N-CSR

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM N-CSR

CERTIFIED SHAREHOLDER REPORT OF REGISTERED MANAGEMENT INVESTMENT COMPANIES

Investment Company Act file number: 811-23626

Name of Fund: BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution

Fund Address: 100 Bellevue Parkway, Wilmington, DE 19809

Name and address of agent for service: John M. Perlowski, Chief Executive Officer, BlackRock Hedge Fund

    Guided Portfolio Solution, 55 East 52^nd Street, New York, NY 10055

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (800) 882-0052, Option 4

Date of fiscal year end: 3/31/2022

Date of reporting period: 3/31/2022

Item 1 – Report to Stockholders

(a) The Report to Shareholders is attached herewith.

MARCH 31, 2022

2022 Annual Report

BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution

Not FDIC Insured · May Lose Value · No Bank Guarantee

The Markets in Review

Dear Shareholder,

The 12-month reporting period as of March 31, 2022 saw a continuation of the resurgent growth that followed the initial coronavirus (or “COVID-19”) pandemic reopening, albeit at a slower pace. The global economy weathered the emergence of several variant strains and the resulting peaks and troughs in infections amid optimism that increasing vaccinations and economic adaptation could help contain the pandemic’s disruptions. However, rapid changes in consumer spending led to supply constraints and elevated inflation. Moreover, while the foremost effect of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has been a severe humanitarian crisis, the invasion has presented challenges for both investors and policymakers.

Equity prices were mixed, as persistently high inflation drove investors’ expectations for higher interest rates, which particularly weighed on relatively high valuation growth stocks and economically sensitive small-capitalization stocks. Overall, small-capitalization U.S. stocks declined, while large-capitalization U.S. stocks posted a strong advance. International equities from developed markets gained slightly, although emerging market stocks declined, pressured by rising interest rates and a strengthening U.S. dollar.

The 10-year U.S. Treasury yield (which is inversely related to bond prices) rose during the reporting period as the economy expanded rapidly and inflation reached its highest annualized reading in decades. The corporate bond market also faced inflationary headwinds, although the improving economy assuaged credit concerns and high-yield corporate bonds consequently declined less than investment-grade corporate bonds.

The U.S. Federal Reserve (the “Fed”), acknowledging that inflation is growing faster than expected, raised interest rates in March 2022, the first increase of this business cycle. Furthermore, the Fed wound down its bond-buying programs and raised the prospect of reversing the flow and reducing its balance sheet. Continued high inflation and the Fed’s new tone led many analysts to anticipate that the Fed will continue to raise interest rates multiple times throughout the year.

Looking ahead, however, the horrific war in Ukraine has significantly clouded the outlook for the global economy, leading to major volatility in energy and metal markets. Sanctions on Russia, Europe’s top energy supplier, and general wartime disruption are likely to drive already-high commodity prices even higher. Sharp increases in energy prices will exacerbate inflationary pressure while also constraining economic growth. Combating inflation without stifling a recovery, while buffering against ongoing supply and price shocks amid the ebb and flow of the pandemic, will be an especially challenging environment for setting effective monetary policy. Despite the likelihood of more rate increases on the horizon, we believe the Fed will err on the side of protecting employment, even at the expense of higher inflation.

In this environment, we favor an overweight to equities, as valuations have become more attractive and inflation-adjusted interest rates remain low. Sectors that are better poised to manage the transition to a lower-carbon world, such as technology and health care, are particularly attractive in the long term. We favor U.S. equities due to strong earnings momentum, while Japanese equities should benefit from supportive monetary and fiscal policy. We are underweight credit overall, but inflation-protected U.S. Treasuries, Asian fixed income, and emerging market local-currency bonds offer potential opportunities for additional yield. We believe that international diversification and a focus on sustainability and quality can help provide portfolio resilience.

Overall, our view is that investors need to think globally, extend their scope across a broad array of asset classes, and be nimble as market conditions change. We encourage you to talk with your financial advisor and visit blackrock.com for further insight about investing in today’s markets.

Sincerely,

Rob Kapito

President, BlackRock Advisors, LLC

Rob Kapito

President, BlackRock Advisors, LLC

Total Returns as of March 31, 2022
	6-Month	12-Month
U.S. large cap equities (S&P 500® Index)	5.92%	15.65%
U.S. small cap equities (Russell 2000® Index)	(5.55)	(5.79)
International equities (MSCI Europe, Australasia, Far East Index)	(3.38)	1.16
Emerging market equities (MSCI Emerging Markets Index)	(8.20)	(11.37)
3-month Treasury bills (ICE BofA 3-Month U.S. Treasury Bill Index)	0.05	0.07
U.S. Treasury securities (ICE BofA 10-Year U.S. Treasury Index)	(6.04)	(3.31)
U.S. investment grade bonds (Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate Bond Index)	(5.92)	(4.15)
Tax-exempt municipal bonds (Bloomberg Municipal Bond Index)	(5.55)	(4.47)
U.S. high yield bonds (Bloomberg U.S. Corporate High Yield 2% Issuer Capped Index)	(4.16)	(0.66)
Past performance is not an indication of future results. Index performance is shown for illustrative purposes only. You cannot invest directly in an index.

2 T H I S  P A G E  I S  N O T  P A R T  O F  Y O U R  F U N D  R E P O R T

Table of Contents

	Page
The Markets in Review		2
The Benefits and Risks of Leveraging		4
Annual Report:
Fund Summary		5
About Fund Performance		8
Disclosure of Expenses		8
Financial Statements:
Schedule of Investments		9
Statement of Assets and Liabilities		11
Statement of Operations		12
Statements of Changes in Net Assets		13
Statement of Cash Flows		14
Financial Highlights		15
Notes to Financial Statements		17
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm		25
Automatic Dividend Reinvestment Plan		26
Trustee and Officer Information		27
Additional Information		31

3

The Benefits and Risks of Leveraging BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution

The Fund may utilize leverage to seek to enhance the distribution rate on, and net asset value (“NAV”) of, its common shares (“Common Shares”). However, there is no guarantee that these objectives can be achieved in all interest rate environments.

In general, the concept of leveraging is based on the premise that the financing cost of leverage, which is based on short-term interest rates, is normally lower than the income earned by the Fund on its longer-term portfolio investments purchased with the proceeds from leverage. To the extent that the total assets of the Fund (including the assets obtained from leverage) are invested in higher-yielding portfolio investments, the Fund’s shareholders benefit from the incremental net income. The interest earned on securities purchased with the proceeds from leverage (after paying the leverage costs) is paid to shareholders in the form of dividends, and the value of these portfolio holdings (less the leverage liability) is reflected in the per share NAV.

To illustrate these concepts, assume the Fund’s capitalization is $100 million and it utilizes leverage for an additional $30 million, creating a total value of $130 million available for investment in longer-term income securities. If prevailing short-term interest rates are 3% and longer-term interest rates are 6%, the yield curve has a strongly positive slope. In this case, the Fund’s financing costs on the $30 million of proceeds obtained from leverage are based on the lower short-term interest rates. At the same time, the securities purchased by the Fund with the proceeds from leverage earn income based on longer-term interest rates. In this case, the Fund’s financing cost of leverage is significantly lower than the income earned on the Fund’s longer-term investments acquired from such leverage proceeds, and therefore the holders of Common Shares (“Common Shareholders”) are the beneficiaries of the incremental net income.

However, in order to benefit shareholders, the return on assets purchased with leverage proceeds must exceed the ongoing costs associated with the leverage. If interest and other costs of leverage exceed the Fund’s return on assets purchased with leverage proceeds, income to shareholders is lower than if the Fund had not used leverage. Furthermore, the value of the Fund’s portfolio investments generally varies inversely with the direction of long-term interest rates, although other factors can influence the value of portfolio investments. In contrast, the amount of the Fund’s obligations under its leverage arrangement generally does not fluctuate in relation to interest rates. As a result, changes in interest rates can influence the Fund’s NAVs positively or negatively. Changes in the future direction of interest rates are very difficult to predict accurately, and there is no assurance that the Fund’s intended leveraging strategy will be successful.

The use of leverage also generally causes greater changes in the Fund’s NAV, market price and dividend rates than comparable portfolios without leverage. In a declining market, leverage is likely to cause a greater decline in the NAV and market price of the Fund’s shares than if the Fund were not leveraged. In addition, the Fund may be required to sell portfolio securities at inopportune times or at distressed values in order to comply with regulatory requirements applicable to the use of leverage or as required by the terms of leverage instruments, which may cause the Fund to incur losses. The use of leverage may limit the Fund’s ability to invest in certain types of securities or use certain types of hedging strategies. The Fund incurs expenses in connection with the use of leverage, all of which are borne by shareholders and may reduce income to the shareholders. Moreover, to the extent the calculation of the Fund’s investment advisory fees includes assets purchased with the proceeds of leverage, the investment advisory fees payable to the Fund’s investment adviser will be higher than if the Fund did not use leverage.

The Fund may utilize leverage through a credit facility or reverse repurchase agreements as described in the Notes to Financial Statements, if applicable.

Under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”), the Fund is permitted to issue debt up to 33 1/3% of its total managed assets. The Fund may voluntarily elect to limit its leverage to less than the maximum amount permitted under the 1940 Act. In addition, the Fund may also be subject to certain asset coverage, leverage or portfolio composition requirements imposed by its credit facility, which may be more stringent than those imposed by the 1940 Act.

If the Fund segregates or designates on its books and records cash or liquid assets having a value not less than the value of the Fund’s obligations under a reverse repurchase agreement (including accrued interest) then such transaction is not considered a senior security and is not subject to the foregoing limitations and requirements imposed by the 1940 Act.

