Allianz Variable Insurance Products Trust N-14Registration statement for investment companies business combination

JOINT INFORMATION STATEMENT/PROSPECTUS Q&A

The Acquiring Fund will issue shares of beneficial interest in an amount equal to the value of the assets that it receives from the Acquired Fund, less the liabilities it assumes. These shares will be distributed to the Acquired Fund’s shareholders (the separate accounts) in proportion to their holdings in the Acquired Fund. Holders of Shares, Class 1 Shares, and/or Class 2 Shares as applicable of the Acquired Fund will receive Shares, Class 1, or Class 2 Shares, as applicable of the Acquiring Fund as noted in the above table. The value of your interest in the subaccounts investing in an Acquiring Fund received in connection with the Reorganization will equal the value of your interest in the subaccounts that were invested in the corresponding Acquired Fund immediately before the Reorganization.

As part of the Reorganization, systematic transactions (such as the automatic investment plan, dollar-cost average program, or flexible rebalancing program) currently set up for your Acquired Fund accounts will be transferred to your new Acquiring Fund account(s). If you do not want your systematic transactions to continue, please contact your financial representative to make changes.

Neither the Acquired Funds nor the Contract Owners whose Contract values are allocated to subaccounts investing in the Acquired Funds will pay any sales charge in connection with the Reorganization.

After the Reorganization has been completed, Contract values that were allocated to subaccounts investing in each Acquired Fund will be allocated to subaccounts investing in the corresponding Acquiring Fund. Each Acquired Fund will be terminated.

Even where a Reorganization is anticipated to be a taxable transaction for federal income tax purposes, provided that the Contracts qualify to be treated as life insurance contracts under Section 7702(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”) or annuity contracts under Section 72 of the Code, the Reorganization will not be a taxable event for U.S. federal income tax purposes for Contract Owners whose Contract values are determined by investment in shares of the Acquired Fund, and any dividend declared in connection with the Reorganization will not be taxable to Contract Owners. Contract Owners should consult the prospectus or other information provided by the insurance company regarding their Contracts as to the specific consequences to them of the Reorganization, including the applicability and effect of any possible state, local, non-U.S. and other tax consequences of the Reorganization.

As a condition to the consummation of the Reorganization, the Trust will have received one or more opinions of Stradley Ronon Stevens & Young, LLP, dated on or before the effective time of the Reorganization, addressed to and in form and substance satisfactory to the Trust that, assuming the variable contracts and the insurance companies issuing them are properly structured under the insurance company provisions of section 817(d) of the Code, and the ownership of shares in the Funds and access to the Funds satisfies the requirements of Treasury Regulations section 1.817-5(f), the Reorganization will not be a taxable event for Contract Owners whose Contract values are determined by investment in shares of the Acquired Fund. For purposes of rendering its opinion, Stradley Ronon Stevens & Young, LLP may rely exclusively and without independent verification, as to factual matters, on the statements made in the Plan, this Joint Information Statement/Prospectus and related SAI, and on such other written representations as will have been verified as of the effective time of the Reorganization.

The Trust has not sought a tax ruling from the Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS”), but is acting in reliance upon the opinion(s) of counsel discussed in the previous paragraph. The opinion(s) is/are not binding on the IRS and do not preclude the IRS from adopting a contrary position. Contract Owners should consult their own tax advisors concerning the potential tax consequences, including state and local income taxes.

For more information about the U.S. federal income tax consequences of the Reorganization, see the section entitled “Tax Status of the Reorganization.”

Leveraging Risk – The Fund may engage in certain kinds of transactions, including the use of derivatives, that may give rise to a form of leverage. The use of leverage may require a fund to liquidate a portfolio position at a disadvantageous time or may exaggerate the effect of any increase or decrease in the value of the Fund’s portfolio securities.

Emerging Markets Risk – Emerging markets may have less developed or more volatile trading markets and greater likelihood of government restrictions, nationalization, or confiscation than developed countries. Companies in emerging market countries may have less developed legal and accounting systems and generally may be subject to less stringent regulatory, disclosure, financial reporting, accounting, auditing and recordkeeping standards than companies in more developed countries. As a result, information, including financial information, about such companies may be less available and reliable which can impede a fund’s ability to evaluate such companies. Securities law and the enforcement of systems of taxation in many emerging market countries may change quickly and unpredictably, and the ability to bring and enforce actions, or to obtain information needed to pursue or enforce such actions, may be limited. In addition, investments in emerging markets securities may be subject to additional transaction costs, delays in settlement procedures, unexpected market closures, and lack of timely information. Frontier market countries generally have smaller economies or less developed capital markets and, as a result, the risks of investing in emerging market countries are magnified in frontier market countries.

Privately Placed Securities Risk – The Fund may invest in privately placed securities, which are subject to resale restrictions.

Collateralized Debt Obligations Risk – In addition to the typical risks associated with fixed-income securities and asset-backed securities, collateralized debt obligations, including CLOs, carry additional risks including, but not limited to: (i) the possibility that distributions from collateral securities will not be adequate to make interest or other payments; (ii) the risk that the collateral may default or decline in value

or be downgraded, if rated by a nationally recognized statistical rating organization; (iii) a fund may invest in tranches of CDOs that are subordinate to other tranches; (iv) the structure and complexity of the transaction and the legal documents could lead to disputes among investors regarding the characterization of proceeds; (v) the investment return achieved by the Fund could be significantly different than those predicted by financial models; (vi) the lack of a readily available secondary market for CDOs; (vii) the risk of forced “fire sale” liquidation due to technical defaults such as coverage test failures; and (viii) the CDO’s manager may perform poorly.

LIBOR Transition Risk – Many financial instruments use or may use a floating rate based on the London Interbank Offered Rate, or “LIBOR,” which is the offered rate for short-term Eurodollar deposits between major international banks. There remains uncertainty regarding the future utilization of LIBOR and the nature of any replacement rate. The elimination of LIBOR or changes to other reference rates or any other changes or reforms to the determination or supervision of reference rates could have an adverse impact on the market for, or value of, any securities or payments linked to those reference rates, which may adversely affect the fund’s performance and/or net asset value.

Futures Risk – The value of futures contracts depend primarily upon the price of the securities, indexes, commodities, currencies or other instruments underlying them. Price movements are also influenced by, among other things, interest rates, changing supply and demand relationships, trade, fiscal, monetary, and exchange control programs and policies of governments, and national and international political and economic events and policies. The cost of futures may also be related, in part, to the degree of volatility of the underlying indices, securities, currencies, or other assets. Accordingly, futures on highly volatile indices, securities, currency, or other assets may be more expensive than futures on other investments. Changes in the value of the derivative may not correlate perfectly with the underlying asset, rate or index, and a fund could lose more than the principal amount invested.

Treasury Obligations Risk – Direct obligations of the U.S. Treasury have historically involved little risk of loss of principal if held to maturity. However, due to fluctuations in interest rates, the market value of such securities may vary during the period shareholders own shares of a fund.

U.S. Government Obligations Risk – Certain securities in which a fund may invest, including securities issued by certain government agencies and government sponsored enterprises, are not guaranteed by the U.S. Government or supported by the full faith and credit of the United States.

Sovereign Debt Risk – Sovereign debt instruments are subject to the risk that a governmental entity may delay or refuse to pay interest or repay principal on its sovereign debt, due, for example, to cash flow problems, insufficient foreign currency reserves, political considerations, the relative size of the governmental entity’s debt position in relation to the economy or the failure to put in place economic reforms required by the International Monetary Fund or other multilateral agencies.

Interest Rate Risk – Debt securities held by a fund may decline in value due to rising interest rates. Interest rates recently have been at historic lows, which may increase the risks associated with rising interest rates. Currently, interest rates are at or near historic lows, which may increase the risk that interest rates will rise.

Credit Risk – The failure of the issuer of a debt security to pay interest or repay principal in a timely manner may have an adverse impact on a fund’s earnings.

Call Risk – If interest rates fall, issuers of callable debt securities are more likely to prepay prior to the maturity date. The fund may not be able to reinvest the proceeds from the prepayment in investments that will generate the same level of income.

Income Risk – Falling interest rates may cause a fund’s income to decline.

Liquidity Risk – An investment that is difficult to purchase or sell may have an adverse effect on the fund’s returns.

Extension Risk – If interest rates rise, debt securities may be paid in full more slowly than anticipated. Interest rates recently have been at historic lows, which may increase the risks associated with rising interest rates.

Currency Risk – Investing in securities that trade in and receive revenues in foreign currencies creates risk because foreign currencies may decline relative to the U.S. dollar, resulting in a potential loss to a fund. In the case of hedging positions, the U.S. dollar may decline in value relative to the currency that has been hedged.

