

We will generally recommend FOR share repurchase programs taking into account whether:

◾

The share repurchase program can be used as a takeover defense;

◾

There is clear evidence of historical abuse;

◾

There is no safeguard in the share repurchase program against selective buybacks;

◾

Pricing provisions and safeguards in the share repurchase program are deemed to be unreasonable in light of market practice.

Reissuance of Repurchased Shares

Vote FOR requests to reissue any repurchased shares unless there is clear evidence of abuse of this authority in the past.

Capitalization of Reserves for Bonus Issues/Increase in Par Value

Vote FOR requests to capitalize reserves for bonus issues of shares or to increase par value.

Reorganizations/Restructurings

Vote reorganizations and restructurings on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Reincorporation Proposals

 142

Vote reincorporation proposals on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Related-Party Transactions

Vote related-party transactions on a CASE-BY-CASE basis, considering factors including, but not limited to, the following:

◾

The parties on either side of the transaction;

◾

The nature of the asset to be transferred/service to be provided;

◾

The pricing of the transaction (and any associated professional valuation);

◾

The views of independent directors (where provided);

◾

The views of an independent financial adviser (where appointed);

◾

Whether any entities party to the transaction (including advisers) is conflicted; and

◾

The stated rationale for the transaction, including discussions of timing

6.

Environmental and Social Issues

Overall Approach

Proposals considered under this category could include, among others, reports on:

1) employee labor and safety policies;

2) impact on the environment of the company’s production or manufacturing operations;

3) societal impact of products manufactured;

4) risks throughout the supply chain or operations including labor practices, animal treatment practices within food production and conflict minerals; and

5) overall board structure, including diversity.

When evaluating environmental and social shareholder proposals, the following factors are generally considered:

◾

The company’s current level of publicly available disclosure, including if the company already discloses similar information through existing reports or policies;

◾

If the company has implemented or formally committed to the implementation of a reporting program based on the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board’s (SASB) materiality standards, the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosure’s (TCFD) recommendations, or a similar standard;

◾

Whether adoption of the proposal is likely to enhance or protect shareholder value;

◾

Whether the information requested concerns business issues that relate to a meaningful percentage of the company’s business;

◾

The degree to which the company’s stated position on the issues raised in the proposal could affect its reputation or sales, or leave it vulnerable to a boycott or selective purchasing;

◾

Whether the company has already responded in some appropriate manner to the request embodied in the proposal;

◾

What other companies in the relevant industry have done in response to the issue addressed in the proposal;

◾

Whether the proposal itself is well framed and the cost of preparing the report is reasonable;

◾

Whether the subject of the proposal is best left to the discretion of the board;

◾

Whether the company has material fines or violations in the area and if so, if appropriate actions have already been taken to remedy going forward;

◾

Whether providing this information would reveal proprietary or confidential information that would place the company at a competitive disadvantage.

Environmental Issues

Climate Transition Plans

Generally, vote CASE-BY-CASE on management proposed climate transition plans. When evaluating management proposed plans, the following factors are generally considered:

◾

If the company has detailed disclosure of the governance, strategy, risk mitigation efforts, and metrics and targets based on the TCFD’s recommendations, or a similar standard;

◾

If the company has detailed disclosure of their current emissions data based on the SASB materiality framework; and

◾

If the company has detailed disclosure in line with Paris Agreement goals.

143

Generally, vote CASE-BY-CASE on shareholder proposals requesting climate transition plans. When evaluating these shareholder proposals, the following factors are generally considered:

◾

The company’s current level of publicly available disclosure including if the company already discloses similar information through existing reports or policies;

◾

If the proposal asks for detailed disclosure according to the TCFD’s recommendations;

◾

If the proposal asks for detailed disclosure of the company’s current emissions data based on the SASB materiality framework;

◾

If the proposal asks for long-term targets, as well as short and medium term milestones;

◾

If the proposal asks for targets to be aligned to a globally accepted framework, such as Paris Aligned or Net Zero;

◾

If the proposal asks for targets to be approved by the Science Based Target Initiative (“SBTi”);

◾

If the proposal seeks to add reasonable transparency and is not onerous or overly prescriptive; and

◾

Whether the proposal is binding or non-binding.

Environmental Sustainability Reporting

Generally, vote FOR shareholders proposals requesting the company to report on its policies, initiatives and oversight mechanisms related to environmental sustainability, including the impacts of climate change and biodiversity loss. The following factors will be considered:

◾

The company’s current level of publicly available disclosure including if the company already discloses similar information through existing reports or policies;

◾

If the company has formally committed to the implementation of a reporting program based on the SASB materiality standards, the TCFD’s recommendations, or a similar standard within a specified time frame;

◾

If the company’s current level of disclosure is comparable to that of its industry peers; and

◾

If there are significant controversies, fines, penalties, or litigation associated with the company’s environmental performance.

Other Environmental Proposals

Vote CASE-BY-CASE on the following shareholder proposals if relevant to the company:

◾

Seeking information on the financial, physical, or regulatory risks a company faces related to climate change on its operations and investment, or on how the company identifies, measures and manages such risks;

◾

Calling for the reduction of Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions;

◾

Seeking reports on responses to regulatory and public pressures surrounding climate change, and for disclosure of research that aided in setting company policies around climate change;

◾

Requesting an action plan including science based targets and a commitment to net zero emissions by 2050 or earlier;

◾

Requesting a report/disclosure of goals on GHG emissions from company operations and/or products;

◾

Requesting a company report on its energy efficiency policies; and

◾

Requesting reports on the feasibility of developing renewable energy resources.

Social Issues

Board and Workforce Demographics

A company should have a clear, public Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) statement and/or diversity policy. Generally vote FOR proposals seeking to amend a company’s EEO statement or diversity policies to additionally prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and/or gender identity.

Generally, vote FOR proposals requesting reports on a company’s efforts to diversify the board, unless:

◾

The gender and racial minority representation of the company’s board is reasonably inclusive in relation to companies of similar size and business; and

◾

The board already reports on its nominating procedures and gender and racial minority initiatives on the board.

Gender Pay Gap

Generally, vote CASE-BY-CASE on proposals requesting reports on a company’s pay data by gender, or a report on a company’s policies and goals to reduce any gender pay gap, taking into account:

The company’s current policies and disclosure related to both its diversity and inclusion policies and practices and its compensation philosophy and fair and equitable compensation practices;

Whether the company has been the subject of recent controversy, litigation or regulatory actions related to gender pay gap issues; and

 144

Whether the company’s reporting regarding gender pay gap policies or initiatives is lagging its peers.

Labor, Human and Animal Rights Standards

Generally, vote FOR proposals requesting a report on company or company supplier labor, human, and/or animal rights standards and policies, or on the impact of its operations on society, unless such information is already publicly disclosed considering:

◾

The degree to which existing relevant policies and practices are disclosed;

◾

Whether or not existing relevant policies are consistent with internationally recognized standards;

◾

Whether company facilities and those of its suppliers are monitored and how;

◾

Company participation in fair labor organizations or other internationally recognized human rights initiatives;

◾

Scope and nature of business conducted in markets known to have higher risk of workplace labor/human rights abuse;

◾

Recent, significant company controversies, fines, or litigation regarding human rights at the company or its suppliers;

◾

The scope of the request; and

◾

Deviation from industry sector peer company standards and practices.

Generally, vote CASE-BY-CASE on shareholder proposals requesting reports about a company’s use of mandatory arbitrations in employment claims, taking into account the company’s existing policies and disclosures of policies.

Generally, vote CASE-BY-CASE on shareholder proposals requesting reports on the actions taken by a company to prevent sexual and other forms of harassment or on the risks posed by the company’s failure to take such actions, taking into account the company’s existing policies and disclosures of policies.

Racial Equity Audit

Generally, vote CASE-BY-CASE on shareholder proposals requesting the board oversee a racial equity audit. While we believe the decision to initiate an independent audit is best left to management judgment under the oversight of the board of directors, the following factors are generally considered:

◾

The degree to which existing relevant policies and practices are disclosed;

◾

Recent, significant company controversies, fines, or litigation regarding human rights at the company or its suppliers; and

◾

Whether the gender and racial minority representation of the company’s board is reasonably inclusive in relation to companies of similar size and business.

Political Contributions and Trade Association Spending/Lobbying Expenditures and Initiatives

We generally believe that it is the role of boards and management to determine the appropriate level of disclosure of all types of corporate political activity.  When evaluating these proposals, we consider the prescriptive nature of the proposal and the overall benefit to shareholders along with a company’s current disclosure of policies, practices and oversight.

Generally vote AGAINST proposals asking the company to affirm political nonpartisanship in the workplace so long as:

◾

There are no recent, significant controversies, fines or litigation regarding the company’s political contributions or trade association spending; and

◾

The company has procedures in place to ensure that employee contributions to company-sponsored political action committees (PACs) are strictly voluntary and prohibits coercion.

Generally, vote AGAINST proposals requesting increased disclosure of a company’s policies with respect to political contributions, lobbying and trade association spending as long as:

◾

There is no significant potential threat or actual harm to shareholders’ interests;

◾

There are no recent significant controversies or litigation related to the company’s political contributions or governmental affairs; and

◾

There is publicly available information to assess the company’s oversight related to such expenditures of corporate assets.

We generally will vote AGAINST proposals asking for detailed disclosure of political contributions or trade association or lobbying expenditures.

We generally will vote AGAINST proposals barring the company from making political contributions. Businesses are affected by legislation at the federal, state, and local level and barring political contributions can put the company at a competitive disadvantage.

Region: Japan Proxy Items

145

The following section is a broad summary of the Guidelines, which form the basis of the Policy with respect to Japanese public equity investments of operating and/or holding companies.  Applying these guidelines is not inclusive of all considerations in the Japanese market.

1.

Operational Items

Financial Results/Director and Auditor Reports

Vote FOR approval of financial statements and director and auditor reports, unless:

◾

There are concerns about the accounts presented or audit procedures used; or

◾

The company is not responsive to shareholder questions about specific items that should be publicly disclosed.

Appointment of Auditors and Auditor Fees

Vote FOR the re-election of auditors and proposals authorizing the board to fix auditor fees, unless:

◾

There are serious concerns about the accounts presented, audit procedures used or audit opinion rendered;

◾

There is reason to believe that the auditor has rendered an opinion that is neither accurate nor indicative of the company’s financial position;

◾

Name of the proposed auditor has not been published;

◾

The auditors are being changed without explanation;

◾

Non-audit-related fees are substantial or are in excess of standard annual audit-related fees; or

◾

The appointment of external auditors if they have previously served the company in an executive capacity or can otherwise be considered affiliated with the company.

Reincorporation Proposals

Vote reincorporation proposals on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Allocation of Income

Vote FOR approval of the allocation of income, unless:

◾

The dividend payout ratio is less than 20%, and is not appropriate or sufficient when considering the company’s financial position; or

◾

The company proposes the payments even though the company posted a net loss for the year under review, and the payout is excessive given the company’s financial position;

Amendments to Articles of Association

Vote amendments to the articles of association on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Change in Company Fiscal Term

Vote FOR resolutions to change a company’s fiscal term unless a company’s motivation for the change is to postpone its annual general meeting.

Amend Quorum Requirements

Vote proposals to amend quorum requirements for shareholder meetings on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Virtual Meetings

Generally, vote AGAINST proposals allowing for the convening of virtual-only* shareholder meetings.

* The phrase “virtual-only shareholder meeting” refers to a meeting of shareholders that is held exclusively through the use of online technology without a corresponding in-person meeting. The term “hybrid shareholder meeting” refers to an in-person, or physical, meeting in which shareholders are permitted to participate online.

2.

Board of Directors and Statutory Auditors

The board of directors should promote the interests of shareholders by acting in an oversight and/or advisory role; should have independent oversight of management; and should be held accountable for actions and results related to their responsibilities.

 146

Voting on Director Nominees in Uncontested Elections

Vote on director nominees should be determined on a CASE-BY-CASE basis taking into consideration the following:

The company’s committee structure: statutory auditor board structure, US-type three committee structure, or audit committee structure; or

◾

Adequate disclosure has not been provided in a timely manner; or

◾

There are clear concerns over questionable finances or restatements; or

◾

There have been questionable transactions or conflicts of interest; or

◾

There are any records of abuses against minority shareholder interests; or

◾

The board fails to meet minimum corporate governance standards; or

◾

There are reservations about:

◾

Director terms

◾

Bundling of proposals to elect directors

◾

Board independence

◾

Disclosure of named nominees

◾

Combined Chairman/CEO

◾

Election of former CEO as Chairman of the board

◾

Overboarded directors

◾

Composition of committees

◾

Director independence

◾

Number of directors on the board

◾

Lack of gender diversity on the board

◾

Specific concerns about the individual or company, such as criminal wrongdoing or breach of fiduciary responsibilities; or

◾

There are other considerations which may include sanctions from government or authority, violations of laws and regulations, or other issues related to improper business practice, failure to replace management, or egregious actions related to service on other boards.

Vote AGAINST top executives when the company has an excessive amount of strategic shareholdings.

Vote AGAINST top executives when the company has posted average return on equity (ROE) of less than five percent over the last five fiscal years.

Vote AGAINST top executives when the company does not disclose various components of current emissions, a proxy for a company’s dependency on fossil fuels and other sources of greenhouse gasses (such as Scope 1, Scope 2, Scope 3 emissions), material to the company’s business. For companies with 3-committee structure boards, vote AGAINST the Audit Committee Chair.

Board Composition

We generally believe diverse teams have the potential to outperform and we expect the companies that we invest in to focus on the importance of diversity. When evaluating board composition, we believe a diversity of ethnicity, gender and experience is an important consideration. We encourage companies to disclose the composition of their board in the proxy statement and may vote against members of the board without disclosure. See below how we execute our vote at companies that do not meet our diversity expectations.

Vote AGAINST members of the Nominating Committee if the Board does not have at least 10% women directors. For Japanese boards with statutory auditors or audit committee structure, vote AGAINST top executives.

Director Independence

Classification of Directors

Inside Director

◾

Employee or executive of the company;

◾

Any director who is not classified as an outside director of the company.

Non-Independent Non-Executive Director (affiliated outsider)

◾

Any director specifically designated as a representative of a significant shareholder of the company;

◾

Any director who is/was also an employee or executive of a significant shareholder of the company;

147

◾

Beneficial owner (direct or indirect) of at least 10% of the company’s stock, or one of the top 10 shareholders, either in economic terms or in voting rights (this may be aggregated if voting power is distributed among more than one member of a defined group, e.g., family members who beneficially own less than 10% individually, but collectively own more than 10%)

◾

Government representative;

◾

Currently provides or previously provided professional services to the company or to an affiliate of the company;

◾

Represents customer, supplier, creditor, banker, or other entity with which company maintains

◾

transactional/commercial relationship (unless company discloses information to apply a materiality test);

◾

Any director who worked at the company’s external audit firm (auditor).

◾

Any director who has conflicting or cross-directorships with executive directors or the chairman of the company;

◾

Relative of a current employee of the company or its affiliates;

◾

Any director who works or has worked at a company whose shares are held by the company in question as strategic shareholdings (i.e. “cross-shareholdings”)

◾

Former executive;

◾

Any director who has served at a company as an outside director for 12 years or more;

◾

Any additional relationship or principle considered to compromise independence under local corporate governance best practice guidance.

◾

“Cooling off period” for former employees or executives’ representation of significant shareholders and other stakeholders, as well as professional services is considered based on the market best practices and liquidity of executive labor market.

Independent Non-Executive Directors (independent outsider)

◾

No material connection, either directly or indirectly, to the company other than a board seat.

At companies adopting a board with a statutory auditor committee structure or an audit committee structure, vote AGAINST top executives when the board consists of fewer than two outside directors or less than 1/3 of the board consists of outside directors.

At companies adopting an audit committee structure, vote AGAINST affiliated outside directors who are audit committee members.

At companies adopting a US-type three committee structure, vote AGAINST members of Nominating Committee when the board consists of fewer than two outside directors or less than 1/3 of the board consists of outside directors.

At companies adopting a US-type three committee structure, vote AGAINST affiliated outside directors when less than a majority of the board consists of independent outside directors.

At controlled companies adopting board with a statutory auditor structure or an audit committee structure, vote AGAINST top executives if the board does not consist of majority independent outside directors.