4 2 0 2 1  B L A C K R O C K  A N N U A L  R E P O R T  T O  S H A R E H O L D E R S

Fund Summary  as of March 31, 2022 (continued) BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution

Investment Objective

BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution’s (the “Fund”) investment objective is to seek, over time, absolute and risk-adjusted returns that exhibit low volatility and low-to-moderate correlation to global equity and fixed income markets, while preserving capital. The Fund seeks to achieve its investment objective by allocating the Fund’s assets to private investment vehicles commonly referred to as “hedge funds” (“Portfolio Funds”) that are managed by third-party investment management firms that are not affiliated with the Fund’s investment adviser.

The Fund’s common shares are not listed on any securities exchange. The Fund is designed for long-term investors, and an investment in the common shares, unlike an investment in a traditional listed closed-end fund, should be considered illiquid.

No assurance can be given that the Fund’s investment objective will be achieved.

Net Asset Value Per Share Summary

	03/31/22		03/31/21		Change			High		Low
Net Asset Value — Class I	$	10.14	$	10.00		1.40	%	$	10.20	$	9.93
Net Asset Value — Class A		10.11		10.00		1.10			10.17		9.91

The Fund commenced operations on March 31, 2021.

^(a)  Assuming maximum sales charges, if any, transaction costs and other operating expenses, including investment advisory fees.

^(b)  Under normal market conditions, the Fund will invest, in varying proportions, across a number of portfolio strategies, including but not limited to hedge fund strategies and cash strategies. The Fund may also invest directly in securities (other than those of Portfolio Funds) or other financial instruments selected by the Advisor.

^(c)  An index that captures large- and mid-cap representation across certain developed markets certain emerging markets.

Performance

Returns for the period ended March 31, 2022 were as follows:

	Average Annual Total Returns(a)
				Since
	1 Year			Inception(b)
Class I		3.06	%		3.06	%
Class A		2.45			2.45
MSCI All Country World Index® Index(c)		7.28			7.28
HFRI Fund Weighted Composite Index(d)		3.17			3.17

^(a)  See “About Fund Performance” for a detailed description of share classes and how performance was calculated for certain share classes.

^(b)  The Fund commenced operations on March 31, 2021.

^(c)  An index that captures large- and mid-cap representation across certain developed markets certain emerging markets.

^(d) A global, equal-weighted index of single-manager funds that report to Hedge Fund Research Database.

Past performance is not an indication of future results.

Performance results may include adjustments made for financial reporting purposes in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.

F U N D   S U M M A R Y 5

Fund Summary  as of March 31, 2022 (continued) BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution

Portfolio Management Commentary

Investment Strategies

The Fund invests in portfolios of hedge funds as a means to gain exposure to various types of investment strategies in four primary hedge fund strategies, including Equity Hedge, Event-Driven, Relative Value and Macro. The following descriptions are not intended to be complete explanations of the strategies described or a list of all possible investment strategies or methods that may be used by the Fund.

Equity Hedge strategies maintain positions both long and short, normally with a primary focus on equity securities and equity derivatives. A wide variety of investment processes can be employed to arrive at an investment decision, including both quantitative and fundamental techniques.

Event-Driven strategies generally maintain positions in companies currently or prospectively involved in a wide variety of corporate transactions, including, but not limited to, mergers, restructurings, financial distress, tender offers, shareholder buybacks, debt exchanges, security issuances or other capital structure adjustments.

Relative Value strategies maintain positions where the investment thesis is predicated on the realization of a valuation discrepancy in the relationship between multiple securities. These strategies employ a variety of fundamental and quantitative techniques.

Macro strategies employ a broad range of strategies where the investment process is predicated on movements in underlying economic variables and the impact of these movements on equity, fixed income, hard currency and commodity markets.

What factors influenced performance?

The Fund’s exposure to Macro strategies made the largest contribution to positive performance during the period driven by supply/demand imbalances in commodity markets and price appreciation across the energy complex. Relative Value strategies contributed to performance given increased volatility across markets. Event-Driven strategies had mixed performance, but ultimately contributed to performance given continued elevated levels of corporate activity such as mergers and capital raising. The Fund’s exposure to Equity Hedge strategies detracted from performance over the period given adverse factor rotations and sharp selloffs in equity markets globally.

Describe recent portfolio activity.

The Fund commenced operations on March 31, 2021 with allocations to 12 positions by April 1, 2021.

On May 1, 2021, the Fund made three new allocations to MY Asian Opportunities Unit Trust, East One Commodity Fund Limited, and Systematica Alternative Markets Fund Ltd.

On October 1, 2021, the Fund made one new allocation to Nekton Global Fund Ltd.

On January 1, 2022, the Fund made one new allocation to Schonfeld Strategic Partners Offshore Fund Ltd.

On February 1, 2022, the Fund transferred its exposure from Voleon International Investors, Ltd. to Voleon Composition International Fund, Ltd. The transfer does not pose a meaningful change to the Fund’s underlying strategy.

In aggregate, the Fund’s position changes over the period resulted in increased exposure to all strategies, with the largest increases in Macro and Event-Driven strategies. Cash balance in the portfolio decreased as the Fund deployed capital into new and existing positions.

Describe portfolio positioning at period end.

At period end, the Fund held broad exposure across different hedge fund strategies. For purposes of financial reporting, the underlying hedge funds are categorized based on their primary underlying strategy exposure. In this regard, the categories of investment strategies as a percentage of the Fund’s long term investments are 27% Relative Value, 22% Macro, 21% Event-Driven and 20% Equity Hedge. Cash as a percentage of the Fund’s investments was 9% at period end. Cash is held in the portfolio for deployment in new and existing positions and to comply with regulations. The Fund’s cash position had no material impact to Fund performance during the period.

6 2 0 2 2  B L A C K R O C K  A N N U A L  R E P O R T  T O  S H A R E H O L D E R S

Fund Summary  as of March 31, 2022 (continued) BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution

Portfolio Information

TEN LARGEST HOLDINGS

Security	Percent of Net Assets
Pentwater Event Fund, Ltd.		10	%
One William Street Capital Offshore Fund, Ltd.		9
Polar Multi-Strategy Fund		9
Stratus Feeder, Ltd.		8
Crabel Fund SPC, Ltd. Segregated Portfolio AA		5
Systematica Alternative Markets Fund Ltd.		5
East One Commodity Fund Limited		5
Schonfeld Strategic Partners Offshore Fund, Ltd.		5
Voleon Composition International Fund, Ltd.		5
Parallax Offshore Investors Fund, Ltd.		4

SECTOR ALLOCATION

Sector(a)	Percent of Net Assets
Relative Value		27	%
Macro		22
Event-Driven		21
Equity Hedge		20
Short-Term Securities		9
Other Assets Less Liabilities		1

^(a)  For Fund compliance purposes, the Fund’s sector classifications refer to one or more of the sector sub-classifications used by one or more widely recognized market indexes or ratings group indexes, and/or as defined by the investment adviser. These definitions may not apply for purposes of this report, which may combine such sector sub-classifications for reporting ease.

F U N D   S U M M A R Y 7

About Fund Performance (continued) BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution

Class I Shares are not subject to any sales charge. These shares bear no ongoing distribution or service fees and are available only to certain eligible investors.

Class A Shares are not subject to any sales charge. These shares are subject to an ongoing distribution fee and shareholder servicing fee of 0.75% per year.

Past performance is not an indication of future results. Financial markets have experienced extreme volatility and trading in many instruments has been disrupted. These circumstances may continue for an extended period of time, and may continue to affect adversely the value and liquidity of the Fund’s investments. As a result, current performance may be lower or higher than the performance data quoted. Refer to blackrock.com to obtain performance data current to the most recent month-end. Performance results do not reflect the deduction of taxes that a shareholder would pay on Fund distributions or the redemption of Fund shares. Figures shown in the performance table(s) assume reinvestment of all distributions, if any, at net asset value (“NAV”) on the ex-dividend date or payable date, as applicable. Investment return and principal value of shares will fluctuate so that shares, when redeemed, may be worth more or less than their original cost. Distributions paid to each class of shares will vary because of the different levels of service, distribution and transfer agency fees applicable to each class, which are deducted from the income available to be paid to shareholders.

BlackRock Advisors, LLC (the “Manager”), the Fund’s investment adviser, has contractually and/or voluntarily agreed to waive and/or reimburse a portion of the Fund’s expenses. Without such waiver(s) and/or reimbursement(s), the Fund’s performance would have been lower. With respect to the Fund’s voluntary waiver(s), if any, the Manager is under no obligation to waive and/or reimburse or to continue waiving and/or reimbursing its fees and such voluntary waiver(s) may be reduced or discontinued at any time. With respect to the Fund’s contractual waiver(s), if any, the Manager is under no obligation to continue waiving and/or reimbursing its fees after the applicable termination date of such agreement. See the Notes to Financial Statements for additional information on waivers and/or reimbursements.

Disclosure of Expenses for Continuously Offered Closed-End Funds

Shareholders of the Fund may incur the following charges: (a) transactional expenses, including early withdrawal fees; and (b) operating expenses, including investment advisory fees, and other fund expenses. The example below (which is based on a hypothetical investment of $1,000 invested on October 1, 2021 and held through March 31, 2022) is intended to assist shareholders both in calculating expenses based on an investment in the Fund and in comparing these expenses with similar costs of investing in other funds.

The expense example provides information about actual account values and actual expenses. Annualized expense ratios reflect contractual and voluntary fee waivers, if any. In order to estimate the expenses a shareholder paid during the period covered by this report, shareholders can divide their account value by $1,000 and then multiply the result by the number corresponding to their Fund and share class under the heading entitled “Expenses Paid During the Period.”

The expense example also provides information about hypothetical account values and hypothetical expenses based on the Fund’s actual expense ratio and an assumed rate of return of 5% per year before expenses. In order to assist shareholders in comparing the ongoing expenses of investing in the Fund and other funds, compare the 5% hypothetical example with the 5% hypothetical examples that appear in shareholder reports of other funds.

