About this report The PRI Reporting Framework helps to build a common language and industry standard for reporting responsible investment activities. Public RI Reports provide accountability and transparency on signatories’ responsible investment activities and support dialogue within signatories’ organisations, as well as with their clients, beneficiaries and other stakeholders. This Public RI Report is an export of the signatory’s responses to the PRI Reporting Framework during the 2021 reporting period. It includes the signatory’s responses to mandatory indicators, as well as responses to voluntary indicators that the signatory has agreed to make public. The information is presented exactly as it was reported. Where an indicator offered a multiple-choice response, all options that were available to select from are included for context. While presenting the information verbatim results in lengthy reports, the approach is informed by signatory feedback that signatories prefer that the PRI does not summarise the information. Context In consultation with signatories, between 2018 and 2020 the PRI extensively reviewed the Reporting and Assessment processes and set the ambitious objective of launching in 2021 a completely new investor Reporting Framework, together with a new reporting tool. We ran the new investor Reporting and Assessment process as a pilot in its first year, and such process included providing additional opportunities for signatories to provide feedback on the Reporting Framework, the online reporting tool and the resulting reports. The feedback from this pilot phase has been, and is continuing to be analysed, in order to identify any improvements that can be included in future reporting cycles. PRI disclaimer This document presents information reported directly by signatories in the 2021 reporting cycle. This information has not been audited by the PRI or any other party acting on its behalf. While this information is believed to be reliable, no representations or warranties are made as to the accuracy of the information presented. The PRI has taken reasonable action to ensure that data submitted by signatories in the reporting tool is reflected in their official PRI reports accurately. However, it is possible that small data inaccuracies and/or gaps remain, and the PRI shall not be responsible or liable for such inaccuracies and gaps. 2

Table of Contents Module/Indicator Page Senior Leadership Statement (SLS) 4 Organisational Overview (OO) 8 Investment and Stewardship Policy (ISP) 37 Manager Selection, Appointment and Monitoring (SAM) 84 Listed Equity (LE) 102 Fixed Income (FI) 120 Infrastructure (INF) 137 3

Senior Leadership Statement (SLS) Senior leadership statement Our commitment Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle SLS 1 S1 CORE N/A N/A PUBLIC Our commitment GENERAL Why does your organisation engage in responsible investment? What is your organisation’s overall approach to responsible investment? What are the main differences between your organisation’s approach to responsible investment in its ESG practice and in other practices, across asset classes? We started our sustainable investing journey 20 years ago and were early to sign the PRI in 2007. We believe that sustainable investing can generate positive performance not just for our clients, but for the community at large. We aim to integrate environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors throughout our entire investment value chain to better manage risk and generate sustainable, long-term returns. Given the diversity of investors’ objectives and requirements we provide sustainable investing processes with a broad range of approaches, adaptable to different levels of ESG incorporation and client preferences. These enhance our clients’ investment decisions while helping create benefits for society as a whole. As an active investor, research is core to our ability to generate returns. We have been able to demonstrate that ESG research can be an important indicator of future performance. We have an active programme of engagement and stewardship and our proprietary ESG research is available to all investors across AllianzGI. Sustainable investing for AllianzGI includes four broad categories: Integrated ESG, Sustainable, SDG-aligned and Impact Investing. 4

Annual overview Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle SLS 1 S2 CORE N/A N/A PUBLIC Annual overview GENERAL Discuss your organisation’s progress during the reporting year on the responsible investment issue you consider most relevant or material to your organisation or its assets. Reflect on your performance with respect to your organisation’s responsible investment objectives and targets during the reporting year. This might involve e.g. outlining your single most important achievement, or describing your general progress, on topics such as the following: refinement of ESG analysis and incorporation stewardship activities with investees and/or with policy makers collaborative engagements attainment of responsible investment certifications and/or awards In 2020, we embarked on an ambitious program to strengthen our sustainability value proposition. We are building on a strong foundation in sustainable investing and aim to become a shaper of sustainable investing solutions across public and private markets – leading clients and companies on an inclusive transition pathway to a sustainable future. This will significantly enhance our overall sustainable investment offering. The senior hire of Matt Christensen as Global Head of Sustainable and Impact Investing at the end of 2020 marks an important further milestone in our sustainability roadmap. He succeeded Beatrix Anton-Groenemeyer, who stepped down as CSO at the end of 2020. In his role he aims to accelerate the growth of Impact Investing as part of the company’s growing private markets platform; lead the continued integration of ESG factors across our existing range of public markets products, including stewardship activities; and support the development of new Sustainable products. Participating in 10,183 (2019: 9,532) shareholder meetings over the course of 2020, AllianzGI voted against, withheld or abstained from at least one agenda item at 72% (2019: 77%) of all meetings globally. It opposed 23% (2019: 24%) of all resolutions globally. These figures, as well as an increase in the number of meetings voted at, reflect our highly active and globally consistent approach to stewardship and a willingness to vote against proposals that do not meet our expectations of investee companies as well as fulfilling our duty to act in the interests of clients by considering each proposal on merit. We have been recognized by Greenwich Associates as the leading ESG Investment Manager for Institutional Clients in Continental Europe in 2020. Also noteworthy to mention is that AllianzGI has been shortlisted for 2020 PRI Awards in the category ‘Real-world impact initiative of the year’ for its innovative work in blended finance. 5

Next steps Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle SLS 1 S3 CORE N/A N/A PUBLIC Next steps GENERAL What specific steps has your organisation outlined to advance your commitment to responsible investment in the next two years? • Substantial conversion of traditional strategies into sustainable products • Introduction of a dedicated climate engagement program to foster climate transition and commitment to Net-Zero Asset Manager initiative • Scale SDG-aligned and impact investment platforms • Build out our ESG advisory capability to provide holistic sustainability advice • By the end of Q1/2021 we target to have all assets managed by us classified into one of our sustainability approaches Integrated ESG, Sustainable, SDG aligned, Impact or ESG risk assessed Endorsement Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle SLS 1 S4 CORE N/A N/A PUBLIC Endorsement GENERAL The Senior Leadership Statement has been prepared and/or reviewed by the undersigned and reflects our organisation-wide commitment and approach to responsible investment. Name Deborah Zurkow Position Global Head of Investments Organisation's name Allianz Global Investors ◉ This endorsement is for the Senior Leadership Statement only and is not an endorsement of the information reported by Allianz Global Investors in the various modules of the Reporting Framework. The Senior Leadership Statement is simply provided as a general overview of Allianz Global Investors's responsible investment approach. The Senior Leadership Statement does not constitute advice and should not be relied upon as such, and is not a substitute for the skill, judgement and experience of any third parties, their management, employees, advisors and/or clients when making investment and other business decisions. 6

Organisational Overview (OO) Organisational information Categorisation Type of PRI Indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection indicator Principle Signatory Multiple, see OO 1 CORE PUBLIC Categorisation GENERAL category guidance Select the type that best describes your organisation or the services you provide. (1) This is our only (or primary) (O) Fund management type (2) This is an additional (P) Fund of funds, manager of managers or sub-advised products (secondary) type (2) This is an additional (Q) Execution and advisory (secondary) type Subsidiary information Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle OO 2 CORE N/A OO 2.1 PUBLIC Subsidiary information GENERAL Does your organisation have subsidiaries that are also PRI signatories in their own right? ○ (A) Yes ◉ (B) No 7

Reporting year Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle OO 3 CORE N/A N/A PUBLIC Reporting year GENERAL Indicate the year-end date for your reporting year. Month Day Year Reporting year end date: December 31 2020 Assets under management All asset classes Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle OO 4 CORE OO 4.1, OO 4.2 N/A PUBLIC All asset classes GENERAL What were your total assets under management (AUM) at the end of the indicated reporting year? Provide the amount in USD. (A) AUM of your organisation, US$ 712,453,574,877.00 including subsidiaries (C) AUM subject to execution, advisory, custody, or research US$ 75,720,644,684.00 advisory only 8

Asset breakdown Type of PRI Indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection indicator Principle Multiple, see Multiple, see Asset OO 5 CORE PUBLIC GENERAL guidance guidance breakdown Provide a percentage breakdown of your total assets under management at the end of your indicated reporting year. Percentage of AUM (A) Listed equity – internal 10-50% (B) Listed equity – external 0-10% (C) Fixed income – internal 50-75% (D) Fixed income – external 0-10% (E) Private equity – internal 0.0% (F) Private equity – external 0-10% (G) Real estate – internal 0.0% (H) Real estate – external 0.0% (I) Infrastructure – internal 0-10% (J) Infrastructure – external 0-10% (K) Hedge funds – internal 0.0% (L) Hedge funds – external 0.0% (M) Forestry – internal 0.0% (N) Forestry – external 0.0% (O) Farmland – internal 0.0% 9

(P) Farmland – external 0.0% (Q) Other – internal, please specify: 0-10% . (R) Other – external, please 0.0% specify: (S) Off-balance sheet – internal 0.0% (T) Off-balance sheet – external 0.0% Type of Dependent Indicator Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle indicator on Multiple, see Asset OO 5.1 CORE OO 5 PUBLIC GENERAL guidance breakdown Provide a breakdown of your organisation's externally managed assets between segregated mandates and pooled funds or investments. (3) Private (1) Listed equity (2) Fixed income (5) Infrastructure equity (A) Segregated mandate(s) 0.0% 0.0% >75% >75% (B) Pooled fund(s) or pooled >75% >75% 0.0% 0.0% investment(s) 10

Type of Dependent Indicator Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle indicator on Multiple, see Asset OO 5.2 LE CORE OO 5, OO 5.1 PUBLIC GENERAL guidance breakdown Provide a further breakdown of your listed equity assets. (C) External allocation (A) Internal allocation – pooled (1) Passive equity 0.0% 10-50% (2) Active – quantitative 10-50% 0.0% (3) Active – fundamental >75% 50-75% (4) Investment trusts (REITs and similar publicly quoted 0.0% 0.0% vehicles) (5) Other, please specify: 0.0% 0.0% 0 Type of Dependent Indicator Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle indicator on Multiple, see Asset OO 5.2 FI CORE OO 5, OO 5.1 PUBLIC GENERAL guidance breakdown Provide a further breakdown of your fixed income assets. (A) Internal allocation (C) External allocation – pooled (1) Passive – SSA 0.0% 0-10% (2) Passive – corporate 0.0% 0-10% (3) Passive – securitised 0.0% 0.0% 11

(4) Active – SSA 10-50% 10-50% (5) Active – corporate 10-50% 50-75% (6) Active – securitised 0-10% 0.0% (7) Private debt 10-50% 0.0% Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle OO 5.2 PE CORE OO 5, OO 5.1 N/A PUBLIC Asset breakdown GENERAL Provide a further breakdown of your private equity assets. (B) External allocation – segregated (1) Venture capital 0-10% (2) Growth capital 0-10% (3) (Leveraged) buyout >75% (4) Distressed, turnaround or 0.0% special situations (5) Secondaries 0-10% (6) Other, please specify: 0-10% Mezzanine 12

Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle OO 5.2 INF CORE OO 5, OO 5.1 N/A PUBLIC Asset breakdown GENERAL Provide a further breakdown of your infrastructure assets. (B) External allocation (A) Internal allocation – segregated (1) Data infrastructure 0-10% 0.0% (2) Energy and water resources 10-50% 10-50% (3) Environmental services 0.0% 0.0% (4) Network utilities 0-10% 10-50% (5) Power generation (excl. 0.0% 0.0% renewables) (6) Renewable power 10-50% 10-50% (7) Social infrastructure 0-10% 10-50% (8) Transport 10-50% 10-50% (9) Other, please specify: 0.0% 0.0% NA 13

ESG strategies Listed equity Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle OO 6 LE CORE OO 5.2 LE OO 6.1 LE, LE 13 PUBLIC Listed equity 1 Which ESG incorporation strategy and/or combination of strategies do you apply to your internally managed active listed equity? Percentage out of total internally managed active listed equity: (A) Screening alone 0.0% (B) Thematic alone 0.0% (C) Integration alone 25-50% (D) Screening and integration 50-75% (E) Thematic and integration 0.0% (F) Screening and thematic 0.0% (G) All three strategies combined 0.0% (H) None 0.0% Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle OO 6.1 LE CORE OO 6 LE LE 8 PUBLIC Listed equity 1 What type of screening is applied to your internally managed active listed equity assets? 14

Percentage coverage out of your total listed equities where screening strategy is applied (A) Positive/best-in-class 0.0% screening only (B) Negative screening only >75% (C) A combination of positive/best-in-class and 0-25% negative screening Fixed income Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle OO 6 FI CORE OO 5.2 FI Multiple, see guidance PUBLIC Fixed income 1 Which ESG incorporation strategy and/or combination of strategies do you apply to your internally managed active fixed income? (2) Fixed income – (3) Fixed income – (1) Fixed income – SSA corporate securitised (A) Screening alone 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% (B) Thematic alone 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% (C) Integration alone 0-25% 0-25% 0-25% (D) Screening and integration 50-75% 50-75% 50-75% (E) Thematic and integration 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% (F) Screening and thematic 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% (G) All three strategies combined 0.0% 0-25% 0.0% (H) None 0-25% 0-25% 25-50% 15

Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle OO 6.1 FI CORE OO 6 FI N/A PUBLIC Fixed income 1 What type of screening is applied to your internally managed active fixed income? (2) Fixed income – (3) Fixed income – (1) Fixed income – SSA corporate securitised (A) Positive/best-in-class 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% screening only (B) Negative screening only >75% >75% >75% (C) A combination of positive/best-in-class and 0-25% 0-25% 0-25% negative screening Externally managed assets Type of PRI Indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection indicator Principle OO 5.2 LE, OO 5.2 OO 6.1 Externally managed OO 6 SAM CORE PUBLIC 1 FI SAM assets Which ESG incorporation strategy and/or combination of strategies apply to your externally managed active listed equity and fixed income? (1) Listed equity - (2) Fixed income – SSA (3) Fixed income – external - external corporate - external (A) Screening alone 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% (B) Thematic alone 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% (C) Integration alone 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% (D) Screening and integration 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 16

(E) Thematic and integration 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% (F) Screening and thematic 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% (G) All three strategies combined >75% >75% >75% (H) None 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle OO 6.1 SAM CORE OO 6 SAM N/A PUBLIC Externally managed assets 1 What type of screening is applied to your externally managed active listed equity and fixed income? (1) Listed equity - (2) Fixed income – SSA (3) Fixed income – external - external corporate - external (A) Positive/best-in-class 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% screening only (B) Negative screening only 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% (C) A combination of positive/best-in-class and >75% >75% >75% negative screening 17

Externally managed assets Captive relationships Type of Dependent PRI Indicator Gateway to Disclosure Subsection indicator on Principle Multiple, see Captive OO 7 CORE OO 5 PUBLIC GENERAL guidance relationships Does your organisation have a captive relationship with some or all of its external investment managers? ○ (A) Yes ◉ (B) No Investment consultants Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle OO 8 CORE OO 5 SAM 1 PUBLIC Investment consultants GENERAL Does your organisation engage investment consultants in the selection, appointment or monitoring of your external investment managers? ○ (A) Yes ◉ (B) No 18

Stewardship Listed equity Type of Indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle indicator OO 5, OO 5.2 OO 9 LE CORE Multiple, see guidance PUBLIC Listed equity 2 LE Does your organisation conduct stewardship activities for your listed equity assets? (1) Engagement (2) Engagement (3) (Proxy) (4) (Proxy) voting on listed equity on listed equity voting on listed on listed equity – – active – passive equity – active passive (A) Through service providers ☐ ☐ ☑ ☐ (B) Through external managers ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ (C) Through internal staff ☑ ☐ ☑ ☐ (D) Collaboratively ☑ ☐ ☐ ☐ (E) We did not conduct this ☐ ☑ ☐ ☑ stewardship activity 19

Fixed income Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle OO 9 FI CORE OO 5, OO 5.2 FI Multiple, see guidance PUBLIC Fixed income 2 Does your organisation conduct stewardship activities for your fixed income assets? (1) (2) (4) (5) (6) Active (7) Private Passive Passive – Active – Active – – debt – SSA corporate SSA corporate securitised (A) Through service providers ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ (B) Through external managers ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ (C) Through internal staff ☐ ☐ ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑ (D) Collaboratively ☐ ☐ ☑ ☑ ☑ ☐ (E) We did not conduct this stewardship activity for this ☑ ☑ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ strategy/asset type Private equity, real estate and infrastructure Type of Dependent PRI Indicator Gateway to Disclosure Subsection indicator on Principle Multiple, see Private equity, real estate and OO 9 ALT CORE OO 5 PUBLIC 2 guidance infrastructure Does your organisation conduct stewardship activities in the following asset classes? (1) Private equity (3) Infrastructure (A) Through service providers ☐ ☐ (B) Through external managers ☐ ☐ 20

(C) Through internal staff ☐ ☑ (D) Collaboratively ☐ ☑ (E) We did not conduct stewardship activities for this ☑ ☐ asset class ESG incorporation Internally managed assets Type of PRI Indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection indicator Principle Multiple, see Multiple, see Internally managed OO 10 CORE PUBLIC 1 guidance guidance assets For each internally managed asset class, select whether or not you incorporate ESG into your investment decisions. (1) ESG incorporated into investment (2) ESG not incorporated into investment decisions decisions (B) Listed equity – active – ◉ ○ quantitative (C) Listed equity – active – ◉ ○ fundamental (F) Fixed income – SSA ◉ ○ (G) Fixed income – corporate ◉ ○ (H) Fixed income – securitised ◉ ○ (I) Fixed income – private debt ◉ ○ (L) Infrastructure ◉ ○ (W) Other [as specified] ◉ ○ 21

External manager selection Type of PRI Indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection indicator Principle Multiple, see Multiple, see External manager OO 11 CORE PUBLIC 1 guidance guidance selection For each externally managed asset class, select whether or not you incorporate ESG into external manager selection. Your response should refer to the selection of the external managers who managed the relevant asset classes during the reporting year, regardless of when such selection took place. (1) ESG incorporated into external (2) ESG not incorporated into external manager selection manager selection (A) Listed equity – passive ◉ ○ (B) Listed equity – active ◉ ○ (C) Fixed income – passive ◉ ○ (D) Fixed income – active ◉ ○ (E) Private equity ◉ ○ (G) Infrastructure ◉ ○ 22

External manager appointment Type of PRI Indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection indicator Principle Multiple, see Multiple, see External manager OO 12 CORE PUBLIC 1 guidance guidance appointment For each externally managed asset class, select whether or not you incorporate ESG into external manager appointment. Your response should refer to the appointment of the external managers who managed the relevant asset classes during the reporting year, regardless of when their appointment took place. (1) ESG incorporated into external (2) ESG not incorporated into external manager appointment manager appointment (E) Private equity ◉ ○ (G) Infrastructure ◉ ○ The following externally managed asset classes are reported in OO 5.1 as 100% pooled funds or pooled investments and, therefore, ESG incorporation into external manager appointment is not applicable. (3) ESG incorporation into external manager appointment is not applicable as we only invest in pooled funds (A) Listed equity – passive ◉ (B) Listed equity – active ◉ (C) Fixed income – passive ◉ (D) Fixed income – active ◉ 23

External manager monitoring Type of PRI Indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection indicator Principle Multiple, see Multiple, see External manager OO 13 CORE PUBLIC 1 guidance guidance monitoring For each externally managed asset class, select whether or not you incorporated ESG into external manager monitoring during the reporting year. (1) ESG incorporated into external (2) ESG not incorporated into external manager monitoring manager monitoring (A) Listed equity – passive ○ ◉ (B) Listed equity – active ○ ◉ (C) Fixed income – passive ○ ◉ (D) Fixed income – active ○ ◉ (E) Private equity ◉ ○ (G) Infrastructure ◉ ○ 24

Voluntary reporting Voluntary modules Type of PRI Indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection indicator Principle Multiple, see Multiple, see Voluntary OO 14 CORE PUBLIC GENERAL guidance guidance modules The following modules are voluntary to report on in the separate PRI asset class modules as they account for less than 10% of your total AUM and are under USD 10 billion. Please select if you wish to voluntarily report on the module. (2) No, opt out of reporting on the (1) Yes, report on the module module (N) External manager selection, appointment and monitoring ◉ ○ (SAM) – infrastructure The following modules are mandatory to report on as they account for 10% or more of your total AUM or are over USD 10 billion. The ISP (Investment and Stewardship Policy) module is always applicable for reporting. (1) Yes, report on the module ISP: Investment and ◉ Stewardship Policy (A) Listed equity ◉ (B) Fixed income – SSA ◉ (C) Fixed income – corporate ◉ (D) Fixed income – securitised ◉ (E) Fixed income – private debt ◉ (H) Infrastructure ◉ 25

(J) External manager selection, appointment and monitoring ◉ (SAM) – listed equity (K) External manager selection, appointment and monitoring ◉ (SAM) – fixed income (L) External manager selection, appointment and monitoring ◉ (SAM) – private equity Pooled funds governance: Appointment Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Pooled funds governance: OO 15 CORE OO 5.1 SAM 12 PUBLIC GENERAL Appointment Would you like to voluntarily report on ESG incorporation in the appointment of your external managers for pooled funds? ○ (A) Yes ◉ (B) No ESG/sustainability funds and products Labelling and marketing Type of PRI Indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection indicator Principle Multiple, see Multiple, see Labelling and OO 16 CORE PUBLIC GENERAL guidance guidance marketing What percentage of your assets under management in each asset class are ESG/sustainability marketed funds or products, and/or ESG/RI certified or labelled assets? Percentage figures can be rounded to the nearest 5% and should combine internally and externally managed assets. Percentage (A) Listed equity – passive 0.0% 26

(B) Listed equity – active 25-50% (C) Fixed income – passive 0.0% (D) Fixed income – active 0-25% (E) Private equity 0.0% (G) Infrastructure 0.0% (K) Other 0.0% Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle OO 16.1 CORE OO 16 ISP 52 PUBLIC Labelling and marketing GENERAL What percentage of your total assets (per asset class) carry a formal ESG/RI certification or label? Percentage figures can be rounded to the nearest 5%. Coverage of ESG/RI certification or label: (A) Listed equity 0-25% (B) Fixed income 0-25% 27

Climate investments Asset breakdown Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle OO 17 CORE N/A N/A PUBLIC Asset breakdown GENERAL What percentage of your assets under management is in targeted low-carbon or climate-resilient investments? 0-25% Other asset breakdowns Geographical breakdown Type of Gateway PRI Indicator Dependent on Disclosure Subsection indicator to Principle Multiple, see Geographical OO 18 CORE N/A PUBLIC GENERAL guidance breakdown What is the geographical breakdown of your organisation's assets under management by investment destination (i.e. where the investments are located)? (2) Fixed income (3) Fixed income (4) Fixed income – (1) Listed equity – SSA – corporate securitised (A) Developed >75% >75% >75% >75% (B) Emerging 0-25% 0-25% 0-25% 0-25% (C) Frontier 0-25% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% (D) Other 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 28