Emerging Markets Risk – Emerging markets may have less developed or more volatile trading markets and greater likelihood of government restrictions, nationalization, or confiscation than developed countries. Companies in emerging market countries may have less developed legal and accounting systems and generally may be subject to less stringent regulatory, disclosure, financial reporting, accounting, auditing and recordkeeping standards than companies in more developed countries. As a result, information, including financial information, about such companies may be less available and reliable which can impede a fund’s ability to evaluate such companies. Securities law and the enforcement of systems of taxation in many emerging market countries may change quickly and unpredictably, and the ability to bring and enforce actions, or to obtain information needed to pursue or enforce such actions, may be limited. In addition, investments in emerging markets securities may be subject to additional transaction costs, delays in settlement procedures, unexpected market closures, and lack of timely information. Frontier market countries generally have smaller economies or less developed capital markets and, as a result, the risks of investing in emerging market countries are magnified in frontier market countries.

Leveraging Risk – The Fund may engage in certain kinds of transactions, including the use of derivatives, that may give rise to a form of leverage. The use of leverage may require a fund to liquidate a portfolio position at a disadvantageous time or may exaggerate the effect of any increase or decrease in the value of the Fund’s portfolio securities.

Privately Placed Securities Risk – The Fund may invest in privately placed securities, which are subject to resale restrictions.

Security Quality Risk (also known as “High Yield Risk” or “Junk Bond Risk”) The Fund may invest in high yield, high risk debt securities, which may be subject to higher levels of credit and liquidity risk than higher quality debt securities. Security quality risk is sometimes known as “high-yield risk” or “junk bond risk.”

Mortgage-Related and Other Asset-Backed Securities Risk – Investing in mortgage-related or other asset-backed securities involves a variety of risks associated with the credit markets, such as rising or falling interest rates, increases in the rate of defaults or prepayments, and the quality of the pool of mortgages (subprime risk) or other assets that backs the security.

Quantitative Investing Risk – The value of securities selected using quantitative analysis can react differently to issuer, political, market, and economic developments than the market as a whole or securities selected using only fundamental analysis. The factors used in quantitative analysis and the weight placed on those factors may not be predictive of a security’s value. In addition, factors that affect a security’s value can change over time and these changes may not be reflected in the quantitative model. A quantitative model can be adversely affected by errors or imperfections in the factors or the data on which evaluations are based, or by technical issues with construction or implementation of the model, which in any case may result in a failure of the portfolio to perform as expected or a failure to identify securities that will perform well in the future. Successful operation of a quantitative model is also reliant upon the information technology systems of the Manager or Subadviser, as applicable, and its ability to ensure those systems remain operational and that appropriate disaster recovery procedures are in place. There can be no assurance that the Manager or Subadviser will be successful in maintaining effective and operational trading models and the related hardware and software systems.

Portfolio Turnover Risk– The Fund may trade portfolio securities frequently, which could result in higher transaction costs and could adversely affect the fund’s performance.

Correlation Risk – The effectiveness of the Fund’s index option-based risk management strategy may be reduced if the performance of the Fund’s equity portfolio does not correlate to the index underlying its option positions.

Options Risk – The value of the Fund’s positions in index options fluctuates in response to changes in the value of the underlying index. Writing index call options reduces the risk of owning stocks, but it limits the opportunity to profit from an increase in the market value of stocks in exchange for up-front cash at the time of selling the call option. The Fund also risks losing all or part of the cash paid for purchasing index put options. Unusual market conditions or the lack of a ready market for any particular option at a specific time may reduce the effectiveness of the Fund’s option strategies, and for these and other reasons the Fund’s option strategies may not reduce the Fund’s volatility to the extent desired. From time to time, the Fund may reduce its holdings of put options, resulting in an increased exposure to a market decline.

Capitalization Risk – Investing in small- to mid-sized companies creates risk because smaller companies may have unpredictable or limited earnings, and their securities may be less liquid or experience more volatile prices than those of large companies.

Depositary Receipt Risk – Depositary receipts involve many of the same risks as those associated with direct investment in foreign securities. Investing in these instruments may expose a fund to credit risk with respect to the issuer of the depositary receipt, in addition to the risks of the underlying investment.

Technology Sector Risk – Technology companies, including information technology companies, may have limited product lines, markets, financial resources or personnel. Technology companies typically face intense competition and potentially rapid product obsolescence. They are also heavily dependent on intellectual property rights and may be adversely affected by the loss or impairment of those rights.

Sovereign Debt Risk – Sovereign debt instruments are subject to the risk that a governmental entity may delay or refuse to pay interest or repay principal on its sovereign debt, due, for example, to cash flow problems, insufficient foreign currency reserves, political considerations, the relative size of the governmental entity’s debt position in relation to the economy or the failure to put in place economic reforms required by the International Monetary Fund or other multilateral agencies.

Real Estate Investments Risk – The performance of investments in real estate depends on the overall strength of the real estate market, the management of real estate investments trusts (REITs), and property management, all of which can be affected by a variety of factors, including national and regional economic conditions.

Currency Risk – Investing in securities that trade in and receive revenues in foreign currencies creates risk because foreign currencies may decline relative to the U.S. dollar, resulting in a potential loss to a fund. In the case of hedging positions, the U.S. dollar may decline in value relative to the currency that has been hedged.

Leveraging Risk – The Fund may engage in certain kinds of transactions, including the use of derivatives, that may give rise to a form of leverage. The use of leverage may require a fund to liquidate a portfolio position at a disadvantageous time or may exaggerate the effect of any increase or decrease in the value of the Fund’s portfolio securities.

LIBOR Transition Risk – Many financial instruments use or may use a floating rate based on the London Interbank Offered Rate, or “LIBOR,” which is the offered rate for short-term Eurodollar deposits between major international banks. There remains uncertainty regarding the future utilization of LIBOR and the nature of any replacement rate. The elimination of LIBOR or changes to other reference rates or any other changes or reforms to the determination or supervision of reference rates could have an adverse impact on the market for, or value of, any securities or payments linked to those reference rates, which may adversely affect the fund’s performance and/or net asset value.

Short Sales Risk – The Fund may engage in short sales, which are transactions in which the Fund sells securities borrowed from others with the expectation that the price of the security will fall before the Fund must purchase the security to return it to the lender. Because the Fund’s potential loss on a short position arises from increases in the value of the asset sold short, the Fund will incur a loss on a short position, which is theoretically unlimited, if the price of the asset sold short increases from the short sale price. The counterparty to a short position or other market factors may prevent the Fund from closing out a short position at a desirable time or price and may reduce or eliminate any gain or result in a loss.

Restricted Securities Risk – Limitations on the resale of restricted securities may have an adverse effect on their marketability, and may prevent the Fund from disposing of them promptly at reasonable prices. There can be no assurance that a trading market will exist at any time for any particular restricted security. Transaction costs may be higher for restricted securities and such securities may be difficult to value and may have significant volatility.

Portfolio Turnover Risk – The Fund may trade portfolio securities frequently, which could result in higher transaction costs and could adversely affect the fund’s performance.

Risks of Investing in Japan – Japan may be subject to political, economic, nuclear, and labor risks, among others. Any of these risks, individually or in the aggregate, can impact an investment made in Japan. The growth of Japan’s economy has recently lagged that of its Asian neighbors and other major developed economies. Since 2000, Japan’s economic growth rate has generally remained low relative to other advanced economies, and it may remain low in the future. The Japanese economy faces several concerns, any of which could negatively affect the value of Japanese investments.

European Investment Risk – Investments in certain countries in the European Union (the “EU”) are susceptible to high economic risks associated with high levels of debt, such as investments in sovereign debt of Greece, Italy and Spain. Efforts of the member countries to further unify their economic and monetary policies may increase the potential for the downward movement of one member country’s market to cause a similar effect on other member countries’ markets. Separately, the EU faces issues involving its membership, structure, procedures and policies. The exit of one or more member countries from the EU, such as the exit of the United Kingdom (known as “Brexit”), could place its currency and banking system in jeopardy. An exit by other member countries could likely result in increased volatility, illiquidity and

potentially lower economic growth in the affected markets, which may adversely affect the Fund’s investments.

Futures Risk – The value of futures contracts depend primarily upon the price of the securities, indexes, commodities, currencies or other instruments underlying them. Price movements are also influenced by, among other things, interest rates, changing supply and demand relationships, trade, fiscal, monetary, and exchange control programs and policies of governments, and national and international political and economic events and policies. The cost of futures may also be related, in part, to the degree of volatility of the underlying indices, securities, currencies, or other assets. Accordingly, futures on highly volatile indices, securities, currency, or other assets may be more expensive than futures on other investments. Changes in the value of the derivative may not correlate perfectly with the underlying asset, rate or index, and a fund could lose more than the principal amount invested.