The expenses shown in the expense example are intended to highlight shareholders’ ongoing costs only and do not reflect transactional expenses, such as sales charges and early withdrawal fees, if any. Therefore, the hypothetical example is useful in comparing ongoing expenses only and will not help shareholders determine the relative total expenses of owning different funds. If these transactional expenses were included, shareholder expenses would have been higher.

	Actual						Hypothetical 5% Return
	Beginning Account Value (10/01/21)		Ending Account Value (03/31/22)		Expenses Paid During the Period(a)		Beginning Account Value (10/01/21)		Ending Account Value (03/31/22)		Expenses Paid During the Period(a)		Annualized Expense Ratio
Class I		$  1,000.00		$  1,011.40		$  7.51		$  1,000.00		$  1,002.06		$  7.48		1.49	%
Class A		1,000.00		1,007.30		11.21		1,000.00		992.47		11.13		2.24

^(a) For each class of the Fund, expenses are equal to the annualized expense ratio for the class, multiplied by the average account value over the period, multiplied by 182/365 (to reflect the one-half year period shown).

8 2 0 2 2  B L A C K R O C K  A N N U A L  R E P O R T  T O  S H A R E H O L D E R S

Schedule of Investments     March 31, 2022 BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution (Percentages shown are based on Net Assets)

Portfolio Funds(a)(b)	First Acquisition Date		Cost		Value		% of Net Assets
Equity Hedge
Kadensa Fund		04/01/21	$	2,312,500	$	2,272,524		4.2	%
Manticore Fund (Cayman) Ltd.		04/01/21		2,562,500		2,274,364		4.2	%
Pelham Long/Short Fund, Ltd.		04/01/21		2,162,500		1,486,706		2.7	%
Schonfeld Strategic Partners Offshore Fund, Ltd.		01/01/22		2,475,000		2,552,129		4.7	%
Voleon Composition International Fund, Ltd.		02/01/22		2,478,483		2,519,124		4.6	%
Total Equity Hedge				11,990,983		11,104,847		20.4	%
Event-Driven
MY Asian Opportunities Unit Trust		05/01/21		1,966,554		1,708,697		3.1	%
Nekton Global Fund Ltd.		10/01/21		2,400,000		2,443,655		4.5	%
Pentwater Event Fund, Ltd.		04/01/21		4,775,000		5,241,398		9.6	%
Segantii Asia-Pacific Equity Multi-Strategy Fund		11/01/21		2,100,000		2,140,271		3.9	%
Total Event-Driven				11,241,554		11,534,021		21.1	%
Macro
Crabel Fund SPC, Ltd. Segregated Portfolio AA		04/01/21		2,512,500		2,664,325		4.9	%
East One Commodity Fund Limited		05/01/21		2,012,500		2,640,374		4.8	%
Stratus Feeder, Ltd.		04/01/21		3,834,500		4,264,033		7.8	%
Systematica Alternative Markets Fund Ltd.		05/01/21		2,212,500		2,658,054		4.9	%
Total Macro				10,572,000		12,226,786		22.4	%
Relative Value
One William Street Capital Offshore Fund, Ltd.		04/01/21		4,700,000		4,940,747		9.1	%
Parallax Offshore Investors Fund, Ltd.		04/01/21		2,193,237		2,454,770		4.5	%
Polar Multi-Strategy Fund		04/01/21		4,850,000		4,882,781		8.9	%
Rose Grove Offshore Fund I, Ltd.		04/01/21		2,412,500		2,359,232		4.3	%
Total Relative Value				14,155,737		14,637,530		26.8	%
Total Portfolio Funds				47,960,274		49,503,184		90.7	%
Security			Cost		Value		% of Net Assets
Short-Term Securities
Money Market Funds
BlackRock Liquidity Funds, T-Fund, Institutional Class, 0.21%(c)(d)				4,721,908		4,721,908		8.7	%
Total Short-Term Securities				4,721,908		4,721,908		8.7	%
Total Investments			$	52,682,182		54,225,092		99.4	%
Other Assets Less Liabilities						350,243		0.6	%
Net Assets					$	54,575,335		100.0	%

(a) Non-income producing security.

(b) Restricted security as to resale, excluding 144A securities. The Fund held restricted securities with a current value of $49,503,184, representing 90.7% of its net assets as of period end, and an original cost of $47,960,274.

(c) Affiliate of the Fund.

(d) Annualized 7-day yield as of period end.

Affiliates

Investments in issuers considered to be affiliate(s) of the Fund during the year ended March 31, 2022 for purposes of Section 2(a)(3) of the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, were as follows:

Affiliated Issuer	Value at 03/31/21		Purchases at Cost			Proceeds from Sale		Net Realized Gain (Loss)		Change in Unrealized Appreciation (Depreciation)		Value at 03/31/22		Shares Held at 03/31/22		Income		Capital Gain Distributions from Underlying Funds
BlackRock Liquidity Funds, T-Fund, Institutional Class		$  —		$  4,721,908	(a)		$  —		$  —		$  —		$  4,721,908		—		$  780		$  —

^(a)  Represents net amount purchased (sold).

S C H E D U L E   O F  I N V E S T M E N T S 9

Schedule of Investments   (continued) March 31, 2022 BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution

Fair Value Hierarchy as of Period End

Various inputs are used in determining the fair value of financial instruments. For a description of the input levels and information about the Fund’s policy regarding valuation of financial instruments, refer to the Notes to Financial Statements.

The following table summarizes the Fund’s financial instruments categorized in the fair value hierarchy. The breakdown of the Fund’s financial instruments into major categories is disclosed in the Schedule of Investments above.

	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total
Assets
Investments
Short-Term Securities
Money Market Funds		$  4,721,908		$ —		$ —	$	4,721,908
Investments valued at NAV								49,503,184
							$	54,225,092

See notes to financial statements.

10 2 0 2 2  B L A C K R O C K  A N N U A L  R E P O R T  T O  S H A R E H O L D E R S

Statement of Assets and Liabilities

March 31, 2022

	BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution
ASSETS
Investments at value — unaffiliated(a)		$	49,503,184
Investments at value — affiliated(b)			4,721,908
Investments in Portfolio Funds paid in advance			900,000
Investments in Portfolio Funds sold receivable			1,000,000
Receivables:
Dividends — affiliated			380
From the Manager			364,195
Prepaid expenses			181
Total assets			56,489,848
LIABILITIES
Capital contributions received in advance			1,581,000
Repurchase offer payable			2,458
Payables:
Administration fees			37,500
Other accrued expenses			179,059
Service and distribution fees			114,496
Total liabilities			1,914,513
NET ASSETS		$	54,575,335
NET ASSETS CONSIST OF
Paid-in capital		$	54,147,741
Accumulated earnings			427,594
NET ASSETS		$	54,575,335
NET ASSET VALUE
Class I
Net assets		$	19,830,979
Shares outstanding			1,955,770
Net asset value		$	10.14
Class A
Net assets		$	34,744,356
Shares outstanding			3,437,423
Net asset value		$	10.11
(a) Investments, at cost — unaffiliated		$	47,960,274
(b) Investments, at cost — affiliated		$	4,721,908

See notes to financial statements.

F I N A N C I A L   S T A T E M E N T S 11

Statement of Operations

Year Ended March 31, 2022

	BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution
INVESTMENT INCOME
Dividends — affiliated		$	780
Other income			4,054
Total investment income			4,834
EXPENSES
Professional			386,166
Organization and offering			355,235
Investment advisory			217,062
Service and distribution — class specific			156,646
Administration			150,000
Custodian			35,934
Accounting services			35,246
Transfer agent — class specific			16,483
Registration			2,880
Trustees and Officer			1,534
Miscellaneous			39,074
Total expenses			1,396,260
Less:
Fees waived and/or reimbursed by the Manager			(648,274	)
Transfer agent fees waived and/or reimbursed — class specific			(16,483	)
Total expenses after fees waived and/or reimbursed			731,503
Net investment loss			(726,669	)
REALIZED AND UNREALIZED GAIN (LOSS)
Net realized gain (loss) from:
Investments — unaffiliated			259,220
			259,220
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments — unaffiliated			1,542,910
Net realized and unrealized gain			1,802,130
NET INCREASE IN NET ASSETS RESULTING FROM OPERATIONS		$	1,075,461

See notes to financial statements.

12 2 0 2 2  B L A C K R O C  K   A N N U A L   R E P O R T   T O   S H A R E H O L D E R S

Statements of Changes in Net Assets

	BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution(a)
	Year Ended 03/31/22
INCREASE (DECREASE) IN NET ASSETS
OPERATIONS
Net investment loss		$	(726,669	)
Net realized gain			259,220
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation)			1,542,910
Net increase in net assets resulting from operations			1,075,461
DISTRIBUTIONS TO SHAREHOLDERS
Class A			(398,502	)
Class I			(286,621	)
Decrease in net assets resulting from distributions to shareholders			(685,123	)
CAPITAL SHARE TRANSACTIONS
Proceeds from the issuance of shares (including capital contributions in advance)			53,803,500
Reinvestment of distributions			306,079
Repurchase of shares resulting from tender offers			(24,582	)
Net increase in net assets derived from capital share transactions			54,084,997
NET ASSETS
Total increase in net assets			54,475,335
Beginning of year			100,000
End of year		$	54,575,335

^(a)  Commenced operations on March 31, 2021.

See notes to financial statements.