(5) Fixed income – (6) Private equity (8) Infrastructure private debt (A) Developed >75% >75% >75% (B) Emerging 0-25% 0-25% 0-25% (C) Frontier 0-25% 0.0% 0.0% (D) Other 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Management by PRI signatories Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Management by PRI OO 19 CORE OO 5 N/A PUBLIC GENERAL signatories What approximate percentage (+/-5%) of your externally managed assets are managed by PRI signatories? 50-75% Fixed income constraints Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle OO 20 CORE OO 5.2 FI OO 20.1 PUBLIC Fixed income constraints GENERAL What percentage of your fixed income assets are subject to constraints? The constraints may be regulatory requirements, credit quality restrictions, currency constraints or similar. Internal and external fixed income assets subject to constraints (A) Fixed income – SSA >75% (B) Fixed income – corporate >75% 29

(C) Fixed income – securitised >75% (D) Fixed income – private debt >75% Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle OO 20.1 CORE OO 20 N/A PUBLIC Fixed income constraints GENERAL Describe the constraints to your fixed income assets. Fixed income constraints The SSA strategies of AllianzGI are varied in their (A) Fixed income – SSA approach to investing and therefore have different constraints in place. The corporate strategies of AllianzGI are varied in their (B) Fixed income – corporate approach to investing and therefore have different constraints in place. The securitised strategies of AllianzGI are varied in their (C) Fixed income – securitised approach to investing and therefore have different constraints in place. The private debt strategies of AllianzGI are varied in their approach to investing across geographies, sectors and risk- (D) Fixed income – private debt return profiles. No private debt strategies have a totally unconstrained ability to invest across risk profiles and currencies. 30

Infrastructure: Fund strategy Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Infrastructure: Fund OO 27 CORE OO 5 N/A PUBLIC GENERAL strategy What is the percentage breakdown of your organisation's infrastructure investments by fund type? (A) Open-ended (2) 1–10% (B) Closed-ended (5) >75% Infrastructure: Nature of ownership Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Infrastructure: Nature of OO 28 CORE OO 5 N/A PUBLIC GENERAL ownership What is the percentage breakdown of your organisation's infrastructure assets by investment vehicle? (A) Direct investment (3) 11–50% (B) Limited liability company or partnership (3) 11–50% (C) Joint venture (JV) with a government entity (2) 1–10% (D) Joint venture (JV) with a private entity (2) 1–10% (E) Joint venture (JV) with a public entity (2) 1–10% (F) Separate account (2) 1–10% (G) Special purpose vehicle (3) 11–50% 31

Infrastructure: Ownership level Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Infrastructure: Ownership OO 29 CORE OO 5 N/A PUBLIC GENERAL level What is the percentage breakdown of your organisation's infrastructure assets by level of ownership? (A) A majority stake (50% and above) (5) >75% (B) A significant minority stake (between 10–50%) (2) 1–10% (C) A limited minority stake (less than 10%) (2) 1–10% Infrastructure: Strategy Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle OO 30 CORE OO 5 N/A PUBLIC Infrastructure: Strategy GENERAL What is the percentage breakdown of your organisation's internally managed infrastructure assets by investment strategy? Percentage of total internally managed infrastructure AUM (A) Core >75% (B) Value added 0.0% (C) Opportunistic 0.0% 32

Infrastructure: Type of asset Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Infrastructure: Type of OO 31 CORE OO 5 INF 1 PUBLIC GENERAL asset What is the percentage breakdown of your infrastructure assets by strategy? Percentage of total internally managed infrastructure AUM (A) Standing >75% investments/operating assets (B) New construction 0-25% (C) Major renovation 0.0% Infrastructure: Management type Type of Dependent PRI Indicator Gateway to Disclosure Subsection indicator on Principle Multiple, see Infrastructure: OO 32 CORE OO 5 PUBLIC GENERAL guidance Management type What is the percentage breakdown of your direct infrastructure assets based on who manages these assets? (A) Directly by our organisation (2) 1–10% (B) By third party infrastructure operators that we appoint (5) >75% (C) By other investors or their third party operators (1) 0% (D) By public or government entities or their third party operators (1) 0% 33

Context and explanation Appointment: Pooled funds Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Appointment: Pooled OO 33 CORE OO 5.1 N/A PUBLIC GENERAL funds For your externally managed pooled funds, please describe any other mechanisms in place to set expectations as part of the appointment or commitment process. The externally managed fund that is dedicated to renewable energy infrastructure assets aims to make an active contribution to achieving at least one social development goal of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (“SDGs”) and, in particular, to secure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy (Goal 7 of the SDGs). In addition, the fund targets the Climate Change Mitigation objective as defined by the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR) of the European Union. This is communicated by our asset managers to the technical and commercial managers (TCMs) of the assets, who are in charge to provide the required inputs for the annual ESG reporting that is disclosed to the investor. The asset managers held conversations with the TCMs almost on a dayly basis or as the transaction might require. ESG in other asset classes Type of Gateway PRI Indicator Dependent on Disclosure Subsection indicator to Principle Multiple, see ESG in other asset OO 34 CORE N/A PUBLIC 1 guidance classes Describe how you incorporate ESG into the following asset classes. Description (C) Other – internal Not applicable 34

ESG not incorporated Type of Gateway PRI Indicator Dependent on Disclosure Subsection indicator to Principle Multiple, see ESG not OO 35 CORE N/A PUBLIC 1, 2 guidance incorporated Describe why you currently do not incorporate ESG into your assets and/or why you currently do not conduct stewardship. Description AllianzGI assesses stewardship activities of external (N) Externally managed: Listed equity – passive managers. However, we do not conduct stewardship activities through external managers. AllianzGI assesses stewardship activities of external (O) Externally managed: Listed equity – active managers. However, we do not conduct stewardship activities through external managers. AllianzGI assesses stewardship activities of external (P) Externally managed: Fixed income – passive managers. However, we do not conduct stewardship activities through external managers. AllianzGI assesses stewardship activities of external (Q) Externally managed: Fixed income – active managers. However, we do not conduct stewardship activities through external managers. ACP does incorporate ESG factors with indirect private equity and infrastructure funds when selecting these in line with the guidelines of Allianz Group. An actual Stewardship is however both not common and possible since investor rights in fund structures are limited and do neither include any participation in strategy and/or investment decisions of the fund nor voting rights. Hence, (R) Externally managed: Private equity investors are mere passive within these fund investments and consequently do not have any noteworthy influence on the portfolio companies. However a fund investor can provide suggestions in this regard, which will carry more weight in the case of a larger investment size and/or a substantial number of investors provide the same or similar suggestions. 35

Investment and Stewardship Policy (ISP) Responsible investment policy & governance Responsible investment policy Type of Dependent PRI Indicator Gateway to Disclosure Subsection indicator on Principle ISP 1.1, ISP Responsible investment ISP 1 CORE N/A PUBLIC 1 1.2 policy Does your organisation have a formal policy or policies covering your approach to responsible investment? Your approach to responsible investment may be set out in a standalone guideline, covered in multiple standalone guidelines or be part of a broader investment policy. Your policy may cover various responsible investment elements such as stewardship, ESG guidelines, sustainability outcomes, specific climate-related guidelines, RI governance and similar. ◉ (A) Yes, we do have a policy covering our approach to responsible investment ○ (B) No, we do not have a policy covering our approach to responsible investment Type of Dependent PRI Indicator Gateway to Disclosure Subsection indicator on Principle Multiple, see Responsible investment ISP 1.1 CORE ISP 1 PUBLIC 1 guidance policy What elements does your responsible investment policy cover? The responsible investment elements may be set out in one or multiple standalone guidelines, or they may be part of a broader investment policy. ☑ (A) Overall approach to responsible investment ☑ (B) Guidelines on environmental factors ☑ (C) Guidelines on social factors ☑ (D) Guidelines on governance factors ☑ (E) Approach to stewardship ☑ (F) Approach to sustainability outcomes ☑ (G) Approach to exclusions ☑ (H) Asset class-specific guidelines that describe how ESG incorporation is implemented ☑ (I) Definition of responsible investment and how it relates to our fiduciary duty ☑ (J) Definition of responsible investment and how it relates to our investment objectives ☑ (K) Responsible investment governance structure 36

☐ (L) Internal reporting and verification related to responsible investment ☑ (M) External reporting related to responsible investment ☑ (N) Managing conflicts of interest related to responsible investment ☐ (O) Other responsible investment aspects not listed here, please specify: Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Responsible investment ISP 2 CORE ISP 1.1 N/A PUBLIC 6 policy Indicate which of your responsible investment policy elements are publicly available and provide links. ☑ (A) Overall approach to responsible investment. Add link(s): https://www.allianzgi.com/en/our-firm/esg/documents#keypolicydocumentsandreports ☑ (B) Guidelines on environmental factors. Add link(s): https://www.allianzgi.com/en/our-firm/esg/documents#keypolicydocumentsandreports ☑ (C) Guidelines on social factors. Add link(s): https://www.allianzgi.com/en/our-firm/esg/documents#keypolicydocumentsandreports ☑ (D) Guidelines on governance factors. Add link(s): https://www.allianzgi.com/en/our-firm/esg/documents#keypolicydocumentsandreports ☑ (E) Approach to stewardship. Add link(s): https://www.allianzgi.com/en/our-firm/esg/documents#keypolicydocumentsandreports ☑ (F) Approach to sustainability outcomes. Add link(s): https://www.allianzgi.com/en/our-firm/esg/documents#keypolicydocumentsandreports ☑ (G) Approach to exclusions. Add link(s): https://www.allianzgi.com/en/our-firm/esg/documents#keypolicydocumentsandreports ☑ (H) Asset class-specific guidelines that describe how ESG incorporation is implemented. Add link(s): https://www.allianzgi.com/en/our-firm/esg/documents#keypolicydocumentsandreports ☑ (I) Definition of responsible investment and how it relates to our fiduciary duty. Add link(s): https://www.allianzgi.com/en/our-firm/esg/documents#keypolicydocumentsandreports ☑ (J) Definition of responsible investment and how it relates to our investment objectives. Add link(s): https://www.allianzgi.com/en/our-firm/esg/documents#keypolicydocumentsandreports ☑ (K) Responsible investment governance structure. Add link(s): https://www.allianzgi.com/en/our-firm/esg/documents#keypolicydocumentsandreports ☑ (M) External reporting related to responsible investment. Add link(s): 37

https://www.allianzgi.com/en/our-firm/esg/documents#keypolicydocumentsandreports ☑ (N) Managing conflicts of interest related to responsible investment. Add link(s): https://www.allianzgi.com/en/our-firm/esg/documents#keypolicydocumentsandreports ☐ (P) Our responsible investment policy elements are not publicly available Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Responsible investment ISP 3 CORE ISP 1.1 N/A PUBLIC 1 policy What percentage of your total assets under management are covered by your policy elements on overall approach to responsible investment and/or guidelines on environmental, social and governance factors? ○ (A) Overall approach to responsible investment ○ (B) Guidelines on environmental factors ○ (C) Guidelines on social factors ○ (D) Guidelines on governance factors AUM coverage of all policy elements in total: >75% Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Responsible investment ISP 4 CORE ISP 1.1 N/A PUBLIC 1 policy Which elements does your exclusion policy include? ☑ (A) Legally required exclusions (e.g. those required by domestic/international law, bans, treaties or embargoes) ☑ (B) Exclusions based on our organisation's values or beliefs (e.g. regarding weapons, alcohol, tobacco and/or avoiding other particular sectors, products, services or regions) ☑ (C) Exclusions based on screening against minimum standards of business practice based on international norms (e.g. OECD guidelines, the UN Human Rights Declaration, Security Council sanctions or the UN Global Compact) 38

Type of Gateway PRI Indicator Dependent on Disclosure Subsection indicator to Principle Multiple, see Responsible investment ISP 5 CORE N/A PUBLIC 1 guidance policy What percentage of your total assets under management are covered by your asset class–specific guidelines that describe how ESG incorporation is implemented? AUM Coverage: (A) Listed Equity >75% (B) Fixed Income >75% (C) Private Equity >75% (E) Infrastructure >75% Governance Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle ISP 6 CORE N/A ISP 8 PUBLIC Governance 1 Do your organisation's board, chief-level staff, investment committee and/or head of department have formal oversight and accountability for responsible investment? ☐ (A) Board and/or trustees ☑ (B) Chief-level staff (e.g. Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Chief Investment Officer (CIO) or Chief Operating Officer (COO)) ☑ (C) Investment committee ☐ (D) Other chief-level staff, please specify: ☑ (E) Head of department, please specify department: Global Head of Sustainable and Impact Investing ☐ (F) None of the above roles have oversight and accountability for responsible investment 39

Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle ISP 7 CORE N/A ISP 8 PUBLIC Governance 1 In your organisation, which internal or external roles have responsibility for implementing responsible investment? ☐ (A) Board and/or trustees ☑ (B) Chief-level staff (e.g. Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Chief Investment Officer (CIO) or Chief Operating Officer (COO)) ☑ (C) Investment committee ☐ (D) Other chief-level staff [as specified] ☑ (E) Head of department [as specified] ☑ (F) Portfolio managers ☑ (G) Investment analysts ☑ (H) Dedicated responsible investment staff ☐ (I) Investor relations ☐ (J) External managers or service providers ☐ (K) Other role, please specify: ☐ (L) Other role, please specify: ☐ (M) We do not have roles with responsibility for implementing responsible investment. People and capabilities Type of Dependent Indicator Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle indicator on ISP 8 CORE ISP 6, ISP 7 ISP 8.1, ISP 8.2 PUBLIC People and capabilities General What formal objectives for responsible investment do the roles in your organisation have? (8) (2) (5) Head of (3) (6) (7) Dedicated Chief- department Investment Portfolio Investment responsible level [as committee managers analysts investment staff specified] staff (A) Objective for ESG incorporation in investment ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑ activities (B) Objective for contributing to the development of the ☐ ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑ organisation's ESG incorporation approach 40

(C) Objective for contributing to the organisation's stewardship activities (e.g. through sharing ☐ ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑ findings from continuous ESG research or investment decisions) (D) Objective for ESG ☐ ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑ performance (E) Other objective related to responsible investment [as ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ specified] (F) Other objective related to responsible investment [as ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ specified] (G) No formal objectives for responsible investment exist for ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ this role Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle ISP 8.1 PLUS ISP 8 N/A PUBLIC People and capabilities General Describe the key responsible investment performance indicators (KPIs) or benchmarks that your organisation uses to compare and assess the performance of your professionals in relation to their responsible investment objectives. Accelerate the growth of Impact Investing as part of the company’s growing private markets platform; Lead the continued integration of ESG factors across our existing range of public markets products, including stewardship activities Support the development of new Sustainable products 41

Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle ISP 8.2 CORE ISP 8 N/A PUBLIC People and capabilities General Which responsible investment objectives are linked to variable compensation for roles in your organisation? RI objectives linked to variable compensation for roles in your organisation: (2) Chief-level staff (e.g. Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Chief Investment Officer (CIO) or Chief Operating Officer (COO)) (A) Objective for ESG incorporation in investment activities ☑ (3) Investment committee (A) Objective for ESG incorporation in investment activities ☑ (B) Objective for contributing to the development of the organisation's ☐ ESG incorporation approach (C) Objective for contributing to the organisation's stewardship activities (e.g. through sharing findings from continuous ESG research ☐ or investment decisions) (D) Objective for ESG performance ☐ (5) Head of department (A) Objective for ESG incorporation in investment activities ☑ (B) Objective for contributing to the development of the organisation's ☑ ESG incorporation approach (C) Objective for contributing to the organisation's stewardship activities (e.g. through sharing findings from continuous ESG research ☑ or investment decisions) (D) Objective for ESG performance ☑ 42

(6) Portfolio managers (A) Objective on ESG incorporation in investment activities ☑ (B) Objective for contributing to the development of the organisation's ☐ ESG incorporation approach (C) Objective for contributing to the organisation's stewardship activities (e.g. through sharing findings from continuous ESG research ☑ or investment decisions) (D) Objective for ESG performance ☐ (7) Investment analysts (A) Objective for ESG incorporation in investment activities ☑ (B) Objective for contributing to the development of the organisation's ☐ ESG incorporation approach (C) Objective for contributing to the organisation's stewardship activities (e.g. through sharing findings from continuous ESG research ☑ or investment decisions) (D) Objective for ESG performance ☐ (8) Dedicated responsible investment staff (A) Objective for ESG incorporation in investment activities ☑ (B) Objective for contributing to the development of the organisation's ☑ ESG incorporation approach (C) Objective for contributing to the organisation's stewardship activities (e.g. through sharing findings from continuous ESG research ☑ or investment decisions) (D) Objective for ESG performance ☑ (G) We have not linked any RI objectives to variable compensation ☐ 43

Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle ISP 9 CORE N/A N/A PUBLIC People and capabilities General How frequently does your organisation assess the responsible investment capabilities and training needs among your investment professionals? ○ (A) Quarterly or more frequently ◉ (B) Bi-annually ○ (C) Annually ○ (D) Less frequently than annually ○ (E) On an ad hoc basis ○ (F) We do not have a process for assessing the responsible investment capabilities and training needs among our investment professionals Strategic asset allocation Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle ISP 10 CORE N/A ISP 10.1 PUBLIC Strategic asset allocation 1 Does your organisation incorporate ESG factors into your strategic asset allocation? ☐ (A) We incorporate ESG factors into calculations for expected risks and returns of asset classes ☐ (B) We specifically incorporate physical, transition and regulatory changes related to climate change into calculations for expected risks and returns of asset classes ☐ (C) No, we do not incorporate ESG considerations into our strategic asset allocation ☑ (D) Not applicable, we do not have a strategic asset allocation process 44

Stewardship Stewardship policy Type of Indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle indicator Multiple, see ISP 11 CORE N/A PUBLIC Stewardship policy 2 guidance What percentage of your assets under management does your stewardship policy cover? (A) Listed equity >75% (B) Fixed income >75% (E) Infrastructure 50-75% Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle ISP 12 CORE ISP 1.1 ISP 12.1 PUBLIC Stewardship policy 2 Which elements does your organisation's stewardship policy cover? The policy may be a standalone guideline or part of a wider RI policy. ☑ (A) Key stewardship objectives ☑ (B) Prioritisation approach of ESG factors and their link to engagement issues and targets ☐ (C) Prioritisation approach depending on entity (e.g. company or government) ☐ (D) Specific approach to climate-related risks and opportunities ☐ (E) Stewardship tool usage across the organisation, including which, if any, tools are out of scope and when and how different tools are used and by whom (e.g. specialist teams, investment teams, service providers, external investment managers or similar) ☑ (F) Stewardship tool usage for specific internal teams (e.g. specialist teams, investment teams or similar) ☐ (G) Stewardship tool usage for specific external teams (e.g. service providers, external investment managers or similar) ☑ (H) Approach to collaboration on stewardship ☑ (I) Escalation strategies ☑ (J) Conflicts of interest ☑ (K) Details on how the stewardship policy is implemented and which elements are mandatory, including how and when the policy can be overruled ☑ (L) How stewardship efforts and results should be communicated across the organisation to feed into investment decision- making and vice versa ☐ (M) None of the above elements are captured in our stewardship policy 45

Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle ISP 12.1 PLUS ISP 12 N/A PUBLIC Stewardship policy 2 Describe any additional details related to your stewardship policy elements or your overall stewardship approach. At Allianz Global Investors, our responsibility and fiduciary duty to be an active steward of our clients’ assets is taken very seriously. Our Stewardship Statement covers our principles in discharing our stewardship responsibilities, managing conflicts of interests, how we monitor investee companies, our engagement activities (e.g. providing feedback, challenging corporate practices / seeking change, and in rare circumstances, public interventions, escalation of stewardship activities, collaboration with other investors, and our approach to Proxy Voting including disclosure and reporting of voting activities. For further information, please refer to our Stewardship Statement via the following link: https://www.allianzgi.com/en/our-firm/esg/documents#keypolicydocumentsandreports While our approach to climate related-risks and opportunities is not specifically mentioned in our Stewardship Statement, this is covered under our Global Corporate Governance Guidelines. Climate-related risks can have material impact on companies’ business models and operations and AllianzGI therefore expects boards and management of all companies to assess and report on the impact of climate- related risks. AllianzGI supports shareholder proposals seeking information on climate related risks and normally support proposals calling for the reduction and disclosure of GHG emissions. Details can be found in our Global Corporate Governance Guidelines document via the following link: https://www.allianzgi.com/en/our-firm/esg/documents#keypolicydocumentsandreports Stewardship policy implementation Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Stewardship policy ISP 13 CORE ISP 1.1 N/A PUBLIC 2 implementation How is your stewardship policy primarily applied? ○ (A) It requires our organisation to take certain actions ◉ (B) It describes default actions that can be overridden (e.g. by investment teams for certain portfolios) ○ (C) It creates permission for taking certain measures that are otherwise exceptional ○ (D) We have not developed a uniform approach to applying our stewardship policy 46

Stewardship objectives Type of Gateway PRI Indicator Dependent on Disclosure Subsection indicator to Principle Multiple, see Stewardship ISP 15 CORE N/A PUBLIC 2 guidance objectives For the majority of assets within each asset class, which of the following best describes your primary stewardship objective? (1) Listed equity (2) Fixed income (5) Infrastructure (A) Maximise the risk–return ◉ ◉ ◉ profile of individual investments (B) Maximise overall returns ○ ○ ○ across the portfolio (C) Maximise overall value to ○ ○ ○ beneficiaries/clients (D) Contribute to shaping specific sustainability outcomes ○ ○ ○ (i.e. deliver impact) Stewardship prioritisation Type of Gateway PRI Indicator Dependent on Disclosure Subsection indicator to Principle Multiple, see Stewardship ISP 16 CORE N/A PUBLIC 2 guidance prioritisation What key criteria does your organisation use to prioritise your engagement targets? For asset classes such as real estate, private equity and infrastructure, you may consider this as key criteria to prioritise actions taken on ESG factors for assets, portfolio companies and/or properties in your portfolio. Select up to 3 options per asset class from the list. 47

(1) Listed equity (2) Fixed income (5) Infrastructure (A) The size of our holdings in the entity or the size of the asset, ☑ ☑ ☐ portfolio company and/or property (B) The materiality of ESG factors on financial and/or ☑ ☑ ☑ operational performance (C) Specific ESG factors with systemic influence (e.g. climate or ☑ ☑ ☑ human rights) (D) The ESG rating of the entity ☐ ☐ ☐ (E) The adequacy of public disclosure on ESG ☐ ☐ ☐ factors/performance (F) Specific ESG factors based ☐ ☐ ☐ on input from clients (G) Specific ESG factors based ☐ ☐ ☐ on input from beneficiaries (H) Other criteria to prioritise engagement targets, please ☐ ☐ ☐ specify: (I) We do not prioritise our ☐ ☐ ☐ engagement targets 48