Director Accountability

Vote AGAINST individual outside directors who attend less than 75% of the board and/or committee meetings without a disclosed valid excuse.

Other items considered for an AGAINST vote include specific concerns about the individual or the company, such as criminal wrongdoing or breach of fiduciary responsibilities, sanctions from government or authority, violations of laws and regulations, the presence of inappropriate related party transactions, or other issues related to improper business practices

Vote AGAINST members of the full board or appropriate committee (or only the independent chairman or lead director as may be appropriate in situations such as where there is a classified board and members of the appropriate committee are not up for re-election or the appropriate committee is comprised of the entire board) for the below reasons. New nominees will be considered on a case-by-case basis. Extreme cases may warrant a vote against the entire board.

◾

Material failures of governance, stewardship, or fiduciary responsibilities at the company,

◾

including but not limited to violations of the United Nations Global Compact principles and/or other significant global standards and failure to disclose material environmental, social and governance information;

◾

Egregious actions related to the director(s)’ service on other boards that raise substantial doubt about his or her ability to effectively oversee management and serve the best interests of shareholders at any company;

◾

The board adopts or renews a poison pill without shareholder approval, does not commit to putting it to shareholder vote within 12 months of adoption (or in the case of a newly public company, does not commit to put the pill to a shareholder vote within 12 months following the IPO), or reneges on a commitment to put the pill to a vote, and has not yet received a withhold/against recommendation for this issue;

◾

The board failed to act on takeover offers where the majority of the shareholders tendered their shares;

◾

If in an extreme situation the board lacks accountability and oversight, coupled with sustained poor performance relative to peers.

 148

Voting on Director Nominees in Contested Elections

Vote on a CASE-BY-CASE basis in contested elections of directors, e.g., the election of shareholder nominees or the dismissal of incumbent directors, determining which directors are best suited to add value for shareholders.

The analysis will generally be based on, but not limited to, the following major decision factors:

◾

Company performance relative to its peers;

◾

Strategy of the incumbents versus the dissidents;

◾

Independence of board candidates;

◾

Experience and skills of board candidates;

◾

Governance profile of the company;

◾

Evidence of management entrenchment;

◾

Responsiveness to shareholders;

◾

Whether a takeover offer has been rebuffed;

◾

Whether minority or majority representation is being sought.

Other Board Related Proposals (Management and Shareholder)

Vote AGAINST the introduction of classified boards and mandatory retirement ages for directors.

Vote AGAINST proposals to alter board structure or size in the context of a fight for control of the company or the board.

Independent Board Chair

We will generally vote AGAINST shareholder proposals requiring that the chairman’s position be filled by an independent director, if the company satisfies 3 of the 4 following criteria:

◾

Two-thirds independent board;

◾

A designated, or a rotating, lead director, elected by and from the independent board members with clearly delineated and comprehensive duties;

◾

Fully independent key committees; and/or

◾

Established, publicly disclosed, governance guidelines and director biographies/profiles.

Statutory Auditor Elections

Statutory Auditor Independence

Vote AGAINST affiliated outside statutory auditors.

For definition of affiliated outsiders, see “Classification of Directors”

Statutory Auditor Appointment

Vote FOR management nominees taking into consideration the following:

◾

Adequate disclosure has not been provided in a timely manner; or

◾

There are clear concerns over questionable finances or restatements; or

◾

There have been questionable transactions or conflicts of interest; or

◾

There are any records of abuses against minority shareholder interests; or

◾

The board fails to meet minimum corporate governance standards; or

◾

Specific concerns about the individual or company, such as criminal wrongdoing or breach of fiduciary responsibilities; or

◾

Outside statutory auditor’s attendance at less than 75% of the board and statutory auditor meetings without a disclosed valid excuse; or

◾

Unless there are other considerations which may include sanctions from government or authority, violations of laws and regulations, or other issues related to improper business practice, failure to replace management, or egregious actions related to service on other boards.

3.

Compensation

Director Compensation

149

Vote FOR proposals to award cash fees to non-executive directors unless the amounts are excessive relative to other companies in the country or industry.

Vote non-executive director compensation proposals that include both cash and share-based components on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Vote proposals that bundle compensation for both non-executive and executive directors into a single resolution on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Vote AGAINST proposals to introduce retirement bonuses for outside directors and/or outside statutory auditors, unless the amounts are disclosed and are not excessive relative to other companies in the country or industry.

Compensation Plans

Vote compensation plans on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Director, Officer, and Auditor Indemnification and Liability Provisions

Vote proposals seeking indemnification and liability protection for directors and statutory auditors on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Vote AGAINST proposals to indemnify auditors.

4.

Shareholder Rights and Defenses

Antitakeover Mechanisms

Generally vote AGAINST all antitakeover proposals, unless certain conditions are met to ensure the proposal is intended to enhance shareholder value, including consideration of the company’s governance structure, the anti-takeover defense duration, the trigger mechanism and governance, and the intended purpose of the antitakeover defense.

5.

Strategic Transactions and Capital Structures

Reorganizations/Restructurings

Vote reorganizations and restructurings on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Mergers and Acquisitions

Vote CASE-BY-CASE on mergers and acquisitions taking into account the following based on publicly available information:

◾

Valuation;

◾

Market reaction;

◾

Strategic rationale;

◾

Management’s track record of successful integration of historical acquisitions;

◾

Presence of conflicts of interest; and

◾

Governance profile of the combined company.

Dual Class Structures

Vote FOR resolutions that seek to maintain or convert to a one-share, one-vote capital structure.

Vote AGAINST requests for the creation or continuation of dual-class capital structures or the creation of new or additional super voting shares.

Share Issuance Requests

General Issuances:

Vote FOR issuance requests with preemptive rights to a maximum of 100% over currently issued capital.

Vote FOR issuance requests without preemptive rights to a maximum of 20% of currently issued capital.

Specific Issuances:

 150

Vote on a CASE-BY-CASE basis on all requests, with or without preemptive rights.

Increases in Authorized Capital

Vote FOR non-specific proposals to increase authorized capital up to 100% over the current authorization unless the increase would leave the company with less than 30% of its new authorization outstanding.

Vote FOR specific proposals to increase authorized capital to any amount, unless:

◾

The specific purpose of the increase (such as a share-based acquisition or merger) does not meet guidelines for the purpose being proposed.

Vote AGAINST proposals to adopt unlimited capital authorizations.

Reduction of Capital

Vote FOR proposals to reduce capital for routine accounting purposes unless the terms are unfavorable to shareholders.

Vote proposals to reduce capital in connection with corporate restructuring on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Preferred Stock

Vote FOR the creation of a new class of preferred stock or for issuances of preferred stock up to 50% of issued capital unless the terms of the preferred stock would adversely affect the rights of existing shareholders.

Vote FOR the creation/issuance of convertible preferred stock as long as the maximum number of common shares that could be issued upon conversion meets guidelines on equity issuance requests.

Vote AGAINST the creation of a new class of preference shares that would carry superior voting rights to the common shares.

Vote AGAINST the creation of blank check preferred stock unless the board clearly states that the authorization will not be used to thwart a takeover bid.

Vote proposals to increase blank check preferred authorizations on a CASE-BY-CASE basis.

Share Repurchase Plans

We will generally recommend FOR share repurchase programs taking into account whether:

The share repurchase program can be used as a takeover defense;

There is clear evidence of historical abuse;

There is no safeguard in the share repurchase program against selective buybacks;

Pricing provisions and safeguards in the share repurchase program are deemed to be unreasonable in light of market practice.

Related-Party Transactions

Vote related-party transactions on a CASE-BY-CASE basis, considering factors including, but not limited to, the following:

◾

The parties on either side of the transaction;

◾

The nature of the asset to be transferred/service to be provided;

◾

The pricing of the transaction (and any associated professional valuation);

◾

The views of independent directors (where provided);

◾

The views of an independent financial adviser (where appointed);

◾

Whether any entities party to the transaction (including advisers) is conflicted; and

◾

The stated rationale for the transaction, including discussions of timing.

6.

Environmental and Social Issues

Overall Approach

151

Proposals considered under this category could include, among others, reports on:

1) employee labor and safety policies;

2) impact on the environment of the company’s production or manufacturing operations;

3) societal impact of products manufactured;

4) risks throughout the supply chain or operations including labor practices, animal treatment practices within food production and conflict minerals; and

5) overall board structure, including diversity.

When evaluating environmental and social shareholder proposals, the following factors are generally considered:

◾

The company’s current level of publicly available disclosure, including if the company already discloses similar information through existing reports or policies;

◾

If the company has implemented or formally committed to the implementation of a reporting program based on the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board’s (SASB) materiality standards, the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosure’s (TCFD) recommendations, or a similar standard;

◾

Whether adoption of the proposal is likely to enhance or protect shareholder value;

◾

Whether the information requested concerns business issues that relate to a meaningful percentage of the company’s business;

◾

The degree to which the company’s stated position on the issues raised in the proposal could affect its reputation or sales, or leave it vulnerable to a boycott or selective purchasing;

◾

Whether the company has already responded in some appropriate manner to the request embodied in the proposal;

◾

What other companies in the relevant industry have done in response to the issue addressed in the proposal;

◾

Whether the proposal itself is well framed and the cost of preparing the report is reasonable;

◾

Whether the subject of the proposal is best left to the discretion of the board;

◾

Whether the company has material fines or violations in the area and if so, if appropriate actions have already been taken to remedy going forward;

◾

Whether providing this information would reveal proprietary or confidential information that would place the company at a competitive disadvantage.

Environmental Issues

Climate Transition Plans

Generally, vote CASE-BY-CASE on management proposed climate transition plans. When evaluating management proposed plans, the following factors are generally considered:

◾

If the company has detailed disclosure of the governance, strategy, risk mitigation efforts, and metrics and targets based on the TCFD’s recommendations, or a similar standard;

◾

If the company has detailed disclosure of their current emissions data based on the SASB materiality framework; and

◾

If the company has detailed disclosure in line with Paris Agreement goals.

Generally, vote CASE-BY-CASE on shareholder proposals requesting climate transition plans. When evaluating these shareholder proposals, the following factors are generally considered:

◾

The company’s current level of publicly available disclosure including if the company already discloses similar information through existing reports or policies;

◾

If the proposal asks for detailed disclosure according to the TCFD’s recommendations;

◾

If the proposal asks for detailed disclosure of the company’s current emissions data based on the SASB materiality framework;

◾

If the proposal asks for long-term targets, as well as short and medium term milestones;

◾

If the proposal asks for targets to be aligned to a globally accepted framework, such as Paris Aligned or Net Zero;

◾

If the proposal asks for targets to be approved by the Science Based Target Initiative (“SBTi”);

◾

If the proposal seeks to add reasonable transparency and is not onerous or overly prescriptive; and

◾

Whether the proposal is binding or non-binding.

Environmental Sustainability Reporting

Generally, vote FOR shareholders proposals requesting the company to report on its policies, initiatives and oversight mechanisms related to environmental sustainability, including the impacts of climate change and biodiversity loss. The following factors will be considered:

 152

◾

The company’s current level of publicly available disclosure including if the company already discloses similar information through existing reports or policies;

◾

If the company has formally committed to the implementation of a reporting program based on the SASB materiality standards, the TCFD’s recommendations, or a similar standard within a specified time frame;

◾

If the company’s current level of disclosure is comparable to that of its industry peers; and

◾

If there are significant controversies, fines, penalties, or litigation associated with the company’s environmental performance.

Other Environmental Proposals

Vote CASE-BY-CASE on the following shareholder proposals if relevant to the company:

◾

Seeking information on the financial, physical, or regulatory risks a company faces related to climate change on its operations and investment, or on how the company identifies, measures and manages such risks;

◾

Calling for the reduction of Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions;

◾

Seeking reports on responses to regulatory and public pressures surrounding climate change, and for disclosure of research that aided in setting company policies around climate change;

◾

Requesting an action plan including science based targets and a commitment to net zero emissions by 2050 or earlier;

◾

Requesting a report/disclosure of goals on GHG emissions from company operations and/or products;

◾

Requesting a company report on its energy efficiency policies; and

◾

Requesting reports on the feasibility of developing renewable energy resources.

Social Issues

Board and Workforce Demographics

A company should have a clear, public Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) statement and/or diversity policy. Generally vote FOR proposals seeking to amend a company’s EEO statement or diversity policies to additionally prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and/or gender identity.

Generally vote FOR proposals requesting reports on a company’s efforts to diversify the board, unless:

◾

The gender and racial minority representation of the company’s board is reasonably inclusive in relation to companies of similar size and business; and

◾

The board already reports on its nominating procedures and gender and racial minority initiatives on the board.

Gender Pay Gap

Generally vote CASE-BY-CASE on proposals requesting reports on a company’s pay data by gender, or a report on a company’s policies and goals to reduce any gender pay gap, taking into account:

◾

The company’s current policies and disclosure related to both its diversity and inclusion policies and practices and its compensation philosophy and fair and equitable compensation practices;

◾

Whether the company has been the subject of recent controversy, litigation or regulatory actions related to gender pay gap issues; and

◾

Whether the company’s reporting regarding gender pay gap policies or initiatives is lagging its peers.

Labor, Human and Animal Rights Standards

Generally, vote FOR proposals requesting a report on company or company supplier labor, human, and/or animal rights standards and policies, or on the impact of its operations on society, unless such information is already publicly disclosed considering:

◾

The degree to which existing relevant policies and practices are disclosed;

◾

Whether or not existing relevant policies are consistent with internationally recognized standards;

◾

Whether company facilities and those of its suppliers are monitored and how;

◾

Company participation in fair labor organizations or other internationally recognized human rights initiatives;

◾

Scope and nature of business conducted in markets known to have higher risk of workplace labor/human rights abuse;

◾

Recent, significant company controversies, fines, or litigation regarding human rights at the company or its suppliers;

◾

The scope of the request; and

◾

Deviation from industry sector peer company standards and practices.

Generally, vote CASE-BY-CASE on shareholder proposals requesting reports about a company’s use of mandatory arbitrations in employment claims, taking into account the company’s existing policies and disclosures of policies.

153

Generally, vote CASE-BY-CASE on shareholder proposals requesting reports on the actions taken by a company to prevent sexual and other forms of harassment or on the risks posed by the company’s failure to take such actions, taking into account the company’s existing policies and disclosures of policies.

Racial Equity Audit

Generally, vote CASE-BY-CASE on shareholder proposals requesting the board oversee a racial equity audit. While we believe the decision to initiate an independent audit is best left to management judgment under the oversight of the board of directors, the following factors are generally considered:

◾

The degree to which existing relevant policies and practices are disclosed;

◾

Recent, significant company controversies, fines, or litigation regarding human rights at the company or its suppliers; and

◾

Whether the gender and racial minority representation of the company’s board is reasonably inclusive in relation to companies of similar size and business.

Political Contributions and Trade Association Spending/Lobbying Expenditures and Initiatives

We generally believe that it is the role of boards and management to determine the appropriate level of disclosure of all types of corporate political activity.  When evaluating these proposals, we consider the prescriptive nature of the proposal and the overall benefit to shareholders along with a company’s current disclosure of policies, practices and oversight.

Generally, vote AGAINST proposals asking the company to affirm political nonpartisanship in the workplace so long as:

◾

There are no recent, significant controversies, fines or litigation regarding the company’s political contributions or trade association spending; and

◾

The company has procedures in place to ensure that employee contributions to company-sponsored political action committees (PACs) are strictly voluntary and prohibits coercion.

Generally, vote AGAINST proposals requesting increased disclosure of a company’s policies with respect to political contributions, lobbying and trade association spending as long as:

◾

There is no significant potential threat or actual harm to shareholders’ interests;

◾

There are no recent significant controversies or litigation related to the company’s political contributions or governmental affairs; and

◾

There is publicly available information to assess the company’s oversight related to such expenditures of corporate assets.

We generally will vote AGAINST proposals asking for detailed disclosure of political contributions or trade association or lobbying expenditures.

We generally will vote AGAINST proposals barring the company from making political contributions. Businesses are affected by legislation at the federal, state, and local level and barring political contributions can put the company at a competitive disadvantage.