F I N A N C I A L   S T A T E M E N T S 13

Statement of Cash Flows

Year Ended March 31, 2022

	BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution
CASH PROVIDED BY (USED FOR) OPERATING ACTIVITIES
Net increase in net assets resulting from operations		$	1,075,461
Adjustments to reconcile net increase in net assets resulting from operations to net cash used for operating activities:
Purchases of long-term investments			(50,679,537	)
Proceeds from sales of long-term investments			1,978,483
Net purchases of short-term securities			(4,721,908	)
Net realized gain (loss) on investments			(259,220	)
Net unrealized gain (loss) on investments and foreign currency translations			(1,542,910	)
(Increase) Decrease in Assets:
Investments in Portfolio Funds paid in advance			16,412,500
Prepaid expenses			(181	)
Deferred offering costs			396,216
Receivables:
Dividends - affiliated			(380	)
From the Manager			(364,195	)
Increase (Decrease) in Liabilities:
Payables:
Administration fees			37,500
Service and distribution fees			114,496
Offering costs			(396,216	)
Other accrued expenses			179,059
Net cash used for operating activities			(37,770,832	)
Cash Provided by (Used for) Financing Activities:
Proceeds from issuance of capital shares (net of change in capital contributions received in advance)			30,484,500
Payments on shares repurchased			(22,124	)
Cash dividends paid to shareholders			(379,044	)
Net cash provided by financing activities			30,083,332
CASH
Net decrease in restricted and unrestricted cash			(7,687,500	)
Restricted and unrestricted cash at beginning of year			7,687,500
Restricted and unrestricted cash at end of year		$	—
Non-Cash Financing Activities
Reinvestment of dividends and distributions		$	306,079
Reconciliation of restricted and unrestricted cash at the end of year to the Statement of Assets and Liabilities:
	March 31, 2022
Cash		$	—

See notes to financial statements.

14 2 0 2 2   B L A C K R O C K   A N N U A L   R E P O R T   T O   S H A R E H O L D E R S

Financial Highlights

(For a share outstanding throughout each period)

	BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution
		Class I(a)
		Year Ended 03/31/2022
Net asset value, beginning of year			$	10.00
Net investment loss(b)				(0.15	)
Net realized and unrealized gain				0.45
Net increase from investment operations				0.30
Distributions from net investment income				(0.16	)
Net asset value, end of year			$	10.14
Total Return(c)
Based on net asset value				3.06	%
Ratios to Average Net Assets(d)
Total expenses				3.27	%
Total expenses after fees waived and/or reimbursed				1.45	%
Net investment loss				(1.44	)%
Supplemental Data
Net assets, end of year (000)			$	19,831
Portfolio turnover rate				9	%

^(a)  Commenced operations on March 31, 2021.

^(b) Based on average shares outstanding.

^(c)  Where applicable, assumes the reinvestment of distributions.

^(d) Excludes fees and expenses incurred indirectly as a result of investments in underlying funds.

See notes to financial statements.

F I N A N C I A L   H I G H L I G H T S 15

Financial Highlights  (continued)

(For a share outstanding throughout each period)

BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution

Class A^(a)

	Year Ended 03/31/2022
Net asset value, beginning of year	$	10.00
Net investment loss(b)		(0.22	)
Net realized and unrealized gain		0.46
Net increase from investment operations		0.24
Distributions from net investment income		(0.13	)
Net asset value, end of year	$	10.11
Total Return(c)
Based on net asset value		2.45	%
Ratios to Average Net Assets(d)
Total expenses		3.75	%
Total expenses after fees waived and/or reimbursed		2.16	%
Net investment loss		(2.15	)%
Supplemental Data
Net assets, end of year (000)	$	34,744
Portfolio turnover rate		9	%

^(a)  Commenced operations on March 31, 2021.

^(b)  Based on average shares outstanding.

^(c)  Where applicable, assumes the reinvestment of distributions.

^(d)  Excludes fees and expenses incurred indirectly as a result of investments in underlying funds.

See notes to financial statements.

16 2 0 2 2   B L A C K R O C K   A N N U A L   R E P O R T   T O   S H A R E H O L D E R S

Notes to Financial Statements

1. ORGANIZATION

BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution (the “Fund”) is registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”), as a non-diversified, closed-end management investment company. The Fund is organized as a Delaware statutory trust. The Fund engages in a continuous offering of shares. The Fund may from time to time offer to repurchase shares from shareholders in accordance with written tenders by shareholders at those times, in those amounts, and on such terms and conditions as the Board of Trustees of the Fund (the “Board”) may determine in its sole discretion. The Fund calculates the net asset value (“NAV”) per share of the applicable class of the Fund as of the close of business on the last business day of each calendar month, and at such other times as the Board may determine. The Fund’s shares are offered for sale as of the first business day of each calendar month (the “Subscription Date”) at a price equal to the Fund’s NAV per share determined as of the close of business on the last business day of the calendar month preceding the Subscription Date, except that the Fund may offer shares more or less frequently as determined by the Board. The price of the shares during the Fund’s continuous offering will fluctuate over time with the NAV of the shares.

The Fund offers two classes of shares designated as Class I Shares and Class A Shares. Both classes of shares have identical voting, dividend, liquidation and other rights and will be subject to the same terms and conditions, except that Class A Shares bear expenses related to the shareholder servicing and distribution of such shares.

Effective March 22, 2021, the SEC declared the Fund’s registration statement effective. Prior to commencement of operations on March 31, 2021, the Fund had no operations other than those relating to organizational matters and the sale of 10,000 Common Shares on March 4, 2021 to BlackRock Financial Management, Inc. (“BFM”), an affiliate of the Fund, for $100,000. Additionally, prior to March 31, 2021, BFM contributed capital in advance of $24,900,000 to fund investments into private investment vehicles commonly referred to as “hedge funds” (“Portfolio Funds”). Investment operations for the Fund commenced on April 1, 2021.

The Fund, together with certain other registered investment companies advised by BlackRock Advisors, LLC (the “Manager”) or its affiliates, is included in a complex of open-end non-index fixed-income funds and all BlackRock-advised closed-end funds referred to as the BlackRock Fixed-Income Complex.

2. SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

The financial statements are prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“U.S. GAAP”), which may require management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities in the financial statements, disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of increases and decreases in net assets from operations during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. The Fund is considered an investment company under U.S. GAAP and follows the accounting and reporting guidance applicable to investment companies. Below is a summary of significant accounting policies:

Investment Transactions and Income Recognition: For financial reporting purposes, investment transactions are recorded on the dates the transactions are executed. Realized gains and losses on investment transactions are determined using the specific identification method. Dividend income and capital gain distributions, if any, are recorded on the ex-dividend dates. Non-cash dividends, if any, are recorded on the ex-dividend dates at fair value. Dividends from foreign securities where the ex-dividend dates may have passed are subsequently recorded when the Fund is informed of the ex-dividend dates. Under the applicable foreign tax laws, a withholding tax at various rates may be imposed on capital gains, dividends and interest. Upon notification from issuers, a portion of the dividend income received from a real estate investment trust may be redesignated as a reduction of cost of the related investment and/or realized gain. Interest income, including amortization and accretion of premiums and discounts on debt securities, is recognized daily on an accrual basis. Income, expenses and realized and unrealized gains and losses are allocated daily to each class based on its relative net assets.

Distributions: Distributions from net investment income are declared annually and paid annually. Distributions of capital gains are recorded on the ex-dividend dates and made at least annually. The character and timing of distributions are determined in accordance with U.S. federal income tax regulations, which may differ from U.S. GAAP.

Deferred Compensation Plan: Under the Deferred Compensation Plan (the “Plan”) approved by the Board of Trustees of the Fund (the “Board”), the trustees who are not “interested persons” of the Fund, as defined in the 1940 Act (“Independent Trustees”), may defer a portion of their annual complex-wide compensation. Deferred amounts earn an approximate return as though equivalent dollar amounts had been invested in common shares of certain funds in the BlackRock Fixed-Income Complex selected by the Independent Trustees. This has the same economic effect for the Independent Trustees as if the Independent Trustees had invested the deferred amounts directly in certain funds in the BlackRock Fixed-Income Complex.

The Plan is not funded and obligations thereunder represent general unsecured claims against the general assets of the Fund, as applicable. Deferred compensation liabilities are included in the Trustees’ and Officer’s fees payable in the Statement of Assets and Liabilities and will remain as a liability of the Fund until such amounts are distributed in accordance with the Plan.

Organization and Offering Costs: Upon commencement of operations, organization costs associated with the establishment of the Fund were expensed by the Fund and reimbursed by the Manager. The Manager reimbursed the Fund $83,500, which is included in fees waived and/or reimbursed by the Manager in the Statement of Operations. Offering costs are amortized over a 12-month period beginning with the commencement of operations of a class of shares.

Indemnifications: In the normal course of business, the Fund enters into contracts that contain a variety of representations that provide general indemnification. The Fund’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown because it involves future potential claims against the Fund, which cannot be predicted with any certainty.

Other: Expenses directly related to the Fund or its classes are charged to the Fund or the applicable class. Expenses directly related to the Fund and other shared expenses prorated to the Fund are allocated daily to each class based on its relative net assets or other appropriate methods. Other operating expenses shared by several funds, including other funds managed by the Manager, are prorated among those funds on the basis of relative net assets or other appropriate methods.

N O T E S   T O   F I N A N C I A L   S T A T E M E N T S 17

Notes to Financial Statements  (continued)

The Fund has an arrangement with its custodian whereby credits are earned on uninvested cash balances, which could be used to reduce custody fees and/or overdraft charges. The Fund may incur charges on certain uninvested cash balances and overdrafts, subject to certain conditions.

3. INVESTMENT VALUATION AND FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS

Investment Valuation Policies: The Fund’s investments are valued at fair value (also referred to as “market value” within the financial statements) each day that the Fund is open for business and, for financial reporting purposes, as of the report date. U.S. GAAP defines fair value as the price a fund would receive to sell an asset or pay to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. The Fund determines the fair values of its financial instruments using various independent dealers or pricing services under policies approved by the Board. If a security’s market price is not readily available or does not otherwise accurately represent the fair value of the security, the security will be valued in accordance with a policy approved by the Board as reflecting fair value. The BlackRock Global Valuation Methodologies Committee (the “Global Valuation Committee”) is the committee formed by management to develop global pricing policies and procedures and to oversee the pricing function for all financial instruments.