Collaborative stewardship Type of Gateway PRI Indicator Dependent on Disclosure Subsection indicator to Principle Multiple, see Collaborative ISP 18 CORE ISP 18.1 PUBLIC 2 guidance stewardship Which of the following best describes your organisation's default position, or the position of the service providers/external managers acting on your behalf, with regards to collaborative stewardship efforts such as collaborative engagements? ○ (A) We recognise that stewardship suffers from a collective action problem, and, as a result, we actively prefer collaborative efforts ◉ (B) We collaborate when our individual stewardship efforts have been unsuccessful or are likely to be unsuccessful, i.e. as an escalation tool ○ (C) We collaborate in situations where doing so would minimise resource cost to our organisation ○ (D) We do not have a default position but collaborate on a case-by-case basis ○ (E) We generally do not join collaborative stewardship efforts Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle ISP 18.1 PLUS ISP 18 N/A PUBLIC Collaborative stewardship 2 Describe your position on collaborating for stewardship. Allianz Global Investors prefers direct engagement with companies, however, where these do not progress as expected or our shareholding is insufficient for an effective escalation on a standalone basis, we will consider other options including collaborating with other institutional investors. Allianz Global Investors participates in collective engagement when this route offers the most effective way of achieving engagement objectives and is in the best interests of our clients. This is often the case with public policy engagements and collective investor initiatives aimed at improving practices at an industry, market or international level. Allianz Global Investors is a member of multiple trade associations, investor networks and other bodies that facilitate investor engagement, and we leverage these when and as appropriate. Collaborating with other investors in company engagements is particularly important where share ownership is dispersed and it is difficult to have shareholder voice heard through individual engagements. Our decision to initiative or join a collective engagement will depend on a number of factors, including: - Issue of concerns; - Extent to which we can exert influence on our own; - Trust and alignment in views and objectives with other investors; - Agreement on strategy and potential escalation; and - Probability of success. Allianz Global Investors’ collective engagement activies are undertaken in compliance with relevant statutory rules and guidelines from regulatory authorities, including on market abuse, insider dealing and concert party regulations. At any given time, Allianz Global Investors may be actively involved in several investor bodies and projects that facilitate discussion, sharing of information and collective engagement at an issuer or public policy level. 49

Escalation strategies Type of Gateway PRI Indicator Dependent on Disclosure Subsection indicator to Principle Multiple, see Escalation ISP 19 PLUS N/A PUBLIC 2 guidance strategies Which of these measures did your organisation, or the service providers/external managers acting on your behalf, use most frequently when escalating initial stewardship approaches that were deemed unsuccessful? (1) Listed equity (2) Fixed income (A) Collaboratively engaging the ☐ ☐ entity with other investors (B) Filing/co-filing/submitting a shareholder resolution or ☐ ☐ proposal (C) Publicly engaging the entity ☐ ☐ (e.g. open letter) (D) Voting against the re- election of one or more board ☑ ☐ directors (E) Voting against the chair of ☑ ☐ the board of directors (F) Voting against the annual ☐ ☐ financial report (G) Divesting or implementing ☐ ☐ an exit strategy (H) We did not use any escalation measures during the ☐ ☐ reporting year. Please explain why below 50

Type of Gateway PRI Indicator Dependent on Disclosure Subsection indicator to Principle Multiple, see Escalation ISP 20 CORE N/A PUBLIC 2 guidance strategies If initial stewardship approaches were deemed unsuccessful, which of the following measures are excluded from the potential escalation actions of your organisation or those of the service providers/external managers acting on your behalf? (1) Listed equity (2) Fixed income (A) Collaboratively engaging the ☐ ☐ entity with other investors (B) Filing/co-filing/submitting a shareholder resolution or ☐ ☐ proposal (C) Publicly engaging the entity ☐ ☐ (e.g. open letter) (D) Voting against the re- election of one or more board ☐ ☐ directors (E) Voting against the chair of ☐ ☐ the board of directors (F) Voting against the annual ☐ ☐ financial report (G) Divesting or implementing ☐ ☐ an exit strategy (H) We do not have any restrictions on the escalation ☑ ☑ measures we can use 51

Alignment and effectiveness Type of Gateway PRI Indicator Dependent on Disclosure Subsection indicator to Principle Multiple, see Alignment and ISP 21 PLUS N/A PUBLIC 2 guidance effectiveness Describe how you coordinate stewardship across your organisation to ensure that stewardship progress and results feed into investment decision-making and vice versa. Discharging our Stewardship Responsibilities Allianz Global Investors’ integrated approach to stewardship is enabled by our investment philosophy, the structure of our investment platform, and our proprietary global research and collaboration system, as follows: 1. We are an active manager running a large number of long-term fundamental strategies, This creates a substantial pool of portfolio managers who are willing to engage with investee companies to help improve performance and mitigate risk. Portfolio managers also participate in, and contribute to, public policy engagements, where intervention is considered in the best interests of our clients. 2. Allianz Global Investors has a specialist ESG Research team, whose fundamental role is to share its expertise in the consideration of ESG factors in order to identify risks and opportunities that have not been fully priced by the markes, thus supporting enhanced stock selection of the benefit of the investment decision makers. The team helps to coordinate our engagement efforts and often lead engagements on corporate governance, environmental, social and business conduct matters. Furthermore, the ESG Research team contributes to public policy engagements and collective engagements in multi-stateholder initiatives. 3. Allianz Global investors’ proprietary global research and collaboration system ensures that all sector research and issuer analysis, third-party and proprietary ESG research, engagement notes and other outputs are readily available to all investment staff. It allows any fund manager or analyst across the company to review and challenge published research and comments when making investment recommendations or selecting issuers for portfolios. It also facilitates real-time communication for all investment professionals, helping us to run an effective proxy voting process, provide and collect feedback on company engagements and share engagement outcomes. Proxy Voting and Internal Consultation Process As outlined above, Allianz Global Investors’ investment platform has processes designed to link portfolio managers and the ESG Research team, and through their collaboration we are able to highlight ESG risks and sub-standard practices in investee companies. Allianz Global Investors has adopted a risk-based approach to proxy voting research and analysis, whereby the ESG Research team focuses its efforts on reviewing shareholder meeting proposals for a proportion of holdings in our portfolios (e.g. large aggregate positions across our funds, core holdings in individual funds,companies with an ongoing engagement activity etc), and our proxy voting policy is consistently applied to the remaining holdings. Our investment teams review potentially contentious proposals for holdings in their portfolios and bring these to the attention of the ESG Research team for further analysis and vote decision. For policy overrides, internal consultations involving analysts and portfolio managers take place through our global research and collaboration system. All voting decisions are made on the basis of our proxy voting policy and investment perspectives shared in our internal consultation processes. We do not automatically support company management or the board, which is evidenced by our voting statistics. Allianz Global Investors aims to speak with one voice when it comes to proxy voting decisions and will only depart form this approach in exceptional circumstances when differing votes by investment teams can by justified by strategy-specific considerations. 52

Stewardship examples Type of Gateway PRI Indicator Dependent on Disclosure Subsection indicator to Principle Multiple, see Stewardship ISP 22 PLUS N/A PUBLIC 2 guidance examples Describe stewardship activities that you participated in during the reporting year that led to desired changes in the entity you interacted with. Include what ESG factor(s) you engaged on and whether your stewardship activities were primarily focused on managing ESG risks and opportunities or delivering sustainability outcomes. (1) Engagement type (2) Primary goal of stewardship activity c) Both managing ESG risks and (A) Example 1 a) Internally (or service provider) led delivering outcomes c) Both managing ESG risks and (B) Example 2 a) Internally (or service provider) led delivering outcomes c) Both managing ESG risks and (C) Example 3 a) Internally (or service provider) led delivering outcomes (3) The ESG factors you focused on (4) Description of stewardship activity in the stewardship activity and the desired change(s) you achieved In 2020 we continued our engagement with a consumer staples company on their child labour practices and the incidents that have been found within their supply chain. Over the past two years, Allianz Global Investors engaged the company with three specific requests, Social factor – child labour practices i.e. banning minors within the supply (A) Example 1 within the supply chain of the chain, including ESG metrics company. including child labour in executive remuneration, and increasing transparency on the supply chain overall. We appreciate that the company released a Human Rights report in 2020 for the first time and applaud them for developments in their data disclosure, but would like to see additional improvements. 53

Allianz Global Investors strongly believes that directors should have sufficient time and energy to exercise their roles on boards. We therefore speak to companies in cases where we consider directors overcommitted. We engaged a tech company on a non- executive director being overboarded Governance – overcommitted and raised additional concerns with (B) Example 2 directors respect to his low attendance rate at board meetings. Following our conversations, we appreciated a comprehensive board refreshment according to a pre-defined set of criteria and highlighting desired competences as well as the fact that the director in question did not stand for re-election. Allianz Global Investors favours the integration of social, environmental and governance issues into performance measurement, where material and appropriate. We have engaged an oil major over several years on their compensation plans Environmental and Governance – and their long-term ambitions related (C) Example 3 alignment of energy transition plans to the energy transition. We note with management compensation. that the company strengthened their approach to managing the energy transition through the inclusion of related metrics within their long-term variable compensation following a number of consultations with investors. 54

Engaging policymakers Type of Dependent PRI Indicator Gateway to Disclosure Subsection indicator on Principle Multiple, see Engaging ISP 23 CORE N/A PUBLIC 2 guidance policymakers How does your organisation, or the external investment managers or service providers acting on your behalf, engage with policymakers for a more sustainable financial system? ☑ (A) We engage with policymakers directly ☑ (B) We provide financial support, are members of and/or are in another way affiliated with third-party organisations, including trade associations and non-profit organisations, that engage with policymakers ☐ (C) We do not engage with policymakers directly or indirectly Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle ISP 23.1 CORE ISP 23 N/A PUBLIC Engaging policymakers 2 What methods do you, or the external investment managers or service providers acting on your behalf, use to engage with policymakers for a more sustainable financial system? ☑ (A) We participate in "sign-on" letters on ESG policy topics. Describe: Not during the reporting year 2020 ☑ (B) We respond to policy consultations on ESG policy topics. Describe: Recent examples here are our responses to the European Commission’s consultation on Taxonomy, Ecolabel, as well as the consultation by the Hong Kong SFC on the management and disclosure of climate -related risks by fund managers. ☑ (C) We provide technical input on ESG policy change. Describe: Members of staff participate in various working- and expert groups set up by legislators and regulators specifically for this purpose. ☑ (D) We proactively engage financial regulators on financial regulatory topics regarding ESG integration, stewardship, disclosure or similar. Describe: We regularly engage with financial regulators in meetings on these topics, most notably with ESMA, ESRB, BaFIN and other national regulators. ☑ (E) We proactively engage regulators and policymakers on other policy topics. Describe: We also regularly engage with regulators and policy makers on topics of financial markets regulation which support or embed sustainable finance legislation in the framework which governs our business as an asset manager ☐ (F) Other methods used to engage with policymakers. Describe: 55

Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle ISP 23.2 CORE ISP 23 N/A PUBLIC Engaging policymakers 2 Do you have governance processes in place (e.g. board accountability and oversight, regular monitoring and review of relationships) that ensure your policy activities, including those through third parties, are aligned with your position on sustainable finance and your commitment to the 6 Principles of the PRI? ◉ (A) Yes, we have governance processes in place to ensure that our policy activities are aligned with our position on sustainable finance and our commitment to the 6 Principles of the PRI. Describe your governance processes: Allianz Global Investors is managed by our Executive Committee. With respect to all investment matters, the responsibility for ensuring our approach is designed to meet our obligations to our clients rests with the Investment Executive Committee, comprised of the firm’s senior investment leadership. The Compliance and Independent Enterprise Risk Management functions provide further governance oversight by regularly evaluating our processes and reviewing decisions to ensure that we have taken appropriate actions. ○ (B) No, we do not have these governance processes in place. Please explain why not: Engaging policymakers – Policies Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Engaging policymakers – ISP 24 CORE ISP 23 ISP 24.1 PUBLIC 2 Policies Do you have policies in place that ensure that your political influence as an organisation is aligned with your position on sustainable finance and your commitment to the 6 Principles of the PRI? ◉ (A) Yes, we have a policy(ies) in place. Describe your policy(ies): Alignment with Sustainable Investment Team takes place in connection with all policy engagement activities, either before meetings with legislators and policymakers or when preparing written feedback, e.g. on public consultations ○ (B) No, we do not a policy(ies) in place. Please explain why not: 56

Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Engaging policymakers – ISP 24.1 CORE ISP 24 N/A PUBLIC 2 Policies Is your policy that ensures alignment between your political influence and your position on sustainable finance publicly disclosed? ○ (A) Yes. Add link(s): ◉ (B) No, we do not publicly disclose this policy(ies) Engaging policymakers – Transparency Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Engaging policymakers – ISP 25 CORE ISP 23 N/A PUBLIC 2 Transparency During the reporting year, did your organisation publicly disclose your policy engagement activities or those conducted on your behalf by external investment managers/service providers? ☐ (A) We publicly disclosed details of our policy engagement activities. Add link(s): ☐ (B) We publicly disclosed a list of our third-party memberships in or support for trade associations, think-tanks or similar that conduct policy engagement activities with our support or endorsement. Add link(s): ☑ (C) No, we did not publicly disclose our policy engagements activities during the reporting year. Explain why: Such policy engagement activities and engagement with policymakers and regulators is often informal. Our consultation responses are however generally public and as such disclosed by the consulting organizations. ☐ (D) Not applicable, we did not conduct policy engagement activities 57

Climate change Public support Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle ISP 26 CORE N/A N/A PUBLIC Public support General Does your organisation publicly support the Paris Agreement? ◉ (A) Yes, we publicly support the Paris Agreement Add link(s) to webpage or other public document/text expressing support for the Paris Agreement: https://www.netzeroassetmanagers.org/ ○ (B) No, we currently do not publicly support the Paris Agreement Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle ISP 27 CORE N/A N/A PUBLIC Public support General Does your organisation publicly support the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures (TCFD)? ◉ (A) Yes, we publicly support the TCFD Add link(s) to webpage or other public document/text expressing support for the TCFD: https://www.fsb-tcfd.org/supporters/ ○ (B) No, we currently do not publicly support the TCFD 58

Governance Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle ISP 28 CORE N/A N/A PUBLIC Governance General How does the board or the equivalent function exercise oversight over climate-related risks and opportunities? ☐ (A) By establishing internal processes through which the board or the equivalent function are informed about climate-related risks and opportunities. Specify: ☑ (B) By articulating internal/external roles and responsibilities related to climate. Specify: The highest governing body for sustainability-related issues at AllianzSE is the Group ESG Board. Established in 2012, it currently consists of four Allianz SE Board members and the Chief Risk Officer. The Group ESG Board is responsible for integrating ESG into all business lines and core processes dealing with insurance and investment decisions. The five members meet quarterly and assume responsibility for ESG issues such as the role of Allianz as a sustainable insurer, responsible investor and committed "corporate citizen". A special focus is on Allianz's contribution to climate protection, reducing its own carbon footprint and promoting the global transition to a low-carbon economy ☐ (C) By engaging with beneficiaries to understand how their preferences are evolving with regard to climate change. Specify: ☐ (D) By incorporating climate change into investment beliefs and policies. Specify: ☑ (E) By monitoring progress on climate-related metrics and targets. Specify: The highest governing body for sustainability-related issues at AllianzSE is the Group ESG Board. Established in 2012, it currently consists of four Allianz SE Board members and the Chief Risk Officer. The Group ESG Board is responsible for integrating ESG into all business lines and core processes dealing with insurance and investment decisions. The five members meet quarterly and assume responsibility for ESG issues such as the role of Allianz as a sustainable insurer, responsible investor and committed "corporate citizen". A special focus is on Allianz's contribution to climate protection, reducing its own carbon footprint and promoting the global transition to a low-carbon economy ☐ (F) By defining the link between fiduciary duty and climate risks and opportunities. Specify: ☐ (G) Other measures to exercise oversight, please specify: ☐ (H) The board or the equivalent function does not exercise oversight over climate-related risks and opportunities Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle ISP 29 CORE N/A N/A PUBLIC Governance General What is the role of management in assessing and managing climate-related risks and opportunities? ☐ (A) Management is responsible for identifying climate-related risks/opportunities and reporting them back to the board or the equivalent function. Specify: ☐ (B) Management implements the agreed-upon risk management measures. Specify: ☐ (C) Management monitors and reports on climate-related risks and opportunities. Specify: ☑ (D) Management ensures adequate resources, including staff, training and budget, are available to assess, implement and monitor climate-related risks/opportunities and measures. Specify: AllianzGI has a Sustainable Investment Working Group in place with representatives from Investment Executive Committee and relevant internal stakeholders. It advises the Executive Committee and other relevant committees on sustainability issues including climate change. Executive Committee has responsibility for all sustainability related topics, including climate change. The Investment Executive Committee and Head of Investments have responsibility for all sustainability related investment topics, including climate change ☐ (E) Other roles management takes on to assess and manage climate-related risks/opportunities, please specify: 59

☐ (F) Our management does not have responsibility for assessing and managing climate-related risks and opportunities Strategy Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle ISP 30 CORE N/A Multiple, see guidance PUBLIC Strategy General Which climate-related risks and opportunities has your organisation identified within its investment time horizon(s)? ☑ (A) Specific financial risks in different asset classes. Specify: Our key assumptions across the three climate risk factors are as follows. We consider the transition risk of corporates moving into a low- carbon emitting economy to be broad and to go beyond energy supply transition only. Transition will concern energy using processes and products, agriculture and forestry, waste management etc. We are in this transition already and it is far from over; business disruption looms. In our view it is also not clear that, despite large scale efforts following COP 21, we will avoid the 2°C warming which scientists are so warning of. It is likely that both mitigation and adaptation will have major ramifications for investors ☑ (B) Specific sectors and/or assets that are at risk of being stranded. Specify: In the next 2 years, increased policy ambition can be expected to reach the Paris Agreement goals that is likely to translate into stricter regulatory and policy action thus potentially increasing company compliance costs or exerting reputational pressure on company and sector climate profiles. A rise in EU Emissions Certificate prices is an example of such risk ☑ (C) Assets with exposure to direct physical climate risk. Specify: In areas exposed to high physical risks, due to more frequent extreme weather events anticipated in the next 10 years, there may be an increase in disruption to business services thus leading to a higher risk of economic distress and future losses. ☐ (D) Assets with exposure to indirect physical climate risk. Specify: ☑ (E) Specific sectors and/or assets that are likely to benefit under a range of climate scenarios. Specify: Opportunities for businesses and economies that enable and benefit from the climate transition towards cleaner energy generation, efficient energy storage, and sustainable energy consumption. This not only would decrease costs per unit produced but the freed up capacity can be leveraged for sustainable business growth, thus benefitting the investment value ☐ (F) Specific sectors and/or assets that contribute significantly to achieving our climate goals. Specify: ☐ (G) Other climate-related risks and opportunities identified. Specify: ☐ (H) We have not identified specific climate-related risks and opportunities within our organisation's investment time horizon 60

Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle ISP 30.1 CORE ISP 30 N/A PUBLIC Strategy General For each of the identified climate-related risks and opportunities, indicate within which investment time-horizon they were identified. (2) 6 months to (1) 3–5 months (3) 2–4 years (4) 5–10 years 2 years (A) Specific financial risks in different asset classes [as ☐ ☑ ☑ ☑ specified] (B) Specific sectors and/or assets that are at risk of being stranded ☐ ☑ ☑ ☑ [as specified] (C) Assets with exposure to direct physical climate risk [as ☐ ☐ ☐ ☑ specified] (E) Specific sectors and/or assets that are likely to benefit under a ☐ ☑ ☐ ☑ range of climate scenarios [as specified] (5) 11–20 years (6) 21–30 years (7) >30 years (A) Specific financial risks in different asset classes [as ☐ ☐ ☐ specified] (B) Specific sectors and/or assets that are at risk of being stranded ☐ ☐ ☐ [as specified] (C) Assets with exposure to direct physical climate risk [as ☐ ☑ ☐ specified] 61

(E) Specific sectors and/or assets that are likely to benefit under a ☐ ☐ ☐ range of climate scenarios [as specified] Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle ISP 31 CORE N/A N/A PUBLIC Strategy General Which climate-related risks and opportunities has your organisation identified beyond its investment time horizon(s)? ☑ (A) Specific financial risks in different asset classes. Specify: In areas exposed to high physical risks, due to more frequent extreme weather events anticipated in the next 10 years, there may be an increase in disruption to business services thus leading to a higher risk of economic distress and future losses. ☑ (B) Specific sectors and/or assets that are at risk of being stranded. Specify: With a more prevalent public attention to climate change, some business models will not meet objectives of a Paris-Aligned World, which may transmit by losing a ‘social licence to operate’ or reputational risk, e.g. via movements like ‘Extinction Rebellion’. Both risks can affect the value of investments due to decreased growth expectations or increased cost expectations. Larger economic trends like energy transition and further policy action are likely to exacerbate pressure in the next 2 to 10 years on fossil fuel producers. Additionally, policy and customer preference changes are likely to amplify the shift in market demand towards companies with more sustainable services and/or products. ☑ (C) Assets with exposure to direct physical climate risk. Specify: Some of the costliest losses from extreme weather and natural catastrophes events have occurred in recent years. Such acute physical climate risks are likely to increase insurance premia to entities in the areas affected. Thus, investments exposed to areas prone to increasing acute physical risks may either experience higher insurance costs or increased expenditure to adapt to such events.The locked- in emissions in the atmosphere are predicted to lead to more frequent and severe extreme weather events , which could destroy assets or disrupt business services leading to a potential loss on investment. The same causes can lead to economic distress in countries exposed to physical climate risks, which may result in re-pricing of investments linked to sovereigns ☐ (D) Assets with exposure to indirect physical climate risk. Specify: ☑ (E) Specific sectors and/or assets that are likely to benefit under a range of climate scenarios. Specify: The climate transition and emergence of more prevalent physical climate risks is likely to bring a transformation unlocking new sources of revenue, change in competitive positioning of businesses and economies, emerging leaders in climate innovation, and significant reputation advantages, all of which may result in opportunities in investments.Companies already aligned with Paris Agreement targets may benefit from a “first-mover” advantage in reputation and attracting new financing at potentially lower rates. Likewise, companies showing credible transition efforts will likely benefit from cheaper financing, e.g. bonds linked to climate KPIs. To achieve that also new technological solutions will be required, thus companies at the innovative edge may receive positive tailwinds, too. An example of a policy framework that will amplify these opportunities is the EU Taxonomy ☐ (F) Specific sectors and/or assets that contribute significantly to achieving our climate goals. Specify: ☐ (G) Other climate-related risks and opportunities identified, please specify: ☐ (H) We have not identified specific climate-related risks and opportunities beyond our organisation's investment time horizon 62

Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle ISP 32 PLUS N/A N/A PUBLIC Strategy General Describe the impact of climate-related risks and opportunities on your organization's investment strategy, products (where relevant) and financial planning. Our Response – Active company dialogue, joining forces and targeted engagement As a part of our support for TCFD, we recognise the necessity for a broader change and alignment in the investment industry around climate risks and opportunities. We believe that this can bring several long-term benefits to our investors: more attention and efforts from investees due to more aligned climate expectations, more precise measurement through clear requirements on climate scenarios that meet investor needs, and more refined climate investment frameworks. Concretely, Allianz Global Investors has been a very active member of the Paris Aligned Investment Initiative, which has been launched by the Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change (IIGCC) to bring together some of the world’s largest asset owners and asset managers for the development of a “Net Zero Investment Framework”. We are also joining forces with other asset owners in encouraging companies to implement such pathways. Our participation in the engagement platform Climate Action 100+, the Institutional Investor Group's on Climate Change, as well as the Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI) connects us with like-minded investors and offers platforms for collaborative engagement. Our Response – Climate scenarios We are committed to advancing on our climate journey, where we are taking the necessary steps and actions to further innovate and enhance our climate investment capabilities. To be able to account for climate change in our analysis, we are looking at technical ways how to enable access for climate scenario assessment by our portfolio managers and analysts to enhance their active research process with a quantitative climate perspective. While these efforts are only in an early iteration, it already allows us to obtain valuable insights to assess the potential climate risks of our investees and portfolio profiles surrounding climate change mitigation and adaptation but it is our aim to continously develop and enhance our climate capabilities further adjusting to the latest advancements in climate science investments. A key pillar in our philosophy surrounding climate investments today is that the public corporate disclosures on climate are not yet highly developed nor in-depth enough to be sufficient for simple rules-based strategies. For this reason, we believe that there exist market inefficiencies on climate risks and opportunities, for which active research and corporate engagement are necessary. That is why we do not aim to rely solely on the climate data used by us but rather have it inform our portfolio managers and analysts in their investment analysis and engagement efforts. For mainstream investment strategies, all AllianzGI portfolio managers have access to the ESG and climate risk research including intrinsic issuer ESG ratings. For many sectors, climate change already poses a material consideration for fundamental analysts and, as such, is reflected in the sector frameworks (capturing material ESG risks) and stock ratings used to inform investment decisions.. 63

Strategy: Scenario analysis Type of Indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle indicator ISP 33 CORE N/A ISP 33.1 PUBLIC Strategy: Scenario analysis General Does your organisation use scenario analysis to assess climate-related investment risks and opportunities? Select the range of scenarios used. ☑ (A) An orderly transition to a 2°C or lower scenario ☐ (B) An abrupt transition consistent with the Inevitable Policy Response ☑ (C) A failure to transition, based on a 4°C or higher scenario ☑ (D) Other climate scenario, specify: We do not consider that only looking at a 2°C, 4°C, and an abrupt transition scenario captures best practice. Instead, looking, in addition, at scenarios that represent a “middle-of-the-road” like the IEA RTS scenario that represents currently climate trajectories. Even though the logic of the Inevitable Policy Response scenarios is valid, to stay true to appropriate risk management prudency, the baseline scenario should be one closest to the current state of affairs, which are forecasting a 2.7°C pathway ☐ (E) We do not use scenario analysis to assess climate-related investment risks and opportunities Type of Indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle indicator ISP 33.1 PLUS ISP 33 N/A PUBLIC Strategy: Scenario analysis General Describe how climate scenario analysis is used to test the resilience of your organisation's investment strategy and inform investments in specific asset classes. ☑ (A) An orderly transition to a 2°C or lower scenario The transition to 2°C or lower is used to inform investment and engagement analysis on which companies have been on a sufficient decarbonisation path already or are on track to reach that within the next 5 years. The companies that are aligned to a 2°C or lower scenario already may have favourable effects on an investment portfolio’s overall alignment. Such companies may also experience potential benefits in not having to expend additional efforts in the future as their business may already be aligned to the 2050 climate goals. ☑ (C) A failure to transition, based on a 4°C or higher scenario The transition to 4°C or higher is used to inform investment and engagement analysis on which companies have been on an emissions pathway contradictory to reach the global 2050 climate goals currently or within the next 5 years. The companies that are aligned to a 4°C or higher scenario already may have unfavourable effects on an investment portfolio’s overall alignment. Such companies may also experience potential disadvantages in having to expend additional efforts in the future to align their business to the 2050 climate goals. ☑ (D) Other climate scenario 64

A middle-of-the-road scenario of aligning to 2.7°C/3°C enables to assess with much more granularity and precision, which companies are neither aligned to the global 2050 climate goals nor far astray. This scenario also enables us to have a prudent baseline from which to measure climate alignment and whether the efforts are helping to reduce emissions from the status quo towards a 1.5°C/2°C world more accurately. Understanding the status quo is also paramount to us because it also helps to identify, where further climate alignment may occur, not necessarily just in the heavily misaligned parts. This cannot be achieved by an Inevitable Policy Response scenario as it applies more assumptions to baseline events Risk management Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle ISP 34 PLUS ISP 30 N/A PUBLIC Risk management General Which risk management processes do you have in place to identify and assess climate-related risks? ☐ (A) Internal carbon pricing. Describe: ☐ (B) Hot spot analysis. Describe: ☐ (C) Sensitivity analysis. Describe: ☐ (D) TCFD reporting requirements on external investment managers where we have externally managed assets. Describe: ☑ (E) TCFD reporting requirements on companies. Describe: As investors we are dependent on the disclosure companies are providing to us. Therefore, climate is one of the focus areas for us when engaging with companies. Over time we expect this disclosure to improve making it easier also for us to report in a more meaningful way. We will continue our engagement with companies on climate related issues and encourage them to report on TCFD and SBT (Science Based Targets) because we believe this will also lead to improved quality of disclosures provided to our investors positioning them to meet their climate ambition more precisely. We also support and participate in the Climate 100+ initiative. ☑ (F) Other risk management processes in place, please describe: For listed equities and corporate fixed income assets, Allianz Global Investors performs a regular portfolio screening of Principal Adverse Impact risks along selected key performance indicators, including climate change-relevant indicators, such as carbon emissions and exposure to sectors that are affecting climate change more than other sectors. For private market investments, Allianz Global Investors considers Principal Adverse Impact risks during the origination and structuring phases, often through project and fund-specific due diligence questionnaires that may also include a climate-change relevant section where applicable. Additionally, many of Allianz Global Investors’ private market assets are subject to the Allianz ESG Integration Framework, which sets out criteria to be considered and met when investing in particular sensitive business areas. ☐ (G) We do not have any risk management processes in place to identify and assess climate-related risks 65

Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle ISP 35 PLUS Multiple, see guidance N/A PUBLIC Risk management General In which investment processes do you track and manage climate-related risks? ☐ (A) In our engagements with investee entities, and/or in engagements conducted on our behalf by service providers and/or external managers. Describe: ☑ (B) In (proxy) voting conducted by us, and/or on our behalf by service providers and/or external managers. Describe: Our TCFD journey plays an important role in our proxy voting activities by establishing clearer strategy and expectations. Our voting records on climate related shareholder resolutions demonstrate strong support for such resolutions encouraging companies to pursue the transition to decarbonization Our proxy voting decision-making process involves close collaboration between portfolio managers, research analysts and environmental, social and governance (“ESG”) analysts. The specialist ESG Research team coordinate our engagement efforts and often leads engagements on corporate governance, environmental, social and business conduct matters. Hence, thanks to steering and proxy voting climate-related risks are effectively assessed, addressed, mitigated, and monitored. ☐ (C) In our external investment manager selection process. Describe: ☐ (D) In our external investment manager monitoring process. Describe: ☐ (E) In the asset class benchmark selection process. Describe: ☑ (F) In our financial analysis process. Describe: The transition to 2°C or lower is used to inform investment and engagement analysis on which companies have been on a sufficient decarbonisation path already or are on track to reach that within the next 5 years. The companies that are aligned to a 2°C or lower scenario already may have favourable effects on an investment portfolio’s overall alignment. Such companies may also experience potential benefits in not having to expend additional efforts in the future as their business may already be aligned to the 2050 climate goals. ☐ (G) Other investment process(es). Describe: ☐ (H) We are not tracking and managing climate-related risks in specific investment processes Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle ISP 36 PLUS N/A N/A PUBLIC Risk management General How are the processes for identifying, assessing and managing climate-related risks incorporated into your organisation's overall risk management? ☐ (A) The risk committee or the equivalent function is formally responsible for identifying, assessing and managing climate risks. Describe: ☐ (B) Climate risks are incorporated into traditional risks (e.g. credit risk, market risk, liquidity risk or operational risk). Describe: ☐ (C) Climate risks are prioritised based on their relative materiality, as defined by our organisation's materiality analysis. Describe: ☐ (D) Executive remuneration is linked to climate-related KPIs. Describe: ☐ (E) Management remuneration is linked to climate-related KPIs. Describe: ☐ (F) Climate risks are included in the enterprise risk management system. Describe: ☐ (G) Other methods for incorporating climate risks into overall risk management, please describe: 66

☑ (H) Processes for identifying, assessing and managing climate-related risks are not integrated into our overall risk management Metrics and targets Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle ISP 37 PLUS N/A ISP 37.1 PUBLIC Metrics and targets General Have you set any organisation-wide targets on climate change? ☐ (A) Reducing carbon intensity of portfolios ☐ (B) Reducing exposure to assets with significant climate transition risks ☐ (C) Investing in low-carbon, energy-efficient climate adaptation opportunities in different asset classes ☐ (D) Aligning entire group-wide portfolio with net zero ☑ (E) Other target, please specify: Work in partnership with asset owner clients on decarbonisation goals, consistent with an ambition to reach net zero emissions by 2050 or sooner across all assets under management (‘AUM’); Set an interim target for the proportion of assets to be managed in line with the attainment of net zero emissions by 2050 or sooner; Review our interim target at least every five years, with a view to ratcheting up the proportion of AUM covered until 100% of assets are included. ☐ (F) No, we have not set any climate-related targets Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle ISP 37.1 PLUS ISP 37 N/A PUBLIC Metrics and targets General Provide more details about your climate change target(s). (2) The timeframe over which the (1) Absolute- or intensity-based target applies: Years [Enter a value between 1 and 100] (E) Other target [as specified] (1) Absolute-Based 29 (3) Baseline year [between 1900–2020] (4) Baseline amount (E) Other target [as specified] 2021 0 (5) Target date dd/mm/yyyy (6) Target value/amount (E) Other target [as specified] 01/01/2050 100% 67

(7) Interim targets or KPIs used to (8) Other details assess progress against the target (E) Other target [as specified] - - Metrics and targets: Transition risk Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Metrics and targets: Transition ISP 38 PLUS N/A ISP 38.1 PUBLIC General risk What climate-related metric(s) has your organisation identified for transition risk monitoring and management? ☑ (A) Total carbon emissions ☑ (B) Carbon footprint ☐ (C) Carbon intensity ☑ (D) Weighted average carbon intensity ☑ (E) Implied temperature warming ☐ (F) Percentage of assets aligned with the EU Taxonomy (or similar taxonomy) ☐ (G) Avoided emissions metrics (real assets) ☑ (H) Other metrics, please specify: Sector-specific carbon budget above/below a 1.5/2/3 degree scenario ☐ (I) No, we have not identified any climate-related metrics for transition risk monitoring Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Metrics and targets: Transition ISP 38.1 PLUS ISP 38 N/A PUBLIC General risk Provide details about the metric(s) you have identified for transition risk monitoring and management. (1) Coverage of AUM (2) Purpose Measures the total greenhouse gas (A) Total carbon emissions (2) for the majority of our assets footprint of a portfolio in tons of carbon-dioxide equivalents (tCO2e). 68

Measures the absolute greenhouse (B) Carbon footprint (2) for the majority of our assets gas footprint of a portfolio in tons of carbon-dioxide equivalents (tCO2e). The Weighted Average Carbon Intensity measures a portfolio’s exposure to greenhouse gases relative to company revenues. Companies carbon intensity links emissions to (D) Weighted average carbon revenues, this metric can serve as a (2) for the majority of our assets intensity proxy for portfolio’s emissions profile regardless of the size of the companies it holds, assuming that company emissions are tied to their business activity and therefore revenues. To enable tracking companies, portfolios, and benchmarks against the goal of limiting global warming to (E) Implied temperature warming (2) for the majority of our assets below 2°C from pre-industrial levels, as well as other climate change scenario outcomes. To enable tracking companies, portfolios, and benchmarks against the goal of limiting global warming to (H) Other metrics [as specified] (3) for a minority of our assets below 2°C from pre-industrial levels, as well as other climate change scenario outcomes. (3) Metric unit (4) Methodology The emissions for an issuer i refer to the sum of the scope 1 and scope 2 emissions according to the GHG Protocol. Measures of GHG emissions can also be referred to as (A) Total carbon emissions tCO2e carbon footprint. The emissions for the 2020 report calculation are sourced from MSCI ESG, which mainly represents emission data based on CDP (Carbon Disclosure Project) data. 69

The emissions for an issuer i refer to the sum of the scope 1 and scope 2 emissions according to the GHG Protocol. Measures of GHG emissions can also be referred to as carbon (B) Carbon footprint tCO2e footprint. The emissions for the 2020 report calculation are sourced from MSCI ESG, which mainly represents emission data based on CDP (Carbon Disclosure Project) data. It is the product of the portfolio (D) Weighted average carbon tCO2e/EUR mn sales weights and corporate issuer carbon intensity intensity Carbon budgets are calculated for each temperature scenario. If a company’s or portfolio’s carbon budget is below (negative value) a given temperature’s carbon budget it Temperature ranges: 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5 (E) Implied temperature warming may be attributed an implied degrees temperature corresponding to the scenario. The Implied temperature range will be between the lowest positive carbon budget and highest negative carbon budget figure. Carbon budgets are calculated for each temperature scenario. If a company’s or portfolio’s carbon budget is below (negative value) a given temperature’s carbon budget it may be attributed an implied tCO2e above a carbon budget for (H) Other metrics [as specified] temperature corresponding to the temperature ranges scenario. If the company’s emissions have stayed above (below) a Sectoral Decarbonisation or Global Decarbonisation pathway from a given base year, then it has positive (negative) carbon budget. (5) Disclosed value (A) Total carbon emissions 31 (B) Carbon footprint 187 (D) Weighted average carbon intensity 352 70

(E) Implied temperature warming Not disclosed (H) Other metrics [as specified] Not disclosed Metrics and targets: Physical risk Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Metrics and targets: Physical ISP 39 PLUS N/A ISP 39.1 PUBLIC General risk What climate-related metric(s) has your organisation identified for physical risk monitoring and management? ☐ (A) Weather-related operational losses for real assets or the insurance business unit ☐ (B) Proportion of our property, infrastructure or other alternative asset portfolios in an area subject to flooding, heat stress or water stress ☑ (C) Other metrics, please specify: Physical climate risk scores dependent on different time horizon and scenario ☐ (D) Other metrics, please specify: ☐ (E) We have not identified any metrics for physical risk monitoring Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Metrics and targets: Physical ISP 39.1 PLUS ISP 39 N/A PUBLIC General risk Provide details about the metric(s) you have identified for physical risk monitoring and management. (1) Coverage of AUM (2) Purpose To proxy which companies may be (C) Other metrics [as specified] (3) for a minority of our assets most exposed to highest physical climate risks. (3) Metric unit (4) Methodology 71

The dataset used by us focuses on three future climate change scenarios based on IPCC Representative Concentration Pathways (RCP 8.5, RCP 4.5, and RCP 2.6) and (C) Other metrics [as specified] Physical risk score from 0 - 100 informed by the TCFD technical guidelines. Physical risks are scored at an asset-level considering the asset sensitivity and baseline score into its final risk score. (5) Disclosed value (C) Other metrics [as specified] Not disclosed Sustainability outcomes Set policies on sustainability outcomes Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Set policies on sustainability ISP 40 CORE ISP 1.1 N/A PUBLIC 1, 2 outcomes Where is your approach to sustainability outcomes set out? Your policy/guideline may be a standalone document or part of a wider responsible investment policy. ☑ (A) Our approach to sustainability outcomes is set out in our responsible investment policy ☐ (B) Our approach to sustainability outcomes is set out in our exclusion policy ☑ (C) Our approach to sustainability outcomes is set out in our stewardship policy ☐ (D) Our approach to sustainability outcomes is set out in asset class–specific investment guidelines ☑ (E) Our approach to sustainability outcomes is set out in separate guidelines on specific outcomes (e.g. the SDGs, climate or human rights) 72

Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Set policies on sustainability ISP 41 CORE ISP 1.1 N/A PUBLIC 1, 2 outcomes Which global or regionally recognised frameworks do your policies and guidelines on sustainability outcomes refer to? ☐ (A) The SDG goals and targets ☑ (B) The Paris Agreement ☐ (C) The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights ☐ (D) The OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, including guidance on Responsible Business Conduct for Institutional Investors ☑ (E) Other frameworks, please specify: UN Global Compact ☐ (F) Other frameworks, please specify: Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Set policies on sustainability ISP 42 PLUS ISP 1.1 N/A PUBLIC 1, 2 outcomes What are the main reasons that your organisation has established policies or guidelines on sustainability outcomes? Select a maximum of three options. ☑ (A) Because we understand which potential financial risks and opportunities are likely to exist in (and during the transition to) an SDG-aligned world ☑ (B) Because we see it as a way to identify opportunities, such as through changes to business models, across supply chains and through new and expanded products and services ☐ (C) Because we want to prepare for and respond to legal and regulatory developments, including those that may lead to stranded assets ☐ (D) Because we want to protect our reputation and licence-to-operate (i.e. the trust of beneficiaries, clients and other stakeholders), particularly in the event of negative sustainability outcomes from investments ☐ (E) Because we want to meet institutional commitments on global goals (including those based on client or beneficiaries' preferences), and communicate on progress towards meeting those objectives ☐ (F) Because we consider materiality over longer time horizons to include transition risks, tail risks, financial system risks and similar ☑ (G) Because we want to minimise negative sustainability outcomes and increase positive sustainability outcomes of investments 73

Identify sustainability outcomes Type of Dependent PRI Indicator Gateway to Disclosure Subsection indicator on Principle Multiple, see Identify sustainability ISP 43 CORE N/A PUBLIC 1 guidance outcomes Has your organisation identified the intended and unintended sustainability outcomes from any of its activities? ○ (A) No, we have not identified the sustainability outcomes from our activities ◉ (B) Yes, we have identified one or more sustainability outcomes from some or all of our activities Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Identify sustainability ISP 44 CORE ISP 43 ISP 44.1 PUBLIC 1 outcomes What frameworks/tools did your organisation use to identify the sustainability outcomes from its activities? Indicate the tools or frameworks you have used to identify and map some or all of your sustainability outcomes. ☐ (A) The UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and targets ☑ (B) The Paris Agreement ☐ (C) The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) ☐ (D) The OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, including guidance on Responsible Business Conduct for Institutional Investors ☐ (E) The EU Taxonomy ☐ (F) Other taxonomies (e.g. similar to the EU Taxonomy), please specify: ☑ (G) Other framework/tool, please specify: UN Global Compact ☐ (H) Other framework/tool, please specify: ☐ (I) Other framework/tool, please specify: 74

Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Identify sustainability ISP 44.1 CORE ISP 44 N/A PUBLIC 1 outcomes At what level(s) did your organisation identify the sustainability outcomes from its activities? ☐ (A) At the asset level ☐ (B) At the economic activity level ☑ (C) At the company level ☐ (D) At the sector level ☐ (E) At the country/region level ☐ (F) At the global level ☑ (G) Other level(s), please specify: asset class level ☐ (H) We do not track at what level(s) our sustainability outcomes were identified Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Identify sustainability ISP 45 CORE ISP 43 SO 1 PUBLIC 1 outcomes How has your organisation determined your most important sustainability outcome objectives? ☑ (A) Identifying sustainability outcomes that are closely linked to our core investment activities ☐ (B) Consulting with key clients and/or beneficiaries to align with their priorities ☑ (C) Assessing the potential severity (e.g. probability and amplitude) of specific negative outcomes over different timeframes ☑ (D) Focusing on the potential for systemic impacts (e.g. due to high level of interconnectedness with other global challenges) ☐ (E) Evaluating the potential for certain outcome objectives to act as a catalyst/enabler to achieve a broad range of goals (e.g. gender or education) ☐ (F) Analysing the input from different stakeholders (e.g. affected communities, civil society or similar) ☐ (G) Understanding the geographical relevance of specific sustainability outcome objectives ☑ (H) Other method, please specify: availability and quality of data ☐ (I) We have not yet determined our most important sustainability outcome objectives 75

Transparency & Confidence-Building Measures Information disclosed – ESG assets Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Information disclosed – ESG ISP 46 CORE OO 16 N/A PUBLIC 6 assets For the majority of your ESG/sustainability marketed funds or products, and/or your ESG/RI certified or labelled assets, what information about your ESG approach do you (or the external investment managers/service providers acting on your behalf) include in material shared with clients, beneficiaries and/or the public? The material may be marketing material, information targeted towards existing or prospective clients or information for beneficiaries. ☑ (A) A commitment to responsible investment (e.g. that we are a PRI signatory) ☑ (B) Industry-specific and asset class–specific standards that we align with (e.g. TCFD, or GRESB for property and infrastructure) ☑ (C) Our responsible investment policy (at minimum a summary of our high-level approach) ☑ (D) A description of our investment process and how ESG is considered ☑ (E) ESG objectives of individual funds ☑ (F) Information about the ESG benchmark(s) that we use to measure fund performance ☑ (G) Our stewardship approach ☑ (H) A description of the ESG criteria applied (e.g. sectors, products, activities, ratings and similar) ☑ (I) The thresholds for the ESG criteria applied in our investment decisions or universe construction ☑ (J) A list of our main investments and holdings ☑ (K) ESG case study/example from existing fund(s) ☐ (L)We do not include our approach to ESG in material shared with clients/beneficiaries/the public for the majority of our ESG/sustainability marketed funds or products, and/or our ESG/RI certified or labelled assets 76