Emerging Markets Risk – Emerging markets may have less developed or more volatile trading markets and greater likelihood of government restrictions, nationalization, or confiscation than developed countries. Companies in emerging market countries may have less developed legal and accounting systems and generally may be subject to less stringent regulatory, disclosure, financial reporting, accounting, auditing and recordkeeping standards than companies in more developed countries. As a result, information, including financial information, about such companies may be less available and reliable which can impede a fund’s ability to evaluate such companies. Securities law and the enforcement of systems of taxation in many emerging market countries may change quickly and unpredictably, and the ability to bring and enforce actions, or to obtain information needed to pursue or enforce such actions, may be limited. In addition, investments in emerging markets securities may be subject to additional transaction costs, delays in settlement procedures, unexpected market closures, and lack of timely information. Frontier market countries generally have smaller economies or less developed capital markets and, as a result, the risks of investing in emerging market countries are magnified in frontier market countries.

Risks of Investing in China – Investments in companies located or operating in China, including Hong Kong, involve risks not associated with investments in Western nations, such as nationalization, expropriation, or confiscation of property; difficulty in obtaining information necessary for investigations into and/or litigation against Chinese companies, as well as in obtaining and/or enforcing judgments; limited legal remedies for shareholders; alteration or discontinuation of economic reforms; military conflicts, either internal or with other countries; inflation, currency fluctuations and fluctuations in inflation and interest rates that may have negative effects on the economy and securities markets of China; and China’s dependency on the economies of other Asian countries, many of which are developing countries. Further, health events, such as the recent coronavirus outbreak, may cause uncertainty and volatility in the Chinese economy. Certain securities issued by companies located or operating in China are subject to trading restrictions, quota limitations, and clearing and settlement risks. Significant portions of the Chinese securities markets may become rapidly illiquid, as Chinese issuers have the ability to suspend the trading of their equity securities, or as a result of adverse economic, market or political events, or adverse investor perceptions, whether or not accurate. The inability of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (“PCAOB”) to inspect audit work papers and practices of PCAOB-registered accounting firms in China with respect to their audit work of U.S. reporting companies may impose significant additional risks associated with investments in China.

Depositary Receipt Risk – Depositary receipts involve many of the same risks as those associated with direct investment in foreign securities. Investing in these instruments may expose a fund to credit risk with respect to the issuer of the depositary receipt, in addition to the risks of the underlying investment.

Capitalization Risk – Investing in small- to mid-sized companies creates risk because smaller companies may have unpredictable or limited earnings, and their securities may be less liquid or experience more volatile prices than those of large companies.

Focused Investments Risk – Investing in a relatively small number of issuers, industries, or regions involves added risk. Changes in the value of a single security or a single economic, political, or regulatory event may have a large impact on the value of a fund’s portfolio.

Technology Sector Risk – Technology companies, including information technology companies, may have limited product lines, markets, financial resources or personnel. Technology companies typically face intense competition and potentially rapid product obsolescence. They are also heavily dependent on intellectual property rights and may be adversely affected by the loss or impairment of those rights.

Index Fund Risk – Certain of the Underlying Funds do not attempt to manage market volatility or reduce the effects of poor performance. In addition, factors such as fund expenses, selection of a representative portfolio, changes in the composition of the index, or the timing of purchases or redemptions of fund shares may affect the correlation between the performance of the index and the fund’s performance.

Selection Risk – Because the AZL Enhanced Bond Index Fund, an Underlying Fund, is actively managed, there can be no guarantee that investment decisions made for the Fund will produce the desired results.

Risks of Investing in Japan – Japan may be subject to political, economic, nuclear, and labor risks, among others. Any of these risks, individually or in the aggregate, can impact an investment made in Japan. The growth of Japan’s economy has recently lagged that of its Asian neighbors and other major developed economies. Since 2000, Japan’s economic growth rate has generally remained low relative to other advanced economies, and it may remain low in the future. The Japanese economy faces several concerns, any of which could negatively affect the value of Japanese investments.

European Investment Risk – Investments in certain countries in the European Union (the “EU”) are susceptible to high economic risks associated with high levels of debt, such as investments in sovereign debt of Greece, Italy and Spain. Efforts of the member countries to further unify their economic and monetary policies may increase the potential for the downward movement of one member country’s market to cause a similar effect on other member countries’ markets. Separately, the EU faces issues involving its membership, structure, procedures and policies. The exit of one or more member countries from the EU, such as the exit of the United Kingdom (known as “Brexit”), could place its currency and banking system in jeopardy. An exit by other member countries could likely result in increased volatility, illiquidity and potentially lower economic growth in the affected markets, which may adversely affect the Fund’s investments.

Treasury Obligations Risk – Direct obligations of the U.S. Treasury have historically involved little risk of loss of principal if held to maturity. However, due to fluctuations in interest rates, the market value of such securities may vary during the period shareholders own shares of a fund.

Derivatives Risk – Investing in derivative instruments involves risks that may be different from or greater than the risks associated with investing directly in securities or other traditional investments. Derivatives are subject to a number of other risks, such as liquidity risk, interest rate risk, market risk, credit risk, counterparty risk, and selection risk. Derivatives also involve the risk of mispricing or improper valuation and the risk that changes in the value may not correlate perfectly with the underlying asset, rate, or index. Using derivatives may result in losses, possibly in excess of the principal amount invested.

Leveraging Risk – Certain Underlying Funds may engage in certain kinds of transactions, including the use of derivatives, that may give rise to a form of leverage. The use of leverage may require a fund to liquidate a portfolio position at a disadvantageous time or may exaggerate the effect of any increase or decrease in the value of the Fund’s portfolio securities.

Liquidity Risk – An investment that is difficult to purchase or sell may have an adverse effect on a fund’s returns.

Mortgage-Related and Other Asset-Backed Securities Risk – Investing in mortgage-related or other asset-backed securities involves a variety of risks associated with the credit markets, such as rising or falling interest rates, increases in the rate of defaults or prepayments, and the quality of the pool of mortgages (subprime risk) or other assets that backs the security.

Portfolio Turnover Risk – A fund may trade portfolio securities frequently, which could result in higher transaction costs and could adversely affect the fund’s performance.

Privately Placed Securities Risk – Certain Underlying Funds may invest in privately placed securities, which are subject to resale restrictions.

Repurchase Agreements and Purchase and Sale Contracts Risk – If the other party to a repurchase agreement or purchase and sale contract defaults on its obligation under the agreement, a fund may suffer delays and incur costs or lose money in exercising its rights under the agreement. If the seller fails to repurchase the security in either situation and the market value of the security declines, the fund may lose money.

Technology Sector Risk – Technology companies, including information technology companies, may have limited product lines, markets, financial resources or personnel. Technology companies typically face intense competition and potentially rapid product obsolescence. They are also heavily dependent on intellectual property rights and may be adversely affected by the loss or impairment of those rights.

Collateralized Debt Obligations Risk – In addition to the typical risks associated with fixed-income securities and asset-backed securities, collateralized debt obligations, including CLOs, carry additional risks including, but not limited to: (i) the possibility that distributions from collateral securities will not be adequate to make interest or other payments; (ii) the risk that the collateral may default or decline in value or be downgraded, if rated by a nationally recognized statistical rating organization; (iii) a fund may invest in tranches of CDOs that are subordinate to other tranches; (iv) the structure and complexity of the

transaction and the legal documents could lead to disputes among investors regarding the characterization of proceeds; (v) the investment return achieved by the Fund could be significantly different than those predicted by financial models; (vi) the lack of a readily available secondary market for CDOs; (vii) the risk of forced “fire sale” liquidation due to technical defaults such as coverage test failures; and (viii) the CDO’s manager may perform poorly.

LIBOR Transition Risk – Many financial instruments use or may use a floating rate based on the London Interbank Offered Rate, or “LIBOR,” which is the offered rate for short-term Eurodollar deposits between major international banks.

Emerging Markets Risk – Emerging markets may have less developed or more volatile trading markets and greater likelihood of government restrictions, nationalization, or confiscation than developed countries. Companies in emerging market countries may have less developed legal and accounting systems and generally may be subject to less stringent regulatory, disclosure, financial reporting, accounting, auditing and recordkeeping standards than companies in more developed countries. As a result, information, including financial information, about such companies may be less available and reliable which can impede a fund’s ability to evaluate such companies. Securities law and the enforcement of systems of taxation in many emerging market countries may change quickly and unpredictably, and the ability to bring and enforce actions, or to obtain information needed to pursue or enforce such actions, may be limited. In addition, investments in emerging markets securities may be subject to additional transaction costs, delays in settlement procedures, unexpected market closures, and lack of timely information. Frontier market countries generally have smaller economies or less developed capital markets and, as a result, the risks of investing in emerging market countries are magnified in frontier market countries.