In valuing interests in Portfolio Funds, the Manager, under the supervision of the Board, considers all relevant information to determine the price that the Fund might reasonably expect to receive from the current sale (or redemption in the case of a Portfolio Fund whose interests carry redemption rights) of the interest in the Portfolio Fund in an arm’s-length transaction. In general, the Manager will rely primarily on any actual or estimated (as applicable) unaudited values provided by the Portfolio Fund manager to the extent such unaudited values are received in a timely fashion and are believed to be the most reliable and relevant indication of the value of interests in such Portfolio Fund. It is anticipated that these unaudited values will be prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP and will, in effect, be the fair value of each Portfolio Fund’s assets, less such Portfolio Fund’s liabilities (the net asset value). In some cases, estimated unaudited values are provided before final unaudited values. The Manager will rely primarily on such estimated unaudited values or final unaudited values, to the extent they are the most reliable and relevant indication of value of interests in the Portfolio Funds. The Manager will give weight to such valuations and any other factors and considerations set forth in the Valuation Procedures as deemed appropriate in each case. In general, the Manager will, prior to investing in any Portfolio Fund, and periodically thereafter, assess such Portfolio Fund’s valuation policies and procedures for appropriateness in light of the Fund’s obligation to fair value its assets under the 1940 Act and pursuant to U.S. GAAP for investment companies and will assess the overall reasonableness of the information provided by such Portfolio Fund. As part of this assessment, the Manager may also evaluate, among other things, a Portfolio Fund’s practices in respect of creating “side pockets” and such Portfolio Fund’s valuation policies and procedures in respect of any such “side pockets.” The Manager will also review any other information available to it, including reports by independent auditors, fund administrators, if any, and/or other third parties.

In instances where unaudited estimated or final values may not be available, or where such unaudited estimated or final values are determined not to be the most reliable and relevant indication of value of an interest in a Portfolio Fund (as further discussed below), additional factors that may be relevant in determining the value of an interest in a Portfolio Fund, in addition to those other factors and considerations set forth in the Valuation Procedures, include (1) changes in the valuation of hedge fund indices, (2) publicly available information regarding a Portfolio Fund’s underlying portfolio companies or investments, (3) the price at which recent subscriptions and redemptions of such Portfolio Fund interests were offered, (4) relevant news and other sources, (5) significant market events and (6) information provided to the Manager or the Fund by a Portfolio Fund, or the failure to provide such information as agreed to in the Portfolio Fund’s offering materials or other agreements with the Fund.

In circumstances where, taking into account the factors and considerations set forth above and in the Valuation Procedures, the Manager has reason to believe that a value provided by a Portfolio Fund is not the most reliable and relevant indication of the value of an interest in the Portfolio Fund, the Manager may adjust such reported value to reflect the fair value of the interest in the Portfolio Fund. Likewise, in circumstances where a Portfolio Fund does not provide a valuation as contemplated above, the factors and considerations set forth above and in the Valuation Procedures may be the only indicators of the value of an interest in a Portfolio Fund and the Manager will use such factors, together with other valuation methodologies set forth in the Valuation Procedures that may be relevant, to estimate the fair value of its interest in a Portfolio Fund. In circumstances where the Manager determines to adjust the values reported by Portfolio Funds, or in circumstances where the Portfolio Funds do not provide valuations as contemplated above (such circumstances being collectively referred to as “Adjusted Fair Values”), such valuations will be subject to review and approval by the Global Valuation Committee or its delegate as outlined in the Valuation Procedures. The Board reviews all fair value determinations at its regularly scheduled meetings and also reviews the Valuation Procedures on a regular basis.

Fair Value Inputs and Methodologies: The following methods and inputs are used to establish the fair value of the Fund’s assets and liabilities:

• Investments in open-end U.S. mutual funds (including money market funds) are valued at that day’s published net asset value (“NAV”).

Fair Value Hierarchy: Various inputs are used in determining the fair value of financial instruments. These inputs to valuation techniques are categorized into a fair value hierarchy consisting of three broad levels for financial reporting purposes as follows:

• Level 1 – Unadjusted price quotations in active markets/exchanges for identical assets or liabilities that the Fund has the ability to access;

• Level 2 – Other observable inputs (including, but not limited to, quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in markets that are active, quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in markets that are not active, inputs other than quoted prices that are observable for the assets or liabilities (such as interest rates, yield curves, volatilities, prepayment speeds, loss severities, credit risks and default rates) or other market–corroborated inputs); and

• Level 3 – Unobservable inputs based on the best information available in the circumstances, to the extent observable inputs are not available (including the Global Valuation Committee’s assumptions used in determining the fair value of financial instruments).

The hierarchy gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1 measurements) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3 measurements). Accordingly, the degree of judgment exercised in determining fair value is greatest for instruments categorized in Level 3. The inputs used to measure fair value may fall into different levels of the fair value hierarchy. In such cases, for disclosure purposes, the fair value hierarchy classification is determined based on the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement in its entirety. Investments classified within Level 3 have significant unobservable inputs used by the Global Valuation Committee in determining the price for Fair Valued Investments. Level 3 investments include equity or debt issued by Private Companies

18 2 0 2 2  B L A C K R O C K   A N N U A L  R E P O R T  T O  S H A R E H O L D E R S

Notes to Financial Statements  (continued)

that may not have a secondary market and/or may have a limited number of investors. The categorization of a value determined for financial instruments is based on the pricing transparency of the financial instruments and is not necessarily an indication of the risks associated with investing in those securities.

As of March 31, 2022, certain investments of the Fund were fair valued using NAV per share as no quoted market value is available and therefore have been excluded from the fair value hierarchy.

4. INVESTMENTS IN PORTFOLIO FUNDS

Information reflecting the Fund’s investments in Portfolio Funds as of March 31, 2022 is summarized below.

Investment	Value		% of Fund’s Net Assets			Primary Geographic Locations		Redemptions Permitted
Equity Hedge
							Developed Asia Pacific,
							Emerging Markets,
Kadensa Fund		$  2,272,524		4.2	%		North America		Quarterly
							Developed Asia Pacific,
							Emerging Markets,
							North America,
Manticore Fund (Cayman) Ltd.		2,274,364		4.2			Western Europe		Monthly
							North America,
Pelham Long/Short Fund, Ltd.		1,486,706		2.7			Western Europe		Monthly
							Developed Asia Pacific,
							Emerging Markets,
							North America,
Schonfeld Strategic Partners Offshore Fund, Ltd.		2,552,129		4.7			Western Europe		Monthly
							North America,
Voleon Composition International Fund, Ltd.		2,519,124		4.6			Western Europe		Monthly
Event-Driven
MY Asian Opportunities Unit Trust		1,708,697		3.1			North America		Quarterly
							Developed Asia Pacific,
							Emerging Markets,
							North America,
Nekton Global Fund Ltd.		2,443,655		4.5			Western Europe		Quarterly
							Emerging Markets,
							North America,
Pentwater Event Fund, Ltd.		5,241,398		9.6			Western Europe		Monthly
							Developed Asia Pacific,
							Emerging Markets,
Segantii Asia-Pacific Equity Multi-Strategy Fund		2,140,271		3.9			North America		Monthly
Macro
							Developed Asia Pacific,
							Emerging Markets,
							North America,
Crabel Fund SPC, Ltd. Segregated Portfolio AA		2,664,325		4.9			Western Europe		Monthly
							Emerging Markets,
							North America,
East One Commodity Fund Limited		2,640,374		4.8			Western Europe		Monthly
							Developed Asia Pacific,
							Emerging Markets,
							North America,
Stratus Feeder, Ltd.		4,264,033		7.8			Western Europe		Monthly
							Developed Asia Pacific,
							Emerging Markets,
							North America,
Systematica Alternative Markets Fund Ltd.		2,658,054		4.9			Western Europe		Monthly
Relative Value
One William Street Capital Offshore Fund, Ltd.		4,940,747		9.1			North America		Quarterly

N O T E S   T O   F I N A N C I A L   S T A T E M E N T S 19

Notes to Financial Statements  (continued)

Investment	Value		% of Fund’s Net Assets			Primary Geographic Locations		Redemptions Permitted
							Developed Asia Pacific,
							North America,
Parallax Offshore Investors Fund, Ltd.		$    2,454,770		4.5	%		Western Europe		Quarterly
							Developed Asia Pacific,
							Emerging Markets,
							North America,
Polar Multi-Strategy Fund		4,882,781		8.9			Western Europe		Monthly
							North America,
Rose Grove Offshore Fund I, Ltd.		2,359,232		4.3			Western Europe		Quarterly
		$  49,503,184		90.7	%

Major Category	Fair Value		Illiquid Investments(a)		Gates(b)		Lock-ups(c)		Redemption Frequency(d)		Redemption Notice Period(d)
Equity Hedge(e)		$  11,104,847		$  —		$  1,136,722		$  8,585,723		Quarterly, Monthly		5-90 days
Event-Driven(f)		11,534,021		—		1,335,007		98,628		Quarterly, Monthly		30-90 days
Macro(g)		12,226,786		—		—		5,304,776		Monthly		5-60 days
Relative Value(h)		14,637,530		—		1,235,187		9,754,749		Quarterly, Monthly		45-90 days
		$  49,503,184		$  —		$  3,706,916		$23,743,876

^(a)  Represents private investment funds that cannot be voluntarily redeemed by the Fund at any time. This includes: (i) private investment funds that are liquidating and making distribution payments as their underlying assets are sold, (ii) suspended redemptions/withdrawals, and (iii) side pocket holdings. These types of investments may be realized within 1 to 3 years from March 31, 2022, depending on the specific investment and market conditions. This does not include private investment funds with gates and lockups, which are noted above.