Client reporting – ESG assets Type of Gateway PRI Indicator Dependent on Disclosure Subsection indicator to Principle Multiple, see Client reporting – ESG ISP 48 CORE N/A PUBLIC 6 guidance assets What ESG information is included in your client reporting for the majority of your ESG/sustainability marketed funds or products, and/or your ESG/RI certified or labelled assets? ☑ (A) Qualitative analysis, descriptive examples or case studies ☑ (B) Quantitative analysis or key performance indicators (KPIs) related to ESG performance ☐ (C) Progress on our sustainability outcome objectives ☑ (D) Stewardship results ☑ (E) Information on ESG incidents, where applicable ☐ (F) Analysis of ESG contribution to portfolio financial performance ☐ (G) We do not include ESG information in client reporting for the majority of our ESG/sustainability marketed funds or products, and/or our ESG/RI certified or labelled assets Information disclosed – All assets Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Information disclosed – All ISP 49 CORE N/A N/A PUBLIC 6 assets For the majority of your total assets under management, what information about your ESG approach do you (or the external managers/service providers acting on your behalf) include in material shared with clients, beneficiaries and/or the public? The material may be marketing material, information targeted towards existing or prospective clients or information for beneficiaries. ☑ (A) A commitment to responsible investment (e.g. that we are a PRI signatory) ☑ (B) Industry-specific and asset class–specific standards that we align with (e.g. TCFD, or GRESB for property and infrastructure) ☑ (C) Our responsible investment policy (at minimum a summary of our high-level approach) ☑ (D) A description of our investment process and how ESG is considered ☐ (E) ESG objectives of individual funds ☐ (F) Information about the ESG benchmark(s) that we use to measure fund performance ☑ (G) Our stewardship approach ☐ (H) A description of the ESG criteria applied (e.g. sectors, products, activities, ratings and similar) ☐ (I) The thresholds for the ESG criteria applied in our investment decisions or universe construction ☑ (J) A list of our main investments and holdings ☐ (K) ESG case study/example from existing fund(s) 77

☐ (L) We do not include our approach to ESG in material shared with clients/beneficiaries/the public for the majority of our assets under management Client reporting – All assets Type of Gateway PRI Indicator Dependent on Disclosure Subsection indicator to Principle Multiple, see Client reporting – All ISP 50 CORE N/A PUBLIC 6 guidance assets What ESG information is included in your client reporting for the majority of your assets under management? ☑ (A) Qualitative ESG analysis, descriptive examples or case studies ☑ (B) Quantitative analysis or key performance indicators (KPIs) related to ESG performance ☐ (C) Progress on our sustainability outcome objectives ☑ (D) Stewardship results ☑ (E) Information on ESG incidents where applicable ☐ (F) Analysis of ESG contribution to portfolio financial performance ☐ (G) We do not include ESG information in client reporting for the majority of our assets under management Frequency of client reporting – All assets Type of Gateway PRI Indicator Dependent on Disclosure Subsection indicator to Principle Multiple, see Frequency of client reporting – ISP 51 CORE N/A PUBLIC 6 guidance All assets For the majority of each asset class, how frequently do you report ESG-related information to your clients? (A) Listed equity (1) Quarterly (B) Fixed income (1) Quarterly (E) Infrastructure (3) Annually 78

Confidence-building measures Type of Dependent PRI Indicator Gateway to Disclosure Subsection indicator on Principle Multiple, see Confidence-building ISP 52 CORE OO 16.1 PUBLIC 6 guidance measures What verification has your organisation had regarding the information you have provided in your PRI Transparency Report this year? ☑ (A) We received third-party independent assurance of selected processes and/or data related to our responsible investment processes, which resulted in a formal assurance conclusion ☐ (B) We conducted a third-party readiness review and are making changes to our internal controls/governance or processes to be able to conduct an external assurance next year ☐ (C) The internal audit function team performed an independent audit of selected processes/and or data related to our responsible investment processes reported in this PRI report ☑ (D) Our board, CEO, other C-level equivalent and/or investment committee has signed off on our PRI report ☑ (E) Some or all of our funds have been audited as part of the certification process against a sustainable investment/RI label ☐ (F) We conducted an external ESG audit of our ESG/sustainability marketed funds or products (excluding ESG/RI certified or labelled assets) ☐ (G) We conducted an external ESG audit of our holdings to check that our funds comply with our RI policy (e.g. exclusion list or investee companies in portfolio above certain ESG rating) ☐ (H) We conducted an external ESG audit of our holdings as part of risk management, engagement identification or investment decision-making ☑ (I) Responses related to our RI practices documented in this report have been internally reviewed before submission to the PRI ☐ (J) None of the above Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle ISP 52, OO Confidence-building ISP 53 CORE N/A PUBLIC 6 14 measures Which responsible investment processes and/or data did your organisation have third-party external assurance on? (A) Investment and stewardship policy (1) Processes assured (4) Neither process nor data (B) Manager selection, appointment and monitoring assured (4) Neither process nor data (C) Listed equity assured 79

(4) Neither process nor data (D) Fixed income assured (4) Neither process nor data (G) Infrastructure assured Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Confidence-building ISP 54 CORE ISP 52 ISP 54.1 PUBLIC 6 measures What standard did your third-party external assurance provider use? ☐ (A) PAS 7341:2020 ☑ (B) ISAE 3000 and national standards based on this ☐ (C) Dutch Standard 3810N (Assurance engagements regarding sustainability reports) ☐ (D) RevR6 (Assurance of Sustainability) ☐ (E) IDW AsS 821 (Assurance Standard for the Audit or Review of Reports on Sustainability Issues) ☐ (F) Accountability AA1000 Assurance Standard (AA1000AS) ☐ (G) IFC performance standards ☐ (H) SSAE 18 and SOC 1 ☐ (I) Other national auditing/assurance standard with guidance on sustainability, please specify: ☐ (J) Invest Europe Handbook of Professional Standards ☐ (K) ISAE 3402 ☐ (L) AAF 01/06 ☐ (M) AAF 01/06 Stewardship Supplement ☐ (N) ISO 26000 Social Responsibility ☐ (O) ASAE 3410 Assurance Engagements on Greenhouse Gas Statements ☐ (P) PCAF ☐ (Q) NGERS audit framework (National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting) ☐ (R) Auditor’s proprietary assurance framework for assuring RI-related information ☐ (S) Other greenhouse gas emissions assurance standard, please specify: ☐ (T) None of the above 80

Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Confidence-building ISP 54.1 PLUS ISP 54 N/A PUBLIC 6 measures Attach your third-party external assurance provider's report that contains the assurance conclusion. File uploaded: https://priassociation.eu.qualtrics.com/ControlPanel/File.php?F=F_SPmOgm78jCiUK1r Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Confidence-building ISP 55 PLUS ISP 52 N/A PUBLIC 6 measures Provide details of the third-party external assurance. Include details such as the level of assurance attained, who conducted it, limitations, the expertise of the assurer in the subject matter and/or usage of multiple standards. Level of assurance: limited conducted by PricewaterhouseCoopers GmbH Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Confidence-building ISP 58 CORE ISP 52 N/A PUBLIC 6 measures Who has reviewed/verified the entirety of or selected data from your PRI report? (A) Board and/or trustees (4) report not reviewed (B) Chief-level staff (e.g. Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Chief Investment Officer (2) most of the report (CIO) or Chief Operating Officer (COO)) (C) Investment committee (2) most of the report 81

(D) Other chief-level staff, please specify: (4) report not reviewed NA (E) Head of department, please specify: (1) the entire report Head of Sustainable and Impact Investing (F) Compliance/risk management team (4) report not reviewed (G) Legal team (4) report not reviewed (H) RI/ ESG team (1) the entire report (I) Investment teams (4) report not reviewed Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Confidence-building ISP 59 CORE ISP 52 N/A PUBLIC 6 measures Which of the following ESG/RI certifications or labels do you hold? ☐ (A) Commodity type label (e.g. BCI) ☐ (B) GRESB ☐ (C) Austrian Ecolabel (UZ49) ☐ (D) B Corporation ☐ (E) BREEAM ☐ (F) CBI Climate Bonds Standard ☐ (G) EU Ecolabel ☐ (H) EU Green Bond Standard ☑ (I) Febelfin label (Belgium) ☐ (J) FNG-Siegel Ecolabel (Germany, Austria and Switzerland) ☑ (K) Greenfin label (France) ☐ (L) ICMA Green Bond Principles ☐ (M) Le label ISR (French government SRI label) ☐ (N) Luxflag Climate Finance ☐ (O) Luxflag Environment ☐ (P) Luxflag ESG ☐ (Q) Luxflag Green Bond ☐ (R) Luxflag Microfinance ☑ (S) National stewardship code (e.g. UK or Japan), please specify: UK stewardship code ☐ (T) Nordic Swan Ecolabel 82

☑ (U) Other SRI label based on EUROSIF SRI Transparency Code (e.g. Novethic), please specify: French ISR label ☐ (V) People's Bank of China green bond guidelines ☐ (W) RIAA (Australia) ☑ (X) Towards Sustainability label (Belgium) ☑ (Y) Other, please specify: Eurosif SRI Transparency Code Manager Selection, Appointment and Monitoring (SAM) Selection Responsible investment policy Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Responsible investment SAM 2 CORE OO 11 SAM 2.1 PUBLIC 1, 4 policy During the reporting year, did your organisation include compliance with your responsible investment policy as a pre-requisite when selecting external managers? (If you did not select any external managers during the reporting year, refer to the last reporting year in which you did select external managers.) (2) Yes, when selecting external managers of (3) We did not include (1) Yes, only when ESG/sustainability compliance with our selecting external funds and mainstream responsible investment managers of funds (This option also policy as a pre-requisite ESG/sustainability applies to signatories when selecting external funds who may not hold managers ESG/sustainability funds) (A) Listed equity (active) ○ ◉ ○ (B) Listed equity (passive) ○ ◉ ○ (C) Fixed income (active) ○ ◉ ○ 83

(D) Fixed income (passive) ○ ◉ ○ (E) Private equity ○ ◉ ○ (G) Infrastructure ○ ◉ ○ Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Responsible investment SAM 2.1 CORE SAM 2 N/A PUBLIC 1,4 policy In what proportion of cases did your organisation include compliance with your responsible investment policy as a pre-requisite when selecting external managers? (1) Listed equity (active) (B) When selecting external managers of ESG/sustainability funds and mainstream (3) in a minority of cases funds (2) Listed equity (passive) (B) When selecting external managers of ESG/sustainability funds and mainstream (3) in a minority of cases funds (3) Fixed income (active) (B) When selecting external managers of ESG/sustainability funds and mainstream (3) in a minority of cases funds (4) Fixed income (passive) (B) When selecting external managers of ESG/sustainability funds and mainstream (3) in a minority of cases funds (5) Private equity (B) When selecting external managers of ESG/sustainability funds and mainstream (1) in all cases funds (7) Infrastructure 84

(B) When selecting external managers of ESG/sustainability funds and mainstream (1) in all cases funds Research and screening Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle SAM 3 CORE OO 11 N/A PUBLIC Research and screening 1 When selecting external managers, which aspects of their organisation do you, or the investment consultant acting on your behalf, assess against responsible investment criteria? (Per asset class, indicate the proportion of your AUM to which each of these selection practices applies, regardless of when you selected your different external managers.) (1) Listed equity (active) (2) Listed equity (passive) (2) for the majority of our externally (2) for the majority of our externally (A) Firm culture managed AUM managed AUM (B) Investment (2) for the majority of our externally (4) for none of our externally managed AUM approach, objectives managed AUM and philosophy (C) Investment (2) for the majority of our externally (4) for none of our externally managed AUM policy or guidelines managed AUM (D) Governance (2) for the majority of our externally (2) for the majority of our externally structure and managed AUM managed AUM management oversight, including diversity (E) Investment (2) for the majority of our externally (4) for none of our externally managed AUM strategy and fund managed AUM structure (F) Investment (2) for the majority of our externally (4) for none of our externally managed AUM team competencies managed AUM 85

(G) Other, please NA NA specify: (1) for all of our externally managed AUM (1) for all of our externally managed AUM (3) Fixed income (active) (4) Fixed income (passive) (2) for the majority of our externally (4) for none of our externally managed AUM (A) Firm culture managed AUM (B) Investment (2) for the majority of our externally (4) for none of our externally managed AUM approach, objectives managed AUM and philosophy (C) Investment (2) for the majority of our externally (4) for none of our externally managed AUM policy or guidelines managed AUM (D) Governance (2) for the majority of our externally (4) for none of our externally managed AUM structure and managed AUM management oversight, including diversity (E) Investment (2) for the majority of our externally (4) for none of our externally managed AUM strategy and fund managed AUM structure (F) Investment (2) for the majority of our externally (4) for none of our externally managed AUM team competencies managed AUM (G) Other, please NA NA specify: (1) for all of our externally managed AUM (1) for all of our externally managed AUM (5) Private equity (7) Infrastructure (A) Firm culture (1) for all of our externally managed AUM (1) for all of our externally managed AUM (B) Investment (1) for all of our externally managed AUM (1) for all of our externally managed AUM approach, objectives and philosophy (C) Investment (1) for all of our externally managed AUM (1) for all of our externally managed AUM policy or guidelines 86

(D) Governance (1) for all of our externally managed AUM (1) for all of our externally managed AUM structure and management oversight, including diversity (E) Investment (1) for all of our externally managed AUM (1) for all of our externally managed AUM strategy and fund structure (F) Investment (1) for all of our externally managed AUM (1) for all of our externally managed AUM team competencies (G) Other, please NA NA specify: (1) for all of our externally managed AUM (1) for all of our externally managed AUM Investment practices Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle SAM 4 CORE OO 11 N/A PUBLIC Investment practices 1 Which responsible investment practices does your organisation, or the investment consultants acting on your behalf, require as part of your external manager selection criteria? (Per asset class, indicate the proportion of your AUM to which each of these selection practices applies, regardless of when you selected your different external managers.) As part of the selection criteria, we require that external managers: (1) Listed equity (active) (2) Listed equity (passive) (A) Incorporate (3) for a minority of our externally managed (2) for the majority of our externally material ESG AUM managed AUM factors in all of their investment analyses and decisions (B) Incorporate (3) for a minority of our externally managed (4) for none of our externally managed AUM their own AUM responsible investment policy into their asset allocation decisions 87

(C) Have adequate (3) for a minority of our externally managed (4) for none of our externally managed AUM resources and AUM processes to analyse ESG factors (D) Incorporate (3) for a minority of our externally managed (2) for the majority of our externally material ESG AUM managed AUM factors throughout their portfolio construction (E) Engage with (3) for a minority of our externally managed (4) for none of our externally managed AUM underlying portfolio AUM assets to address ESG risks and opportunities (F) Comply with (3) for a minority of our externally managed (4) for none of our externally managed AUM their own exclusions AUM policy (G) Embed ESG (3) for a minority of our externally managed (2) for the majority of our externally considerations in AUM managed AUM contractual documentation (H) Implement (3) for a minority of our externally managed (4) for none of our externally managed AUM adequate disclosure AUM and accountability mechanisms (I) Are willing to (2) for the majority of our externally (4) for none of our externally managed AUM work in partnership managed AUM with our organisation to develop their responsible investment approach (J) Track the (3) for a minority of our externally managed (4) for none of our externally managed AUM positive and AUM negative sustainability outcomes of their activities (K) Other, please NA NA specify: (1) for all of our externally managed AUM (1) for all of our externally managed AUM 88

(3) Fixed income (active) (4) Fixed income (passive) (A) Incorporate (3) for a minority of our externally managed (3) for a minority of our externally managed material ESG AUM AUM factors in all of their investment analyses and decisions (B) Incorporate (3) for a minority of our externally managed (4) for none of our externally managed AUM their own AUM responsible investment policy into their asset allocation decisions (C) Have adequate (3) for a minority of our externally managed (4) for none of our externally managed AUM resources and AUM processes to analyse ESG factors (D) Incorporate (3) for a minority of our externally managed (4) for none of our externally managed AUM material ESG AUM factors throughout their portfolio construction (E) Engage with (4) for none of our externally managed AUM (4) for none of our externally managed AUM underlying portfolio assets to address ESG risks and opportunities (F) Comply with (3) for a minority of our externally managed (4) for none of our externally managed AUM their own exclusions AUM policy (G) Embed ESG (3) for a minority of our externally managed (4) for none of our externally managed AUM considerations in AUM contractual documentation (H) Implement (3) for a minority of our externally managed (4) for none of our externally managed AUM adequate disclosure AUM and accountability mechanisms 89

(I) Are willing to (2) for the majority of our externally (4) for none of our externally managed AUM work in partnership managed AUM with our organisation to develop their responsible investment approach (J) Track the (3) for a minority of our externally managed (4) for none of our externally managed AUM positive and AUM negative sustainability outcomes of their activities (K) Other, please NA .NA specify: (1) for all of our externally managed AUM (1) for all of our externally managed AUM (5) Private equity (7) Infrastructure (A) Incorporate (1) for all of our externally managed AUM (1) for all of our externally managed AUM material ESG factors in all of their investment analyses and decisions (B) Incorporate (1) for all of our externally managed AUM (1) for all of our externally managed AUM their own responsible investment policy into their asset allocation decisions (C) Have adequate (1) for all of our externally managed AUM (1) for all of our externally managed AUM resources and processes to analyse ESG factors (D) Incorporate (2) for the majority of our externally (1) for all of our externally managed AUM material ESG managed AUM factors throughout their portfolio construction (E) Engage with (2) for the majority of our externally (2) for the majority of our externally underlying portfolio managed AUM managed AUM assets to address ESGrisks and 90

(F) Comply with (1) for all of our externally managed AUM (1) for all of our externally managed AUM their own exclusions policy (G) Embed ESG (1) for all of our externally managed AUM (1) for all of our externally managed AUM considerations in contractual documentation (H) Implement (2) for the majority of our externally (2) for the majority of our externally adequate disclosure managed AUM managed AUM and accountability mechanisms (I) Are willing to (1) for all of our externally managed AUM (1) for all of our externally managed AUM work in partnership with our organisation to develop their responsible investment approach (J) Track the (3) for a minority of our externally managed (2) for the majority of our externally positive and AUM managed AUM negative sustainability outcomes of their activities (K) Other, please NA .NA specify: (1) for all of our externally managed AUM (1) for all of our externally managed AUM Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle SAM 5 PLUS OO 11 N/A PUBLIC Investment practices 1 Does your organisation, or the investment consultants acting on your behalf, expressly assess the following practices regarding derivatives and short positions as part of your manager selection process? (Indicate the proportion of your AUM to which each of these selection practices applies, regardless of when you selected your different external managers.) (A) We assess whether they apply ESG incorporation into derivatives, insurance (5) for none of our externally instruments (such as CDS) and other synthetic exposures or positions managed AUM 91

(B) We assess how they apply their exclusion policies to short and derivative (5) for none of our externally exposures managed AUM (C) We assess whether their use of leverage is aligned with their responsible (5) for none of our externally investment policy managed AUM Sustainability outcomes Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle SAM 10 PLUS OO 11 N/A PUBLIC Sustainability outcomes 1 How does your organisation, or the investment consultant acting on your behalf, assess external managers' approaches to their sustainability outcomes as part of your selection process? (Indicate the proportion of your AUM to which each of these selection practices applies, regardless of when you selected your different external managers.) (A) We assess their track records on advancing sustainability outcomes across their (3) for a minority of our assets externally managed AUM (B) We assess whether they have set targets for the sustainability outcomes of their (3) for a minority of our activities or are willing to incorporate our own targets externally managed AUM (C) We assess how they use key levers including asset allocation, engagement and (3) for a minority of our stewardship activities to advance sustainability outcomes externally managed AUM (D) We assess how well they report on their progress on sustainability outcomes (4) for none of our externally across their assets managed AUM (E) Other, please specify: (1) for all of our externally . managed AUM 92

Documentation and track record Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Documentation and track SAM 11 CORE OO 11 N/A PUBLIC 1 record As part of your selection process, which documents does your organisation, or the investment consultants acting on your behalf, review to gain confidence in external managers' responsible investment practices? (Indicate the proportion of your AUM to which each of these selection practices applies, regardless of when you selected your different external managers.) (2) for the majority of our (A) Standard client reporting, responsible investment reports or impact reports externally managed AUM (B) Responsible investment methodology and its influence on past investment (2) for the majority of our decisions externally managed AUM (3) for a minority of our (C) Historical voting and engagement activities with investees externally managed AUM (3) for a minority of our (D) Historical engagement activities with policymakers externally managed AUM (E) Compliance manuals and portfolios to ensure universal construction rules are (2) for the majority of our applied (e.g. exclusions, thematic, best-in-class definitions and thresholds) externally managed AUM (3) for a minority of our (F) Controversies and incidence reports externally managed AUM (3) for a minority of our (G) Code of conduct or codes of ethics externally managed AUM (H) Other, please specify: (1) for all of our externally .NA managed AUM 93

Appointment Segregated mandates Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle SAM 13 CORE OO 12, OO 5.1 N/A PUBLIC Segregated mandates 4 When setting up segregated mandates with external managers, which responsible investment clauses did your organisation, or the investment consultants acting on your behalf, include in your current contractual agreements? (Indicate the proportion of your AUM invested in segregated funds to which each of these requirements applies, regardless of when you appointed your different external managers.) (A) The manager's commitment to follow our responsible investment strategy in the (3) for a minority of our AUM management of our assets invested in segregated mandates (B) The manager's commitment to incorporate material ESG factors into its (2) for the majority of our AUM investment and stewardship activities invested in segregated mandates (2) for the majority of our AUM (C) Exclusion list(s) invested in segregated mandates (D) Responsible investment communication and reporting obligations, including on (3) for a minority of our AUM stewardship activities and results invested in segregated mandates (E) Stewardship commitments in line with the PRI's guidance and focused on (3) for a minority of our AUM seeking sustainability outcomes and prioritising common goals and collaborative invested in segregated mandates action (F) Where applicable, commitment to fulfil a clear policy on security lending aligned (4) for none of our AUM with our own security lending policy or with the ICGN Securities Lending Code of invested in segregated mandates Best Practice (1) for all of our AUM invested (G) Incentives and controls to ensure alignment of interests in segregated mandates (H) Commitments on climate-related disclosure in line with internationally (4) for none of our AUM recognised frameworks such as the TCFD invested in segregated mandates (4) for none of our AUM (I) If applicable, commitment to disclose against the EU Taxonomy invested in segregated mandates 94

(J) Commitment to respect human rights as defined in the OECD Guidelines for (4) for none of our AUM Multinational Enterprises and the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human invested in segregated mandates Rights (K) The manager's acknowledgement that their appointment was conditional on (4) for none of our AUM their fulfilment of their responsible investment obligations invested in segregated mandates (L) Other, please specify: (4) for none of our AUM NA invested in segregated mandates Monitoring Investment practices Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle SAM 14 CORE OO 13 N/A PUBLIC Investment practices 1 During the reporting year, which aspects of your external manager's responsible investment practices did you, or your investment consultant acting on your behalf, monitor? (5) Private equity (7) Infrastructure (A) We monitored (1) for all of our externally managed AUM (1) for all of our externally managed AUM their alignment with our organisation's responsible investment strategy (B) We monitored (1) for all of our externally managed AUM (2) for the majority of our externally any changes in their managed AUM responsible investment–related policies, resourcing, oversight and responsibilities or investment processes (C) We monitored (2) for the majority of our externally (2) for the majority of our externally their use of ESG managed AUM managed AUM data, benchmarks, tools and certifications 95