Depositary Receipt Risk – Depositary receipts involve many of the same risks as those associated with direct investment in foreign securities. Investing in these instruments may expose a fund to credit risk with respect to the issuer of the depositary receipt, in addition to the risks of the underlying investment.

Selection Risk – Because the underlying fund is actively managed, there can be no guarantee that investment decisions made for the Fund will produce the desired results.

Treasury Obligations Risk – Direct obligations of the U.S. Treasury have historically involved little risk of loss of principal if held to maturity. However, due to fluctuations in interest rates, the market value of such securities may vary during the period shareholders own shares of a fund.

Privately Placed Securities Risk – The Underlying Fund may invest in privately placed securities, which are subject to resale restrictions.

Derivatives Risk – Investing in derivative instruments involves risks that may be different from or greater than the risks associated with investing directly in securities or other traditional investments. Derivatives are subject to a number of other risks, such as liquidity risk, interest rate risk, market risk, credit risk, counterparty risk, and selection risk. Derivatives also involve the risk of mispricing or improper valuation

and the risk that changes in the value may not correlate perfectly with the underlying asset, rate, or index. Using derivatives may result in losses, possibly in excess of the principal amount invested.

Leveraging Risk – The Underlying Fund may engage in certain kinds of transactions, including the use of derivatives, that may give rise to a form of leverage. The use of leverage may require a fund to liquidate a portfolio position at a disadvantageous time or may exaggerate the effect of any increase or decrease in the value of the Fund’s portfolio securities.

Security Quality Risk (also known as “High Yield Risk” or “Junk Bond Risk”) A fund may invest in high yield, high risk debt securities, which may be subject to higher levels of credit and liquidity risk than higher quality debt securities. Security quality risk is sometimes known as “high-yield risk” or “junk bond risk.”

Liquidity Risk – An investment that is difficult to purchase or sell may have an adverse effect on the Underlying fund’s returns.

Repurchase Agreements and Purchase and Sale Contracts Risk – If the other party to a repurchase agreement or purchase and sale contract defaults on its obligation under the agreement, a fund may suffer delays and incur costs or lose money in exercising its rights under the agreement. If the seller fails to repurchase the security in either situation and the market value of the security declines, the fund may lose money.

Mortgage-Related and Other Asset-Backed Securities Risk – Investing in mortgage-related or other asset-backed securities involves a variety of risks associated with the credit markets, such as rising or falling interest rates, increases in the rate of defaults or prepayments, and the quality of the pool of mortgages (subprime risk) or other assets that backs the security.

Real Estate Investments Risk – The performance of investments in real estate depends on the overall strength of the real estate market, the management of real estate investments trusts (REITs), and property management, all of which can be affected by a variety of factors, including national and regional economic conditions.

Portfolio Turnover Risk– The Fund may trade portfolio securities frequently, which could result in higher transaction costs and could adversely affect the fund’s performance.

Capitalization Risk – Investing in small- to mid-sized companies creates risk because smaller companies may have unpredictable or limited earnings, and their securities may be less liquid or experience more volatile prices than those of large companies.

Depositary Receipt Risk – Depositary receipts involve many of the same risks as those associated with direct investment in foreign securities. Investing in these instruments may expose a fund to credit risk with respect to the issuer of the depositary receipt, in addition to the risks of the underlying investment.

Selection Risk – Because each underlying fund is actively managed, there can be no guarantee that investment decisions made for the Fund will produce the desired results.

Value Stocks Risk – Value stocks may perform differently from the market as a whole and following a value-oriented investment strategy may cause a fund to at times underperform equity funds that use other investment strategies. Value stocks can react differently to political, economic, and industry developments than the market as a whole and other types of stocks. Value stocks also may underperform the market for long periods of time.

Risks of Investing in Japan – Japan may be subject to political, economic, nuclear, and labor risks, among others. Any of these risks, individually or in the aggregate, can impact an investment made in Japan. The growth of Japan’s economy has recently lagged that of its Asian neighbors and other major developed economies. Since 2000, Japan’s economic growth rate has generally remained low relative to other advanced economies, and it may remain low in the future. The Japanese economy faces several concerns, any of which could negatively affect the value of Japanese investments.

Derivatives Risk – Investing in derivative instruments involves risks that may be different from or greater than the risks associated with investing directly in securities or other traditional investments. Derivatives are subject to a number of other risks, such as liquidity risk, interest rate risk, market risk, credit risk, counterparty risk, and selection risk. Derivatives also involve the risk of mispricing or improper valuation and the risk that changes in the value may not correlate perfectly with the underlying asset, rate, or index. Using derivatives may result in losses, possibly in excess of the principal amount invested.

Portfolio Turnover Risk – A Fund may trade portfolio securities frequently, which could result in higher transaction costs and could adversely affect the fund’s performance.

Treasury Obligations Risk – Direct obligations of the U.S. Treasury have historically involved little risk of loss of principal if held to maturity. However, due to fluctuations in interest rates, the market value of such securities may vary during the period shareholders own shares of a fund.

Repurchase Agreements and Purchase and Sale Contracts Risk – If the other party to a repurchase agreement or purchase and sale contract defaults on its obligation under the agreement, a fund may suffer delays and incur costs or lose money in exercising its rights under the agreement. If the seller fails to repurchase the security in either situation and the market value of the security declines, the fund may lose money.

Profitability Investment Risk – High relative profitability stocks may perform differently from the market as a whole and following a profitability-oriented strategy may cause a fund to, at times, underperform equity funds that use other investment strategies.

Technology Sector Risk – Technology companies, including information technology companies, may have limited product lines, markets, financial resources or personnel. Technology companies typically face intense competition and potentially rapid product obsolescence. They are also heavily dependent on intellectual property rights and may be adversely affected by the loss or impairment of those rights.

Financials Sector Risk – The performance of companies in the financials sector may be adversely impacted by many factors, including, among others, changes in government regulations, economic conditions, interest rates, credit rating downgrades, and decreased liquidity in credit markets. The extent to which a fund may invest in a company that engages in securities-related activities or banking is limited by applicable law. The impact of changes in capital requirements and recent or future regulation of any individual financial company, or of the financials sector as a whole, cannot be predicted. In recent years, cyberattacks and technology malfunctions and failures have become increasingly frequent in this sector and have caused significant losses to companies in this sector, which may negatively impact a fund.

Industry Sector Risk – Investing in a single industry or sector, or concentrating investments in a limited number of industries or sectors, tends to increase the risk that economic, political, or regulatory developments affecting certain industries or sectors will have a large impact on the value of a fund’s portfolio.

Emerging Markets Risk – Emerging markets may have less developed or more volatile trading markets and greater likelihood of government restrictions, nationalization, or confiscation than developed countries. Companies in emerging market countries may have less developed legal and accounting systems and generally may be subject to less stringent regulatory, disclosure, financial reporting, accounting, auditing and recordkeeping standards than companies in more developed countries. As a result, information, including financial information, about such companies may be less available and reliable which can impede a fund’s ability to evaluate such companies. Securities law and the enforcement of systems of taxation in many emerging market countries may change quickly and unpredictably, and the ability to bring and enforce actions, or to obtain information needed to pursue or enforce such actions, may be limited. In addition, investments in emerging markets securities may be subject to additional transaction costs, delays in settlement procedures, unexpected market closures, and lack of timely information. Frontier market countries generally have smaller economies or less developed capital markets and, as a result, the risks of investing in emerging market countries are magnified in frontier market countries.

Call Risk – If interest rates fall, issuers of callable debt securities are more likely to prepay prior to the maturity date. A fund may not be able to reinvest the proceeds from the prepayment in investments that will generate the same level of income.

Extension Risk – If interest rates rise, debt securities may be paid in full more slowly than anticipated. Interest rates recently have been at historic lows, which may increase the risks associated with rising interest rates.

The Board of Trustees of the VIP Trust and the VIP FoF Trust has approved the Plan. While shareholders are encouraged to review the Plan, which has been attached as Exhibit A to this Joint Information Statement/Prospectus, the following is a summary of certain terms of the Plan:

Each Reorganization is scheduled to occur on or about [March 10 , 2023], subject, among other things, to the New York Stock Exchange being open for business and receipt of any necessary regulatory approvals, but it may occur on any later date agreed to by the Funds.

Each Acquired Fund will transfer all of its assets to its corresponding Acquiring Fund and, in exchange, the Acquiring Fund will assume the Acquired Fund’s liabilities.

Each Acquiring Fund will issue shares to the corresponding Acquired Fund in an amount equal to the value of the assets that it receives from the Acquired Fund, less the liabilities assumed by the Acquiring Fund in the transaction. These shares will immediately be distributed by the Acquired Fund to its shareholders (the separate accounts) in proportion to their holdings in the Acquired Fund. As a result, shareholders (the separate accounts) of the Acquired Fund will become shareholders of the Acquiring Fund. Contract values that were allocated to subaccounts invested in each Acquired Fund will be allocated to subaccounts investing in the corresponding Acquiring Fund.  The value of your interest in the subaccounts investing in an Acquiring Fund received in connection with the Reorganization will equal the value of your interest in the subaccounts that were invested in the corresponding Acquired Fund immediately before the Reorganization.