1For purposes of this Policy, “Asset Management” refers, collectively, to the following legal entities:

Goldman Sachs Asset Management, L.P.; Goldman Sachs Asset Management International; Goldman Sachs Hedge Fund Strategies LLC; GS Investment Strategies, LLC; GSAM Stable Value, LLC; Goldman Sachs Asset Management (Singapore) Pte. Ltd; Goldman Sachs Asset Management (Hong Kong) Limited.; Goldman Sachs Asset Management Co. Ltd.; GSAM Services Private Limited; GS Investment Strategies Canada Inc.; Goldman Sachs Management (Ireland) Limited; Goldman Sachs Asset Management Australia Pty Ltd; Goldman Sachs Services Private Limited.; Goldman Sachs Bank Europe SE; and Goldman Sachs Asset Management Fund Services Limited.

JENNISON ASSOCIATES LLC (Jennison)

PROXY VOTING POLICY AND PROCEDURES

I.

Policy

Jennison (or the “Company”) has adopted the following policy and related procedures to guide the voting of proxies in a manner that is consistent with Jennison’s fiduciary duties and the requirements of Rule 206(4)-6 under the Advisers Act.

In the absence of any written delegation or when proxy voting authority has been delegated in writing to Jennison by clients, Jennison will exercise this voting authority in each client’s best interests. The Company will not consider its own interests, or those of any affiliates, when voting proxies.

 154

Unless otherwise specified by a client, “best interest” means the client’s best economic interest over the long term, as determined by Jennison’s portfolio managers and analysts (“Investment Professionals”) covering the issuer. We recognize that the nature of ballot issues, including environmental and social issues (“ESG”), can vary widely depending on the company, industry practices, the company's operations and geographic footprint, to name a few, and will consider relevant issues, including ESG issues, in a manner consistent with our fiduciary duties and the goal of maximizing shareholder value.

Jennison's proxy voting policy and procedures and proxy voting records are publicly available on our website. Clients may obtain a copy of our guidelines, as well as the proxy voting records for that client's securities, by contacting the client service representative responsible for the client's account.

II.

Procedures

Proxy Voting Guidelines

Jennison has adopted proxy voting guidelines (“Guidelines”) with respect to certain recurring issues. When Jennison is responsible for voting proxies, Jennison considers these guidelines except, where appropriate, when Jennison accepts custom guidelines.

The Guidelines are reviewed annually and as necessary by the Proxy Team. Proposed revisions to the Guidelines are reviewed and approved by the Company's Proxy Voting Committee and Investment Professionals when a change is appropriate. The Proxy Team maintains the Guidelines and distributes copies to the Investment Professionals following confirmation of any change. The Guidelines are meant to convey Jennison’s general approach to voting decisions on certain issues. Nevertheless, Investment Professionals are responsible for reviewing all proposals related to fundamental strategies individually and making final decisions based on the merits of each voting opportunity.

If an Investment Professional believes that Jennison should vote in a way that is different from the Guidelines, the Proxy Team is notified. In certain circumstances, an Investment Professional may conclude that different clients should vote in different ways, or that it is in the best interests of some or all clients to abstain from voting. The Proxy Team will notify each Investment Professional’s supervisor of any Guideline overrides authorized by that Investment Professional.

The Proxy Team is responsible for maintaining Investment Professionals’ reasons for deviating from the Guidelines.

Client Directed and Jennison Custom Voting Guidelines

Any client’s specific voting instructions must be communicated or confirmed by the client in writing, either through a provision in the investment advisory contract or through other written correspondence. Such instructions may call for Jennison to vote the client’s securities according to the client’s own voting guidelines (“Client Directed Custom Guidelines”), or may indicate that the Company is not responsible for voting the client’s proxies. We try to accommodate such requests where appropriate.

The Proxy Team reviews Client Directed Custom Guidelines and approves operational implementation, and certain instructions may only be implemented on a best efforts basis. The Proxy Team is responsible for communicating such instructions to the third party vendor.

Additionally, for certain investment products or vehicles that are developed and managed by the Company that seek to follow certain religious values (“Jennison Investment Products”), Jennison has adopted custom guidelines from a third party proxy voting vendor that are aligned with the particular Jennison Investment Product (“Jennison Custom Guidelines”). Prior to the adoption of Jennison Custom Guidelines, the Proxy Committee will review the custom guidelines provided by the third party proxy vendor. The Proxy Team will review the proxy voting records of the Jennison Investment Products that utilize the Jennison Custom Guidelines on a quarterly basis and provide reporting to the Proxy Committee.

Use of a Third Party Voting Service

Jennison has engaged an independent third party proxy voting vendor that provides research and analytical services, operational implementation and recordkeeping and reporting services. The proxy voting vendor will cast votes in accordance with the Company’s Guidelines; however, notwithstanding the Guidelines, Investment Professionals for fundamental strategies are responsible for reviewing the facts and circumstances related to each proposal in order to make all final voting decisions.

The third party proxy voting vendor is responsible for operational implementation of Client Directed Custom Guidelines and Jennison Custom Guidelines (“Client Directed Custom Guidelines and Jennison Custom Guidelines are collectively Custom Guidelines”). The ballots received for clients/accounts with Custom Guidelines will be automatically voted in accordance with the Custom Guideline recommendations by the third party proxy voting vendor.

155

Identifying and Addressing Potential Material Conflicts of Interest

There may be instances where Jennison’s interests conflict materially, or appear to conflict materially, with the interests of clients in connection with a proxy vote (a “Material Conflict”). Examples of potential Material Conflicts include, but are not limited to:

◾

Jennison managing the pension plan of the issuer.

◾

Jennison or its affiliates have a material business relationship with the issuer.

◾

Jennison investment professionals who are related to a person who is senior management or a director at a public company.

◾

Jennison has a material investment in a security that the investment professional who is responsible for voting that security’s proxy also holds the same security personally.

If an Investment Professional or any other employee perceives a Material Conflict, he or she must promptly report the matter to the Chief Compliance Officer.

If the Proxy Voting Committee determines that a Material Conflict is present and if the Investment Professional is recommending a vote that deviates from the Guidelines or there is no specific recommended Guideline vote and decisions are made on a case-by-case basis, then the voting decision must be reviewed and approved by the Investment Professional’s supervisor and the Proxy Committee prior to casting the vote.

Jennison will not abstain from voting a proxy for the purpose of avoiding a Material Conflict.

Quantitatively Derived Holdings and the Jennison Managed Accounts

In voting proxies for non-fundamental strategies such as quantitatively derived holdings and Jennison Managed Accounts (i.e. “wrap”) where the securities are not held elsewhere in the firm, proxies will be voted utilizing the Guidelines. Additionally, in those circumstances where no specific Guidelines exist, the Company will consider the recommendations of the proxy voting vendor.

International Holdings

Jennison will exercise opportunities to vote on international holdings on a best efforts basis. Such votes will be cast based on the same principles that govern domestic holdings.

In some countries casting a proxy vote can adversely affect a client, such as countries that restrict stock sales around the time of the proxy vote by requiring “share blocking” as part of the voting process. The Investment Professional covering the issuer will weigh the expected benefits of voting proxies on international holdings against any anticipated costs or limitations, such as those associated with share blocking. Jennison may abstain from voting if it anticipates that the costs or limitations associated with voting outweigh the benefits.

Securities Lending

Jennison may be unable to vote proxies when the underlying securities have been lent out pursuant to a client’s securities lending program. The Company does not know when securities are on loan and are therefore not available to be voted. In rare circumstances, Investment Professionals may ask the Proxy Team to work with the client’s custodian to recall the shares so that Jennison can vote. Efforts to recall loaned securities are not always effective since such requests must be submitted prior to the record date for the upcoming proxy vote; therefore voting shares on loan is on a best efforts basis. In determining whether to call back securities that are out on loan, the Investment Professional will consider whether the benefit to the client in voting the matter outweighs the benefit to the client in keeping the security out on loan.

Disclosure to Advisory Clients

Jennison will provide a copy of these Policies and Procedures and the Guidelines to any client upon request. The Company will also provide any client with information about how Jennison has voted that client’s proxies upon request. Any such requests should be directed to the client service representative responsible for the client's account who will coordinate with the Proxy Team.

Compliance Reporting for Investment Companies

Upon request, the Proxy Team will provide to each investment company for which Jennison acts as sub-adviser reporting needed to satisfy their regulatory and board requirements, including, but not limited to, information required for Form NP-X.

III.

Internal Controls

 156

Supervisory Notification

The Proxy Team will notify each Investment Professional’s supervisor of any Guideline overrides authorized by that Investment Professional. The supervisor reviews the overrides ensuring that they were made based on clients’ best interests, and that they were not influenced by any Material Conflict or other considerations.

The Proxy Voting Committee

The Proxy Voting Committee consists of representatives from Operations, Operational Risk, Legal, and Compliance. It meets at least quarterly, and has the following responsibilities:

◾

Review potential Material Conflicts and decide whether a material conflict is present, and needs to be addressed according to these policies and procedures.

◾

Review proposed amendments to the Guidelines in consultation with the Investment Professionals and make revisions as appropriate.

◾

Review these Policies and Procedures annually for accuracy and effectiveness, and recommend and adopt any necessary changes.

◾

Review all Guideline overrides.

◾

Review quarterly voting metrics and analysis published by the Proxy Team.

◾

Review accuracy of the application of Custom Guidelines

◾

Review the performance of the proxy voting vendor and determine whether Jennison should continue to retain their services. The Committee will consider the following factors while conducting their review:

◾

Accuracy and completeness of research reports, engagement with issuers, potential conflicts of interest and overall administration of Jennison’s proxy voting recommendations.

IV.

Escalating Concerns

Any concerns about aspects of the policy that lack specific escalation guidance may be reported to the reporting employee’s supervisor, the Chief Compliance Officer, Chief Legal Officer, Chief Risk Officer, Chief Ethics Officer, Chief Operating Officer or Chief Executive Officer. Alternatively, Jennison has an Ethics Reporting Hotline phone number and email address that enable employees to raise concerns anonymously. Information about the Ethics Reporting Hotline phone number and email address can be found on the Jennison intranet’s “Ethics” web page.

V.

Discipline and Sanctions

All Jennison employees are responsible for understanding and complying with the policies and procedures outlined in this policy. The procedures described in this policy are intended to ensure that Jennison and its employees act in full compliance with the law. Violations of this policy and related procedures will be communicated to your supervisor and to senior management through Jennison’s Compliance Council, and may lead to disciplinary action.

J.P. MORGAN INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT INC. (J.P. Morgan)

Proxy Voting Guidelines. Proxy Voting Guidelines. The Board of Trustees has delegated to J.P. Morgan and its affiliated advisers, proxy voting authority with respect to the fund’s portfolio securities. To ensure that the proxies of portfolio companies are voted in the best interests of the fund, the fund’s Board of Trustees has adopted J.P. Morgan’s detailed proxy voting procedures (the Procedures) that incorporate guidelines (Guidelines) for voting proxies on specific types of issues.

J.P. Morgan and its affiliated advisers are part of a global asset management organization with the capability to invest in securities of issuers located around the globe. Because the regulatory framework and the business cultures and practices vary from region to region, the Guidelines are customized for each region to take into account such variations. Separate Guidelines cover the regions of (1) North America, (2) Europe, Middle East, Africa, Central America and South America, (3) Asia (ex-Japan) and (4) Japan, respectively.

Notwithstanding the variations among the Guidelines, all of the Guidelines have been designed with the uniform objective of encouraging corporate action that enhances shareholder value. As a general rule, in voting proxies of a particular security, J.P. Morgan and its affiliated advisers will apply the Guidelines of the region in which the issuer of such security is organized. Except as noted below, proxy voting decisions will be made in accordance with the Guidelines covering a multitude of both routine and non-routine matters that J.P. Morgan and its affiliated adviser have encountered globally, based on many years of collective investment management experience.

To oversee the proxy-voting process, J.P. Morgan has established a proxy committee and appointed a proxy administrator in each global location where proxies are voted. The primary function of each proxy committee is to determine the independence of any third-party vendor which it has delegated proxy voting responsibilities and to conclude that there are not conflicts of interest that would prevent

157

such vendor from performing such proxy voting services prior to delegation, review and approve the Guidelines annually, and provide advice and recommendations on general proxy-voting matters as well as on specific voting issues. The procedures permit an independent voting service, to perform certain services otherwise carried out or coordinated by the proxy administrator.

Although for many matters the Guidelines specify the votes to be cast, for many others, the Guidelines contemplate case-by-case determinations. In addition, there will undoubtedly be proxy matters that are not contemplated by the Guidelines. With respect to matters not contemplated by the Guidelines and to override the Guidelines, the Procedures require a certification and review process to be completed before the vote is cast. That process is designed to identify actual or potential material conflicts of interest (between the fund on the one hand, and J.P. Morgan and its affiliates on the other hand) and ensure that the proxy vote is cast in the best interests of the fund. A conflict is deemed to exist when the proxy is for J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. stock or for J.P. Morgan Funds, or when the proxy administrator has actual knowledge indicating that a J.P. Morgan affiliate is an investment banker or rendered a fairness opinion with respect to the matter that is the subject of the proxy vote. When such conflicts are identified, the proxy will be voted by an independent third party either in accordance with J.P. Morgan proxy voting guidelines or by the third party using its own guidelines, provided, however, that JPMAM investment professional(s) may request an exception to this process to vote against a proposal rather than referring it to an independent third party (“Exception Request”) where the Proxy Administrator has actual knowledge indicating that a J.P. Morgan affiliate is an investment banker or rendered a fairness opinion with respect to the matter that is the subject of a proxy vote. The Proxy Committee shall review the Exception Request and shall determine whether JPMAM should vote against the proposal or whether such proxy should still be referred to an independent third party due to the potential for additional conflicts or otherwise.

When other types of potential material conflicts of interest are identified, the proxy administrator and, as necessary, a legal representative from the Proxy Committee will evaluate the potential conflict of interest and determine whether such conflict actually exists, and if so, will recommend how J.P. Morgan will vote the proxy. In addressing any material conflict, J.P. Morgan may take one or more of the following measures (or other appropriate action): removing or “walling off” from the proxy voting process certain J.P. Morgan personnel with knowledge of the conflict, voting in accordance with any applicable Guideline if the application of the Guideline would objectively result in the casting of a proxy vote in a predetermined manner, or deferring the vote to or obtaining a recommendation from a third independent party, in which case the proxy will be voted by, or in accordance with the recommendation of, the independent third party.

A complete set of proxy voting guidelines may be found here: https://am.jpmorgan.com/content/dam/jpm-am-aem/americas/us/en/supplemental/proxy-information/global-procedures-and-guidelines.pdf

LSV ASSET MANAGEMENT (LSV)

LSV Asset Management’s (LSV) proxy voting responsibilities on behalf of a client’s account are expressly stated in the applicable agreement with such client. If LSV is responsible for voting proxies, the agreement with each client will typically state whether the votes will be cast in accordance with this proxy voting policy or in accordance with the client’s proxy voting policy. In either case, LSV will make appropriate arrangements with each account custodian to have proxies forwarded on a timely basis, and will endeavor to correct delays or other problems relating to timely delivery of proxies and proxy materials to the extent it is aware of such delays or problems. If the client elects to retain proxy voting responsibility, LSV will have no involvement in the proxy voting process for that client.

To satisfy its fiduciary duty in making any voting determination, an investment adviser must make the determination in the best interests of the client and must not place the investment adviser’s own interests ahead of the interests of the client. In addition, with respect to Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) plan clients, LSV is required to consider those factors that may affect the value of the client’s investment and may not subordinate the interests of the participants and beneficiaries in their retirement income or financial benefits under the plan to any other objective, or promote benefits or goals unrelated to those financial interests of the plan’s participants and beneficiaries.