^(b)  Represents the portion of the Portfolio Funds for which there are investor level gates, which are not otherwise included as illiquid investments.

^(c)  Represents investments that cannot be redeemed without a fee due to a lock-up provision, which are not otherwise included as illiquid investments or investments with gates. The lock-up period for these investments is 1 to 36 months at March 31, 2022.

^(d)  Redemption frequency and redemption notice period reflect general redemption terms, and exclude liquidity restrictions noted above.

^(e)  Equity Hedge strategies maintain positions both long and short, normally with a primary focus on equity securities and equity derivatives. A wide variety of investment processes can be employed to arrive at an investment decision, including both quantitative and fundamental techniques. The application of the Valuation Procedures to investments in this category did not result in any Adjusted Fair Values as of March 31, 2022. The fair values of the investments in this category have been estimated based on the net asset values provided by management of the Portfolio Funds.

^(f)  Event-driven strategies concentrate on companies that are subject to corporate events such as mergers, acquisitions, restructurings, spin-offs, shareholder activism or other special situations that alter a company’s financial structure or operating strategy. The intended goal of these strategies is to profit when the price of a security changes to reflect more accurately the likelihood and potential impact of the occurrence, or nonoccurrence, of the event. The application of the Valuation Procedures to investments in this category did not result in any Adjusted Fair Values as of March 31, 2022. The fair values of the investments in this category have been estimated based on the net asset values provided by management of the Portfolio Funds.

^(g)  Macro strategies employ a broad range of strategies where the investment process is predicated on movements in underlying economic variables and the impact of these movements on equity, fixed income, hard currency and commodity markets. The application of the Valuation Procedures to investments in this category did not result in any Adjusted Fair Values as of March 31, 2022. The fair values of the investments in this category have been estimated based on the net asset values provided by management of the Portfolio Funds.

^(h)  Relative value strategies seek to profit from the mispricing of financial instruments relative to each other or historical norms. These strategies utilize quantitative and qualitative analyses to identify securities or spreads between securities that deviate from their theoretical fair value and/or historical norms. The application of the Valuation Procedures to investments in this category did not result in any Adjusted Fair Values as of March 31, 2022. The fair values of the investments in this category have been estimated based on the net asset values provided by management of the Portfolio Funds.

5. INVESTMENT ADVISORY AGREEMENT AND OTHER TRANSACTIONS WITH AFFILIATES

Investment Advisory: The Fund entered into an Investment Advisory Agreement with the Manager, the Fund’s investment adviser and an indirect, wholly-owned subsidiary of BlackRock, Inc. (“BlackRock”), to provide investment advisory and administrative services. The Manager is responsible for the management of the Fund’s portfolio and provides the personnel, facilities, equipment and certain other services necessary to the operations of the Fund.

20 2 0 2 2  B L A C K R O C K   A N N U A L  R E P O R T  T O  S H A R E H O L D E R S

Notes to Financial Statements  (continued)

For such services, the Fund pays the Manager a monthly fee at an annual rate equal to 0.55% of the average monthly value of the Fund’s net assets.

Service and Distribution Fees: The Fund has entered into a Distribution Agreement (the “Distribution Agreement”) with BlackRock Investments, LLC (the “Distributor”), an affiliate of the Manager, to provide for distribution of the common shares. The Distribution Agreement provides that the Distributor will sell, and will appoint financial intermediaries to sell, common shares on behalf of the Fund on a reasonable efforts basis. The Fund has adopted a distribution and servicing plan (the “Distribution and Servicing Plan”) with respect to certain classes of the common shares and in doing so has voluntarily complied with Rule 12b-1 under the 1940 Act, as if the Fund were an open-end investment company, and will be subject to an ongoing distribution fee and shareholder servicing fee (together, the “Distribution and Servicing Fee”) in respect of the classes of common shares paying such Distribution and Servicing Fee. The maximum annual rates at which the Distribution and Servicing Fees may be paid under the Distribution and Servicing Plan (calculated as a percentage of the Fund’s monthly net assets attributable to the classes of common shares paying such Distribution and Servicing Fee) is 0.75%. Class I Shares are not subject to a distribution fee or shareholder servicing fee.

For the year ended March 31, 2022, the class specific service and distribution fees borne directly by Class A Shares amounted to $156,646.

Transfer Agent: Pursuant to written agreements, certain financial intermediaries, some of which may be affiliates, provide the Fund with sub-accounting, recordkeeping, sub-transfer agency and other administrative services with respect to servicing of underlying investor accounts. For these services, these entities receive an asset-based fee or an annual fee per shareholder account, which will vary depending on share class and/or net assets. For the year ended March 31, 2022, the Fund did not pay any amounts to affiliates in return for these services.

In addition, the Fund pays the transfer agent, which is not an affiliate, a fee for the issuance, transfer and redemption of shares and the opening and maintenance of shareholder accounts, which is included in transfer agent in the Statement of Operations.

For the year ended March 31, 2022, the following table shows the class specific transfer agent fees borne directly by each share class of the Fund:

Class Name	Total
Class I	$  2,817
Class A	13,666
	16,483

Expense Limitations, Waivers and Reimbursements: The Manager contractually agreed to waive its investment advisory fees by the amount of investment advisory fees the Fund pays to the Manager indirectly through its investment in affiliated money market funds (the “affiliated money market fund waiver”) through June 30, 2023. The contractual agreement may be terminated upon 90 days’ notice by a majority of the Independent Trustees, or by a vote of a majority of the outstanding voting securities of the Fund. This amount is included in fees waived and/or reimbursed by the Manager in the Statements of Operations. For the year ended March 31, 2022, the amount waived was $1,432.

The Manager contractually agreed to waive its investment advisory fee with respect to any portion of the Fund’s assets invested in affiliated equity and fixed-income mutual funds and affiliated exchange-traded funds that have a contractual management fee through June 30, 2023. The agreement can be renewed for annual periods thereafter, and may be terminated on 90 days’ notice, each subject to approval by a majority of the Funds’ Independent Trustees. For the year ended March 31, 2022, there were no fees waived by the Manager pursuant to this arrangement.

The Manager contractually agreed to waive and/or reimburse certain operating and other expenses of the Fund in order to limit other expenses to 0.80% of the Fund’s average monthly value of the net assets of each share class. This expense limitation excludes the investment advisory fee, service and distribution fees, interest expense, portfolio transaction, sub-accounting, record keeping, other administrative services and other investment-related costs (including acquired fund fees and expenses, commitment fees on leverage, prime broker fees and dividend expense) and certain other fund expenses, which constitute extraordinary expenses not incurred in the ordinary course of the Fund’s business. The Manager has agreed not to reduce or discontinue the contractual expense limitations through June 30, 2023. This amount is included in fees waived and/or reimbursed by the Manager in the Statements of Operations. For the year ended March 31, 2022, the Manager waived $563,342 pursuant to this arrangement.

In addition, these amounts waived and/or reimbursed by the Manager are included in transfer agent fees waived and/or reimbursed — class specific in the Statement of Operations. For the year ended March 31, 2022, class specific expense waivers and/or reimbursements are as follows:

Class Name	Total
Class I	$  2,817
Class A	13,666
	16,483

With respect to the contractual expense limitations, if during the Fund’s fiscal year the operating expenses of a share class, that at any time during the prior two fiscal years received a waiver and/or reimbursement from the Manager, are less than the current expense limitation for that share class, the Manager is entitled to be reimbursed by such share class up to the lesser of: (a) the amount of fees waived and/or expenses reimbursed during those prior two fiscal years under the agreement and (b) an amount not to exceed either the current expense limitation of that share class or the expense limitation of the share class in effect at the time that the share class received the applicable waiver and/or reimbursement, provided that:

(1) the Fund has more than $50 million in assets for the fiscal year, and

(2) the Manager or an affiliate continues to serve as the Fund’s investment adviser or administrator.

N O T E S   T O   F I N A N C I A L   S T A T E M E N T S 21

Notes to Financial Statements  (continued)

This repayment applies only to the contractual expense limitation on net expenses and does not apply to the contractual advisory fee waiver described above or any voluntary waivers that may be in effect from time to time. Effective April 1, 2028, the repayment arrangement between the Fund and the Manager pursuant to which such Fund may be required to repay amounts waived and/or reimbursed under the Fund’s contractual caps on net expenses will be terminated.

As of March 31, 2022, the fund level and class specific waivers and/or reimbursements subject to possible future recoupment under the expense limitation agreement are as follows:

	Expiring March 31,
Fund Level/Share Class	2024
Fund Level	$  563,342
Class I	2,817
Class A	13,666

Trustees and Officers: Certain trustees and/or officers of the Trust are directors and/or officers of BlackRock or its affiliates. The Fund reimburses the Manager for a portion of the compensation paid to the Trust’s Chief Compliance Officer, which is included in Trustees and Officer in the Statement of Operations.

6. PURCHASES AND SALES

For the year ended March 31, 2022, purchases and sales of investments, excluding short-term investments, were $50,679,537 and $2,978,483, respectively.

7. INCOME TAX INFORMATION

It is the Fund’s policy to comply with the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, applicable to regulated investment companies, and to distribute substantially all of its taxable income to its shareholders. Therefore, no U.S. federal income tax provision is required. The Fund’s initial tax year is September 30, 2021.

The Fund files U.S. federal and various state and local tax returns. No income tax returns are currently under examination. The statute of limitations on the Fund’s U.S. federal tax returns generally remains open for a period of three fiscal years after they are filed. The statutes of limitations on the Fund’s state and local tax returns may remain open for an additional year depending upon the jurisdiction.