Neither the Acquired Fund nor any Contract Owners whose Contract values are allocated to subaccounts investing in the Acquired Fund will pay any sales charge in connection with the Reorganization.

The net asset value of each Acquired Fund and its corresponding Acquiring Fund will be computed as of 3:00 p.m. Central time, on the closing date.

After the Reorganization, each Acquired Fund will be terminated.

The completion of the Reorganization is subject to certain conditions described in the Plan, including:

Each Acquired Fund will have declared and paid a dividend that will distribute all of the Acquired Fund’s taxable income, if any, to the shareholders (the separate accounts) of the Fund for the taxable years ending at or prior to the closing.

Each Acquired Fund and the Acquiring Fund will have received any approvals, consents, or exemptions from the SEC or any regulatory body necessary to carry out the Reorganization.

An effective registration statement on Form N-14 will be on file with the SEC.

The Funds will receive an opinion of tax counsel to the effect that the Reorganization will not be a taxable event for Contract Owners who have a portion of their Contract allocated to shares of an Acquired Fund.

At any time prior to the Closing, the VIP Trust and VIP FoF Trust may waive compliance with any of the conditions made for the Trust’s benefit, provided that such waiver will not have a material adverse effect on the interests of shareholders of the Acquired Funds or Acquiring Funds, and provided further that the Trusts may not waive the requirement to obtain a tax opinion.

Even where a Reorganization is anticipated to be a taxable transaction for federal income tax purposes, provided that the Contracts qualify to be treated as life insurance contracts under Section 7702(a) of the Code or annuity contracts under Section 72 of the Code, the Reorganization will not be a taxable event for U.S. federal income tax purposes for Contract Owners whose Contract values are determined by investment in shares of an Acquired Fund, and any dividend declared by an Acquired Fund in connection with a Reorganization will not be taxable to Contract Owners. Contract Owners should consult the prospectus or other information provided by the insurance company regarding their Contracts as to the specific consequences to them of the Reorganization, including the applicability and effect of any possible state, local, non-U.S. and other tax consequences of the Reorganization.

As a condition to the consummation of each Reorganization, each Trust will have received one or more opinions of Stradley Ronon Stevens & Young, LLP, dated on or before the effective time of the Reorganization, addressed to and in form and substance satisfactory to the Trust that, assuming the variable contracts and the insurance companies issuing them are properly structured under the insurance company provisions of section 817(d) of the Code, and the ownership of shares in the Funds and access to the Funds satisfies the requirements of Treasury Regulations section 1.817-5(f), each Reorganization will not be a taxable event for Contract Owners whose Contract values are determined by investment in shares of the Acquired Fund. For purposes of rendering its opinion, Stradley Ronon Stevens & Young, LLP may rely exclusively and without independent verification, as to factual matters, on the statements made in the Plan, this Joint Information Statement/Prospectus and related SAI, and on such other written representations as will have been verified as of the effective time of the Reorganization.

The Trusts have not sought a tax ruling from the IRS, but is acting in reliance upon the opinion(s) of counsel discussed in the previous paragraph. The opinion(s) is/are not binding on the IRS and do not preclude the IRS from adopting a contrary position. Contract Owners should consult their own tax advisors concerning the potential tax consequences, including state, local, non-U.S. and other tax consequences of the Reorganization.

The opinion will be based on certain factual certifications made by officers of the Funds and will also be based on customary assumptions.  The opinion may note and distinguish certain published precedent.

Although it is not expected to affect Contract Owners, the Funds, as a result of the Reorganization, lose the benefit of certain tax losses that could have been used to offset or defer future gains of the combined Fund, and the combined Fund will have tax attributes that reflect a blending of the tax attributes of each Fund at the time of the Reorganization.

Contract Owners who choose to redeem or exchange their investments by surrendering their Contracts or initiating a partial withdrawal may be subject to taxes and tax penalty. Contract Owners should consult the prospectus or other information provided by the insurance company regarding their Contracts as to the specific consequences to them of the Reorganization, including the applicability and effect of any possible state, local, non-U.S. and other tax laws.

Prior to the closing of a Reorganization, the Acquired Fund will, and the Acquiring Fund may, declare a dividend to their respective separate accounts as shareholders, which together with all previous distributions, will have the effect of distributing to shareholders all of such Fund’s investment company taxable income (computed without regard to the deduction for dividends paid) and net realized capital gains, if any, through the closing of the Reorganization.

It is expected that all or substantially all of the securities held by the AZL MSCI Emerging Markets Equity Index Fund will be disposed of in connection with a Reorganization. This could result in additional transaction costs to the Acquired Fund and increased distributions to the shareholders (the separate accounts and certain funds-of-funds managed by the Manager) of one or both Funds.  AZL MSCI Emerging Markets Equity Index Fund expects to sell all or approximately all of its existing portfolio and incur transaction costs of approximately $280,000 in connection with its respective Reorganization. It is anticipated that the AZL MVP Fusion Balanced Fund, AZL MVP Fusion Conservative Fund and AZL MVP Fusion Moderate Fund (collectively, the “Fusion Funds”) will redeem their shares in the AZL MSCI Emerging Markets Equity Index Fund (the “Emerging Markets Fund”) after the Emerging Markets Fund liquidates its portfolio and, as a result, the Fusion Funds will each indirectly bear its pro rata share of the transaction costs involved in liquidating the Emerging Markets Fund’s portfolio.  Similarly, the Fusion Funds will redeem their shares in the AZL Gateway Fund as part of the Reorganization  and in connection with such redemption, will indirectly bear their pro rata share of any transaction costs incurred related to the liquidation of AZL Gateway Fund’s portfolio securities that are needed to be made in order to satisfy such redemption request.

This description of the U.S. federal income tax consequences of the Reorganization is made without regard to the particular facts and circumstances of any shareholder or Contract Owner. Shareholders and Contract Owners are urged to consult their own tax advisors as to the specific consequences to them of the Reorganization in light of their individual circumstances, and as to the applicability and effect of state, local, non-U.S. and other tax laws with respect to the Reorganization.

Each Reorganization was reviewed by the Board of Trustees with respect to the Acquired Fund and the Acquiring Fund, with the advice and assistance of Fund counsel and independent legal counsel to the members of the Board who are not “interested persons” within the meaning of Section 2(a)(19) of the 1940 Act (the “Independent Trustees”). At a meeting held on December 13, 2022, the Manager recommended that the Board approve each Reorganization. The Board considered materials, analyses and other information provided by the Manager regarding, among other things, the topics discussed below. In addition, the Manager also was present and responded to questions raised by the Independent Trustees during that meeting.

After the Board reviewed, evaluated and discussed the materials, analyses and information that the Board considered pertinent to its deliberations, the Board, including the Independent Trustees, unanimously approved the Plan and each Reorganization. The Board, including the Independent Trustees, also unanimously determined that participation by each Acquired Fund and its corresponding Acquiring Fund in the Reorganization was in the best interests of the Acquired Fund and Acquiring Fund, respectively, and that the interests of existing shareholders of each Acquired Fund and its corresponding Acquiring Fund would not be diluted as a result of the Reorganization.

The Board of Trustees believes that the proposed Reorganization will be advantageous to shareholders of each Acquired Fund based on its consideration of various factors, described below. In its deliberations, the Board did not identify any single factor that was paramount or controlling and individual Board members may have attributed different weights to various factors. The Board determined, within the context of its overall conclusions, that each factor supported approval of the Reorganization.

Reorganization Rationales.  The Board considered the following rationales for each Reorganization promulgated by Fund management:

Terms and Conditions of the Reorganization. The Board considered the terms and conditions of the Reorganization as described in the previous paragraphs.

Tax Consequences. The Board considered the U.S. federal income tax consequences of the Reorganization for Contract Owners and for the Funds, as set forth in the sections entitled “Tax Status of the Reorganization” and “Certain Tax Consequences,” above.