In general, LSV’s quantitative investment process does not provide output or analysis that would be functional in analyzing proxy issues. As a result, LSV does not consider proxy voting to be a material factor in its investment strategy or results. LSV, therefore, has retained an expert independent third party to assist in proxy voting, currently Glass Lewis & Co. (GLC). LSV’s selection of GLC was made after careful consideration of GLC’s proxy voting services, including related voting policies and expertise. GLC implements LSV’s proxy voting process, develops proxy voting guidelines and provides analysis of proxy issues on a case-by-case basis. Where LSV has been responsible for voting proxies for a client, LSV votes in accordance with GLC’s standard guidelines, as updated from time to time, which can be found at https://www.glasslewis.com/guidelines. For new clients who wish to make LSV responsible for voting proxies, LSV intends to vote in accordance with GLC’s climate guidelines, as updated from time to time, which are described by GLC at https://www.glasslewis.com/climate-policy, and which may be obtained from LSV and applied to existing clients’ accounts upon request. LSV describes available GLC guidelines to clients on at least an annual basis. Those guidelines generally are aligned with LSV’s investment goals, and LSV’s use of GLC, therefore, is not a delegation of LSV’s fiduciary obligation to vote proxies for clients. GLC’s guidelines have been developed based on, among other things, GLC’s focus on facilitating shareholder voting in favor of governance

 158

structures that drive performance and create shareholder value. LSV believes that GLC’s guidelines are reasonably designed to ensure that proxies are voted in the best interests of LSV’s clients. Although it is expected to be rare, LSV reserves the right to vote issues contrary to, or issues not covered by, GLC’s guidelines when LSV believes it is in the best interests of the client and LSV does not have a material conflict of interest. In certain circumstances, clients are permitted to direct their vote in a particular solicitation. Direction from a client on a particular proxy vote will take precedence over GLC’s guidelines. Where the client has engaged LSV to vote proxies and has also provided proxy voting guidelines to LSV, those guidelines will be followed with the assistance of GLC.

GLC assists LSV with voting execution, including through an electronic vote management system that allows GLC to: (1) populate each client’s votes shown on GLC’s electronic voting platform with GLC’s recommendations under applicable guidelines (pre-population); and (2) automatically submit the client’s votes to be counted (automated voting). There will likely be circumstances where, before the submission deadline for proxies to be voted at the shareholder meeting, an issuer intends to file or has filed additional soliciting materials with the Securities and Exchange Commission regarding a matter to be voted upon. It is possible in such circumstances that LSV’s use of pre-population and automated voting could result in votes being cast that do not take into account such additional information. In order to address this concern, GLC actively monitors information sources for supplemental or updated information and has in place a system to allow for issuer feedback on its voting recommendations. Such updated information and feedback is considered by GLC and voting recommendations are modified as appropriate. LSV’s pre-populated votes would then also be automatically updated. GLC’s processes in this area are part of LSV’s review of their services as described below.

LSV conducts a number of periodic reviews to seek to ensure votes are cast in accordance with this policy and applicable GLC guidelines. In addition, on a semi-annual basis, LSV requires GLC to, among other things, provide confirmations regarding its policies and procedures and reporting on any changes to such policies and procedures. As part of such semi-annual process, LSV also obtains information regarding the capacity and competency of GLC to provide proxy advisory services to LSV.

In the voting process, conflicts can arise between LSV’s interests and that of its clients, or between clients’ interests due to each client’s objectives. In such situations, LSV will continue to vote the proxies in accordance with the recommendations of GLC based on each client’s applicable guidelines. A written record will be maintained explaining the reasoning for the vote recommendation. LSV also monitors GLC’s conflicts of interest policies and procedures on a periodic basis.

LSV may be unable or may choose not to vote proxies in certain situations. For example, and without limitation, LSV may refrain from voting a proxy if (i) the cost of voting the proxy exceeds the expected benefit to the client, (ii) LSV is not given enough time to process the vote, (iii) voting the proxy requires the security to be “blocked” or frozen from trading or (iv) it is otherwise impractical or impossible to vote the proxy, such as in the case of voting a foreign security that must be cast in person.

Clients may receive a copy of this proxy voting policy and LSV’s voting record for their account by request. In addition, clients are sent a copy of their respective guidelines and a summary of other available options on an annual basis and may elect to change their guidelines at any time. LSV will additionally provide any mutual fund for which LSV acts as adviser or sub-adviser, a copy of LSV’s voting record for the fund so that the fund may fulfill its obligation to report proxy votes to fund shareholders.

LSV may modify this policy and use of GLC from time to time.

Recordkeeping

LSV will retain:

◾

Copies of its proxy voting policies and procedures.

◾

A copy of each proxy statement received regarding client securities (maintained by the proxy voting service and/or available on EDGAR).

◾

A record of each vote cast on behalf of a client (maintained by the proxy voting service).

◾

A copy of any document created that was material to the voting decision or that memorializes the basis for that decision (maintained by the proxy voting service).

◾

A copy of clients’ written requests for proxy voting information and a copy of LSV’s written response to a client’s request for proxy voting information for the client’s account.

LSV will ensure that it may obtain access to the proxy voting service’s records promptly upon LSV’s request.

The above listed information is intended to, among other things, enable clients to review LSV’s proxy voting procedures and actions taken in individual proxy voting situations.

LSV will maintain required materials in an easily accessible place for not less than five years from the end of the fiscal year during which the last entry took place.

159

Consideration of Environmental, Social and Governance Factors

LSV became a signatory to the Principles for Responsible Investment (“PRI”) in April 2014. GLC is also a signatory to the PRI. The PRI provides a framework, through its six principles, for consideration of environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors in portfolio management and investment decision-making. The six principles ask an investment manager, to the extent consistent with its fiduciary duties, to seek to: (1) incorporate ESG issues into investment analysis and decision-making processes; (2) be an active owner and incorporate ESG issues into its ownership policies and practices; (3) obtain appropriate disclosure on ESG issues by the entities in which it invests; (4) promote acceptance and implementation of the PRI principles within the investment industry; (5) work to enhance its effectiveness in implementing the PRI principles; and (6) report on its activities and progress toward implementing the PRI principles. Voting in favor of effective disclosure and governance of ESG issues is incorporated into GLC’s standard guidelines, as well as a supplement GLC maintains for shareholder initiatives. GLC’s climate guidelines are substantially similar, but go further to encourage enhanced disclosure of climate-related governance measures, risk mitigation, and metrics or targets. Through utilizing these GLC guidelines, LSV incorporates ESG issues into its proxy voting decision-making processes. Further, through GLC, LSV is able to offer ESG-focused guidelines that include an additional level of analysis on behalf of clients seeking to vote to encourage company actions that are consistent with widely-accepted enhanced ESG practices.

MASSACHUSETTS FINANCIAL SERVICES COMPANY (MFS)

PROXY VOTING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES

January 1, 2023

At MFS Investment Management, our core purpose is to create value responsibly. In serving the long-term economic interests of our clients, we rely on deep fundamental research, risk awareness, engagement, and effective stewardship to generate long-term risk-adjusted returns for our clients. A core component of this approach is our proxy voting activity. We believe that robust ownership practices can help protect and enhance long-term shareholder value. Such ownership practices include diligently exercising our voting rights as well as engaging with our issuers on a variety of proxy voting topics. We recognize that environmental, social and governance (“ESG”) issues may impact the long-term value of an investment, and, therefore, we consider ESG issues in light of our fiduciary obligation to vote proxies in what we believe to be in the best long- term economic interest of our clients.

MFS Investment Management and its subsidiaries that perform discretionary investment activities (collectively, “MFS”) have adopted these proxy voting policies and procedures (“MFS Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures”) with respect to securities owned by the clients for which MFS serves as investment adviser and has been delegated the power to vote proxies on behalf of such clients. These clients include pooled investment vehicles sponsored by MFS (an “MFS Fund” or collectively, the “MFS Funds”).

Our approach to proxy voting is guided by the overall principle that proxy voting decisions are made in what MFS believes to be the best long-term economic interests of our clients, and not in the interests of any other party, including company management, or in MFS' corporate interests, including interests such as the distribution of MFS Fund shares and institutional client relationships. These Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures include voting guidelines that govern how MFS generally will vote on specific matters as well as how we monitor potential material conflicts of interest on the part of MFS that could arise in connection with the voting of proxies on behalf of MFS’ clients.The MFS Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures include:

Our approach to proxy voting is guided by the following additional principles:

1.

Consistency in application of the policy across multiple client portfolios: While MFS generally votes consistently on the same matter when securities of an issuer are held by multiple client portfolios, MFS may vote differently on the matter for different client portfolios under certain circumstances. For example, we may vote differently for a client portfolio if we have received explicit voting instructions to vote differently from such client for its own account. Likewise, MFS may vote differently if the portfolio management team responsible for a particular client account believes that a different voting instruction is in the best long-term economic interest of such account.

2.

Consistency in application of policy across shareholder meetings in most instances: As a general matter, MFS seeks to vote consistently on similar proxy proposals across all shareholder meetings. However, as many proxy proposals (e.g., mergers, acquisitions, and environmental, social and governance shareholder proposals) are analyzed on a case-by-case basis in light of all the relevant facts and circumstances of the issuer and proposal MFS may vote similar proposals differently at different shareholder meetings. In addition, MFS also reserves the right to override the guidelines with respect to a particular proxy proposal when such an override is, in MFS’ best judgment, consistent with the overall principle of voting proxies in the best long-term economic interests of MFS’ clients.

 160

3.

Consideration of company specific context and informed by engagement: As noted above MFS will seek to consider a company’s specific context in determining its voting decision. Where there are significant, complex or unusual voting items we may seek to engage with a company before making the vote to further inform our decision. Where sufficient progress has not been made on a particular issue of engagement, MFS may determine a vote against management may be warranted to reflect our concerns and influence for change in the best long-term economic interests of our clients.

4.

Clear decisions to best support issuer processes and decision making: To best support improved issuer decision making we strive to generally provide clear decisions by voting either For or Against each item. We may however vote to Abstain in certain situations if we believe a vote either For or Against may produce a result not in the best long-term economic interests of our clients.

5.

Transparency in approach and implementation: In addition to the publication of the MFS Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures on our website, we are open to communicating our vote intention with companies, including ahead of the annual meeting. We may do this proactively where we wish to make our view or corresponding rationale clearly known to the company. Our voting data is reported to clients upon request and publicly on a quarterly and annual basis on our website (under Proxy Voting Records & Reports). For more information about reporting on our proxy voting activities, please refer to Section F below.

A.

VOTING GUIDELINES

The following guidelines govern how MFS will generally vote on specific matters presented for shareholder vote. These guidelines are not exhaustive, and MFS may vote on matters not identified below. In such circumstances, MFS will be governed by its general policy to vote in what MFS believes to be in the best long-term economic interest of its clients.

These guidelines are written to apply to the markets and companies where MFS has significant assets invested. There will be markets and companies, such as controlled companies and smaller markets, where local governance practices are taken into consideration and exceptions may need to be applied that are not explicitly stated below. There are also markets and companies where transparency and related data limit the ability to apply these guidelines.

BOARD STRUCTURE AND PERFORMANCE

MFS generally supports the election and/or discharge of directors proposed by the board in uncontested or non-contentious elections, unless concerns have been identified, such as in relation to:

Director independence

MFS believes that good governance is enabled by a board with at least a simple majority of directors who are “independent” (as determined by MFS in its sole discretion)1 of management, the company and each other. MFS may not support the non-independent nominees, or other relevant director (e.g., chair of the board or the chair of the nominations committee), where insufficient independence is identified and determined to be a risk to the board’s and/or company’s effectiveness.

As a general matter we will not support a nominee to a board if, as a result of such nominee being elected to the board, the board will consist of less than a simple majority of members who are “independent.” However, there are also governance structures and markets where we may accept lower levels of independence, such as companies required to have non-shareholder representatives on the board, controlled companies, and companies in certain Asian or emerging markets. In these circumstances we generally expect the board to be at least one-third independent or at least half of shareholder representatives to be independent, and as a general matter we will not support the nominee to the board if as a result of such nominee’s elections these expectations are not met. In certain circumstances, we may not support another relevant director’s election. For example, in Japan, we will generally not support the most senior director where the board is not comprised of at least one-third independent directors.

MFS also believes good governance is enabled by a board whose key committees, in particular audit, nominating and compensation/remuneration, consist entirely of “independent” directors. For US and Canadian companies, MFS generally votes against any non-independent nominee that would cause any of the audit, compensation, nominating committee to not be fully independent. For Switzerland and UK issuers MFS generally votes against any non-independent nominee which would cause the audit or compensation/remuneration committee to not be fully independent.

In other markets MFS generally votes against non-independent nominees or other relevant director if a majority of committee members or the chair of the audit committee are not independent. However, there are also governance structures (e.g., controlled companies or boards with non-shareholder representatives) and markets where we may accept lower levels of independence for these key committees.

161

Tenure in leadership roles

For a board with a lead independent director whose overall tenure on the board equals or exceeds twenty (20) years, we will generally engage with the company to encourage refreshment of that role, and we may vote against the long tenured lead director if progress on refreshment is not made or being considered by the company’s board.

Overboarding

All directors on a board should have sufficient time and attention to fulfil their duties and play their part in achieving effective oversight, both in normal and exceptional circumstances. As a general matter, we vote against a director’s election if they:

◾

Are not a CEO of a public company, but serve on more than four (4) public company boards in total at US companies and more than five (5) in other markets.

◾

Are a CEO of a public company, and serve on more than two (2) public company boards in total at US companies and two (2) outside companies in other markets. In these cases, MFS would only apply a vote against at the meetings of the companies where the director is non-executive.

MFS may also vote against any director if we deem such nominee to have board roles or outside time commitments that we believe would impair their ability to dedicate sufficient time and attention to their director role. MFS may consider exceptions to this policy if: (i) the company has disclosed the director's plans to step down from the number of public company boards exceeding the above limits, as applicable, within a reasonable time; or (ii) the director exceeds the permitted number of public company board seats solely due to either his/her board service on an affiliated company (e.g., a subsidiary), or service on more than one investment company within the same investment company complex (as defined by applicable law).

Diversity

MFS believes that a well-balanced board with diverse perspectives is a foundation for sound corporate governance, and this is best spread across the board rather than concentrated in one or a few individuals. We take a holistic view on the dimensions of diversity that can lead to diversity of perspectives and stronger oversight and governance.

Gender diversity is one such dimension and where good disclosure and data enables a specific expectation and voting policy.

On gender representation specifically MFS wishes to see companies in all markets achieve a consistent minimum representation of women of at least a third of the board, and we are likely to increase our voting policy towards this over time.

Currently, MFS will generally vote against the chair of the nominating and governance committee or other most relevant position at any company whose board is comprised of an insufficient representation of directors who are women for example:

At US, Canadian, European, Australian companies: less than 22%.

At Japanese companies: less than 10%.

As a general matter, MFS will vote against the chair of the nominating committee of US S&P 500 companies and UK FTSE 100 companies that have failed to appoint at least one director who identifies as either an underrepresented ethnic/racial minority or a member of the LGBTQ+ community.

MFS may consider exceptions to these guidelines if we believe that the company is transitioning towards these goals or has provided clear and compelling reasons for why they have been unable to comply with these goals.

For other markets, we will engage on board diversity and may vote against the election of directors where we fail to see progress.

Board size

MFS believes that the size of the board can have an effect on the board's ability to function efficiently and effectively. While MFS may evaluate board size on a case-by-case basis, we will typically vote against the chair of the nominating and governance committee in instances where the size of the board is greater than sixteen (16) members. An exception to this is companies with requirements to have equal representation of employees on the board where we expect a maximum of twenty (20) members.

Other concerns related to director election:

MFS may also not support some or all nominees standing for election to a board if we determine:

 162

◾

There are concerns with a director or board regarding performance, governance or oversight, which may include:

◾

Clear failures in oversight or execution of duties, including the identification, management and reporting of material risks and information, at the company or any other at which the nominee has served. This may include climate-related risks;

◾

A failure by the director or board of the issuer to take action to eliminate shareholder unfriendly provisions in the issuer's charter documents;

◾

Allowing the hedging and/or significant pledging of company shares by executives.

◾

A director attended less than 75% of the board and/or relevant committee meetings in the previous year without a valid reason stated in the proxy materials or other annual governance reporting;

◾

The board or relevant committee has not adequately responded to an issue that received majority support or significant dissent from shareholders;

◾

The board has implemented a poison pill without shareholder approval since the last annual meeting and such poison pill is not on the subsequent shareholder meeting's agenda (including those related to net-operating loss carry-forwards); or

◾

In Japan, the company allocates a significant portion of its net assets to cross-shareholdings.

◾

Unless the concern is commonly accepted market practice, MFS may also not support some or all nominees standing for election to a nominations committee if we determine the chair is not independent and there is no strong lead independent director role in place or an executive director is a member of a key board committee.