Management has analyzed tax laws and regulations and their application to the Fund as of March 31, 2022, and does not believe that there are any uncertain tax positions that require recognition of a tax liability in the Fund’s financial statements.

U.S. GAAP requires that certain components of net assets be adjusted to reflect permanent differences between financial and tax reporting. These reclassifications have no effect on net assets or net asset values per share. As of the tax year ended September 30, 2021, permanent differences attributable to non-deductible expenses were reclassified to the following accounts:

	Amounts
Paid-in capital	$  (37,256)
Accumulated earnings (loss)	37,256

As of the tax year ended September 30, 2021, the tax components of accumulated net earnings (loss) were as follows:

	Amounts
Undistributed ordinary income	$  391,997
Net unrealized gains(a)	205,283
	$  597,280

^(a)  The difference between book-basis and tax-basis of net accumulated losses was attributable primarily to the realization for tax purposes of unrealized gains on investments in passive foreign investment companies.

As of the tax year ended September 30, 2021, gross unrealized appreciation and depreciation based on cost of investments (including short positions and derivatives, if any) for U.S. federal income tax purposes were as follows:

	Amounts
Tax cost	$37,903,843
Gross unrealized appreciation	$     473,328
Gross unrealized depreciation	(268,045)
Net unrealized appreciation (depreciation)	$     205,283

22 2 0 2 2  B L A C K R O C K   A N N U A L  R E P O R T  T O  S H A R E H O L D E R S

Notes to Financial Statements   (continued)

8. BANK BORROWINGS

The Fund entered into a 364-day, $5 million credit agreement with Credit Suisse International. Under this agreement, the Fund may borrow to address timing mismatches between inflows and outflows of capital to and from the Fund in connection with (a) the repurchase of shares in the Fund, (b) the Fund’s investment activities, and (c) the payment of fees, expenses and other obligations of the Fund in the ordinary course of business. The credit agreement has the following terms: a fee of 0.35% per annum on unused commitment amounts and interest at a rate equal to three-month London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) on the date the loan is made plus 1.35% per annum. The agreement expires in September 2022 unless extended or renewed. For the year ended March 31, 3022, the Fund did not borrow under the credit agreement.

9. PRINCIPAL RISKS

In the normal course of business, the Fund invests in securities or other instruments and may enter into certain transactions, and such activities subject the Fund to various risks, including among others, fluctuations in the market (market risk) or failure of an issuer to meet all of its obligations. The value of securities or other instruments may also be affected by various factors, including, without limitation: (i) the general economy; (ii) the overall market as well as local, regional or global political and/or social instability; (iii) regulation, taxation or international tax treaties between various countries; or (iv) currency, interest rate and price fluctuations. Local, regional or global events such as war, acts of terrorism, the spread of infectious illness or other public health issues, recessions, or other events could have a significant impact on the Fund and its investments. The Fund’s prospectus provides details of the risks to which the Fund is subject.

Market Risk: An outbreak of respiratory disease caused by a novel coronavirus has developed into a global pandemic and has resulted in closing borders, quarantines, disruptions to supply chains and customer activity, as well as general concern and uncertainty. The impact of this pandemic, and other global health crises that may arise in the future, could affect the economies of many nations, individual companies and the market in general in ways that cannot necessarily be foreseen at the present time. This pandemic may result in substantial market volatility and may adversely impact the prices and liquidity of a fund’s investments. Although vaccines have been developed and approved for use by various governments, the duration of this pandemic and its effects cannot be determined with certainty.

The Fund may invest without limitation in illiquid or less liquid investments or investments in which no secondary market is readily available or which are otherwise illiquid, including private placement securities. The Fund may not be able to readily dispose of such investments at prices that approximate those at which the Fund could sell such investments if they were more widely traded and, as a result of such illiquidity, the Fund may have to sell other investments or engage in borrowing transactions if necessary to raise funds to meet its obligations. Limited liquidity can also affect the market price of investments, thereby adversely affecting the Fund’s NAV and ability to make dividend distributions. Privately issued debt securities are often of below investment grade quality, frequently are unrated and present many of the same risks as investing in below investment grade public debt securities.

Valuation Risk: The market values of equities, such as common stocks and preferred securities or equity related investments, such as futures and options, may decline due to general market conditions which are not specifically related to a particular company. They may also decline due to factors which affect a particular industry or industries. The Fund may invest in illiquid investments. An illiquid investment is any investment that the Fund reasonably expects cannot be sold or disposed of in current market conditions in seven calendar days or less without the sale or disposition significantly changing the market value of the investment. The Fund may experience difficulty in selling illiquid investments in a timely manner at the price that it believes the investments are worth. Prices may fluctuate widely over short or extended periods in response to company, market or economic news. Markets also tend to move in cycles, with periods of rising and falling prices. This volatility may cause the Fund’s NAV to experience significant increases or decreases over short periods of time. If there is a general decline in the securities and other markets, the NAV of the Fund may lose value, regardless of the individual results of the securities and other instruments in which the Fund invests.

The price the Fund could receive upon the sale of any particular portfolio investment may differ from the Fund’s valuation of the investment, particularly for securities that trade in thin or volatile markets or that are valued using a fair valuation technique or a price provided by an independent pricing service. Changes to significant unobservable inputs and assumptions (i.e., publicly traded company multiples, growth rate, time to exit) due to the lack of observable inputs may significantly impact the resulting fair value and therefore the Fund’s results of operations. As a result, the price received upon the sale of an investment may be less than the value ascribed by the Fund, and the Fund could realize a greater than expected loss or lesser than expected gain upon the sale of the investment. The Fund’s ability to value its investments may also be impacted by technological issues and/or errors by pricing services or other third party service providers.

Counterparty Credit Risk: The Fund may be exposed to counterparty credit risk, or the risk that an entity may fail to or be unable to perform on its commitments related to unsettled or open transactions, including making timely interest and/or principal payments or otherwise honoring its obligations. The Fund manages counterparty credit risk by entering into transactions only with counterparties that the Manager believes have the financial resources to honor their obligations and by monitoring the financial stability of those counterparties. Financial assets, which potentially expose the Fund to market, issuer and counterparty credit risks, consist principally of financial instruments and receivables due from counterparties. The extent of the Fund’s exposure to market, issuer and counterparty credit risks with respect to these financial assets is approximately their value recorded in the Statement of Assets and Liabilities, less any collateral held by the Fund.

LIBOR Transition Risk: The United Kingdom’s Financial Conduct Authority announced a phase out of the LIBOR. Although many LIBOR rates ceased to be published or no longer are representative of the underlying market they seek to measure after December 31, 2021, a selection of widely used USD LIBOR rates will continue to be published through June 2023 in order to assist with the transition. The Fund may be exposed to financial instruments tied to LIBOR to determine payment obligations, financing terms, hedging strategies or investment value. The transition process away from LIBOR might lead to increased volatility and illiquidity in markets for, and reduce the effectiveness of new hedges placed against instruments whose terms currently include LIBOR. The ultimate effect of the LIBOR transition process on the Fund is uncertain.

10. CAPITAL SHARE TRANSACTIONS

The Fund is authorized to issue an unlimited number of shares, all of which were initially classified as Common Shares. The par value for the Fund’s Common Shares is $0.001.

N O T E S   T O   F I N A N C I A L   S T A T E M E N T S 23

Notes to Financial Statements  (continued)

Transactions in capital shares for each class were as follows:

	Year Ended 03/31/22
Share Class	Shares			Amounts
Class I
Proceeds from the issuance of shares (excluding capital contributions received in advance)		1,944,195		$	19,477,500
Reinvestment of distributions		4,036			40,321
Repurchase of Shares resulting from tender offers		(2,461	)		(24,582	)
		1,945,770		$	19,493,239
Class A
Proceeds from the issuance of shares (excluding capital contributions received in advance)		3,410,794			34,326,000
Reinvestment of distributions		26,629			265,758
		3,437,423		$	34,591,758
		5,383,193		$	54,084,997

For the year ended March 31, 2022, common shares issued and outstanding had a net increase of 28,204 as a result of 30,665 shares issued from dividend reinvestment and 2,461 shares repurchased in tender offers.

The Fund intends, but is not obligated, to conduct quarterly tender offers for up to 25% of its NAV at the time in the sole discretion of its Board. In a tender offer, the Fund repurchases outstanding shares at the Fund’s NAV on the valuation date for the tender offer. In any given quarter, the Manager may or may not recommend to the Board that the Fund conduct tender offers. Accordingly, there may be quarters in which no tender offer is made. Shares are not redeemable at an investor’s option nor are they exchangeable for shares of any other fund.

	Commencement Date of Tender Offer Period(a)	Valuation Date	Number of Shares Tendered	Tendered Shares as a Percentage of Outstanding Shares		Number of Tendered Shares Purchased	Tendered Shares Purchased as a Percentage of Outstanding Shares		Purchase Price	Total Amount of Purchases
Class I	June 25, 2021	September 30, 2021	—	—	%	—	—	%	$  —	$  —
Class A	June 25, 2021	September 30, 2021	—	—		—	—		—	—
Class I	September 27, 2021	December 31, 2021	2,461	0.05		2,461	0.05		9.99	24,582
Class A	September 27, 2021	December 31, 2021	—	—		—	—		—	—
Class I	December 23, 2021	March 31, 2022	—	—		—	—		—	—
Class A	December 23, 2021	March 31, 2022	—	—		—	—		—	—

^(a) Date the tender offer period began.

Tendered share amounts are shown as repurchase of shares resulting from tender offers in the Statements of Changes in Net Assets.

As of March 31, 2022, BlackRock Financial Management, Inc., an affiliate of the Fund, owned 1,500,000 Class I and 1,000,000 Class A Shares of the Fund.