Continuity of Investment. The Board considered the compatibility of each Acquired Fund with the corresponding Acquiring Fund and the degree of similarity and difference between the investment objectives and the principal investment strategies for each Fund, as described in this Joint Information Statement/Prospectus. The considerations relevant to each Reorganization are described below:

Expense Ratios. The Board considered the relative expenses of the Funds, noting that the Management Fee and the Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses for each Acquiring Fund following its Reorganization is expected to be lower than the Management Fee and the Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses for each corresponding Acquired Fund, as of September 30, 2022.   The Board noted that two Acquiring Funds, the AZL FIAM Total Bond Fund and the AZL MVP DFA Multi-Strategy Fund, benefit from a temporary management fee reduction, which reduces the management fee paid by these Funds enabling the Total Annual Fund Operation Expenses to be lower following its respective Reorganization than those of the corresponding Acquired Fund; this management fee reduction may be eliminated at any time after April 30, 2024.  The Board also noted that the Acquired Funds (with the exception of AZL Gateway Fund) also benefit from a temporary management fee reduction, which reduces the management fee paid by these Funds; this management fee reduction may be eliminated at any time after April 30, 2024.  The Board noted that the Funds do not have Management Fee breakpoints, with the exception of AZL FIAM Multi-Strategy Fund and AZL FIAM Total Bond Fund. The Board also noted that each applicable class or classes of the

Acquiring Fund will have the same Distribution (12b-1) Fees as the applicable class or classes of the corresponding Acquired Fund. The Board considered that, in sum, shareholders of each Acquired Fund are expected to incur expenses which are lower following the Reorganization.

The Board also noted that each Fund is subject to an expense limitation agreement, in place through at least April 30, 2024, which limits operating expenses (excluding certain Fund expenses such as acquired fund fees and expenses) as described further in the Manager and Subadvisers section starting on page 77. The Board also noted that the Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses for each Fund is below its respective expense limit, with the exception of AZL FIAM Multi-Strategy Fund and AZL MVP DFA Multi-Strategy Fund. The Board also considered the fact that each Acquired Fund will pay the expenses associated with the Reorganization, subject to a cost limit described under Costs, below.

Economies of Scale. The Board also received information from the Manager regarding the asset levels of each Acquired Fund over the last three years. The Board considered that, in the absence of a Reorganization, the Acquired Funds generally may be expected to continue to lose assets over time and shrink in size, which would result in the fixed costs of operating the Acquired Fund being spread over an ever-smaller asset base. This would mean that the expenses of an Acquired Fund may be expected to increase over time as a percentage of net assets. The Board also considered that each Acquiring Fund may be expected to gain assets and increase in size due to the influx of assets from the Reorganization. Higher aggregate net assets may result in the Acquiring Fund being better able to achieve economies of scale by spreading certain fixed costs over a larger asset base, which would mean that the expenses of the Acquiring Fund may be expected to decrease as a percentage of assets. In sum, the Board believes that each combined Fund, following the Reorganization, should have a better opportunity to take advantage of economies of scale than either Fund standing alone. A larger fund should have an enhanced ability to effect portfolio transactions on more favorable terms and should have greater investment flexibility, and fixed expenses, such as audit expenses and accounting expenses that are charged on a per fund basis may be reduced as a percentage of net assets.

Costs. The Board considered that AZL MSCI Emerging Markets Equity Index Fund will liquidate all or substantially all of its assets prior to the Reorganization.  The Board noted that each Acquired Fund, other than AZL DFA Five-Year Global Fixed Income Fund and AZL MetWest Total Return Bond Fund, will pay the costs associated with its Reorganization, including expenses associated with printing and mailing communications to Contract Owners and other expenses of the Reorganization, including accounting, legal, and custodial expenses, and any transaction costs related to repositioning of the portfolios in connection with the Reorganization, subject to the cost limit (the “Cost Limit”) shown in the table below. In approving the relevant Cost Limits, the Board considered that the Fusion Funds would redeem their shares in the Emerging Markets Fund in advance of the Reorganization of the Emerging Markets Fund and that the Fusion Funds would redeem their shares in the AZL Gateway Fund in advance of the Reorganization of the AZL Gateway Fund and as a result, in each case, the Fusion Funds would indirectly bear their pro rata share of any transaction costs incurred in connection with repositioning or liquidation of the portfolios. To the extent that the actual costs of a Reorganization exceed the Cost Limit, the Manager will pay any excess Reorganization costs. For AZL DFA Five-Year Global Fixed Income Fund and AZL MetWest Total Return Bond Fund, the Manager will pay all costs associated with the Reorganizations. The estimated cost of each Reorganization is also shown in the table below. 

The Board received information on expected shareholder fee savings for Acquired Fund shareholders following each Reorganization, from which the Cost Limit below is derived. For the AZL DFA 5-Year Global Fixed Income Fund and the AZL MetWest Total Return Bond Fund, which were not anticipated to benefit substantially from shareholder fee savings, the Board considered the other benefits that resulted from the Reorganization such as reorganizing into an Acquiring Fund with better long-term performance.

Dilution. The Board considered the fact that each Reorganization will not dilute the interests of the current Contract Owners with Contract values allocated to subaccounts investing in the Acquired Fund because it would be effected on the basis of the relative net asset value per share of the Acquired Fund and the Acquiring Fund, respectively. Thus, subaccounts holding shares of the Acquired Fund will receive shares of the Acquiring Fund equal in value to their shares in the Acquired Fund.

Performance and Other Factors. The Board considered the relative performance records of the Funds for various periods. The Board noted that the performance history of each Acquiring Fund, other than the AZL Enhanced Bond Index Fund, was generally better than the corresponding performance for the Acquired Fund, including one-year, three-year, five-year periods and since inception.

With respect to the AZL DFA Five-Year Global Fixed Income Fund, the Board noted that the recent performance of the Acquired Fund has been higher than its Acquiring Fund (AZL Enhanced Bond Index Fund); however, the Board took into account the Manager’s explanation that the Acquired Fund’s recent performance was due to its shorter duration exposure, which benefitted from the Federal Reserve’s recent moves to increase interest rates to combat inflation, circumstances which the Manager believes are unlikely to reoccur soon. The Board noted that while the strong recent performance of the Acquired Fund had lifted cumulative performance for the one- and three-year periods, the Acquiring Fund had outperformed the Acquired Fund for the five-year period, since inception and in five of the last six years on an annual basis.   The Board also took into consideration the comparative portfolio credit quality (i.e., the bond ratings) of the Acquired Fund, the Acquiring Fund, and potential alternative acquiring funds.

The Board also was cognizant of the fact that a Fund’s past performance is no guarantee of similar future results.  The Board also noted that the overall track record of each Acquiring Fund was satisfactory and consistent with its investment objective. The Board concluded that the other benefits to shareholders of the Reorganization, such as those discussed under Expense Ratios and Economies of Scale, above, supported approving the Reorganization.

AZL DFA Five Year Global Fixed Income Fund’s Subadvisor.  Dimensional Fund Advisors LP (“DFA” or “Dimensional”) has been engaged in the business of providing investment management services since May 1981. DFA is currently organized as a Delaware limited partnership and is controlled and operated by its general partner, Dimensional Holdings Inc., a Delaware corporation. As of September 30, 2022, assets under management for all Dimensional affiliated advisors totaled approximately $540 billion.

The portfolio managers for the Acquired  Fund are: David A. Plecha, Global Head of Fixed Income Portfolio Management, Senior Portfolio Manager, and Vice President, since April 2015, Joseph K.

Kolerich, Head of Fixed Income, Americas, Senior Portfolio Manager and Vice President since April 2015, and Travis A. Meldau, Senior Portfolio Manager and Vice President, since May 2020.

David A. Plecha is Dimensional’s Global Head of Fixed Income Portfolio Management, Senior Portfolio Manager and a Vice President, and a member of the Investment Committee at Dimensional. Mr. Plecha received his BS from the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor in 1983 and his MBA from the University of California at Los Angeles in 1987. Mr. Plecha has been a portfolio manager since 1989. Mr. Plecha has been a portfolio manager for the Fund since 2015.

Joseph F. Kolerich is Head of Fixed Income, Americas, Senior Portfolio Manager and a Vice President of Dimensional and a member of the Investment Committee at Dimensional. Mr. Kolerich has an MBA from the University of Chicago Booth School of Business and a BS from Northern Illinois University. Mr. Kolerich joined Dimensional as a portfolio manager in 2001. Mr. Kolerich has been a portfolio manager for the Fund since 2015.

Travis A. Meldau is a Senior Portfolio Manager and Vice President of Dimensional. Mr. Meldau holds an MBA from Wake Forest University and a BSBA from Appalachian State University. Mr. Meldau joined Dimensional as a portfolio manager in 2011. Mr. Meldau has been a portfolio manager for the Fund since 2020.

AZL Enhanced Bond Index Fund’s Subadvisor.  BlackRock Financial Management, Inc. is a wholly-owned, indirect subsidiary of BlackRock, Inc., one of the largest publicly traded investment management firms in the United States having, together with its affiliates, approximately $8.0 trillion in assets under management as of September 30, 2022. BlackRock International Limited is located at Exchange Place One, 1 Semple Street, Edinburgh, EH3 8BL, United Kingdom. BlackRock (Singapore) Limited is located at 20 Anson Road, #18-01, Singapore, 079912. BlackRock International Limited and BlackRock (Singapore) Limited are wholly-owned subsidiaries of BlackRock, Inc. and each serves as a sub-subadviser pursuant to a Sub-Sub-Investment Advisory Agreement with BlackRock Financial Management, Inc.