Where individual directors are not presented for election in the year MFS may apply the same vote position to votes on the discharge of the director. Where the election of directors is bundled MFS may vote against the whole group if there is concern with an individual director and no other vote related to that director.

Proxy contests

From time to time, a shareholder may express alternative points of view in terms of a company's strategy, capital allocation, or other issues. Such a shareholder may also propose a slate of director nominees different than the slate of director nominees proposed by the company (a “Proxy Contest”). MFS will analyze Proxy Contests on a case-by-case basis, taking into consideration the track record and current recommended initiatives of both company management and the dissident shareholder(s). MFS will support the slate of director nominees that we believe is in the best, long-term economic interest of our clients.

OTHER ITEMS RELATED TO BOARD ACCOUNTABILITY:

Majority voting for the election of directors: MFS generally supports reasonably crafted proposals calling for directors to be elected with an affirmative majority of votes cast and/or the elimination of the plurality standard for electing directors (including binding resolutions requesting that the board amend the company’s bylaws), provided the proposal includes a carve-out for a plurality voting standard when there are more director nominees than board seats (e.g., contested elections).

Declassified boards: MFS generally supports proposals to declassify a board (i.e., a board in which only a sub-set of board members is elected each year) for all issuers other than for certain closed-end investment companies. MFS generally opposes proposals to classify a board for issuers other than for certain closed-end investment companies.

The right to call a special meeting or act by written consent: MFS will generally support management proposals to establish these rights. We will also support shareholder proposals to establish the right for shareholders to call a special meeting.

If a company already provides shareholders the right to call a special meeting at a threshold of 15% or below, MFS will generally vote against shareholder proposals to establish or amend the threshold at a lower level.

MFS will support shareholder proposals to establish the right to act by majority written consent if shareholders do not have the right to call a special meeting at a 15% or lower threshold.

Independent chairs: MFS believes boards should include some form of independent leadership responsible for amplifying the views of independent directors and setting meeting agendas, and this is often best positioned as an independent chair of the board. We review the merits of a change in leadership structure on a case-by-case basis.

Proxy access: MFS believes that the ability of qualifying shareholders to nominate a certain number of directors on the company's proxy statement (“Proxy Access”) may have corporate governance benefits. However, such potential benefits must be balanced by its potential misuse by shareholders. Therefore, MFS generally supports Proxy Access proposals at US issuers that establish ownership criteria of 3% of the company held continuously for a period of 3 years. In our view, such qualifying shareholders should have the ability to nominate at least 2 directors. We also believe companies should be mindful of imposing any undue impediments within their bylaws that may render Proxy Access impractical, including re-submission thresholds for director nominees via Proxy Access.

163

ITEMS RELATED TO SHAREHOLDER RIGHTS:

Anti-takeover measures: In general, MFS votes against any measure that inhibits capital appreciation in a stock, including proposals that protect management from action by shareholders. These types of proposals take many forms, ranging from “poison pills” and “shark repellents” to super-majority requirements. While MFS may consider the adoption of a prospective “poison pill” or the continuation of an existing “poison pill” on a case-by-case basis, MFS generally votes against such anti-takeover devices.

MFS will consider any poison pills designed to protect a company’s net-operating loss carryforwards on a case-by-case basis, weighing the accounting and tax benefits of such a pill against the risk of deterring future acquisition candidates. MFS will also consider, on a case-by-case basis, proposals designed to prevent tenders which are disadvantageous to shareholders such as tenders at below market prices and tenders for substantially less than all shares of an issuer.

MFS generally supports proposals that seek to remove governance structures that insulate management from shareholders. MFS generally votes for proposals to rescind existing “poison pills” and proposals that would require shareholder approval to adopt prospective “poison pills.”

Cumulative voting: MFS generally opposes proposals that seek to introduce cumulative voting and supports proposals that seek to eliminate cumulative voting. In either case, MFS will consider whether cumulative voting is likely to enhance the interests of MFS’ clients as minority shareholders.

One-share one-vote: As a general matter, MFS supports proportional alignment of voting rights with economic interest, and may not support a proposal that deviates from this approach. Where multiple share classes or other forms of disproportionate control are in place, we expect these to have sunset provisions of generally no longer than seven years after which the structure becomes single class one-share one-vote.

Reincorporation and reorganization proposals: When presented with a proposal to reincorporate a company under the laws of a different state, or to effect some other type of corporate reorganization, MFS considers the underlying purpose and ultimate effect of such a proposal in determining whether or not to support such a measure. MFS generally votes with management in regards to these types of proposals, however, if MFS believes the proposal is not in the best long-term economic interests of its clients, then MFS may vote against management (e.g., the intent or effect would be to create additional inappropriate impediments to possible acquisitions or takeovers).

Other business: MFS generally votes against “other business” proposals as the content of any such matter is not known at the time of our vote.

ITEMS RELATED TO CAPITALIZATION PROPOSALS, CAPITAL ALLOCATION AND CORPORATE ACTIONS:

Issuance of stock: There are many legitimate reasons for the issuance of stock. Nevertheless, as noted above under “Stock Plans,” when a stock option plan (either individually or when aggregated with other plans of the same company) would substantially dilute the existing equity (e.g., by more than approximately 10-15%), MFS generally votes against the plan.

MFS typically votes against proposals where management is asking for authorization to issue common or preferred stock with no reason stated (a “blank check”) because the unexplained authorization could work as a potential anti-takeover device. MFS may also vote against the authorization or issuance of common or preferred stock if MFS determines that the requested authorization is excessive or not warranted. MFS will consider the duration of the authority and the company’s history in using such authorities in making its decision.

Repurchase programs: MFS generally supports proposals to institute share repurchase plans in which all shareholders have the opportunity to participate on an equal basis. Such plans may include a company acquiring its own shares on the open market, or a company making a tender offer to its own shareholders.

Mergers, acquisitions & other special transactions: MFS considers proposals with respect to mergers, acquisitions, sale of company assets, share and debt issuances and other transactions that have the potential to affect ownership interests on a case-by-case basis.

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

MFS generally supports the election of auditors but may determine to vote against the election of a statutory auditor and/or members of the audit committee in certain markets if MFS reasonably believes that the statutory auditor is not truly independent, sufficiently competent or there are concerns related to the auditor’s work or opinion. To inform this view, MFS may evaluate the use of non-audit services in voting decisions when the percentage of non-audit fees to total auditor fees exceeds 40%, in particular if recurring.

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

 164

MFS believes that competitive compensation packages are necessary to attract, motivate and retain executives. We seek compensation plans that are geared towards durable long-term value creation and aligned with shareholder interests and experience, such as where:

◾

The plan is aligned with the company’s strategic priorities with clear, suitably challenging and measurable performance conditions such that future pay is likely to reflect performance;

◾

Substantial portions of awards paid in deferred shares and based on long performance periods (e.g., at least three years);

◾

Potential awards, and any increases to this, reflect the role and business; and

◾

Awards reflect the policies approved by shareholders at previous meetings with appropriate use of discretion (positive and negative).

MFS will analyze votes on executive compensation on a case-by-case basis. MFS will vote against an issuer's executive compensation practices if MFS determines that such practices are misaligned with shareholders or include incentive metrics or structures that are poorly aligned with the best, long-term economic interest of its clients. When analyzing whether an issuer’s compensation practices are geared towards durable long-term value creation, we use a variety of materials and information, including our own internal research and engagement with issuers as well as the research of third-party service providers. We also have identified the following practices in compensation plans that we believe may be problematic and we review any plan that contains four (4) or more of these practices with extra scrutiny:

◾

Relative total shareholder return (TSR) performance thresholds requiring less than median performance.

◾

Qualitative (i.e., strategic or individual) goals that account for 30% or more of a given short- or long-term award.

◾

Performance-based long-term incentives that have less than a 3-year performance period.

◾

CEO perks of more than $100,000.

◾

A long-term performance plan that has no financial performance requirements.

◾

Executive or director pledging of shares.

◾

CEO pay that is four times the average pay of the company's next named executive officers (NEO).

MFS may also vote against an issuer's executive compensation practices if there is insufficient disclosure about the issuer’s practices.

MFS generally supports proposals to include an advisory shareholder vote on an issuer’s executive compensation practices on an annual basis.

MFS does not have formal voting guideline in regards to the inclusion of ESG incentives in a company’s compensation plan; however, where such incentives are included, we believe:

◾

The incentives should be tied to quantitative or other externally verifiable outcomes rather than qualitative measures.

◾

The weighting of incentives should be appropriately balanced with other strategic priorities.

We believe non-executive directors may be compensated in cash or stock but these should not be performance-based.

Stock Plans

MFS may oppose stock option programs and restricted stock plans if they:

◾

Provide unduly generous compensation for officers, directors or employees, or could result in excessive dilution to other shareholders. As a general guideline, MFS votes against restricted stock, stock option, non-employee director, omnibus stock plans and any other stock plan if all such plans for a particular company involve potential excessive dilution (which we typically consider to be, in the aggregate, of more than 15%). MFS will generally vote against stock plans that involve potential dilution, in aggregate, of more than 10% at US issuers that are listed in the Standard and Poor’s 100 index as of December 31 of the previous year.

◾

Allow the board or the compensation committee to re-price underwater options or to automatically replenish shares without shareholder approval.

◾

Do not require an investment by the optionee, give “free rides” on the stock price, or permit grants of stock options with an exercise price below fair market value on the date the options are granted.

In the cases where a stock plan amendment is seeking qualitative changes and not additional shares, MFS will vote on a case-by-case basis.

MFS will consider proposals to exchange existing options for newly issued options, restricted stock or cash on a case-by-case basis, taking into account certain factors, including, but not limited to, whether there is a reasonable value-for-value exchange and whether senior executives are excluded from participating in the exchange.

From time to time, MFS may evaluate a separate, advisory vote on severance packages or “golden parachutes” to certain executives at the same time as a vote on a proposed merger or acquisition. MFS will vote on a severance package on a case-by-case basis, and MFS may vote against the severance package regardless of whether MFS supports the proposed merger or acquisition.

165

MFS supports the use of a broad-based employee stock purchase plans to increase company stock ownership by employees, provided that shares purchased under the plan are acquired for no less than 85% of their market value and do not result in excessive dilution.

MFS may also not support some or all nominees standing for election to a compensation/remuneration committee if:

◾

MFS votes against consecutive pay votes;

◾

MFS determines that a particularly egregious executive compensation practice has occurred. This may include use of discretion to award excessive payouts. MFS believes compensation committees should have flexibility to apply discretion to ensure final payments reflect long-term performance as long as this is used responsibly; or

◾

An advisory pay vote is not presented to shareholders, or the company has not implemented the advisory vote frequency supported by a plurality/majority of shareholders.

SHAREHOLDER PROPOSALS ON EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

MFS generally opposes shareholder proposals that seek to set rigid restrictions on executive compensation as MFS believes that compensation committees should retain flexibility to determine the appropriate pay package for executives.

MFS may support reasonably crafted shareholder proposals that:

◾

Require shareholder approval of any severance package for an executive officer that exceeds a certain multiple of such officer’s annual compensation that is not determined in MFS’ judgment to be excessive;

◾

Require the issuer to adopt a policy to recover the portion of performance-based bonuses and awards paid to senior executives that were not earned based upon a significant negative restatement of earnings, or other significant misconduct or corporate failure, unless the company already has adopted a satisfactory policy on the matter;

◾

Expressly prohibit the backdating of stock options; or,

◾

Prohibit the acceleration of vesting of equity awards upon a broad definition of a “change-in-control” (e.g., single or modified single-trigger).

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL PROPOSALS

Where management presents climate action/transition plans to shareholder vote, we will evaluate the level of ambition over time, scope, credibility and transparency of the plan in determining our support. Where companies present climate action progress reports to shareholder vote we will evaluate evidence of implementation of and progress against the plan and level of transparency in determining our support.

Most vote items related to environmental and social topics are presented by shareholders. As these proposals, even on the same topic, can vary significantly in scope and action requested, many must be assessed on a case-by-case basis.

For example, MFS may support proposals reasonably crafted proposals:

◾

On climate change: that seek disclosure consistent with the recommendations of a generally accepted global framework (e.g., Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures) that is appropriately audited and that is presented in a way that enables shareholders to assess and analyze the company's data; or request appropriately robust and ambitious plans or targets.

◾

Other environmental: that request the setting of targets for reduction of environmental impact or disclosure of key performance indicators or risks related to the impact, where materially relevant to the business. An example of such a proposal could be reporting on the impact of plastic use or waste stemming from company products or packaging.

◾

On diversity: that seek to amend a company’s equal employment opportunity policy to prohibit discrimination; that request good practice employee-related DEI disclosure; or that seek external input and reviews on specific related areas of performance.

◾

On lobbying: that request good practice disclosure regarding a company’s political contributions and lobbying payments and policy (including trade organizations and lobbying activity).

◾

On tax: that request reporting in line with the GRI 207 Standard on Tax.

◾

On corporate culture and/or human/worker rights: that request additional disclosure on corporate culture factors like employee turnover and/or management of human and labor rights.

MFS is unlikely to support a proposal if we believe that the proposal is unduly costly, restrictive, unclear, burdensome, has potential unintended consequences, is unlikely to lead to tangible outcomes or we don’t believe the issue is material or the action a priority for the business. MFS is also unlikely to support a proposal where the company already provides publicly available information that we believe is sufficient to enable shareholders to evaluate the potential opportunities and risks on the subject of the proposal, if the request of the proposal has already been substantially implemented, or if through engagement we gain assurances that it will be substantially implemented.

 166

The laws of various states or countries may regulate how the interests of certain clients subject to those laws (e.g., state pension plans) are voted with respect to environmental, social and governance issues. Thus, it may be necessary to cast ballots differently for certain clients than MFS might normally do for other clients.

B. GOVERNANCE OF PROXY VOTING ACTIVITIES

From time to time, MFS may receive comments on the MFS Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures from its clients. These comments are carefully considered by MFS when it reviews these MFS Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures and revises them as appropriate, in MFS' sole judgment.

MFS Proxy Voting Committee

The administration of these MFS Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures is overseen by the MFS Proxy Voting Committee, which includes senior personnel from the MFS Legal and Global Investment and Client Support Departments as well as members of the investment team. The Proxy Voting Committee does not include individuals whose primary duties relate to client relationship management, marketing, or sales. The MFS Proxy Voting Committee:

a. Reviews these MFS Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures at least annually and recommends any amendments considered to be necessary or advisable;

b.

Determines whether any potential material conflict of interest exists with respect to instances in which MFS (i) seeks to override these MFS Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures; (ii) votes on ballot items not governed by these MFS Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures; (iii) evaluates an excessive executive compensation issue in relation to the election of directors; or (iv) requests a vote recommendation from an MFS portfolio manager or investment analyst (e.g., mergers and acquisitions);

c.

Considers special proxy issues as they may arise from time to time; and

d.

Determines engagement priorities and strategies with respect to MFS' proxy voting activities

The day-to-day application of the MFS Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures are conducted by the MFS stewardship team led by MFS’ Director of Global Stewardship. The stewardship team are members of MFS’ investment team.

2.

Potential Conflicts of Interest

These policies and procedures are intended to address any potential material conflicts of interest on the part of MFS or its subsidiaries that are likely to arise in connection with the voting of proxies on behalf of MFS’ clients. If such potential material conflicts of interest do arise, MFS will analyze, document and report on such potential material conflicts of interest (see below) and shall ultimately vote the relevant ballot items in what MFS believes to be the best long-term economic interests of its clients. The MFS Proxy Voting Committee is responsible for monitoring and reporting with respect to such potential material conflicts of interest.

The MFS Proxy Voting Committee is responsible for monitoring potential material conflicts of interest on the part of MFS or its subsidiaries that could arise in connection with the voting of proxies on behalf of MFS’ clients. Due to the client focus of our investment management business, we believe that the potential for actual material conflict of interest issues is small. Nonetheless, we have developed precautions to assure that all votes are cast in the best long-term economic interest of its clients.2 Other MFS internal policies require all MFS employees to avoid actual and potential conflicts of interests between personal activities and MFS’ client activities. If an employee (including investment professionals) identifies an actual or potential conflict of interest with respect to any voting decision (including the ownership of securities in their individual portfolio), then that employee must recuse himself/herself from participating in the voting process. Any significant attempt by an employee of MFS or its subsidiaries to unduly influence MFS’ voting on a particular proxy matter should also be reported to the MFS Proxy Voting Committee.

