Company: VBF
Filing Date: 2025-11-07
Form Type: N-CSRS
Source: 0001193125-25-271159
Chunk: 27

Company: Invesco Bond Fund
Filing Date: 2025-11-07
Form: N-CSRS
Chunk 27
---
 Board concluded that the nature, extent and quality of the services that may be provided to the Fund by the Affiliated Sub-Adviserssupported the renewal of the sub-advisorycontracts.

| B. | Fund Investment Performance |

The Board considered Fund investment performance as a relevant factor in considering whether to approve the investment advisory agreement. The Board did not view Fund investment performance as a relevant factor in considering whether to approve the sub-advisorycontracts for the Fund, as no Affiliated Sub-Advisercurrently manages assets of the Fund. The Board compared the Fund’s investment performance over multiple time periods ending December 31, 2024 to the performance of funds in the Broadridge performance universe and against the Bloomberg Baa U.S. Corporate Bond Index (Index). The Board noted that there were only five funds (including the Fund) in the performance universe, therefore, Broadridge did not provide quintile rankings. The Board noted that the Fund’s performance was above the performance of the Index for the one year period, below the performance of the Index for the three year period and reasonably comparable to the performance of the Index for the five year period. The Board recognized that the performance data reflects a snapshot in time as of a

| 37 |     | Invesco Bond Fund |

particular date and that selecting a different performance period could produce different results. The Board also reviewed more recent Fund performance as well as other performance metrics, which did not change its conclusions. The Board also reviewed supplementally historic premium and discount levels of the Fund as provided to the Board at meetings throughout the year.

| C. | Advisory andSub-AdvisoryFees and Fund Expenses |

The Board received information regarding Invesco Advisers’ approach with respect to contractual management fee schedules and compared the Fund’s contractual management fee rate to the contractual management fee rates of funds in the Fund’s Broadridge expense group. The Board noted that the contractual management and actual management fee rates for shares of the Fund were reasonably comparable to and below, respectively, the median contractual management and actual management fee rates of funds in its expense group. The Board noted that there were only four funds (including the Fund) in the expense group, therefore, Broadridge did not provide quintile rankings. The Board noted that the term “contractual management fee” and “actual management fee” for funds in the expense group may include both advisory and certain non-portfoliomanagement administrative services fees, but that Broadridge is not able to provide information on a fund-by