The portfolio managers for the AZL Enhanced Bond Index Fund are: Akiva Dickstein, Managing Director, since June 2014, and Harrison Segall, Director, since April 2019.

AZL Gateway Fund’s Subadvisor.  Gateway Investment Advisers, LLC (“Gateway”) is a subsidiary of Natixis Investment Managers, LLC. Gateway had approximately $8.7 billion in assets under management at September, 2022.

The portfolio managers of the AZL Gateway Fund are: Kenneth H. Toft, Vice President and Portfolio Manager, since 1992, Michael T. Buckius, Chief Investment Officer, President and Portfolio Manager, since 2013 and Daniel M. Aschcroft, Portfolio Manager, since 2009.

Kenneth H. Toft joined Gateway in 1992 and is a Senior Vice President and portfolio manager for the firm. He is co-portfolio manager for several mutual funds advised or sub-advised by Gateway, including the Gateway Fund. His responsibilities include managing portfolios using hedging strategies for growth-oriented, high-volatility indexes, trading, and servicing individual client relationships. Prior to joining Gateway, he served as a registered representative for Fidelity Investments. Mr. Toft earned his B.A. and M.B.A. from the University of Cincinnati and is a CFA^® charterholder.

Michael T. Buckius joined Gateway in 1999 and currently holds the positions of Chief Investment Officer and President. He is co-portfolio manager for several mutual funds advised or sub-advised by Gateway including the Gateway Fund. Prior to February 2013, Mr. Buckius served as portfolio manager and Senior Vice President of Gateway. Prior to joining Gateway, Mr. Buckius was an equity derivative sales professional at Bear Stearns & Co. and Bankers Trust Company in New York. Prior to his employment in New York, Mr. Buckius held a number of option-related research and trading positions at Alex. Brown & Sons Inc. in Baltimore. Mr. Buckius received his B.A. and M.B.A. in finance from Loyola University Maryland and is a CFA^® charterholder.

Dan Ashcraft joined Gateway in 2009 as a member of Gateway’s portfolio management team. He is co-portfolio manager for several mutual funds advised or sub-advised by Gateway, including the Gateway Fund. In this role, he is heavily involved in trading and analysis as well as the implementation of the firm’s equity multifactor model. Prior to joining Gateway, Mr. Ashcraft held a role conducting equity research. He is a CFA^® charterholder and received a B.S. from the Richard T. Farmer School of Business at Miami University in Ohio.

AZL FIAM Multi-Strategy Fund’s Subadvisor.  FIAM LLC  managed approximately $3.6  trillion in assets worldwide as of September 30, 2022. FIAM LLC is an indirectly held wholly-owned subsidiary of FMR LLC.

The portfolio managers for the AZL FIAM Multi-Strategy Fund are: Anna Lester, Portfolio Manager, since 2022, Maximillian Kaufann, Portfolio Manager, since 2022, Shashi Naik, Portfolio Manager, since 2022, Ford O’Neil, Portfolio Manager, since 1992, Celso Munoz, Portfolio Manager, since 2016, Michael Weaver, Portfolio Manager, since 2009 and Alexandre Karam, Portfolio Manager since 2016.

Anna Lester joined Fidelity in March 2022 as a portfolio manager. Ms. Lester worked as a senior portfolio manager at Geode from April 2019 to March 2022. Prior to joining Geode, Ms. Lester was a senior portfolio manager at State Street Global Advisors, where she worked from 2005 to 2019.

Maximilian Kaufmann joined Fidelity in March 2022 as a portfolio manager. Mr. Kaufmann worked as a portfolio manager and a senior portfolio manager at Geode from 2009 to March 2022. Prior to joining Geode, Mr. Kaufmann held similar positions at Lazard Asset Management, PanAgora Asset Management and Putnam Investments.

Shashi Naik, CFA, joined Fidelity in March 2022 as a portfolio manager. Mr. Naik worked as a portfolio performance analyst, assistant portfolio manager and portfolio manager at Geode from 2010 to March 2022. Prior to joining Geode, Mr. Naik was a quantitative analyst at PanAgora Asset Management. He is a Chartered Financial Analyst charterholder.

Ford O’Neil, Portfolio Manager, manages retail and institutional assets. Mr. O’Neil joined Fidelity as an analyst in 1989 and has been a portfolio manager since 1992. Prior to joining Fidelity, he worked for Advest, Inc. as an associate in investment banking from 1985 to 1989. Mr. O’Neil received a Bachelor of Arts degree in government from Harvard College and a Master of Business Administration from The Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania.

Celso Munoz, CFA, Portfolio Manager, co-manages retail and institutional assets. Mr. Munoz joined Fidelity as a research analyst in 2005 and has been managing fixed income portfolios since 2016. Prior to joining Fidelity, he served as an associate in the Merger & Acquisitions group within the investment banking practice at Deutsche Bank from 1999 to 2005. Mr. Munoz earned his Bachelor of Science degree in economics (with a concentration in finance) from the University of Pennsylvania and his Master of Business Administration degree from Harvard Business School. He is also a Chartered Financial Analyst charterholder.

Michael Weaver co-manages retail and institutional assets. Mr. Weaver joined Fidelity in 2005 as a research analyst and has been managing portfolios since 2009. Prior to joining Fidelity, he worked as a research analyst at Janus Capital Group from 2003 to 2005, an investment banking associate at JPMorgan from 2000-2003, and as an investment banking analyst at Barclays Capital from 1998-2000. Mr. Weaver earned his Bachelor of Science degree in economics from the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania.

Alexandre Karam, Portfolio Manager, co-manages retail and institutional assets. Prior to joining Fidelity in 2016, Mr. Karam was a vice president at Paulson & Company, and an analyst at Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley. Mr. Karam earned his Bachelor of Arts degree in economics and Bachelor of Science degree in electrical engineering from Stanford University. He also earned his Master of Business Administration from Harvard Business School.

The portfolio managers for the AZL MetWest Total Return Bond Fund’s since November, 2014, are: Stephen Kane, CFA and Portfolio Manager, Laird R. Landmann, CFA and Portfolio Manager and Bryan Whalen, Portfolio Manager. Stephen M. Kane, CFA, is the Group Managing Director and Co-Chief Investment Officer of MetWest, and has been with MetWest since 1996. Laird R. Landmann is the President of MetWest and has been with MetWest since August 1996. Bryan Whalen, CFA is the Group Managing Director and Co-Chief Investment Officer of MetWest and has been with MetWest since 2004.

AZL FIAM Total Bond Fund’s Subadvisor.  FIAM LLC managed approximately $3.6 trillion in assets worldwide as of September 30, 2022. FIAM LLC is an indirectly held, wholly-owned subsidiary of FMR LLC.

The portfolio managers for the Acquiring Fund are: Ford O’Neil, Celso Munoz, Michael Weaver and Alexandre Karam. Their backgrounds may be found in the AZL Gateway Fund and AZL FIAM Multi-Strategy Fund sub-section.

AZL MSCI Emerging Markets Equity Index Fund and AZL International Index Fund Subadvisor.  BlackRock Investment Management, LLC is a wholly-owned, indirect subsidiary of BlackRock, Inc., one of the largest publicly traded investment management firms in the United States having, together with its affiliates, approximately $8.0 trillion in investment company and other assets under management as of September 30, 2022.

The portfolio managers of the AZL MSCI Emerging Markets Equity Index Fund and AZL International Index Fund are: Jennifer Hsui, CFA, Managing Director and Portfolio Manager, since 2009, Suzanne Henige, CFA, Director and Senior Portfolio Manager, since 2009, Amy Whitelaw, Managing Director, since 1999, Peter Sietsema, Director, since 2007 and Paul Whitehead, Managing Director and Co-Head of Index Equity, since 1996.

Jennifer Hsui, CFA, Managing Director and portfolio manager, is a member of BlackRock’s Index Equity team, currently leading the team responsible for the emerging markets iShares funds. Ms. Hsui’s service with the firm dates back to 2006, including her years with Barclays Global Investors (BGI), which merged with BlackRock in 2009. At BGI, she led the team responsible for the domestic institutional equity index funds. Prior to joining BGI, she worked as an equity research analyst covering the medical devices industry at RBC Capital Markets. Suzanne Henige, CFA, Director and Senior Portfolio Manager, is a member of BlackRock’s ETF and Index Investments (EII) Portfolio Engineering group. She currently leads the Sub-Advised PE team, which is responsible for managing US and Developed markets Mutual Funds and Sub-Advised portfolios. Ms. Henige’s service with the firm dates back to 2009. Prior to her current role, she managed portfolios in the iShares Emerging Markets and US Institutional teams. Before transitioning to

the portfolio management team in 2011, she was a team lead in Client Reporting. Mrs. Henige began her career as an Officer in the International Developed Fund Accounting team at State Street in 2003. Ms. Henige earned a BS degree in managerial economics and an MBA degree from University of California, Davis in 2003 and 2012, respectively.