In cases where ballots are voted in accordance with these MFS Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures, no material conflict of interest will be deemed to exist. In cases where (i) MFS is considering overriding these MFS Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures, (ii) matters presented for vote are not governed by these MFS Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures, (iii) MFS evaluates a potentially excessive executive compensation issue in relation to the election of directors or advisory pay or severance package vote, or (iv) a vote recommendation is requested from an MFS portfolio manager or investment analyst (e.g., mergers and acquisitions); (collectively, “Non-Standard Votes”); the MFS Proxy Voting Committee will follow these procedures:

Compare the name of the issuer of such ballot or the name of the shareholder making such proposal against a list of significant current (i) distributors of MFS Fund shares, and (ii) MFS institutional clients (the “MFS Significant Distributor and Client List”);

167

If the name of the issuer does not appear on the MFS Significant Distributor and Client List, then no material conflict of interest will be deemed to exist, and the proxy will be voted as otherwise determined by the MFS Proxy Voting Committee;

If the name of the issuer appears on the MFS Significant Distributor and Client List, then the MFS Proxy Voting Committee will be apprised of that fact and each member of the MFS Proxy Voting Committee (with the participation of MFS' Conflicts Officer) will carefully evaluate the proposed vote in order to ensure that the proxy ultimately is voted in what MFS believes to be the best long-term economic interests of MFS’ clients, and not in MFS' corporate interests; and

For all potential material conflicts of interest identified under clause (c) above, the MFS Proxy Voting Committee will document: the name of the issuer, the issuer’s relationship to MFS, the analysis of the matters submitted for proxy vote, the votes as to be cast and the reasons why the MFS Proxy Voting Committee determined that the votes were cast in the best long-term economic interests of MFS’ clients, and not in MFS' corporate interests. A copy of the foregoing documentation will be provided to MFS’ Conflicts Officer.

The members of the MFS Proxy Voting Committee are responsible for creating and maintaining the MFS Significant Distributor and Client List, in consultation with MFS’ distribution and institutional business units. The MFS Significant Distributor and Client List will be reviewed and updated periodically, as appropriate.

For instances where MFS is evaluating a director nominee who also serves as a director/trustee of the MFS Funds, then the MFS Proxy Voting Committee will adhere to the procedures described in section (c) above regardless of whether the portfolio company appears on our Significant Distributor and Client List. In doing so, the MFS Proxy Voting Committee will adhere to such procedures for all Non-Standard Votes at the company’s shareholder meeting at which the director nominee is standing for election.

If an MFS client has the right to vote on a matter submitted to shareholders by Sun Life Financial, Inc. or any of its affiliates (collectively “Sun Life”), MFS will cast a vote on behalf of such MFS client as such client instructs or in the event that a client instruction is unavailable pursuant to the recommendations of Institutional Shareholder Services, Inc.'s (“ISS”) benchmark policy, or as required by law. Likewise, if an MFS client has the right to vote on a matter submitted to shareholders by a public company for which an MFS Fund director/trustee serves as an executive officer, MFS will cast a vote on behalf of such MFS client as such client instructs or in the event that client instruction is unavailable pursuant to the recommendations of ISS or as required by law.

Except as described in the MFS Fund's Prospectus, from time to time, certain MFS Funds (the “top tier fund”) may own shares of other MFS Funds (the “underlying fund”). If an underlying fund submits a matter to a shareholder vote, the top tier fund will generally vote its shares in the same proportion as the other shareholders of the underlying fund. If there are no other shareholders in the underlying fund, the top tier fund will vote in what MFS believes to be in the top tier fund’s best long-term economic interest. If an MFS client has the right to vote on a matter submitted to shareholders by a pooled investment vehicle advised by MFS (excluding those vehicles for which MFS' role is primarily portfolio management and is overseen by another investment adviser), MFS will cast a vote on behalf of such MFS client in the same proportion as the other shareholders of the pooled investment vehicle.

3.

Review of Policy

The MFS Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures are available on www.mfs.com and may be accessed by both MFS’ clients and the companies in which MFS’ clients invest. The MFS Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures are reviewed by the Proxy Voting Committee annually. From time to time, MFS may receive comments on the MFS Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures from its clients. These comments are carefully considered by MFS when it reviews these MFS Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures and revises them as appropriate, in MFS' sole judgment.

C. OTHER ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS & USE OF PROXY ADVISORY FIRMS

Use of Proxy Advisory Firms

MFS, on behalf of itself and certain of its clients (including the MFS Funds) has entered into an agreement with an independent proxy administration firm pursuant to which the proxy administration firm performs various proxy vote related administrative services such as vote processing and recordkeeping functions. Except as noted below, the proxy administration firm for MFS and its clients, including the MFS Funds, is ISS. The proxy administration firm for MFS Development Funds, LLC is Glass, Lewis & Co., Inc. (“Glass Lewis”; Glass Lewis and ISS are each hereinafter referred to as the “Proxy Administrator”).

The Proxy Administrator receives proxy statements and proxy ballots directly or indirectly from various custodians, logs these materials into its database and matches upcoming meetings with MFS Fund and client portfolio holdings, which are inputted into the Proxy Administrator’s system by an MFS holdings data-feed. The Proxy Administrator then reconciles a list of all MFS accounts that hold shares of a company’s stock and the number of shares held on the record date by these accounts with the Proxy Administrator’s list of

 168

any upcoming shareholder’s meeting of that company. If a proxy ballot has not been received, the Proxy Administrator and/or MFS may contact the client’s custodian requesting the reason as to why a ballot has not been received. Through the use of the Proxy Administrator system, ballots and proxy material summaries for all upcoming shareholders’ meetings are available on-line to certain MFS employees and members of the MFS Proxy Voting Committee.

MFS also receives research reports and vote recommendations from proxy advisory firms. These reports are only one input among many in our voting analysis, which includes other sources of information such as proxy materials, company engagement discussions, other third-party research and data. MFS has due diligence procedures in place to help ensure that the research we receive from our proxy advisory firms is materially accurate and that we address any material conflicts of interest involving these proxy advisory firms. This due diligence includes an analysis of the adequacy and quality of the advisory firm staff, its conflict of interest policies and procedures and independent audit reports. We also review the proxy policies, methodologies and peer-group-composition methodology of our proxy advisory firms at least annually. Additionally, we also receive reports from our proxy advisory firms regarding any violations or changes to conflict of interest procedures.

2. Analyzing and Voting Proxies

Proxies are voted in accordance with these MFS Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures. The Proxy Administrator, at the prior direction of MFS, automatically votes all proxy matters that do not require the particular exercise of discretion or judgment with respect to these MFS Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures as determined by MFS. In these circumstances, if the Proxy Administrator, based on MFS' prior direction, expects to vote against management with respect to a proxy matter and MFS becomes aware that the issuer has filed or will file additional soliciting materials sufficiently in advance of the deadline for casting a vote at the meeting, MFS will consider such information when casting its vote. With respect to proxy matters that require the particular exercise of discretion or judgment, the MFS Proxy Voting Committee or its representatives considers and votes on those proxy matters. In analyzing all proxy matters, MFS uses a variety of materials and information, including, but not limited to, the issuer's proxy statement and other proxy solicitation materials (including supplemental materials), our own internal research and research and recommendations provided by other third parties (including research of the Proxy Administrator). As described herein, MFS may also determine that it is beneficial in analyzing a proxy voting matter for members of the Proxy Voting Committee or its representatives to engage with the company on such matter. MFS also uses its own internal research, the research of Proxy Administrators and/or other third party research tools and vendors to identify (i) circumstances in which a board may have approved an executive compensation plan that is excessive or poorly aligned with the portfolio company's business or its shareholders, (ii) environmental, social and governance proposals that warrant further consideration, or (iii) circumstances in which a company is not in compliance with local governance or compensation best practices. Representatives of the MFS Proxy Voting Committee review, as appropriate, votes cast to ensure conformity with these MFS Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures.

For certain types of votes (e.g. mergers and acquisitions, proxy contests and capitalization matters), MFS’ stewardship team will seek a recommendation from the MFS investment analyst that is responsible for analyzing the company and/or portfolio managers that holds the security in their portfolio.3 For certain other votes that require a case-by-case analysis per these policies (e.g., potentially excessive executive compensation issues, or certain shareholder proposals), the stewardship team will likewise consult with MFS investment analysts and/or portfolio managers. However, the MFS Proxy Voting Committee will ultimately be responsible for the manner in which all ballots are voted.

As noted above, MFS reserves the right to override the guidelines when such an override is, in MFS’ best judgment, consistent with the overall principle of voting proxies in the best long-term economic interests of MFS’ clients. Any such override of the guidelines shall be analyzed, documented and reported in accordance with the procedures set forth in these policies.

In accordance with its contract with MFS, the Proxy Administrator also generates a variety of reports for the MFS Proxy Voting Committee and makes available on-line various other types of information so that the MFS Proxy Voting Committee or its representatives may review and monitor the votes cast by the Proxy Administrator on behalf of MFS’ clients.

For those markets that utilize a “record date” to determine which shareholders are eligible to vote, MFS generally will vote all eligible shares pursuant to these guidelines regardless of whether all (or a portion of) the shares held by our clients have been sold prior to the meeting date.

3. Securities Lending

From time to time, certain MFS Funds may participate in a securities lending program. In the event MFS or its agent receives timely notice of a shareholder meeting for a US security, MFS and its agent will attempt to recall any securities on loan before the meeting’s record date so that MFS will be entitled to vote these shares. However, there may be instances in which MFS is unable to timely recall securities on loan for a US security, in which cases MFS will not be able to vote these shares. MFS will report to the appropriate board of

169

the MFS Funds those instances in which MFS is not able to timely recall the loaned securities. MFS generally does not recall non-US securities on loan because there may be insufficient advance notice of proxy materials, record dates, or vote cut-off dates to allow MFS to timely recall the shares in certain markets on an automated basis. As a result, non-US securities that are on loan will not generally be voted. If MFS receives timely notice of what MFS determines to be an unusual, significant vote for a non-US security whereas MFS shares are on loan and determines that voting is in the best long-term economic interest of shareholders, then MFS will attempt to timely recall the loaned shares.

4. Potential impediments to voting

In accordance with local law or business practices, some companies or custodians prevent the sale of shares that have been voted for a certain period beginning prior to the shareholder meeting and ending on the day following the meeting (“share blocking”). Depending on the country in which a company is domiciled, the blocking period may begin a stated number of days prior or subsequent to the meeting (e.g., one, three or five days) or on a date established by the company. While practices vary, in many countries the block period can be continued for a longer period if the shareholder meeting is adjourned and postponed to a later date. Similarly, practices vary widely as to the ability of a shareholder to have the “block” restriction lifted early (e.g., in some countries shares generally can be “unblocked” up to two days prior to the meeting whereas in other countries the removal of the block appears to be discretionary with the issuer’s transfer agent). Due to these restrictions, MFS must balance the benefits to its clients of voting proxies against the potentially serious portfolio management consequences of a reduced flexibility to sell the underlying shares at the most advantageous time. For companies in countries with share blocking periods or in markets where some custodians may block shares, the disadvantage of being unable to sell the stock regardless of changing conditions generally outweighs the advantages of voting at the shareholder meeting for routine items. Accordingly, MFS will not vote those proxies in the absence of an unusual, significant vote that outweighs the disadvantage of being unable to sell the stock.

From time to time, governments may impose economic sanctions which may prohibit us from transacting business with certain companies or individuals. These sanctions may also prohibit the voting of proxies at certain companies or on certain individuals. In such instances, MFS will not vote at certain companies or on certain individuals if it determines that doing so is in violation of the sanctions.

In limited circumstances, other market specific impediments to voting shares may limit our ability to cast votes, including, but not limited to, late delivery of proxy materials, untimely vote cut-off dates, power of attorney and share re-registration requirements, or any other unusual voting requirements. In these limited instances, MFS votes securities on a best-efforts basis in the context of the guidelines described above.

D. ENGAGEMENT

As part of its approach to stewardship MFS engages with companies in which it invests on a range of priority issues. Where sufficient progress has not been made on a particular issue of engagement, MFS may determine a vote against management may be warranted to reflect our concerns and influence for change in the best long-term economic interests of our clients.

MFS may determine that it is appropriate and beneficial to engage in a dialogue or written communication with a company or other shareholders specifically regarding certain matters on the company’s proxy statement that are of concern to shareholders, including environmental, social and governance matters. This may be to discuss and build our understanding of a certain proposal, or to provide further context to the company on our vote decision.

A company or shareholder may also seek to engage with members of the MFS Proxy Voting Committee or Stewardship Team in advance of the company’s formal proxy solicitation to review issues more generally or gauge support for certain contemplated proposals. For further information on requesting engagement with MFS on proxy voting issues or information about MFS' engagement priorities, please contact dlstewardshipteam@mfs.com.

E. RECORDS RETENTION

MFS will retain copies of these MFS Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures in effect from time to time and will retain all proxy voting reports submitted to the Board of Trustees of the MFS Funds for the period required by applicable law. Proxy solicitation materials, including electronic versions of the proxy ballots completed by representatives of the MFS Proxy Voting Committee, together with their respective notes and comments, are maintained in an electronic format by the Proxy Administrator and are accessible on-line by the MFS Proxy Voting Committee and other MFS employees. All proxy voting materials and supporting documentation, including records generated by the Proxy Administrator’s system as to proxies processed, including the dates when proxy ballots were received and submitted, and the votes on each company’s proxy issues, are retained as required by applicable law.

F. REPORTS

 170

US Registered MFS Funds

MFS publicly discloses the proxy voting records of the US registered MFS Funds on a quarterly basis. MFS will also report the results of its voting to the Board of Trustees of the US registered MFS Funds. These reports will include: (i) a summary of how votes were cast (including advisory votes on pay and “golden parachutes”); (ii) a summary of votes against management’s recommendation; (iii) a review of situations where MFS did not vote in accordance with the guidelines and the rationale therefore; (iv) a review of the procedures used by MFS to identify material conflicts of interest and any matters identified as a material conflict of interest; (v) a review of these policies and the guidelines; (vi) a review of our proxy engagement activity; (vii) a report and impact assessment of instances in which the recall of loaned securities of a US issuer was unsuccessful; and (viii) as necessary or appropriate, any proposed modifications thereto to reflect new developments in corporate governance and other issues. Based on these reviews, the Trustees of the US registered MFS Funds will consider possible modifications to these policies to the extent necessary or advisable.

Other MFS Clients

MFS may publicly disclose the proxy voting records of certain other clients (including certain MFS Funds) or the votes it casts with respect to certain matters as required by law. A report can also be printed by MFS for each client who has requested that MFS furnish a record of votes cast. The report specifies the proxy issues which have been voted for the client during the year and the position taken with respect to each issue and, upon request, may identify situations where MFS did not vote in accordance with the MFS Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures.

Firm-wide Voting Records

MFS also publicly discloses its firm-wide proxy voting records on a quarterly basis.

Except as described above, MFS generally will not divulge actual voting practices to any party other than the client or its representatives because we consider that information to be confidential and proprietary to the client. However, as noted above, MFS may determine that it is appropriate and beneficial to engage in a dialogue with a company regarding certain matters. During such dialogue with the company, MFS may disclose the vote it intends to cast in order to potentially effect positive change at a company in regards to environmental, social or governance issues.

___________________
1 MFS’ determination of “independence” may be different than that of the company, the exchange on which the company is listed, or of third party (e.g., proxy advisory firm).

2 For clarification purposes, note that MFS votes in what we believe to be the best, long-term economic interest of our clients entitled to vote at the shareholder meeting, regardless of whether other MFS clients hold “short” positions in the same issuer or whether other MFS clients hold an interest in the company that is not entitled to vote at the shareholder meeting (e.g., bond holder).
3 From time to time, due to travel schedules and other commitments, an appropriate portfolio manager or research analyst may not be available to provide a vote recommendation. If such a recommendation cannot be obtained within a reasonable time prior to the cut-off date of the shareholder meeting, the MFS Proxy Voting Committee may determine to abstain from voting.