(D) We monitored (1) for all of our externally managed AUM (3) for a minority of our externally managed how ESG AUM incorporation affected investment decisions (E) We monitored (3) for a minority of our externally managed (3) for a minority of our externally managed how ESG AUM AUM incorporation affected the fund's financial and ESG performance (F) We monitored (2) for the majority of our externally (2) for the majority of our externally any changes in ESG managed AUM managed AUM risk management processes (G) We monitored (1) for all of our externally managed AUM (1) for all of our externally managed AUM their response to material ESG incidents (H) Other, please NA NA specify: (1) for all of our externally managed AUM (1) for all of our externally managed AUM Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle SAM 16 PLUS OO 13 N/A PUBLIC Investment practices 1 Provide an example of a leading practice you adopted as part of your monitoring of your external managers’ responsible investment practices in private equity, real estate and/ or infrastructure during the reporting year. Please provide examples below: 96

We engaged with smaller external managers / private equity GPs to develop an ESG policy, with a lack of ESG policy sufficient reason to not invest in specific cases. An example is a growth orientated lower mid-market private equity firm that raised a USD 450m fund in Q4 19, without an ESG policy. We engaged with the GP to support the development of its ESG policy, sharing best practices of others in the industry. (A) Private equity When co-investing alongside external managers, we complete an ESG review including engagement with the ACP ESG Committee. ESG concerns identified are raised with the external manager and depending on the materiality we may either decline an investment (e.g. a potential co-investment in the entertainment sector was declined due to animal welfare concerns in October 2020) or seek remedy before committing. During the life of the funds, ACP uses its membership of Advisory Committees to advocate against any investments that are not consistent with ACP’s ESG standards. ACP has established a set of ESG excuse rights (e.g. (C) Infrastructure regarding coal and unconventionally produced hydrocarbons), which are required for fund commitments. ACP has not invested in some funds because their managers were not willing to fully implement appropriate ESG policies. Sustainability outcomes Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle SAM 19 PLUS OO 13 N/A PUBLIC Sustainability outcomes 1 During the reporting year, how did your organisation, or the investment consultants acting on your behalf, monitor your external managers' progress on sustainability outcomes? ☑ (A) We reviewed progress on the sustainability outcomes of their activities ☐ (B) We reviewed how they used asset allocation individually or in partnership with others to make progress on sustainability outcomes ☑ (C) We reviewed how they used individual or collaborative investee engagement, including voting, to make progress on sustainability outcomes ☐ (D) We reviewed how they used individual or collaborative systemic stewardship, including policy engagement, to make progress on sustainability outcomes ☐ (E) We reviewed how they contributed to public goods (such as research) or public discourse (such as media) or collaborated with other actors to track and communicate progress against global sustainability goals ☐ (F) Other, please specify: ☐ (G) We did not review their progress on sustainability outcomes 97

Review Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle SAM 20 CORE OO 13 N/A PUBLIC Review 1 During the reporting year, how often did your organisation, or the investment consultants acting on your behalf, require your external managers to report to you on their responsible investment practices? (5) Private equity (7) Infrastructure (A) Quarterly or (3) for a minority of our externally managed (3) for a minority of our externally managed more often AUM AUM (B) Every six (3) for a minority of our externally managed (3) for a minority of our externally managed months AUM AUM (2) for the majority of our externally (2) for the majority of our externally (C) Annually managed AUM managed AUM (D) Less than once (3) for a minority of our externally managed (3) for a minority of our externally managed a year AUM AUM (E) On an ad hoc (1) for all of our externally managed AUM (1) for all of our externally managed AUM basis (e.g. whenever significant changes, incidents or ESG- linked events occur) 98

Verification Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle SAM 21 PLUS OO 13 N/A PUBLIC Verification 1 During the reporting year, how did your organisation, or the investment consultants acting on your behalf, verify the information reported by external managers on their responsible investment practices? (5) Private equity (7) Infrastructure (A) We required (3) for a minority of our externally managed (2) for the majority of our externally evidence of internal AUM managed AUM monitoring or compliance (B) We required (4) for none of our externally managed AUM (4) for none of our externally managed AUM evidence of external monitoring or compliance (C) We required (4) for none of our externally managed AUM (3) for a minority of our externally managed that they had an AUM independent ESG advisory board or committee (D) We required (4) for none of our externally managed AUM (4) for none of our externally managed AUM verification by an external, independent auditor (E) Other, please . NA specify: (4) for none of our externally managed AUM (4) for none of our externally managed AUM 99

Engagement and escalation Type of Dependent Gateway Indicator Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle indicator on to Engagement and SAM 22 CORE OO 13 N/A PUBLIC 1 escalation Which actions does your organisation, or the investment consultants acting on your behalf, include in its formal escalation process to address concerns raised during monitoring? (5) Private equity (7) Infrastructure (A) We notify the external manager about their placement ☐ ☐ on a watch list (B) We engage the external manager's board or investment ☑ ☑ committee (C) We reduce exposure with the external manager until any non- ☐ ☐ conformances have been rectified (D) We terminate the contract with the external manager if failings persist over a (notified) ☐ ☐ period of time and explain the reasons for the termination (E) Other, please specify ☐ ☐ (F) Our organisation does not have a formal escalation process ☐ ☐ to address concerns raised by monitoring 100

Listed Equity (LE) Pre-investment phase Materiality analysis Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle LE 1 CORE OO 10 LE 1.1 PUBLIC Materiality analysis 1 Does your organisation have a formal investment process to identify material ESG factors across listed equities? (2) Active – quantitative (3) Active – fundamental (A) Yes, we have a formal process to identify material ESG ◉ ◉ factors for all of our assets (B) Yes, we have a formal process to identify material ESG ○ ○ factors for the majority of our assets (C) Yes, we have a formal process to identify material ESG ○ ○ factors for a minority of our assets (D) No, we do not have a formal process. Our investment professionals identify material ○ ○ ESG factors at their own discretion (E) No, we do not have a formal process to identify material ESG ○ ○ factors 101

Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle LE 1.1 CORE LE 1 N/A PUBLIC Materiality analysis 1 How does your current investment process incorporate material ESG factors? (2) Active - Quantitative (3) Active - Fundamental (A) The investment process incorporates material governance ☑ ☑ factors (B) The investment process incorporates material ☑ ☑ environmental and social factors (C) The investment process incorporates material ESG ☑ ☑ factors beyond our organisation's typical investment time horizon (D) The investment process incorporates the effect of ☑ ☑ material ESG factors on revenues and business operations Long-term ESG trend analysis Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Long-term ESG trend LE 2 CORE OO 10 N/A PUBLIC 1 analysis Do you continuously monitor a list of identified long-term ESG trends related to your listed equity assets? (2) Active – quantitative (3) Active – fundamental (A) We monitor long-term ESG ◉ ◉ trends for all assets 102

(B) We monitor long-term ESG ○ ○ trends for the majority of assets (C) We monitor long-term ESG ○ ○ trends for a minority of assets (D) We do not continuously monitor long-term ESG trends in ○ ○ our investment process ESG incorporation Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle LE 3 CORE OO 10 LE 3.1 PUBLIC ESG incorporation 1 How does your financial modelling and equity valuation process incorporate material ESG risks? (2) Active – quantitative (3) Active – fundamental (A) We incorporate governance- related risks into financial ☑ ☑ modelling and equity valuations (B) We incorporate environmental and social risks ☑ ☑ into financial modelling and equity valuations (C) We incorporate environmental and social risks related to companies' supply ☐ ☐ chains into financial modelling and equity valuations (D) ESG risk is incorporated into financial modelling and equity valuations at the ☐ ☐ discretion of individual investment decision-makers, and we do not track this process 103

(E) We do not incorporate ESG risks into our financial modelling ☐ ☐ and equity valuations Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle LE 3.1 CORE LE 3 N/A PUBLIC ESG incorporation 1 In what proportion of cases do you incorporate the following material ESG risks into your financial modelling and equity valuation process? (2) Active - Quantitative (A) We incorporate governance-related risks into financial modelling and equity (2) in the majority of cases valuations (B) We incorporate environmental and social risks into financial modelling and equity (2) in the majority of cases valuations (3) Active - Fundamental (A) We incorporate governance-related risks into financial modelling and equity (2) in the majority of cases valuations (B) We incorporate environmental and social risks into financial modelling and equity (2) in the majority of cases valuations Assessing ESG performance 104

Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Assessing ESG LE 4 CORE OO 10 LE 4.1 PUBLIC 1 performance What information do you incorporate when you assess the ESG performance of companies in your financial modelling and equity valuation process? (2) Active – quantitative (3) Active – fundamental (A) We incorporate information on current performance across a ☑ ☑ range of ESG metrics (B) We incorporate information on historical performance across ☑ ☑ a range of ESG metrics (C) We incorporate information enabling performance comparison ☑ ☑ within a selected peer group across a range of ESG metrics (D) We incorporate information on ESG metrics that may impact ☑ ☑ or influence future corporate revenues and/or profitability (E) We do not incorporate ESG factors when assessing the ESG performance of companies in our ☐ ☐ financial modelling or equity valuation 105

Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Assessing ESG LE 4.1 CORE LE 4 N/A PUBLIC 1 performance In what proportion of cases do you incorporate the following information when assessing the ESG performance of companies in your financial modelling and equity valuation process? (2) Active – quantitative (A) We incorporate information on current performance across a range of ESG (2) in the majority of cases metrics (B) We incorporate information on historical performance across a range of ESG (2) in the majority of cases metrics (C) We incorporate information enabling performance comparison within a selected (2) in the majority of cases peer group across a range of ESG metrics (D) We incorporate information on ESG metrics that may impact or influence future (2) in the majority of cases corporate revenues and/or profitability (3) Active – fundamental (A) We incorporate information on current performance across a range of ESG (2) in the majority of cases metrics (B) We incorporate information on historical performance across a range of ESG (2) in the majority of cases metrics (C) We incorporate information enabling performance comparison within a selected (2) in the majority of cases peer group across a range of ESG metrics (D) We incorporate information on ESG metrics that may impact or influence future (2) in the majority of cases corporate revenues and/or profitability 106

ESG incorporation in portfolio construction Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle ESG incorporation in portfolio LE 6 CORE OO 10 LE 6.1 PUBLIC 1 construction How do ESG factors influence your portfolio construction? (2) Active – quantitative (3) Active – fundamental (A) The selection of individual assets within our portfolio is ☑ ☑ influenced by ESG factors (B) The holding period of individual assets within our ☑ ☑ portfolio is influenced by ESG factors (C) The portfolio weighting of individual assets within our ☑ ☑ portfolio or benchmark is influenced by ESG factors (D) The allocation of assets across multi-asset portfolios is influenced by ESG factors ☐ ☐ through the strategic asset allocation process (E) Other expressions of ☐ ☐ conviction (please specify below) (F) The portfolio construction or benchmark selection does not ☐ ☐ explicitly include the incorporation of ESG factors 107

Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle ESG incorporation in portfolio LE 6.1 CORE LE 6 N/A PUBLIC 1 construction In what proportion of cases did ESG factors influence your portfolio construction? (2) Active – quantitative (A) The selection of individual assets within our portfolio is influenced by ESG (2) in the majority of cases factors (B) The holding period of individual assets within our portfolio is influenced by ESG (2) in the majority of cases factors (C) The portfolio weighting of individual assets within our portfolio or benchmark is (2) in the majority of cases influenced by ESG factors (3) Active – fundamental (A) The selection of individual assets within our portfolio is influenced by ESG (1) in all cases factors (B) The holding period of individual assets within our portfolio is influenced by ESG (2) in the majority of cases factors (C) The portfolio weighting of individual assets within our portfolio or benchmark is (1) in all cases influenced by ESG factors 108

ESG risk management Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle LE 8 CORE OO 6.1 LE N/A PUBLIC ESG risk management 1 What compliance processes do you have in place to ensure that your listed equity assets subject to negative exclusionary screens meet the screening criteria? ☐ (A) We have an independent committee that oversees the screening implementation process, but only for our ESG/sustainability labelled funds that are subject to negative exclusionary screening ☐ (B) We have an independent committee that oversees the screening implementation process for all of our listed equity assets that are subject to negative exclusionary screening ☐ (C) We have an independent committee that verifies that we have correctly implemented pre-trade checks in our internal systems to ensure no execution is possible without their pre-clearance ☑ (D) Other, please specify: our compliance function performs the required checks and balances ☐ (E) We do not have compliance processes in place to ensure that we meet our stated negative exclusionary screens Post-investment phase Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle LE 9 CORE OO 10 N/A PUBLIC ESG risk management 1 Do your regular reviews incorporate ESG risks? (2) Active – quantitative (3) Active – fundamental (A) Our regular reviews include quantitative information on ☑ ☑ material ESG risks specific to individual listed equities (B) Our regular reviews include aggregated quantitative ☑ ☑ information on material ESG risks at a fund level (C) Our regular reviews only highlight fund holdings where ☐ ☐ ESG ratings have changed 109

(D) We do not conduct regular reviews. Risk reviews of ESG factors are conducted at the ☐ ☐ discretion of the individual fund manager and vary in frequency (E) We do not conduct reviews ☐ ☐ Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle LE 10 CORE OO 10 N/A PUBLIC ESG risk management 1 Do you regularly identify and incorporate ESG incidents into the investment process for your listed equity assets? (2) Active – quantitative (3) Active – fundamental (A) Yes, we have a formal process in place for regularly identifying and incorporating ○ ○ ESG incidents into all of our investment decisions (B) Yes, we have a formal process in place for regularly identifying and incorporating ◉ ◉ ESG incidents into the majority of our investment decisions (C) Yes, we have a formal process in place for regularly identifying and incorporating ○ ○ ESG incidents into a minority of our investment decisions (D) Yes, we have an ad hoc process in place for identifying ○ ○ and incorporating ESG incidents (E) Other ○ ○ 110

(F) We currently do not have a process in place for regularly identifying and incorporating ○ ○ ESG incidents into our investment decision-making Reporting/Disclosure Sharing ESG information with stakeholders Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Sharing ESG information with LE 13 CORE OO 6 LE N/A PUBLIC 6 stakeholders How do you ensure that clients and/or beneficiaries understand ESG screens and their implications? (2) for the (3) for a (1) for all of our majority of our minority of our (4) for none of our listed equity listed equity listed equity assets subject to assets subject to assets subject to assets subject to ESG screens ESG screens ESG screens ESG screens (A) We publish a list of ESG screens and share it on a publicly accessible platform such as a ◉ ○ ○ ○ website or through fund documentation (B) We publish any changes in ESG screens and share them on a publicly accessible platform such ◉ ○ ○ ○ as a website or through fund documentation (C) We outline any implications of ESG screens, such as deviation from a benchmark or impact on ○ ○ ◉ ○ sector weightings, to clients and/or beneficiaries 111

Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Sharing ESG information with LE 14 CORE OO 10 N/A PUBLIC 6 stakeholders What ESG information is covered in your regular reporting to stakeholders such as clients or beneficiaries? (2) Active – quantitative (A) Our regular stakeholder reporting includes qualitative examples of engagement 3) In a minority of our and/or ESG incorporation stakeholder reporting 2) In the majority of our regular (B) Our regular stakeholder reporting includes quantitative ESG engagement data stakeholder reporting 2) In the majority of our regular (C) Our regular stakeholder reporting includes quantitative ESG incorporation data stakeholder reporting (3) Active – fundamental (A) Our regular stakeholder reporting includes qualitative examples of engagement 2) In the majority of our regular and/or ESG incorporation stakeholder reporting 2) In the majority of our regular (B) Our regular stakeholder reporting includes quantitative ESG engagement data stakeholder reporting 2) In the majority of our regular (C) Our regular stakeholder reporting includes quantitative ESG incorporation data stakeholder reporting 112

Stewardship Voting policy Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle LE 15 CORE OO 9 LE LE 15.1, LE 16 PUBLIC Voting policy 2 Does your organisation have a publicly available (proxy) voting policy? (The policy may be a standalone policy, part of a stewardship policy or incorporated into a wider RI policy.) ◉ (A) Yes, we have a publicly available (proxy) voting policy Add link(s): https://www.allianzgi.com/en/our-firm/esg/documents#keypolicydocumentsandreports ○ (B) Yes, we have a (proxy) voting policy, but it is not publicly available ○ (C) No, we do not have a (proxy) voting policy Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle LE 15.1 CORE OO 9 LE, LE 15 N/A PUBLIC Voting policy 2 What percentage of your listed equity assets does your (proxy) voting policy cover? (A) Actively managed listed equity covered by our voting policy (12) 100% Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle LE 16 CORE LE 15 N/A PUBLIC Voting policy 2 Does your organisation's policy on (proxy) voting cover specific ESG factors? ☑ (A) Our policy includes voting guidelines on specific governance factors Describe: AllianzGI’s corporate governance guidelines covers a wide range of areas including Board of Directors, Audit and Risk Management, Shareholder Rights, Capital Authority, Corporate Transactions, Corporate Finance Issues and Remuneration. We invest time and resources evaluating corporate governance and proxy voting issues on a case-by-case basis. These decisions take into account companies’ explanations of their governance structures and practices as well as variances across markets in regulatory and legal frameworks and disclosure regimes. ☑ (B) Our policy includes voting guidelines on specific environmental factors Describe: 113

AllianzGI customarily reviews shareholder proposals concerning sustainability issues, including proposals related to climate change action, reporting on climate change or emissions-related topics. Given the variety and variability of shareholder proposals, it is often difficult to develop policy positions on the issues raised by shareholders; hence we prefer to review and vote on a case-by-case basis. AllianzGI supports shareholder proposals seeking information on the climate-related financial, physical or regulatory risks and how the company identifies, measures and manages such risks. We normally support shareholder proposals calling for the reduction of GHG emissions, subject to our own assessments of the company’s efforts and improvements achieved. ☑ (C) Our policy includes voting guidelines on specific social factors Describe: AllianzGI supports a range of social policies such as proposals seeking enhanced reporting of the company’s efforts to improve diversity of boards, management, and workforce, as well as other indicators that help investors assess a company’s human capital management. AllianzGI supports proposals requesting a report on the company’s labour and/or human rights standards and policies, as well as implementation of such standard and policies. AllianzGI generally supports proposals relating to a company’s policies, initiatives and oversight of, product safety and toxic/ hazardous materials. ☐ (D) Our policy is high-level and does not cover specific ESG factors Describe: Alignment & effectiveness Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle LE 17 CORE OO 9 LE N/A PUBLIC Alignment & effectiveness 2 When you use external service providers to give voting recommendations, how do you ensure that those recommendations are consistent with your organisation's (proxy) voting policy? (A) We review service providers' controversial and high-profile voting (1) in all cases recommendations before voting is executed (B) Before voting is executed, we review service providers' voting recommendations (1) in all cases where the application of our voting policy is unclear 114

Security lending policy Type of Dependent Indicator Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle indicator on LE 18.1, LE Security lending LE 18 CORE OO 9 LE PUBLIC 2 18.2 policy Does your organisation have a public policy that states how voting is addressed in your securities lending programme? (The policy may be a standalone guideline or part of a wider RI or stewardship policy.) ○ (A) We have a public policy to address voting in our securities lending programme. Add link(s): ○ (B) We have a policy to address voting in our securities lending programme, but it is not publicly available ○ (C) We rely on the policy of our service provider(s) ○ (D) We do not have a policy to address voting in our securities lending programme ◉ (E) Not applicable, we do not have a securities lending programme Shareholder resolutions Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle LE 19 CORE OO 9 LE N/A PUBLIC Shareholder resolutions 2 Which of the following best describes your decision-making approach regarding shareholder resolutions, or that of your service provider(s) if decision-making is delegated to them? ◉ (A) In the majority of cases, we support resolutions that, if passed, are expected to advance progress on the underlying ESG factors or on our stewardship priorities ○ (B) In the majority of cases, we support resolutions that, if passed, are expected to advance progress on the underlying ESG factors but only if the investee company has not already committed publicly to the action requested in the proposal ○ (C) In the majority of cases, we only support shareholder resolutions as an escalation tactic when other avenues for engagement with the investee company have not achieved sufficient progress ○ (D) In the majority of cases, we support the recommendations of investee company management by default ○ (E) In the majority of cases, we do not vote on shareholder resolutions 115

Pre-declaration of votes Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle LE 20 CORE OO 9 LE N/A PUBLIC Pre-declaration of votes 2 How did your organisation or your service provider(s) pre-declare votes prior to AGMs/EGMs? ☐ (A) We pre-declared our voting intentions publicly through the PRI's vote declaration system ☐ (B) We pre-declared our voting intentions publicly (e.g. through our own website) Link to public disclosure: ☐ (C) We pre-declared our voting intentions publicly through the PRI's vote declaration system, including the rationale for our (proxy) voting decisions where we planned to vote against management proposals or abstain ☐ (D) We pre-declared our voting intentions publicly, including the rationale for our (proxy) voting decisions where we planned to vote against management proposals or abstain Link to public disclosure: ☑ (E) Prior to the AGM/EGM, we privately communicated our voting decision to investee companies in cases where we planned to vote against management proposals or abstain ☐ (F) We did not privately or publicly communicate our voting intentions ☐ (G) We did not cast any (proxy) votes during the reporting year Voting disclosure post AGM/EGM Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Voting disclosure post LE 21 CORE OO 9 LE LE 21.1 PUBLIC 2 AGM/EGM Do you publicly report your (proxy) voting decisions, or those made on your behalf by your service provider(s), in a central source? ◉ (A) Yes, for >95% of (proxy) votes Link: https://www.allianzgi.com/en/our-firm/esg/documents#keypolicydocumentsandreports ○ (B) Yes, for the majority of (proxy) votes Link: ○ (C) Yes, for a minority of (proxy) votes 1) Add link and 2) Explain why you only publicly disclose a minority of (proxy) voting decisions: ○ (D) No, we do not publicly report our (proxy) voting decisions Explain why you do not publicly report your (proxy) voting decisions: 116

Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Voting disclosure post LE 21.1 CORE LE 21 N/A PUBLIC 2 AGM/EGM In the majority of cases, how soon after an investee's AGM/EGM do you publish your voting decisions? ◉ (A) Within one month of the AGM/EGM ○ (B) Within three months of the AGM/EGM ○ (C) Within six months of the AGM/EGM ○ (D) Within one year of the AGM/EGM ○ (E) More than one year after the AGM/EGM Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Voting disclosure post LE 22 CORE OO 9 LE LE 22.1 PUBLIC 2 AGM/EGM Did your organisation and/or the service provider(s) acting on your behalf communicate the rationale for your voting decisions? ☐ (A) In cases where we voted against management recommendations or abstained, the rationale was provided privately to the company ☑ (B) In cases where we voted against management recommendations or abstained, the rationale was disclosed publicly ☐ (C) In cases where we voted against management recommendations or abstained, we did not communicate the rationale ☐ (D) We did not vote against management or abstain Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Voting disclosure post LE 22.1 CORE LE 22 N/A PUBLIC 2 AGM/EGM Indicate the proportion of votes where you and/or the service provider(s) acting on your behalf communicated the rationale for your voting decisions. (B) In cases where we voted against management recommendations or abstained, the (5) >95% rationale was disclosed publicly 117

Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Voting disclosure post LE 23 CORE OO 9 LE LE 23.1 PUBLIC 2, 5 AGM/EGM Did your organisation and/or the service provider(s) acting on your behalf communicate the rationale for your voting decisions when voting against a shareholder resolution proposed/filed by a PRI signatory? ☑ (A) In cases where we voted against a shareholder resolution proposed/filed by a PRI signatory, the rationale was disclosed publicly ☐ (B) In cases where we voted against a shareholder resolution proposed/filed by a PRI signatory, the rationale was not disclosed publicly ☐ (C) We did not vote against any shareholder resolution proposed/filed by a PRI signatory Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Voting disclosure post LE 23.1 CORE LE 23 N/A PUBLIC 2, 5 AGM/EGM Indicate the proportion of votes where you and/or the service provider(s) acting on your behalf communicated the rationale for your voting decisions. (A) In cases where we voted against a shareholder resolution proposed/filed by a (4) 76–95% PRI signatory, the rationale was disclosed publicly 118

Fixed Income (FI) Pre-investment phase Materiality analysis Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle FI 1 CORE OO 10 FI 1.1 PUBLIC Materiality analysis 1 Does your organisation have a formal investment process to identify material ESG factors for its fixed income assets? (1) SSA (2) Corporate (3) Securitised (4) Private debt (A) Yes, we have a formal process to identify material ESG factors ○ ○ ○ ◉ for all of our assets (B) Yes, we have a formal process to identify material ESG factors ◉ ◉ ◉ ○ for the majority of our assets (C) Yes, we have a formal process to identify material ESG factors ○ ○ ○ ○ for a minority of our assets (D) No, we do not have a formal process. Our investment professionals identify material ○ ○ ○ ○ ESG factors at their own discretion (E) No, we do not have a formal process to identify material ESG ○ ○ ○ ○ factors 119

Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle FI 1.1 CORE FI 1 N/A PUBLIC Materiality analysis 1 How does your current investment process incorporate material ESG factors? (1) SSA (2) Corporate (3) Securitised (4) Private debt (A) The investment process incorporates material governance ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑ factors (B) The investment process incorporates material ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑ environmental and social factors (C) The investment process incorporates material ESG factors ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑ beyond our organisation's typical investment time horizon (D) The investment process incorporates the effect of material ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑ ESG factors on revenues and business operations ESG risk management Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle FI 2 CORE OO 10 FI 2.1 PUBLIC ESG risk management 1 How are material ESG factors incorporated into your portfolio risk management process? (1) SSA (2) Corporate (3) Securitised (4) Private debt (A) Investment committee members, or the equivalent ☐ ☐ ☐ ☑ function/group, have a qualitative ESG veto 120

(B) Companies, sectors, countries and currency are monitored for ☐ ☐ ☐ ☑ changes in ESG exposure and for breaches of risk limits (C) Overall exposure to specific ESG factors is measured for our portfolio construction, and sizing ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑ or hedging adjustments are made depending on individual issuers' sensitivity to these factors (D) Other method of incorporating ESG factors into ☐ ☐ ☐ ☑ risk management process, please specify below: (E) We do not have a process to incorporate ESG factors into our ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ portfolio risk management Please specify for "(D) Other method of incorporating ESG factors into risk management process". As part of a periodic review of the investments during the monitoring phase, AllianzGI Investment and Risk Management teams considers whether key ESG risks have arisen since the prior review and if applicable develop an action plan to alleviate the ESG risks that have been identified. For particular strategies with a certain degree of flexibility to implement lender specific requests, AllianzGI Investment teams take the lead in embedding certain ESG specific clauses within the financing documentation. Among other examples, this typically gives AllianzGI investors the ability to be automatically prepaid if, for example, a borrower materially breaches an environmental law. Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle FI 2.1 CORE FI 2 N/A PUBLIC ESG risk management 1 For what proportion of your fixed income assets are material ESG factors incorporated into your portfolio risk management process? (1) SSA (C) Overall exposure to specific ESG factors is measured for our portfolio (2) for the majority of our construction, and sizing or hedging adjustments are made depending on individual assets issuers' sensitivity to these factors (2) Corporate 121

(C) Overall exposure to specific ESG factors is measured for our portfolio (2) for the majority of our construction, and sizing or hedging adjustments are made depending on individual assets issuers' sensitivity to these factors (3) Securitised (C) Overall exposure to specific ESG factors is measured for our portfolio (2) for the majority of our construction, and sizing or hedging adjustments are made depending on individual assets issuers' sensitivity to these factors (4) Private debt (A) Investment committee members, or the equivalent function/group, have a (2) for the majority of our qualitative ESG veto assets (B) Companies, sectors, countries and currency are monitored for changes in ESG (3) for a minority of our assets exposure and for breaches of risk limits (C) Overall exposure to specific ESG factors is measured for our portfolio construction, and sizing or hedging adjustments are made depending on individual (3) for a minority of our assets issuers' sensitivity to these factors (2) for the majority of our (D) Other method of incorporating ESG factors into risk management process assets ESG incorporation in asset valuation Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle ESG incorporation in asset FI 3 CORE OO 10 FI 3.1 PUBLIC 1 valuation How do you incorporate the evolution of ESG factors into your fixed income asset valuation process? (1) SSA (2) Corporate (3) Securitised (4) Private debt (A) We incorporate it into the forecast of cash flow, revenues ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑ and profitability 122

(B) We anticipate how the evolution of ESG factors may ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑ change the ESG profile of the debt issuer (C) We do not incorporate the evolution of ESG factors into our ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ fixed income asset valuation process Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle ESG incorporation in asset FI 3.1 CORE FI 3 N/A PUBLIC 1 valuation In what proportion of cases do you incorporate the evolution of ESG factors into your fixed income asset valuation process? (1) SSA (A) We incorporate it into the forecast of cash flow, revenues and profitability (2) in the majority of cases (B) We anticipate how the evolution of ESG factors may change the ESG profile of (2) in the majority of cases the debt issuer (2) Corporate (A) We incorporate it into the forecast of cash flow, revenues and profitability (2) in the majority of cases (B) We anticipate how the evolution of ESG factors may change the ESG profile of (2) in the majority of cases the debt issuer (3) Securitised (A) We incorporate it into the forecast of cash flow, revenues and profitability (2) in the majority of cases (B) We anticipate how the evolution of ESG factors may change the ESG profile of (2) in the majority of cases the debt issuer (4) Private debt (A) We incorporate it into the forecast of cash flow, revenues and profitability (2) in the majority of cases 123

(B) We anticipate how the evolution of ESG factors may change the ESG profile of (2) in the majority of cases the debt issuer ESG incorporation in portfolio construction Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle ESG incorporation in portfolio FI 5 CORE OO 10 FI 5.1 PUBLIC 1 construction How do ESG factors influence your portfolio construction? (1) SSA (2) Corporate (3) Securitised (4) Private debt (A) The selection of individual assets within our portfolio is ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑ influenced by ESG factors (B) The holding period of individual assets within our ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑ portfolio is influenced by ESG factors (C) The portfolio weighting of individual assets within our ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑ portfolio or benchmark is influenced by ESG factors (D) The allocation of assets across multi-asset portfolios is influenced by ESG factors ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ through the strategic asset allocation process (E) Other expressions of ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ conviction, please specify below: (F) The portfolio construction or benchmark selection does not ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ explicitly include the incorporation of ESG factors 124

Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle ESG incorporation in portfolio FI 5.1 CORE FI 5 N/A PUBLIC 1 construction In what proportion of cases do ESG factors influence your portfolio construction? (1) SSA (A) The selection of individual assets within our portfolio is influenced by ESG (2) in the majority of cases factors (B) The holding period of individual assets within our portfolio is influenced by ESG (2) in the majority of cases factors (C) The portfolio weighting of individual assets within our portfolio or benchmark is (2) in the majority of cases influenced by ESG factors (2) Corporate (A) The selection of individual assets within our portfolio is influenced by ESG (2) in the majority of cases factors (B) The holding period of individual assets within our portfolio is influenced by ESG (2) in the majority of cases factors (C) The portfolio weighting of individual assets within our portfolio or benchmark is (2) in the majority of cases influenced by ESG factors (3) Securitised (A) The selection of individual assets within our portfolio is influenced by ESG (2) in the majority of cases factors (B) The holding period of individual assets within our portfolio is influenced by ESG (2) in the majority of cases factors (C) The portfolio weighting of individual assets within our portfolio or benchmark is (2) in the majority of cases influenced by ESG factors (4) Private debt 125

(A) The selection of individual assets within our portfolio is influenced by ESG (1) in all cases factors (B) The holding period of individual assets within our portfolio is influenced by ESG (2) in the majority of cases factors (C) The portfolio weighting of individual assets within our portfolio or benchmark is (3) in a minority of cases influenced by ESG factors ESG incorporation in assessment of issuers Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle ESG incorporation in assessment of FI 7 CORE OO 10 N/A PUBLIC 1 issuers When assessing issuers'/borrowers' credit quality, how does your organisation incorporate material ESG risks in the majority of cases? (1) SSA (2) Corporate (3) Securitised (4) Private debt (A) In the majority of cases, we incorporate material governance- ○ ○ ○ ○ related risks (B) In addition to incorporating governance-related risks, in the majority of cases we also ◉ ◉ ◉ ◉ incorporate material environmental and social risks (C) We do not incorporate material ESG risks for the ○ ○ ○ ○ majority of our credit quality assessments of issuers/borrowers 126

ESG performance Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle FI 8 CORE OO 10 N/A PUBLIC ESG performance 1 In the majority of cases, how do you assess the relative ESG performance of a borrower within a peer group as part of your investment process? (1) SSA (2) Corporate (3) Securitised (A) We use the relative ESG performance of a borrower to adjust the internal credit ☑ ☑ ☑ assessments of borrowers by modifying forecasted financials and future cash flow estimates (B) We use the relative ESG performance of a borrower to ☑ ☑ ☑ make relative sizing decisions in portfolio construction (C) We use the relative ESG performance of a borrower to screen for outliers when ☑ ☑ ☑ comparing credit spreads to ESG relative performance within a similar peer group (D) We consider the ESG performance of a borrower only on a standalone basis and do not ☐ ☐ ☐ compare it within peer groups of other benchmarks (E) We do not have an internal ESG performance assessment ☐ ☐ ☐ methodology 127

ESG risk management Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle FI 9 CORE OO 10 FI 9.1 PUBLIC ESG risk management 1 For your corporate fixed income, does your organisation have a framework that differentiates ESG risks by issuer country and sector? ☐ (A) Yes, it differentiates ESG risks by country/region (for example, local governance and labour practices) ☑ (B) Yes, it differentiates ESG risks by sector ☐ (C) No, we do not have a framework that differentiates ESG risks by issuer country/region and sector Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle FI 9.1 CORE FI 9 N/A PUBLIC ESG risk management 1 For what proportion of your corporate fixed income assets do you apply your framework for differentiating ESG risks by issuer country/sector? (1) for all of our (2) for the majority of (3) for a minority of our corporate fixed income our corporate fixed corporate fixed income assets income assets assets (B) We differentiate ESG risks ○ ◉ ○ by sector Private debt Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle FI 10 CORE OO 10 FI 10.1 PUBLIC Private debt 1 Indicate how your organisation incorporates ESG factors when selecting private debt investments during the due diligence phase. ☑ (A) We use a qualitative ESG checklist ☑ (B) We assess quantitative ESG data, such as energy consumption, carbon footprint and gender diversity ☐ (C) We require that the investment has its own ESG policy ☐ (D) We hire specialised third parties for additional ESG assessments ☑ (E) We require the review and sign-off of our ESG due diligence process by our investment committee or the equivalent function ☑ (F) Other method of incorporating ESG into the selection of private debt during due diligence (please specify below): ☐ (G) We do not incorporate ESG factors when selecting private debt during the due diligence phase 128

Please specify "(F) Other method of incorporating ESG into selection of private debt during due diligence". For the majority of our private debt strategies AllianzGI is not simply a price-taker but has the ability to negotiate the commercial terms of the investment and can implement specific restrictions on the borrower as a result of conclusions being reached through a detailed ESG risk assessment. This sometimes involves adding ESG specific covenants and undertakings in the financing documentation where possible, but, can also under our Asia Private Credit strategy, extend to actively engaging borrowers to develop a specific E&S Action Plan to alleviate certain risks, when necessary Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle FI 10.1 CORE FI 10 N/A PUBLIC Private debt 1 In what proportion of cases do you incorporate ESG factors when selecting private debt investments during the due diligence phase? (2) in the majority of (1) in all cases (3) in a minority of cases cases (A) We use a qualitative ESG ○ ◉ ○ checklist (B) We assess quantitative ESG data, such as energy ○ ○ ◉ consumption, carbon footprint and gender diversity (E) We require the review and sign off of our ESG due diligence process by our investment ○ ◉ ○ committee, or the equivalent function (F) Other method of incorporating ESG into the ○ ◉ ○ selection of private debt during due diligence 129

Securitised products Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle FI 11 CORE OO 10 N/A PUBLIC Securitised products 1 How do you incorporate ESG factors into the financial analysis of securitised products? ◉ (A) We analyse ESG risks and returns for both the issuer or debtor and the underlying collateral or asset pool ○ (B) We perform ESG analysis that covers the issuer or debtor only ○ (C) We perform ESG analysis that covers the underlying collateral or asset pool only ○ (D) We do not incorporate ESG factors into the financial analysis of securitised products Post-investment phase ESG risk management Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle FI 12 CORE OO 10 N/A PUBLIC ESG risk management 1 Do your regular reviews incorporate ESG risks? (1) SSA (2) Corporate (3) Securitised (4) Private debt (A) Our regular reviews include quantitative information on ☑ ☑ ☑ ☐ material ESG risks specific to individual fixed income assets (B) Our regular reviews include aggregated quantitative ☑ ☑ ☑ ☐ information on material ESG risks at a fund level (C) Our regular reviews only highlight fund holdings where ☐ ☐ ☐ ☑ ESG ratings have changed 130

(D) We do not conduct regular reviews. Risk reviews of ESG factors are conducted at the ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ discretion of the individual fund manager and vary in frequency (E) We do not conduct reviews ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ that incorporate ESG risks Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle FI 13 CORE OO 10 N/A PUBLIC ESG risk management 1 Do you regularly identify and incorporate ESG incidents into the investment process for your fixed income assets? (1) SSA (2) Corporate (3) Securitised (4) Private debt (A) Yes, we have a formal process in place for regularly identifying and incorporating ESG incidents ○ ○ ○ ○ into all of our investment decisions (B) Yes, we have a formal process in place for regularly identifying and incorporating ESG incidents ◉ ◉ ◉ ◉ into the majority of our investment decisions (C) Yes, we have a formal process in place for regularly identifying and incorporating ESG incidents ○ ○ ○ ○ into a minority of our investment decisions (D) Yes, we have an ad hoc process in place for identifying ○ ○ ○ ○ and incorporating ESG incidents (E) We do not have a process in place for regularly identifying and ○ ○ ○ ○ incorporating ESG incidents into our investment decision-making 131

Time horizons Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle FI 14 CORE OO 10 N/A PUBLIC Time horizons 1 In the majority of cases, how does your investment process account for differing time horizons of holdings and how they may affect ESG factors? (1) SSA (2) Corporate (3) Securitised (A) We take into account current ☑ ☑ ☑ risks (B) We take into account ☑ ☑ ☑ medium-term risks (C) We take into account long- ☑ ☑ ☑ term risks (D) We do not take into account differing time horizons of ☐ ☐ ☐ holdings and how they may affect ESG factors Long-term ESG trend analysis Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Long-term ESG trend FI 15 CORE OO 10 N/A PUBLIC 1 analysis Do you continuously monitor a list of identified long-term ESG trends related to your fixed income assets? (1) SSA (2) Corporate (3) Securitised (4) Private debt (A) We monitor long-term ESG ○ ○ ○ ○ trends for all of our assets 132

(B) We monitor long-term ESG trends for the majority of our ◉ ◉ ◉ ○ assets (C) We monitor long-term ESG trends for a minority of our ○ ○ ○ ◉ assets (D) We do not continuously monitor long-term ESG trends in ○ ○ ○ ○ our investment process Thematic bonds Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle FI 19 CORE OO 6 FI N/A PUBLIC Thematic bonds 1 How do you determine which non-labelled thematic bonds to invest in? ☑ (A) By reviewing the bond's use of proceeds ☑ (B) By reviewing companies' ESG targets ☑ (C) By reviewing companies' progress towards achieving ESG targets ☐ (D) We do not invest in non-labelled thematic bonds Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle FI 20 CORE OO 6 FI N/A PUBLIC Thematic bonds 1, 2, 6 What action do you take in the majority of cases where proceeds of a thematic bond issuer are not allocated to the original plan? ☑ (A) We engage with the issuer ☐ (B) We alert regulators ☐ (C) We alert thematic bond certification agencies ☑ (D) We sell the security ☐ (E) We publicly disclose the breach ☑ (F) We blacklist the issuer ☐ (G) Other action, please specify: ☐ (H) We do not take any specific actions when proceeds from bond issuers are not allocated in accordance with the original plan 133

Reporting/Disclosure ESG screens Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle FI 21 CORE OO 6 FI N/A PUBLIC ESG screens 6 How do you ensure that clients and/or beneficiaries understand ESG screens and their implications? (A) We publish a list of ESG screens and share it on a publicly accessible platform (1) for all of our fixed income such as a website or through fund documentation Voluntary URL link(s) to list of assets subject to ESG screens ESG screens: (B) We publish any changes in ESG screens and share it on a publicly accessible (1) for all of our fixed income platform such as a website or through fund documentation Voluntary URL link(s) assets subject to ESG screens to ESG screen changes: (3) for a minority of our fixed (C) We outline any implications of ESG screens, such as deviation from a benchmark income assets subject to ESG or impact on sector weightings, to clients and/or beneficiaries screens Engagement Engaging with issuers/borrowers Type of Dependent Gateway PRI Indicator Disclosure Subsection indicator on to Principle Engaging with FI 22 CORE OO 9 FI FI 22.1 PUBLIC 2 issuers/borrowers At which stages does your organisation engage with issuers/borrowers? (1) SSA (2) Corporate (3) Securitised (4) Private debt (A) At the pre-issuance/pre-deal ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑ stage 134

(B) At the pre-investment stage ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑ (C) During the holding period ☑ ☑ ☑ ☑ (D) At the refinancing stage ☐ ☐ ☐ ☑ (E) When issuers/borrowers ☐ ☐ ☐ ☑ default Sovereign bonds Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle FI 23 CORE OO 9 FI N/A PUBLIC Sovereign bonds 2 For the majority of your sovereign bond engagements, which non-issuer stakeholders do you engage with to promote your engagement objectives? ☐ (A) Non-ruling parties ☑ (B) Originators and primary dealers ☑ (C) Index and ESG data providers ☑ (D) Multinational companies/state-owned enterprises (SOEs) ☑ (E) Supranational organisations ☑ (F) Credit rating agencies (CRAs) ☐ (G) Business associations ☐ (H) Media ☐ (I) NGOs, think tanks and academics ☐ (J) Other non-issuer stakeholders, please specify: ☐ (K) We do not engage with any of the above stakeholders for the majority of our sovereign bond engagements 135

Infrastructure (INF) Policy Investment guidelines Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle INF 1 CORE OO 31, OO 32 N/A PUBLIC Investment guidelines 1 to 6 What infrastructure-specific ESG guidelines are currently covered in your organisation's responsible investment policies? ☑ (A) Guidelines on how we adapt our ESG approach for each infrastructure sector we invest in ☑ (B) Guidelines on our ESG approach to new construction ☑ (C) Guidelines on our ESG approach to standing investments or operating assets ☑ (D) Guidelines on our engagement approach related to workforce ☑ (E) Guidelines on our engagement approach related to third-party operators ☑ (F) Guidelines on our engagement approach related to contractors ☑ (G) Guidelines on our engagement approach related to other external stakeholders (e.g. government, local communities and end-users) ☐ (H) Our policies do not cover infrastructure-specific ESG guidelines 136

Fundraising Commitments to investors Type of Indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle indicator INF 2 CORE N/A N/A PUBLIC Commitments to investors 1, 4 For all of your funds that you closed during the reporting year, what type of formal responsible investment commitments did you make in Limited Partnership Agreements (LPAs) or side letters? (If you did not close any funds during this reporting year, refer to the last reporting year in which you did close funds.) ☑ (A) We incorporated responsible investment commitments in LPAs as a standard, default procedure ☐ (B) We added responsible investment commitments in LPAs upon client request ☐ (C) We added responsible investment commitments in side letters upon client request ☐ (D) We did not make any formal responsible investment commitments for the relevant reporting year ☐ (E) Not applicable as we have never raised funds ☐ (F) Not applicable as we have not raised funds in the last 5 years Pre-investment phase Materiality analysis Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle INF 3 CORE N/A INF 3.1 PUBLIC Materiality analysis 1 During the reporting year, how did you conduct ESG materiality analysis for your potential infrastructure investments? (1) for all of our potential (A) We assessed materiality at the asset level, as each case is unique infrastructure investments (3) for a minority of our (B) We performed a mix of industry-level and asset-level materiality analysis potential infrastructure investments (4) for none of our potential (C) We assessed materiality at the industry level only infrastructure investments 137

Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle INF 3.1 CORE INF 3 N/A PUBLIC Materiality analysis 1 During the reporting year, what tools, standards and data did you use in your ESG materiality analysis of potential infrastructure investments? ☐ (A) We used GRI Standards to inform our infrastructure materiality analysis ☐ (B) We used SASB to inform our infrastructure materiality analysis ☐ (C) We used GRESB Materiality Assessment (RC7) or similar in our infrastructure materiality analysis ☑ (D) We used environmental and social factors detailed in the IFC Performance Standards (or other similar standards) in our infrastructure materiality analysis ☑ (E) We used climate risk disclosures such as the TCFD recommendations (or other climate risk analysis tools) to inform our infrastructure materiality analysis ☑ (F) We used geopolitical and macro-economic considerations in our infrastructure materiality analysis ☑ (G) Other, please specify: Allianz SE and Allianz Global Investors (ACP and the Infrastructure Equity “IEQ” team) have developed rigorous in-house ESG screening and reporting measures and procedures for new and existing assets; these reference assessments developed under a number of ESG-related standards and recommendations including IFC Performance Standards, the Equator Principles, SASB, TCFD, SBTi and the Technical Annex of SFDR (i.e. the EU Taxonomy version 18/06/2020 adapted by the European Parliament). Due diligence Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle INF 4 CORE N/A N/A PUBLIC Due diligence 1 During the reporting year, how did ESG factors affect the selection of your infrastructure investments? (1) for all of our infrastructure (A) ESG factors helped identify risks investments selected (1) for all of our infrastructure (B) ESG factors were discussed by the investment committee (or equivalent) investments selected (C) ESG factors helped identify remedial actions for our 100-day plans (or (1) for all of our infrastructure equivalent) investments selected (2) for the majority of our (D) ESG factors helped identify opportunities for value creation infrastructure investments selected 138