Amy Whitelaw, Managing Director, is the Head of the US & Canadian iShares Equity ETF Portfolio Engineering within BlackRock’s Index Equity team. She is responsible for overseeing the management of the Americas listed US & Canadian iShares equity funds.  She is a member of the LifePath Executive Committee and serves as a member of the US & Canada Defined Contribution Operating Committee. Ms. Whitelaw’s service with the firm dates back to 1999, including her years with Barclays Global Investors (BGI), which merged with BlackRock in 2009. At BGI, she led the Defined Contribution Portfolio Management team in Client Solutions, responsible for the management of defined contribution strategies for institutional and retail investors. Previously, Ms. Whitelaw worked in the Transition Services group as both a transition manager and strategist, and was also an international equity trader on Barclays Global Investors’ trading desk. Prior to BGI, she worked in the Institutional Derivatives Sales group at Goldman Sachs.

Peter Sietsema, Director, is a member of BlackRock’s Index Equity Portfolio Management Group. He is responsible for the Sub-Advised vehicles. Mr. Sietsema was previously responsible for the management of a broad range of US equity portfolios. Mr. Sietsema’s service with the firm dates back to 2007, including his years with Barclays Global Investors (BGI), which merged with BlackRock in 2009. At BGI, he was a portfolio manager within the US Index Portfolio Management group in San Francisco. Mr. Sietsema began his career as Senior Manager of Alternative Investments at State Street. Mr. Sietsema earned a BS degree in business administration from California State University, Sacramento, in 2000.

Paul Whitehead, Managing Director, Co-Head of Index Equity, is the Co-Head of the BlackRock’s ETF and Index Investments business. He is responsible for overseeing the management of Institutional and iShares funds. Paul was previously the Global Head of Equity Trading and the Global Head of Transition Management within BlackRock’s Global Trading Group. Mr. Whitehead’s service with the firm dates back to 1996, including his years with Barclays Global Investors (BGI), which merged with BlackRock in 2009. Prior to assuming his current role, Mr. Whitehead was Head of Americas Equity Trading. Previously, he managed the trading team responsible for all Institutional Index funds, Exchange Traded funds, and Transition Management mandates. Mr. Whitehead represents BlackRock on the board of Luminex, a buy-side owned Alternative Trading System launched in 2015. Mr. Whitehead earned a BS degree in economics at the University of Colorado in 1993.

The Manager is not aware of any material pending legal proceedings, other than routine litigation incidental to the conduct of their respective businesses, to which the Funds, the Manager or the principal underwriter is a party. However, several of the Subadvisers have reported that they are currently the subject of the following proceedings which relate to its management of other mutual funds:

On May 27, 2014, certain investors in the BlackRock Global Allocation Fund, Inc. (“Global Allocation”) and the BlackRock Equity Dividend Fund (“Equity Dividend”) filed a consolidated complaint in the United

States District Court for the District of New Jersey against BlackRock Advisors, LLC, BlackRock Investment Management, LLC and BlackRock International Limited (collectively, the “Defendants”) under the caption In re BlackRock Mutual Funds Advisory Fee Litigation. In the lawsuit, which purports to be brought derivatively on behalf of Global Allocation and Equity Dividend, the plaintiffs allege that the Defendants violated Section 36(b) of the Investment Company Act by receiving allegedly excessive investment advisory fees from Global Allocation and Equity Dividend. On June 13, 2018, the court granted in part and denied in part the Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. On July 25, 2018, the plaintiffs served a pleading that supplemented the time period of their alleged damages to run through the date of trial. The lawsuit seeks, among other things, to recover on behalf of Global Allocation and Equity Dividend all allegedly excessive advisory fees received by the Defendants beginning twelve months preceding the start of the lawsuit with respect to each of Global Allocation and Equity Dividend and ending on the date of judgment, along with purported lost investment returns on those amounts, plus interest. The trial on the remaining issues was completed on August 29, 2018. On February 8, 2019, the court issued an order dismissing the claims in their entirety. On March 8, 2019, the plaintiffs provided notice that they were appealing both the February 8, 2019 post-trial order and the June 13, 2018 order partially granting Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. On May 28, 2020, the appellate court affirmed the trial court’s orders. On June 26, 2020, the plaintiffs petitioned the appeals court for a rehearing, which was denied on July 9, 2020. Plaintiffs’ deadline to seek further appeal has passed; consequently, this matter is now closed.

Dimensional is not aware of any pending legal proceeding related to its asset management business and to which it is a party that, in Dimensional’s view, has had or is likely to have a material adverse effect on the subadvisory services that Dimensional provides to the Manager.

From time to time, in the regular course of its business, FIAM LLC (including any officer or principal thereof) may be involved in legal proceedings (including, but not limited to, litigation, arbitration, bankruptcy, receivership, or similar proceedings). Below please find the legal proceedings currently pending involving FIAM LLC that might be deemed material:

In March 2020, the trustee for the Nine West Holdings litigation trust and a trustee for Nine West bondholders began filing suits around the country raising fraudulent conveyance theories in connection with the Jones Group leveraged buyout in 2014. Fidelity Investments, FIAM LLC, and Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund, along with three Fidelity funds, have been named as defendants in the Massachusetts action. The cases have been consolidated in New York federal court for pretrial proceedings. In August, the court granted a Motion to Dismiss which dismisses all claims against all Fidelity entities. Plaintiffs have filed a notice of appeal in the Second Circuit Court.

To the best of its knowledge, Gateway Investment Advisers, LLC is not a party to any material pending legal proceedings.

Metropolitan West Asset Management, LLC (“MetWest”) has been named in a lawsuit by an investor in the Metropolitan West Total Return Bond Fund (“Fund”), a series of Metropolitan West Funds, a registered investment company. The complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California on October 16, 2015. The lawsuit contends that MetWest, as investment advisor to the Fund, breached its fiduciary duty by charging excessive advisory fees. In fact, the Fund has among the best long-term risk-adjusted results and lowest fees in its category, and MetWest believes the claim is entirely without merit. MetWest engaged Ropes & Gray to represent it in this litigation and initially moved to dismiss the claim. The motion to dismiss was denied, but the judge ordered phased discovery, initially focusing on provision of services by MetWest. The parties commenced discovery and MetWest subsequently filed its motion for summary judgment on April 28, 2017 and the Summary Judgment Motion was argued on June 5, 2017. The judge requested supplemental briefing, and oral argument based on the supplemental briefing occurred on September 11, 2017. On September 22, 2017 the Court issued a ruling denying MetWest’s motion for summary judgment on the grounds that there appeared to be disputed issues of fact requiring a trial. On October 2, 2017 the Court held a scheduling conference and established a calendar for the next phase of the litigation, and on March 12, 2018, the Court held a scheduling conference and extended the scheduled dates. The discovery period ended May 25, 2018, and expert reports were due August 20, 2018. MetWest filed a motion for summary judgment on September 20, 2018 and plaintiffs filed their opposition on October 9, 2018. MetWest filed a reply on October 15, 2018. A hearing was held on October 25, 2018 and the judge denied MetWest’s motion for summary judgment. A five-day bench trial commenced on December 11, 2018. Closing arguments were made on February 22, 2019. A ruling is pending. On July 9, 2019, Judge Wu entered a tentative judgment in favor of MetWest on all counts. A final judgment was issued on August 5, 2019 in favor of MetWest, adopting the tentative judgment in all respects, stipulating that plaintiff is to recover no form of relief and dismissing the action in its entirety, on the merits, with prejudice. On August 8, 2019, Plaintiff filed a notice of appeal before the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The appeal was fully briefed and the Ninth Circuit heard the case without arguments from the parties on August 31, 2020. On September 17, 2020 the Ninth Circuit panel that considered the appeal concluded that the district court did not clearly err in finding that Plaintiff failed to carry his burden of showing that MetWest breached its fiduciary duty under section 36(b) of the 1940 Act. As such the Ninth Circuit unanimously affirmed the trial court ruling on all counts, bringing the case to a close in favor of TCW.

The procedures that are designed to detect and deter market timing activities at the contract or policy level cannot provide a guarantee that all market timing activity will be identified and restricted. In addition, state law and the terms of some contracts and policies may prevent or restrict the effectiveness of the market timing procedures from stopping certain market timing activity. Market timing activity that is not identified, prevented, or restricted may adversely impact the performance of a Fund.