PGIM, INC. (PGIM)

PROXY VOTING POLICIES OF THE SUBADVISER

VOTING APPROACH OF PGIM ASSET MANAGEMENT UNITS

PGIM Fixed Income. PGIM Fixed Income is a business unit of PGIM. PGIM Fixed Income’s policy is to vote proxies in the best interests of its clients. In the case of pooled accounts, the policy is to vote proxies in the best interests of the pooled account. The proxy voting policy contains detailed voting guidelines on a wide variety of issues commonly voted upon by shareholders. These guidelines reflect PGIM Fixed Income’s judgment of how to further the best interests of its clients through the shareholder or debt-holder voting process.

PGIM Fixed Income invests primarily in debt securities, thus there are few traditional proxies voted by it. PGIM Fixed Income generally votes with management on routine matters such as the appointment of accountants or the election of directors. From time to time, ballot issues arise that are not addressed by the policy or circumstances may suggest a vote not in accordance with the established guidelines. In these cases, voting decisions are made on a case-by-case basis by the applicable portfolio manager taking into consideration the potential economic impact of the proposal. Not all ballots are received by PGIM Fixed Income in advance of voting deadlines, but when ballots are received in a timely fashion, PGIM Fixed Income strives to meet its voting obligations. It cannot, however, guarantee that every proxy will be voted prior to its deadline.

With respect to non-US holdings, PGIM Fixed Income takes into account additional restrictions in some countries that might impair its ability to trade those securities or have other potentially adverse economic consequences. PGIM Fixed Income generally votes non-US securities on a best efforts basis if it determines that voting is in the best interests of its clients.

171

Occasionally, a conflict of interest may arise in connection with proxy voting. For example, the issuer of the securities being voted may also be a client of PGIM Fixed Income. When PGIM Fixed Income identifies an actual or potential material conflict of interest between the firm and its clients with respect to proxy voting, the matter is presented to senior management who will resolve such issue in consultation with the compliance and legal departments. Proxy voting is reviewed by the trade management oversight committee.

Any client may obtain a copy of PGIM Fixed Income’s proxy voting policy, guidelines and procedures, as well as the proxy voting records for that client’s securities, by contacting the account management representative responsible for the client’s account.

PGIM Quantitative Solutions LLC

Description of PGIM Quantitative Solutions Proxy Voting Policies. It is the policy of PGIM Quantitative Solutions LLC (PGIM Quantitative Solutions) to vote proxies on client securities in the best long-term economic interest of its clients (i.e., the mutual interests of clients in seeing the appreciation in value of a common investment over time). In the case of pooled accounts, PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ policy is to vote proxies on securities in such account in the best long-term economic interest of the pooled account. In the event of any actual or potential conflict of interest between PGIM Quantitative Solutions and its clients or affiliates, PGIM Quantitative Solutions votes in accordance with the policy of its proxy voting advisor rather than its own policy.

PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ proxy voting policy contains detailed voting guidelines on a wide variety of issues commonly voted upon by shareholders. These guidelines reflect PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ judgment of how to further the best long-range economic interest of its clients through the shareholder voting process. They also reflect PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ general philosophy on corporate governance matters and its approach to governance and other issues that may often arise when voting ballots on the various securities held in client accounts. PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ guidelines are not intended to limit the analysis of individual issues at specific companies nor do they indicate how it will vote in every instance. Rather, they express PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ views about various ballot issues generally, and provide insight into how it typically approaches such issues. PGIM Quantitative Solutions may consider Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) factors in its voting decisions. Where ballot issues are not addressed by PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ policy, or when circumstances may suggest a vote not in accordance with its established guidelines, PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ voting decisions are made on a case-by-case basis taking into consideration the potential economic impact of the proposal as well as any circumstances that may result in restrictions on trading the security. Case-by-case, or manual, evaluation of a ballot item entails consideration of various, specific factors as they relate to a particular issuer and/or proposed action. For example, when performing manual evaluation of a ballot item relating to executive compensation (which will generally occur if PGIM Quantitative Solutions receives research suggesting a vote “against” the item), we consider such factors as stock performance, financial position and compensation practices of the issuer relative to its peers, change in control, tax gross-up and clawback policies of the issuer, pay inequality and other corporate practices, although not all factors may be relevant or of equal significance to a specific matter. With respect to contested meetings, which we always vote on a case-by-case basis, we consider research provided by PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ proxy advisor as well as other sources of information available in the marketplace, in order to understand the issues on both sides of the contest and determine our view. With respect to mergers and acquisitions, we consider whether a fairness opinion as to valuation has been obtained. With respect to non-US holdings, PGIM Quantitative Solutions takes into account additional restrictions in some countries that might impair its ability to trade those securities or have other potentially adverse economic consequences, and generally votes non-US securities on a best efforts basis if PGIM Quantitative Solutions determines that voting is in the best economic interest of its clients. PGIM Quantitative Solutions may be unable to vote proxies in countries where clients or their custodians do not have the ability to cast votes due to lack of documentation or operational capacity, or otherwise. The Fund determines whether fund securities out on loan are to be recalled for voting purposes and PGIM Quantitative Solutions is not involved in any such decision. PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ Proxy Voting Committee includes representatives of PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ Investment, Operations, Compliance, Risk and Legal teams. This committee is responsible for interpreting the proxy voting policy, identifying conflicts of interest, and periodically assessing the effectiveness of the policies and procedures.

PGIM Quantitative Solutions utilizes the services of a third party proxy voting advisor, and has directed the proxy advisor, upon receipt of proxies, to vote in a manner consistent with PGIM Quantitative Solutions’ established proxy voting guidelines described above (assuming timely receipt of proxy materials from issuers and custodians). PGIM Quantitative Solutions conducts regular due diligence on its proxy advisor. In accordance with its obligations under the Advisers Act, PGIM Quantitative Solutions provides full disclosure of its proxy voting policy, guidelines and procedures to its clients upon their request, and will also provide to any client, upon request, the proxy voting records for that client’s securities.

T. ROWE PRICE ASSOCIATES, INC. AND CERTAIN OF ITS INVESTMENT ADVISER AFFILIATESPROXY VOTING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES

PROXY VOTING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES

RESPONSIBILITY TO VOTE PROXIES

 172

T. Rowe Price Associates, Inc. and certain of its investment adviser affiliates1 (collectively, T. Rowe Price) have adopted these Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures (Policies and Procedures) for the purpose of establishing formal policies and procedures for performing and documenting their fiduciary duty with regard to the voting of client proxies. This document is reviewed at least annually and updated as necessary.

T. Rowe Price recognizes and adheres to the principle that one of the privileges of owning stock in a company is the right to vote in the election of the company’s directors and on matters affecting certain important aspects of the company’s structure and operations that are submitted to shareholder vote. The US-registered investment companies which T. Rowe Price sponsors and serves as investment adviser (the Price Funds) as well as other investment advisory clients have delegated to T. Rowe Price certain proxy voting powers. As an investment adviser, T. Rowe Price has a fiduciary responsibility to such clients when exercising its voting authority with respect to securities held in their portfolios. T. Rowe Price reserves the right to decline to vote proxies in accordance with client-specific voting guidelines.

Fiduciary Considerations. It is the policy of T. Rowe Price that decisions with respect to proxy issues will be made in light of the anticipated impact of the issue on the desirability of investing in the portfolio company from the viewpoint of the particular advisory client or Price Fund. Proxies are voted solely in the interests of the client, Price Fund shareholders or, where employee benefit plan assets are involved, in the interests of plan participants and beneficiaries. Our intent has always been to vote proxies, where possible to do so, in a manner consistent with our fiduciary obligations and responsibilities.

One of the primary factors T. Rowe Price considers when determining the desirability of investing in a particular company is the quality and depth of its management. We recognize that a company’s management is entrusted with the day-to-day operations of the company, as well as its long-term direction and strategic planning, subject to the oversight of the company’s board of directors. Accordingly, our proxy voting guidelines are not intended to substitute our judgment for management with respect to the company’s day-to-day operations. Rather, our proxy voting guidelines are designed to promote accountability of a company’s management and board of directors to its shareholders; to align the interests of management with those of shareholders; and to encourage companies to adopt best practices in terms of their corporate governance and disclosure. In addition to our proxy voting guidelines, we rely on a company’s public filings, its board recommendations, its track record, country-specific best practices codes, our research providers and – most importantly – our investment professionals’ views in making voting decisions. T. Rowe Price investment personnel do not coordinate with investment personnel of its affiliated investment adviser, TRPIM, with respect to proxy voting decisions.

T. Rowe Price seeks to vote all of its clients’ proxies. In certain circumstances, T. Rowe Price may determine that refraining from voting a proxy is in a client’s best interest, such as when the cost of voting outweighs the expected benefit to the client. For example, the practicalities and costs involved with international investing may make it impossible at times, and at other times disadvantageous, to vote proxies in every instance.

ADMINISTRATION OF POLICIES AND PROCEDURES

Environmental, Social and Governance Investing Committee. T. Rowe Price’s Environmental, Social and Governance Investing Committee (TRPA ESG Investing Committee or the Committee) is responsible for establishing positions with respect to corporate governance and other proxy issues. Certain delegated members of the Committee also review questions and respond to inquiries from clients and mutual fund shareholders pertaining to proxy issues. While the Committee sets voting guidelines and serves as a resource for T. Rowe Price portfolio management, it does not have proxy voting authority for any Price Fund or advisory client. Rather, voting authority and responsibility is held by the Chairperson of the Price Fund’s Investment Advisory Committee or the advisory client’s portfolio manager. The Committee is also responsible for the oversight of third-party proxy services firms that T. Rowe Price engages to facilitate the proxy voting process.

Global Proxy Operations Team. The Global Proxy Operations team is responsible for administering the proxy voting process as set forth in the Policies and Procedures.

Governance Team. Our Governance team is responsible for reviewing the proxy agendas for all upcoming meetings and making company-specific recommendations to our global industry analysts and portfolio managers with regard to the voting decisions in their portfolios.

Responsible Investment Team. Our Responsible Investment team oversees the integration of environmental and social factors into our investment processes across asset classes. In formulating vote recommendations for matters of an environmental or social nature, the Governance team frequently consults with the appropriate sector analyst from the Responsible Investment team.

HOW PROXIES ARE REVIEWED, PROCESSED AND VOTED

173

In order to facilitate the proxy voting process, T. Rowe Price has retained Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS) as an expert in the proxy voting and corporate governance area. ISS specializes in providing a variety of fiduciary-level proxy advisory and voting services. These services include custom vote recommendations, research, vote execution, and reporting. Services provided by ISS do not include automated processing of votes on our behalf using the ISS Benchmark Policy recommendations. Instead, in order to reflect T. Rowe Price’s issue-by-issue voting guidelines as approved each year by the TRPA ESG Investing Committee, ISS maintains and implements custom voting policies for the Price Funds and other advisory client accounts.

Meeting Notification

T. Rowe Price utilizes ISS’ voting agent services to notify us of upcoming shareholder meetings for portfolio companies held in client accounts and to transmit votes to the various custodian banks of our clients. ISS tracks and reconciles our clients’ holdings against incoming proxy ballots. If ballots do not arrive on time, ISS procures them from the appropriate custodian or proxy distribution agent. Meeting and record date information is updated daily and transmitted to T. Rowe Price through ProxyExchange, an ISS application.

Vote Determination

Each day, ISS delivers into T. Rowe Price’s customized ProxyExchange environment a comprehensive summary of upcoming meetings, proxy proposals, publications discussing key proxy voting issues, and custom vote recommendations to assist us with proxy research and processing. The final authority and responsibility for proxy voting decisions remains with T. Rowe Price. Decisions with respect to proxy matters are made primarily in light of the anticipated impact of the issue on the desirability of investing in the company from the perspective of our clients.

Portfolio managers execute their responsibility to vote proxies in different ways. Some have decided to vote their proxies generally in line with the guidelines as set by the TRPA ESG Investing Committee. Others review the customized vote recommendations and approve them before the votes are cast. Portfolio managers have access to current reports summarizing all proxy votes in their client accounts. Portfolio managers who vote their proxies inconsistent with T. Rowe Price guidelines are required to document the rationale for their votes. The Global Proxy Operations team is responsible for maintaining this documentation and assuring that it adequately reflects the basis for any vote which is contrary to our proxy voting guidelines.

T. Rowe Price Voting Guidelines

Specific proxy voting guidelines have been adopted by the TRPA ESG Investing Committee for all regularly occurring categories of management and shareholder proposals. A detailed set of proxy voting guidelines is available on the T. Rowe Price website, www.troweprice.com/esgpolicy.

Global Portfolio Companies

The TRPA ESG Investing Committee has developed custom international proxy voting guidelines based on our proxy advisor’s general global policies, regional codes of corporate governance, and our own views as investors in these markets. We apply a two-tier approach to determining and applying global proxy voting policies. The first tier establishes baseline policy guidelines for the most fundamental issues, which span the corporate governance spectrum without regard to a company’s domicile. The second tier takes into account various idiosyncrasies of different countries, making allowances for standard market practices, as long as they do not violate the fundamental goals of good corporate governance. The goal is to enhance shareholder value through effective use of the shareholder franchise, recognizing that application of a single set of policies is not appropriate for all markets.

Fixed Income and Passively Managed Strategies

Proxy voting for our fixed income and indexed portfolios is administered by the Global Proxy Operations team using T. Rowe Price’s guidelines as set by the TRPA ESG Investing Committee. Indexed strategies generally vote in line with the T. Rowe Price guidelines. Fixed income strategies generally follow the proxy vote determinations on security holdings held by our equity accounts unless the matter is specific to a particular fixed income security such as consents, restructurings, or reorganization proposals.

Shareblocking

Shareblocking is the practice in certain countries of “freezing” shares for trading purposes in order to vote proxies relating to those shares. In markets where shareblocking applies, the custodian or sub-custodian automatically freezes shares prior to a shareholder meeting once a proxy has been voted. T. Rowe Price’s policy is generally to refrain from voting shares in shareblocking countries unless the matter has compelling economic consequences that outweigh the loss of liquidity in the blocked shares.

Securities on Loan

The Price Funds and our institutional clients may participate in securities lending programs to generate income for their portfolios. Generally, the voting rights pass with the securities on loan; however, lending agreements give the lender the right to terminate the loan and pull back the loaned shares provided sufficient notice is given to the custodian bank in advance of the applicable deadline. T. Rowe Price’s policy is generally not to vote securities on loan unless we determine there is a material voting event that

 174

could affect the value of the loaned securities. In this event, we have the discretion to pull back the loaned securities in order to cast a vote at an upcoming shareholder meeting. A monthly monitoring process is in place to review securities on loan and how they may affect proxy voting.

Monitoring and Resolving Conflicts of Interest

The TRPA ESG Investing Committee is also responsible for monitoring and resolving potential material conflicts between the interests of T. Rowe Price and those of its clients with respect to proxy voting. We have adopted safeguards to ensure that our proxy voting is not influenced by interests other than those of our fund shareholders and other investment advisory clients. While membership on the Committee is diverse, it does not include individuals whose primary duties relate to client relationship management, marketing, or sales. Since T. Rowe Price’s voting guidelines are predetermined by the Committee, application of the guidelines by portfolio managers to vote client proxies should in most instances adequately address any potential conflicts of interest. However, consistent with the terms of the Policies and Procedures, which allow portfolio managers to vote proxies opposite our general voting guidelines, the Committee regularly reviews all such proxy votes that are inconsistent with the proxy voting guidelines to determine whether the portfolio manager’s voting rationale appears reasonable. The Committee also assesses whether any business or other material relationships between T. Rowe Price and a portfolio company (unrelated to the ownership of the portfolio company’s securities) could have influenced an inconsistent vote on that company’s proxy. Issues raising potential conflicts of interest are referred to designated members of the Committee for immediate resolution prior to the time T. Rowe Price casts its vote.

With respect to personal conflicts of interest, T. Rowe Price’s Code of Ethics and Conduct requires all employees to avoid placing themselves in a “compromising position” in which their interests may conflict with those of our clients and restrict their ability to engage in certain outside business activities. Portfolio managers or Committee members with a personal conflict of interest regarding a particular proxy vote must recuse themselves and not participate in the voting decisions with respect to that proxy.