(3) for a minority of our (E) ESG factors led to the abandonment of potential investments infrastructure investments selected (F) ESG factors impacted investments in terms of price offered and/or paid by (1) for all of our infrastructure having an effect on revenue assumptions investments selected (G) ESG factors impacted investments in terms of price offered and/or paid by (1) for all of our infrastructure having an effect on CAPEX assumptions investments selected (H) ESG factors impacted investments in terms of price offered and/or paid by (1) for all of our infrastructure having an effect on OPEX assumptions investments selected (3) for a minority of our (I) ESG factors impacted investments in terms of price offered and/or paid by infrastructure investments having an effect on the cost of capital or discount rate assumptions selected (J) Other, please specify: (1) for all of our infrastructure NA investments selected Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle INF 5 CORE N/A N/A PUBLIC Due diligence 1 Once material ESG factors have been identified, what processes do you use to conduct due diligence on these factors for potential investments? (1) for all of our potential (A) We do a high-level/desktop review against an ESG checklist for initial red flags infrastructure investments (1) for all of our potential (B) We send detailed ESG questionnaires to target assets infrastructure investments (1) for all of our potential (C) We hire third-party consultants to do technical due diligence on specific issues infrastructure investments (1) for all of our potential (D) We conduct site visits and in-depth interviews with management and personnel infrastructure investments (E) We incorporate actions based on the risks and opportunities identified in the (1) for all of our potential due diligence process into the 100-day plan (or equivalent) infrastructure investments 139

(F) We incorporate ESG due diligence findings in all of our relevant investment (1) for all of our potential process documentation in the same manner as for other key due diligence (e.g. infrastructure investments commercial, accounting and legal) (G) Our investment committee (or an equivalent decision-making body) is ultimately (1) for all of our potential responsible for ensuring all ESG due diligence is completed in the same manner as infrastructure investments for other key due diligence (e.g. commercial, accounting and legal) (H) Other, please specify: (1) for all of our potential NA infrastructure investments Selection, appointment and monitoring of third-party operators Selection process Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle INF 6 CORE OO 32 N/A PUBLIC Selection process 1, 4 During the reporting year, how did you include ESG factors in all of your selections of external operators? (If you did not select external operators during the reporting year, report on the most recent year in which you selected external/third-party infrastructure operators.) ☑ (A) We requested information from potential operators on their overall approach to ESG ☑ (B) We requested track records and examples from potential operators on how they manage ESG factors ☑ (C) We requested information from potential operators on their engagement process(es) with stakeholders ☐ (D) We requested documentation from potential operators on their responsible procurement and/or contractor practices (including responsibilities, approach and incentives) ☐ (E) Other, please specify: ☐ (F) We did not include ESG factors in our selection of external operators 140

Appointment process Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle INF 7 CORE OO 32 N/A PUBLIC Appointment process 1, 4 How did you include ESG factors in the appointment of your current external operators? (A) We set clear and detailed expectations for incorporating ESG factors into all (1) for all of our external relevant elements of infrastructure asset management operators (1) for all of our external (B) We set clear ESG reporting requirements operators (1) for all of our external (C) We set clear ESG performance targets operators (2) for the majority of our (D) We set incentives related to ESG targets external operators (E) Other, please specify: In our equity investments in renewable energy assets in US, we request operators to adopt a Responsible Contractor Policy (“RCP”). Developed in partnership with the (1) for all of our external North America’s Building Trades Unions (“NABTU”), this policy aims to foster bidding operators by unions for construction and maintenance contracts attached to the investment projects, requires performance reporting from contractors and promotes fair wages, benefits, gender equality, diversity and better working conditions. Monitoring process Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle INF 8 CORE OO 32 N/A PUBLIC Monitoring process 1, 4 How do you include ESG factors in the monitoring of external operators? (A) We monitor performance against quantitative and/or qualitative environmental (1) for all of our external targets operators (1) for all of our external (B) We monitor performance against quantitative and/or qualitative social targets operators 141

(C) We monitor performance against quantitative and/or qualitative governance (1) for all of our external targets operators (1) for all of our external (D) We have regular discussions about ESG factors with all relevant stakeholders operators (E) We conduct a performance review of key staff based on ESG alignment linked to (2) for the majority of our KPIs and a financial incentive structure external operators (1) for all of our external (F) We have internal/external parties conduct site visits at least once a year operators (G) Other, please specify: (1) for all of our external NA operators Post-investment phase Monitoring Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle INF 9 CORE N/A INF 9.1 PUBLIC Monitoring 1 During the reporting year, did you track one or more core ESG KPIs across all your infrastructure investments? ☑ (A) Yes, we tracked environmental KPIs ☑ (B) Yes, we tracked social KPIs ☑ (C) Yes, we tracked governance KPIs ☐ (D) We did not track ESG KPIs across our infrastructure investments 142

Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle INF 9.1 PLUS INF 9 N/A PUBLIC Monitoring 1 Provide examples of the core ESG KPIs you tracked across all of your infrastructure investments. ☑ (A) ESG KPI #1 Carbon footprint - We collect and analyse the carbon footprint of our portfolio companies and with respect to renewable assets (wind and solar) we also calculate the social costs of carbon emissions avoided ☑ (B) ESG KPI #2 Reduction of CO2 emissions - We work with our Portfolio companies to reduce CO2 emissions with the aim of reaching a net zero position by 2050 ☑ (C) ESG KPI #3 Taxonomy - We undertake Taxonomy analysis on our portfolio companies to determine their contribution and work with them to increase their percentage contribution over time ☑ (D) ESG KPI #4 Renewable Energy - For our renewable portfolio, we track the number of households supplied with electricity produced with renewable resources ☑ (E) ESG KPI #5 Methane leakage - For our gas transmission and distribution investments we track gas leakage reduction and work with the companies to put in place better techniques and initiatives that can reduce emissions further. ☐ (F) ESG KPI #6 ☐ (G) ESG KPI #7 ☐ (H) ESG KPI #8 ☐ (I) ESG KPI #9 ☐ (J) ESG KPI #10 Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle INF 10 CORE N/A N/A PUBLIC Monitoring 1 For the majority of the core KPIs that you tracked, how did you set targets across your infrastructure investments? ☑ (A) We set targets to achieve incremental improvements based on past performance ☑ (B) We set targets using industry benchmarks or standards ☐ (C) We set targets against global benchmarks or thresholds (e.g. on climate change and/or the SDGs) ☐ (D) We did not set targets for the core ESG KPIs that we track ☐ (E) We did not set targets as we don't track core ESG KPIs 143

Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle INF 11 CORE OO 32 INF 11.1 PUBLIC Monitoring 1,2 What processes do you have in place to support meeting your ESG targets for your infrastructure investments? (A) We use operational-level benchmarks to assess and analyse the performance of 1/ For all of our infrastructure assets against sector performance investments (B) We implement international best practice standards such as the IFC 1/ For all of our infrastructure Performance Standards to guide ongoing assessment and analysis investments (C) We implement certified environmental and social management systems across 1/ For all of our infrastructure our portfolio investments (D) We make sufficient budget available to ensure that the systems and procedures 1/ For all of our infrastructure needed to achieve the target are put in place investments (E) We hire external verification services to audit performance, systems and 1/ For all of our infrastructure procedures investments (F) We collaborate and engage with our external operators to develop action plans 1/ For all of our infrastructure to achieve targets investments 1/ For all of our infrastructure (G) We develop minimum health and safety standards investments (H) We conduct ongoing engagement with all key stakeholders (e.g. local 1/ For all of our infrastructure communities, NGOs, governments and end-users) investments (I) Other, please specify: 1/ For all of our infrastructure NA investments 144

Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle INF 11.1 PLUS INF 11 N/A PUBLIC Monitoring 1,2 Describe up to two processes that you put in place during the reporting year to support meeting your ESG targets. Processes to support meeting ESG targets Implementation of the SFRD / EU Taxonomy Implementation has been applied to asset monitoring and investment screening activities: Asset monitoring. Although the EU reporting obligations set out in the Sustainable Financial Related Disclosures (“SFRD”) Directive in its technical annex, the EU Taxonomy, commence from 1 January 2022, AGI has already started to implement them. The methodologies used to discern the technical criteria for: (i) climate change mitigation objectives, (ii) adaptation objectives and (iii) ‘do no significant harm’, have been assessed both at the fund level and the asset level. For example, electricity (A) Process 1 generation through wind farms and solar photovoltaic projects is expected to provide 100g CO2e/kWh emission avoidance. By aggregating the CO2e/kWh emission avoidances of the fund’s assets, the fund’s contribution to the EU Taxonomy is determined and in line with the achievement of EU green targets, this 100g CO2e/kWh per asset threshold might be further reduced every 5 years. Consequently, the funds have an incentive to improve both an assets’ financial and non-financial performance over time. Ultimately the aim is to maintain or increase the Funds’ contribution to the EU Taxonomy as well as contribute to the overall achievement of the six sustainability principles of the SFRD i.e. (response continued in row below) 145

to the transition to a circular economy, to the protection of healthy eco-systems, to anti-corruption policies, to the sustainable use of water, to climate adaptation and to climate protection. Investment screening. Potential new investments are screened to determine their contribution to the EU Taxonomy; where limited information is available at the early stages of a transaction, compliance within the relevant sector is first considered. For example, electric propulsion of rolling stock is targeted over diesel propulsion but is not automatically compliant; noise and vibration benchmarks of <80dB at 80km/h & <95 at 250 km/h also need to be considered to enable compliance. Certain sectors/industries are not yet included in the EU Taxonomy, thereby delaying the screening of certain investments. However, this will be remedied over time through updated legislative amendments. AGI has a diversified investment approach for its customers; although a number of managed funds target specifically sustainable investments, other funds have a wider remit. For these non-sustainable investments, tracking their status under the SFRD is important to monitor the incorporation of sustainable initiatives undertaken by each of the portfolio companies. (response continued in row below) An increase in the percentage of EU Taxonomy compliancy will evidence this approach over time, as for example in gas distribution and transmission companies that switch from carrying methane in their networks to hydrogen. Providing our customers with full transparency on the sustainability ambitions in each of our funds is a priority. In line with the SFRD, funds are classified into three categories: (A) “Non-ESG/Integrated”; (B) “ES” funds, which promote environmental or social characteristics. Here, investee companies follow good governance practices and disclose sustainability indicators and (C) “Sustainable Investment” funds, that are able to measure the incremental social and environmental benefits and financial value creation from the deployment of investors’ capital into qualifying sustainable assets. This new fund type will help investors meet their targets on environmental and social goals. In line with the SFDR requirements, investors are provided with a description of the sustainable investment objective in a web based format together with the methodologies used to assess, measure and monitor the impact of the sustainable investments selected. 146

Biodiversity In 2020, we decided to promote the protection of wild bees at some locations where our solar installations are based. Wild bees play a vital role in the ecosystem and are also (B) Process 2 central to the diversity of crops and thus to our healthy nutrition. The project involves a partnership with a local beekeeper. As maintenance of the facilities also covers the surrounding green areas, the decision was made to combine this with a direct contribution to the environment. (response continued in row below) First, a project site in Brandenburg, Germany was inspected. The expert thoroughly analysed the local environment determining, for example, which insect species were native to the area. The results of the analysis were thoroughly discussed with the onsite maintenance team and on this basis a set of measures were established benefitting a specific insect species. These measures are compatible with the technical operation of the plant and its electricity generation and are designed to further support and protect these insects in their natural environment. (response continued in row below) Through this ESG-related initiative, we found two ways to support “Life on Land” (Goal 15 of the SDGs): Promoting biodiversity – the environmental aspect - In order to align the areas more closely with the insects’ needs, we focused on the requirements of wild bees. Along with honeybees, these are practically the only insects in central Europe that collect pollen, specifically for their offspring. In addition, many species have adapted to work symbiotically with specific plants to best harvest their pollen. Honey production on the vicinity of the solar plant and regional distribution - In addition, we have entered into a partnership with a Bavarian start-up company nearBees to install beehives on our solar facilities. nearBees has a network of beekeepers throughout Germany. The company is pursuing a regional approach and handles all aspects of the business, from conditioning the honey to delivery. 147

Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle INF 12 CORE N/A N/A PUBLIC Monitoring 1, 2 Post-investment, how do you manage material ESG-related risks and opportunities to create value during the holding period of your investments? (A) We develop company-specific ESG action plans based on pre-investment (1) for all of our infrastructure research, due diligence and materiality findings investments (B) We adjust our ESG action plans regularly based on performance monitoring (1) for all of our infrastructure findings investments (C) We hire external advisors to provide support with specific ESG value creation (2) for the majority of our opportunities infrastructure investments (D) Other, please specify: (1) for all of our infrastructure NA investments Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle INF 13 PLUS N/A N/A PUBLIC Monitoring 2 Describe how your long-term ESG action plans are currently defined, implemented and monitored. 148

Whether an investment is made by Allianz SE alone, in conjunction with 3rd party funds managed by AGI or in relation to investments made by AGI for its 3rd party funds, the assessment of ESG issues undertaken during an acquisition process is one of the first agenda items for discussion with the target’s board and management once the company has been acquired. Gap analysis within the first 100 days of acquisition determines the extent of ESG transition work needed to meet AGI and Allianz SE’s ESG performance and reporting standards. Measures are put in place to ensure that remedial actions are carried out within agreed timeframes. All portfolio companies report their compliance with ESG and HSE criteria to their boards at least quarterly, with performance levels set at a minimum of industry benchmark but preferably aiming for best practice; AGI asset management monitors (both through direct interaction with a company’s management and through board seats) compliance on an ongoing basis. AGI also conducts internal semi-annual reviews of each portfolio company where ESG and HSE topics are covered. The various investment committees of our business units and funds are presented with a summary of the ESG, HSE and reputational status by the investment teams; here ESG risks are identified, opportunities approved (with support if required) and targets are set. Decarbonisation of the portfolio companies is also monitored and targets are set annually; portfolio companies are working to define their transition pathway to a net zero emission position by 2050. ESG status information is passed annually to the Allianz SE ESG working group responsible for AGI/asset management, who in turn report to the Allianz Group ESG Board. Where ESG or HSE issues arise that require close monitoring and remediation for more complex investments, reporting can be required more frequently. In the event of a material ESG, HSE or reputational event occurring (including a near miss situation), the portfolio company must inform AGI immediately and this information is escalated to the Allianz Group ESG Board and then to the Allianz SE Board and the relevant 3rd party funds. Areas covered include environmental contamination (ground, water and air, including CO2 emissions), resettlement or maltreatment of people, loss of rights (land and water), ethical and business compliance and other asset specific considerations. These are relevant in the construction, operation and maintenance of AGI’s managed infrastructure assets. AGI and the Allianz ESG working group regularly refine ESG reporting to include requirements derived from either new legislation, as a result of commitments made to external agencies (such as the Asset Owner Alliance), in response to stakeholder engagement or in an effort to drive best market practice in the management of the portfolio, thereby where possible addressing issues on a proactive rather than reactive basis. Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle INF 14 CORE N/A INF 14.1 PUBLIC Monitoring 1, 2 How do you ensure that adequate ESG-related competence exists at the asset level? (1) for all of our infrastructure (A) We assign the board responsibility for ESG matters investments (B) We mandate that material ESG matters are discussed by the board at least once (1) for all of our infrastructure a year investments (C) We provide training on ESG aspects and management best practices relevant to (1) for all of our infrastructure the asset to C-suite executives only investments (D) We provide training on ESG aspects and management best practices relevant to (2) for the majority of our the asset to employees (excl. C-suite executives) infrastructure investments (1) for all of our infrastructure (E) We support the asset in developing and implementing its ESG strategy investments (F) We support the asset by finding external ESG expertise (e.g. consultants or (2) for the majority of our auditors) infrastructure investments 149

(G) We share best practices across assets (e.g. educational sessions, implementation (1) for all of our infrastructure of environmental and social management systems) investments (H) We include incentives to improve ESG performance in management (2) for the majority of our remuneration schemes infrastructure investments (I) Other, please specify: (1) for all of our infrastructure Na investments Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle INF 14.1 PLUS INF 14 N/A PUBLIC Monitoring 1, 2 Describe up to two initiatives taken as part of your ESG competence-building efforts during the reporting year. ESG competence-building initiatives Decarbonisation initiatives - ACP Direct Infrastructure (“ACP”) has been tracking the carbon footprint of its portfolio companies since 2018. However, it became clear that collecting data was not enough to actively encourage a reduction in carbon emissions (whether incurred directly or indirectly) by the portfolio companies. In addition, certain aspects such as contrasting views in determining levels of SBTi Scope 3 CO2e emissions data across different sectors created confusion and detracted from the (A) Initiative 1 ultimate goal. ACP was keen to promote decarbonisation and therefore put in place initiatives to inform and encourage this approach: In-house training: investment and asset management teams are informed of Allianz’s decarbonisation targets at the beginning of each year, the rationale for the targets, how the targets are to be implemented and any forthcoming legislation that would impact reporting procedures (such as the implementation of SFDR). (response continued in row below) 150

Implementation: Asset management teams liaise with portfolio companies to determine ongoing and future decarbonisation initiatives. ACP ensures that these initiatives are discussed at the companies’ Board Meetings, encouraging other shareholders to take a common approach particularly where initiatives require funding. Investment teams ensure that the business case for any new investment includes a decarbonisation pathway to net zero emissions by 2050. This may in result in additional capex requirements for the company which in turn may impact the anticipated returns. (response continued in row below) Where ACP’s view of what the targeted company should be doing to decarbonise versus the actual business plan pre acquisition is addressed if possible before acquisition or failing that, during the 100 day plan once the investment is made. Here ACP makes a strong case to all shareholders to ensure that all are aligned. Reporting: details of decarbonisation initiatives from the existing portfolio are collected throughout the year. Work has already commenced to have each portfolio company commit to a specific carbon reduction target for the period 2020 to 2025 and this will include details of the initiatives driving this reduction as well as the implied capex requirements. AllianzGI wild bee initiative - The preservation of biodiversity is one of the main targets when investing in renewables (especially solar) assets. Therefore we decided to promote the protection of wild bees on some of our areas for solar installations. Wild bees play a vital role in the ecosystem and are also central to the diversity of crops and thus to our healthy nutrition. See further details in (B) Initiative 2 INF 11.1 (B). Part of our project is a partnership with a local bee keeper. What’s so special about the partnership with the local bee keeper, nearBees? nearBees is a Bavarian start-up company that has been working since 2015 to fight the killing-off of bees. The company cares for European bee colonies and assumes the responsibility for honey production at our sites. (response continued in row below) 151

nearBees is focused on promoting a return to local honey consumption and strengthening local beekeepers.Consuming locally made honey not only keeps transportation routes short and reduces CO2 emissions, but also supports beekeepers in their socially important hobby, thereby making an important contribution to maintaining local biodiversity. Unlike other local providers, however, nearBees is not restricted to one region. A widespread network of local beekeepers enables the company to offer honey from every part of Germany. For other products, nearBees also places a priority on regional sourcing and environmentally friendly production. For example, the ceramic honey pot is produced by an independent manufacturer in the Westerwald region in Germany. nearBees’ bee sponsorship is an especially direct form of environmental commitment, since it makes it possible to form new bee colonies. This allows us – even without any beekeeping experience – to establish bees at locations of our choice/our solar plants. Our bee colonies in those locations are looked after year-round by an experienced beekeeper and in addition to providing uniquely delicious honey, they also pollinate the surrounding area. Through nearBees the initiative aims to ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns and thus generate a positive impact on Goal 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production). In addition, the initiative aims to improve the achievement of Goal 15 of the SDGs (Life on Land). (response continued in row below) To promote Goal 15, we made some changes to the annual maintenance schedules: • Grass is now mowed only once a year, one section at a time. Both the date and frequency of the mowing are based on the needs of the wild bees. This ensures that the flowers available will not all be destroyed in one fell swoop. • As a rule, a small portion of the plot should only be mowed every few years, so that old stalks or layers of grass can be used as nesting places. • At the same time, we will promote, sow bee-friendly plant species that are typical for the region and can serve as food or building materials. • Aside from improving the flower supply, our focus is primarily on the often-neglected promotion of ground- nesting places. For example, vegetation-free or only sparsely covered, nutrition-poor ground areas offer ideal nesting. 152

Exit Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle INF 15 CORE N/A N/A PUBLIC Exit 4, 6 During the reporting year, what responsible investment information has your organisation shared with potential buyers of infrastructure investments? (A) We shared our firm's high-level commitment to responsible investment (e.g. that (1) for all of our infrastructure we are a PRI signatory) investments (B) We shared a description of what industry and asset class standards our firm (1) for all of our infrastructure aligns with (e.g. TCFD or GRESB) investments (C) We shared our firm's responsible investment policy (at minimum, a summary of (1) for all of our infrastructure key aspects and firm-specific approach) investments (D) We shared our firm's ESG risk assessment methodology (topics covered, in-house (1) for all of our infrastructure and/or with external support) investments (E) We shared the outcome of our latest ESG risk assessment on the asset or (1) for all of our infrastructure portfolio company investments (F) We shared key ESG performance data on the asset or portfolio company being (1) for all of our infrastructure sold investments (G) Other, please specify: (1) for all of our infrastructure NA investments 153

Reporting/Disclosure ESG portfolio information Indicator Type of indicator Dependent on Gateway to Disclosure Subsection PRI Principle INF 16 CORE N/A N/A PUBLIC ESG portfolio information 6 During the reporting year, how did you report on core ESG data and targets to your investors or beneficiaries? ☑ (A) We reported in aggregate through a publicly disclosed sustainability report ☑ (B) We reported in aggregate through formal reporting to investors or beneficiaries ☑ (C) We reported on the asset level through formal reporting to investors or beneficiaries ☑ (D) We reported through a limited partners advisory committee (or equivalent) ☑ (E) We reported back at digital or physical events or meetings with investors or beneficiaries ☑ (F) We did adhoc or informal reporting on serious ESG incidents ☐ (G) Other, please specify: ☐ (H) We did not report on core ESG data and targets to our investors or beneficiaries during the reporting year 154