Specific Conflict of Interest Situations - Voting of T. Rowe Price Group, Inc. common stock (sym: TROW) by certain T. Rowe Price Index Funds will be done in all instances in accordance with T. Rowe Price voting guidelines and votes inconsistent with the guidelines will not be permitted. In the event that there is no previously established guideline for a specific voting issue appearing on the T. Rowe Price Group proxy, the Price Funds will abstain on that voting item. In addition, T. Rowe Price has voting authority for proxies of the holdings of certain Price Funds that invest in other Price Funds. In cases where the underlying fund of an investing Price Fund, including a fund-of-funds, holds a proxy vote, T. Rowe Price will mirror vote the fund shares held by the upper-tier fund in the same proportion as the votes cast by the shareholders of the underlying funds (other than the T. Rowe Price Reserve Investment Fund).

Limitations on Voting Proxies of Banks

T. Rowe Price has obtained relief from the US Federal Reserve Board (the FRB Relief) which permits, subject to a number of conditions, T. Rowe Price to acquire in the aggregate on behalf of its clients, 10% or more of the total voting stock of a bank, bank holding company, savings and loan holding company or savings association (each a Bank), not to exceed a 15% aggregate beneficial ownership maximum in such Bank. One such condition affects the manner in which T. Rowe Price will vote its clients’ shares of a Bank in excess of 10% of the Bank’s total voting stock (Excess Shares). The FRB Relief requires that T. Rowe Price use its best efforts to vote the Excess Shares in the same proportion as all other shares voted, a practice generally referred to as “mirror voting,” or in the event that such efforts to mirror vote are unsuccessful, Excess Shares will not be voted. With respect to a shareholder vote for a Bank of which T. Rowe Price has aggregate beneficial ownership of greater than 10% on behalf of its clients, T. Rowe Price will determine which of its clients’ shares are Excess Shares on a pro rata basis across all of its clients’ portfolios for which T. Rowe Price has the power to vote proxies.2

REPORTING, RECORD RETENTION AND OVERSIGHT

The TRPA ESG Investing Committee, and certain personnel under the direction of the Committee, perform the following oversight and assurance functions, among others, over T. Rowe Price’s proxy voting: (1) periodically samples proxy votes to ensure that they were cast in compliance with T. Rowe Price’s proxy voting guidelines; (2) reviews, no less frequently than annually, the adequacy of the Policies and Procedures to make sure that they have been implemented effectively, including whether they continue to be reasonably designed to ensure that proxies are voted in the best interests of our clients; (3) performs due diligence on whether a retained proxy advisory firm has the capacity and competency to adequately analyze proxy issues, including the adequacy and quality of the proxy advisory firm’s staffing and personnel and its policies; and (4) oversees any retained proxy advisory firms and their procedures regarding their capabilities to (i) produce proxy research that is based on current and accurate information and (ii) identify and address any conflicts of interest and any other considerations that we believe would be appropriate in considering the nature and quality of the services provided by the proxy advisory firm.

175

T. Rowe Price will furnish Vote Summary Reports, upon request, to its institutional clients that have delegated proxy voting authority. The report specifies the portfolio companies, meeting dates, proxy proposals, and votes which have been cast for the client during the period and the position taken with respect to each issue. Reports normally cover quarterly or annual periods and are provided to such clients upon request.

T. Rowe Price retains proxy solicitation materials, memoranda regarding votes cast in opposition to the position of a company’s management, and documentation on shares voted differently. In addition, any document which is material to a proxy voting decision such as the T. Rowe Price proxy voting guidelines, Committee meeting materials, and other internal research relating to voting decisions are maintained in accordance with applicable requirements.

1This document is not applicable to T. Rowe Price Investment Management, Inc. (TRPIM). TRPIM votes proxies independently from the other T. Rowe Price-related investment advisers and has adopted its own proxy voting policy.

2The FRB Relief and the process for voting of Excess Shares described herein apply to the aggregate beneficial ownership of T. Rowe Price and TRPIM.

WILLIAM BLAIR INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT, LLC (WILLIAM BLAIR)

Under rule 206(4)-6, it is a fraudulent, deceptive, or manipulative act, practice or course of business within the meaning of section 206(4) of the Act for an investment adviser to exercise voting authority with respect to client securities, unless:

I.

the adviser has adopted and implemented written policies and procedures that are reasonably designed to ensure that the adviser votes proxies in the best interest of its clients

II.

the adviser describes its proxy voting procedures to its clients and provides copies on request, and

III

the adviser discloses to clients how they may obtain information on how the adviser voted their proxies.

This statement sets forth the proxy voting policy and procedures of William Blair. It is provided to all covered clients as described below even if William Blair currently does not have authority to vote proxies for their account.

The Department of Labor (DOL) has stated that the fiduciary act of managing plan assets by an investment adviser generally includes the authority to vote proxies for shares held by a plan unless the plan documents reserve this authority to some other entity. ERISA section 3(38) defines an investment manager as any fiduciary who is registered as an investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. William Blair is a registered investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) requires registered investment advisers to implement a proxy voting policy and procedures with respect to the voting of proxies for its advisory clients. Registered investment advisers are required to identify potential conflicts involved in the voting of proxies and meet specific recordkeeping and disclosure requirements. On June 30, 2014, the staff of the SEC Divisions of Investment Management and Corporation Finance issued Staff Legal Bulletin No. 20, which provides guidance on investment advisers’ responsibilities in voting client proxies and retaining proxy advisory firms.  On August 21, 2019, the staff of the SEC Division of Investment Management issued Release Nos. IA-5325 and IC-33605, Commission Guidance Regarding Proxy Voting Responsibilities of Investment Advisers. This policy is intended to comply with the applicable rules and guidance of the DOL and the SEC.

General Policy

William Blair shall vote the proxies of its clients solely in the best interest of their participants and beneficiaries and for the exclusive purpose of providing benefits to them, and shall not place William Blair’s own interests ahead of the interests of its clients. William Blair shall act with the care, skill, prudence and diligence under the circumstances then prevailing that a prudent person acting in a like capacity and familiar with such matters would use in the conduct of an enterprise of a like character and with like aims. William Blair is not responsible for voting proxies it does not receive in a timely manner. However, William Blair will make reasonable efforts to obtain missing proxies. For clients participating in a securities lending program via their custodian, William Blair will not be eligible to vote proxies for the portion of shares on loan.

William Blair has adopted the Voting Guidelines of an independent proxy advisory firm (the Proxy Administrator)1. All proxies are reviewed by the Proxy Administrator, subject to the requirement that all votes shall be cast solely in the best interest of the clients in their capacity as shareholders of a company. The Proxy Administrator votes the proxies according to the Voting Guidelines, which are designed to address matters typically arising in proxy votes. In instances where William Blair has implemented a client provided proxy voting policy, William Blair will vote in accordance with the client’s policy at all times even if the client’s policy is inconsistent with William Blair’s vote. In the case when nominee voting is not allowed it may be impractical for William Blair to participate in those particular votes.

William Blair does not intend the Voting Guidelines to be exhaustive; hundreds of issues appear on proxy ballots and it is neither practical nor productive to fashion a guideline for each. Rather, the Voting Guidelines are intended to cover the most significant and frequent proxy issues that arise. For issues not covered or to be voted on a “Case-by-Case” basis by the Voting Guidelines, the Proxy

 176

Administrator will consult the Proxy Committee. In addition, portfolio managers and analysts covering specific companies are responsible for monitoring significant corporate developments, including proxy proposals submitted to shareholders and notifying the Proxy Committee of circumstances where the interests of William Blair’s clients may warrant a vote contrary to the Voting Guidelines. In such instances, the portfolio manager or analyst will submit a written rationale to the Proxy Committee. In each case, the Proxy Committee will review the issues and will vote each proxy based on information from the company, our internal analysts and third party research sources, in the best interests of the clients in their capacity as shareholders of a company. The Proxy Committee consists of certain representatives from the Investment Management Department, including management, portfolio manager(s), analyst(s), operations, as well as a representative from the Compliance Department. The Proxy Committee reviews the Proxy Voting Policy and procedures annually and shall revise its guidelines as events warrant.

Conflicts of Interest Policy

William Blair is sensitive to conflicts of interest that may arise in the proxy decision-making process and has identified the following potential conflicts of interest:

I.

An affiliate of William Blair has received investment banking compensation from the company in the preceding 12 months or anticipates receiving investment banking compensation in the next three months

II.

A principal or employee of William Blair or an affiliate currently serves on the company’s Board of Directors

III.

William Blair, its principals, employees and affiliates, in the aggregate, own 1% or more of the company’s outstanding shares

IV.

The Company is a client of William Blair

In the event that any of the above potential conflicts of interest arise, the Proxy Committee will vote all proxies for that company in the following manner:

I.

If our Voting Guidelines indicate a vote “For” or “Against” a specific issue William Blair will continue to vote according to the Voting Guidelines

II.

If our Voting Guidelines have no recommendation or indicate a vote on a “Case-by-Case” basis, William Blair will vote consistent with the voting recommendation provided by the Proxy Administrator

Oversight of Proxy Administrator

William Blair believes that contracting with the Proxy Administrator to provide services including:

I.

Providing research and analysis regarding the matters subject to a vote

II.

Promulgating general voting guidelines

III.

Making voting recommendations on specific matters subject to vote

can reduce burdens for William Blair and potentially reduce costs for William Blair clients as compared to conducting them in-house.

William Blair shall provide reasonable oversight of the Proxy Administrator. In providing oversight, William Blair will seek to ascertain whether the Proxy Administrator has the capacity and competency to adequately analyze proxy issues. Specific oversight responsibilities will include the following:

I.

On at least an annual basis, the Proxy Committee will assess:

a.

Whether the Proxy Administrator has the competency and capacity to adequately analyze the matters for which William Blair is responsible for voting, including the adequacy and quality of the Proxy Administrator’s staffing, personnel and technology

b.

Assess whether the Proxy Administrator has adequate policies and procedures to:

i.

Enable it to make proxy voting recommendations based on current and accurate information, including whether it has an effective process for seeking timely input from issuers and its clients with respect to, for example, its proxy voting policies, methodologies, and peer group constructions, including for “say-on-pay” votes

177

ii.

If peer group constructions are a component of the evaluation does the Proxy Administrator incorporate appropriate input in formulating its methodologies for construction of peer groups, including taking into account unique characteristics of the issuer including, to the extent available,

1.

The issuer’s size

2.

Its governance structure

3.

Its industry and any particular practices unique to that industry

4.

Its history

5.

Its financial performance

iii.

Identify and address conflicts of interest relating to its voting recommendations, including:

1.

Conflicts relating to the provision of proxy voting recommendations and proxy voting services generally

2.

Conflicts relating to activities other than proxy voting recommendations and proxy voting services generally

3.

Conflicts presented by certain affiliations, including whether a third party with significant influence over the Proxy Administrator has taken a position on a particular voting issue or voting issues more generally

iv.

Are the Proxy Administrator’s methodologies used in formulating recommendations adequately disclosed such that William Blair can understand the factors underlying the recommendation

v.

Identify the nature of any third-party information sources the Proxy Administrator uses as a basis for its recommendations and when and how it engages with issuers and third parties

vi.

Provide adequate disclosure of the Proxy Administrator’s actual and potential conflicts of interest with respect to the services it provides to William Blair, including whether the Proxy Administrator has provided consulting services to an issuer, and, if so, any compensation paid or whether a proponent of a shareholder proposal or an affiliate of the proponent is or has been a client of the Proxy Administrator

II.

William Blair personnel responsible for the administration of proxy voting shall periodically review a sample of votes recommended by the Proxy Administrator for consistency with the Voting Guidelines and report any inconsistencies to the Proxy Committee. The sample should include proxy votes that relate to proposals that may require more issuer-specific analysis (e.g. mergers and acquisitions, dissolutions, conversions or consolidations), to assist in evaluating whether William Blair’s voting determinations are consistent with its voting policies and procedures and in its clients’ best interest.

III.

William Blair personnel shall periodically review a sample of votes before the votes are cast for consistency with these procedures and client best interest which may include:

a.

A sample of “pre-populated” votes

b.

Consideration of additional information that may become available regarding a particular proposal, which may include an issuer or shareholder proponent’s additional definitive proxy materials or other information conveyed to William Blair that could reasonably be expected to affect William Blair’s voting determination

c.

Matters where William Blair’s policies do not address how it should vote a particular matter, or whether the matter is highly contested or controversial

IV.

William Blair personnel responsible for proxy voting shall periodically assess the extent to which potential factual errors, potential incompleteness, or potential methodological weaknesses in the Proxy Administrator’s analysis (that the investment adviser becomes aware of and deems credible and relevant to its voting determinations) materially affected the Proxy Administrator’s research or recommendations that the investment adviser utilized.

V.

William Blair personnel responsible for proxy voting shall periodically inquire whether the Proxy Administrator has learned that any recommendation was based on a factual errors, potential incompleteness, or potential methodological weaknesses in the Proxy

 178

Administrator’s analysis, and, if so, William Blair shall investigate the factual errors, potential incompleteness, or potential methodological weaknesses and evaluate whether the Proxy Administrator is taking steps to mitigate making such errors in the future and report any such errors, as well as their resolution to the Proxy committee

VI.

William Blair personnel responsible for proxy voting shall consider the effectiveness of the Proxy Administrator’s policies and procedures for obtaining current and accurate information relevant to matters included in its research and on which it makes voting recommendations. As part of this assessment, William Blair should consider the following:

a.

The Proxy Administrator’s engagement with issuers, including the firm’s process for ensuring that it has complete and accurate information about the issuer and each particular matter, and the firm’s process, if any, for investment advisers to access the issuer’s views about the firm’s voting recommendations in a timely and efficient manner

b.

The Proxy Administrator’s efforts to correct any identified material deficiencies in the proxy advisory firm’s analysis

c.

The Proxy Administrator’s disclosure regarding the sources of information and methodologies used in formulating voting recommendations or executing voting instructions

d.

The Proxy Administrator’s consideration of factors unique to a specific issuer or proposal when evaluating a matter subject to a shareholder vote

VII.

William Blair personnel responsible for proxy voting shall require the Proxy Administrator to update on business changes that may impact the Proxy Administrator’s capacity and competency to provide proxy voting advice or conflict of interest policies and procedures

International Markets and Share Blocking Policy

In some cases proxy votes cast by William Blair for clients may be rejected in certain markets. Some non-US markets have additional requirements for custodians in order to process votes in those markets. Two specific cases include Power of Attorney documentation and Split Voting. Power of Attorney documentation authorizes a local agent to facilitate the voting instruction on behalf of the client in the local market. If the appropriate documentation is not available for use, a vote instruction may be rejected. Split Voting occurs when a custodian utilizes an omnibus account to aggregate multiple customer accounts for voting into a single voting record. If one portion of the holdings would like to vote in one manner (“FOR”) and another portion would like to vote in another manner (“AGAINST”), the custodian needs to ensure they are authorized to split the vote for an agenda item in certain markets.

In international markets where share blocking applies, William Blair typically will not, but reserve the right to, vote proxies due to liquidity constraints. Share blocking is the “freezing” of shares for trading purposes at the custodian/sub-custodian bank level in order to vote proxies. Share blocking typically takes place between 1 and 20 days before an upcoming shareholder meeting, depending on the market. While shares are frozen, they may not be traded. Therefore, the potential exists for a pending trade to fail if trade settlement falls on a date during the blocking period. William Blair shall not subordinate the interests of participants and beneficiaries to unrelated objectives.

Recordkeeping and Disclosure

Pursuant to this policy, William Blair will retain: 1) the Proxy Voting Policy Statement and Procedures; 2) all proxy statements received regarding client securities 3) records of all votes cast on behalf of clients; 4) records of client requests for proxy voting information, and 5) any documents prepared by William Blair that are material to making a decision how to vote, or that memorialize the basis for the decision.

Upon a client’s request to the Proxy Administrator, William Blair will make available to its clients a report on proxy votes cast on their behalf. These proxy-voting reports will demonstrate William Blair’s compliance with its responsibilities and will facilitate clients’ monitoring of how their securities were voted.

The Proxy Voting Policy Statement and Procedures will be provided with each advisory contract and will also be described and provided with William Blair’s Form ADV, Part 2A. With respect to the William Blair Funds, the policies and procedures used to determine how to vote proxies relating to securities held in their portfolios will be reflected in the Statement of Additional Information.

179

 

This page intentionally left blank

 

This page intentionally left blank