11. SUBSEQUENT EVENTS

Management has evaluated the impact of all subsequent events on the Fund through the date the financial statements were issued and has determined that there were no subsequent events requiring adjustment or additional disclosure in the financial statements.

24 2 0 2 2  B L A C K R O C K   A N N U A L  R E P O R T  T O  S H A R E H O L D E R S

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Shareholders and Board of Trustees of BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution:

Opinion on the Financial Statements and Financial Highlights

We have audited the accompanying statement of assets and liabilities of BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution (the “Fund”), including the schedule of investments, as of March 31, 2022, the related statements of operations, changes cash flows, changes in net assets, and the financial highlights for the year then ended, and the related notes. In our opinion, the financial statements and financial highlights present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Fund as of March 31, 2022, and the results of its operations, its cash flows, the changes in its net assets, and the financial highlights for the year then ended, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Basis for Opinion

These financial statements and financial highlights are the responsibility of the Fund’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Fund’s financial statements and financial highlights based on our audit. We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB) and are required to be independent with respect to the Fund in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements and financial highlights are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. The Fund is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. As part of our audit we are required to obtain an understanding of internal control over financial reporting but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Fund’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion.

Our audit included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements and financial highlights, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements and financial highlights. Our audit also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements and financial highlights. Our procedures included confirmation of securities owned as of March 31, 2022, by correspondence with the custodians or counterparties; when replies were not received, we performed other auditing procedures. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

Deloitte & Touche LLP

Boston, Massachusetts

May 20, 2022

We have served as the auditor of one or more BlackRock investment companies since 1992.

R E P O R T  O F  I N D E P E N D E N T  R E G I S T E R E D  P U B L I C  A C C O U N T I N G  F I R M 25

Automatic Dividend Reinvestment Plan

Pursuant to the Fund’s dividend reinvestment plan (the “Reinvestment Plan”), registered shareholders will have all dividends, including any capital gain dividends, reinvested automatically in additional Shares of the Fund by BNY Mellon Investment Servicing (US) Inc. (the “Reinvestment Plan Agent”), unless the shareholder elects to receive cash. Shareholders who elect not to participate in the Reinvestment Plan will receive all dividends in cash paid directly to the shareholder of record (or, if the Shares are held through banks, brokers or other nominee name, then to such banks, brokers or other nominee) by BNY Mellon Investment Servicing (US) Inc., as dividend disbursing agent. You may elect not to participate in the Reinvestment Plan and to receive all dividends in cash by contacting your bank, broker or other nominee who holds your Fund common shares or if your Fund common shares are held directly by the Fund, by contacting the Reinvestment Plan Agent, at the address set forth below. Participation in the Reinvestment Plan is completely voluntary and may be terminated or resumed at any time without penalty by written notice if received and processed by the Reinvestment Plan Agent prior to the dividend record date. Additionally, the Reinvestment Plan Agent seeks to process notices received after the record date but prior to the payable date and such notices often will become effective by the payable date. Where late notices are not processed by the applicable payable date, such termination or resumption will be effective with respect to any subsequently declared dividend.

In the case of record shareholders such as banks, brokers or other nominees that hold Fund common shares for others who are the beneficial owners, the Reinvestment Plan Agent will administer the Reinvestment Plan on the basis of the number of Shares certified from time to time by the record shareholder as representing the total amount registered in such shareholder’s name and held for the account of beneficial owners who are to participate in the Reinvestment Plan. Shareholders whose Shares are held in the name of a bank, broker or other nominee should contact the bank, broker or other nominee for details. Such shareholders may not be able to transfer their shares to another bank, broker or other nominee and continue to participate in the Reinvestment Plan.

The number of newly issued Shares to be credited to each participant’s account will be determined by dividing the dollar amount of the dividend by the NAV on the reinvestment date; there is no sales or other charge for reinvestment.

The Reinvestment Plan Agent’s fees for the handling of the reinvestment of dividends will be paid by the Fund. The Fund reserves the right to amend or terminate the Reinvestment Plan. There is no direct service charge to participants with regard to newly issued Shares in the Reinvestment Plan. Notice of amendments to the Reinvestment Plan will be sent to participants.

All correspondence concerning the Reinvestment Plan should be directed to the Reinvestment Plan Agent, in writing to: BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution, c/o Plan Administrator, 4400 Computer Drive, Westborough, MA 01581, or by calling the Fund toll-free at 1-888-919-6092.

26 2 0 2 2   B L A C K R O C K   A N N U A L    R E P O R T   T O   S H A R E H O L D E R S

Trustee and Officer Information  

Independent Trustees(a)
Name Year of Birth(b)	Position(s) Held (Length of Service)(c)	Principal Occupation(s) During Past Five Years	Number of BlackRock-Advised Registered Investment Companies (“RICs”) Consisting of Investment Portfolios (“Portfolios”) Overseen	Public Company and Other Investment Company Directorships Held During Past Five Years
R. Glenn Hubbard 1958	Chair of the Board (Since 2022)	Dean, Columbia Business School from 2004 to 2019; Faculty member, Columbia Business School since 1988.	73 RICs consisting of 103 Portfolios	ADP (data and information services) 2004- 2020; Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (insurance); KKR Financial Corporation (finance) from 2004 until 2014
W. Carl Kester(d) 1951	Vice Chair of the Board (Since 2022) Trustee (Since 2021)	George Fisher Baker Jr. Professor of Business Administration, Harvard Business School since 2008; Deputy Dean for Academic Affairs from 2006 to 2010; Chairman of the Finance Unit, from 2005 to 2006; Senior Associate Dean and Chairman of the MBA Program from 1999 to 2005; Member of the faculty of Harvard Business School since 1981.	75 RICs consisting of 105 Portfolios	None
Cynthia L. Egan 1955	Trustee (Since 2021)	Advisor, U.S. Department of the Treasury from 2014 to 2015; President, Retirement Plan Services, for T. Rowe Price Group, Inc. from 2007 to 2012; executive positions within Fidelity Investments from 1989 to 2007.	73 RICs consisting of 103 Portfolios	Unum (insurance); The Hanover Insurance Group (Board Chair) (insurance); Huntsman Corporation (Lead Independent Director and non Executive Vice Chair of the Board) (chemical products); Envestnet (investment platform) from 2013 until 2016
Frank J. Fabozzi(d) 1948	Trustee (Since 2021)	Editor of The Journal of Portfolio Management since 1986; Professor of Finance, EDHEC Business School (France) since 2011; Visiting Professor, Princeton University for the 2013 to 2014 academic year and Spring 2017 semester; Professor in the Practice of Finance, Yale University School of Management from 1994 to 2011 and currently a Teaching Fellow in Yale’s Executive Programs; Board Member, BlackRock Equity-Liquidity Funds from 2014 to 2016; affiliated professor Karlsruhe Institute of Technology from 2008 to 2011; Visiting Professor, Rutgers University for the Spring 2019 semester; Visiting Professor, New York University for the 2019 academic year. Adjunct Professor of Finance, Carnegie Mellon University in fall 2020 semester; Professor of Practice, Johns Hopkins University since 2021.	75 RICs consisting of 105 Portfolios	None
Lorenzo A. Flores 1964	Trustee (Since 2021)	Vice Chairman, Kioxia, Inc. since 2019; Chief Financial Officer, Xilinx, Inc. from 2016 to 2019; Corporate Controller, Xilinx, Inc. from 2008 to 2016.	73 RICs consisting of 103 Portfolios	None
Stayce D. Harris 1959	Trustee (Since 2021)	Lieutenant General, Inspector General, Office of the Secretary of the United States Air Force from 2017 to 2019; Lieutenant General, Assistant Vice Chief of Staff and Director, Air Staff, United States Air Force from 2016 to 2017; Major General, Commander, 22nd Air Force, AFRC, Dobbins Air Reserve Base, Georgia from 2014 to 2016; Pilot, United Airlines from 1990 to 2020.	73 RICs consisting of 103 Portfolios	The Boeing Company

T R U S T E E  A N D  O F F I C E R  I N F O R M A T I O N 27

Trustee and Officer Information  (continued)

Independent Trustees(a)
Name Year of Birth(b)	Position(s) Held (Length of Service)(c)	Principal Occupation(s) During Past Five Years	Number of BlackRock-Advised Registered Investment Companies (“RICs”) Consisting of Investment Portfolios (“Portfolios”) Overseen	Public Company and Other Investment Company Directorships Held During Past Five Years
J. Phillip Holloman 1955	Trustee (Since 2021)	President and Chief Operating Officer, Cintas Corporation from 2008 to 2018.	73 RICs consisting of 103 Portfolios	PulteGroup, Inc. (home construction); Rockwell Automation Inc. (industrial automation)
Catherine A. Lynch(d) 1961	Trustee (Since 2021)	Chief Executive Officer, Chief Investment Officer and various other positions, National Railroad Retirement Investment Trust from 2003 to 2016; Associate Vice President for Treasury Management, The George Washington University from 1999 to 2003; Assistant Treasurer, Episcopal Church of America from 1995 to 1999.	75 RICs consisting of 105 Portfolios	PennyMac Mortgage Investment Trust
Karen P. Robards 1950	Trustee (Since 2021)	Principal of Robards & Company, LLC (consulting and private investing) since 1987; Co-founder and Director of the Cooke Center for Learning and Development (a not-for-profit organization) since 1987; Director of Enable Injections, LLC (medical devices) since 2019; Investment Banker at Morgan Stanley from 1976 to 1987.	73 RICs consisting of 103 Portfolios	Greenhill & Co., Inc.; AtriCure, Inc. (medical devices) from 2000 until 2017

28 2 0 2 2   B L A C K R O C K   A N N U A L    R E P O R T   T O   S H A R E H O L D E R S

Trustee and Officer Information  (continued)

Interested Trustees(a)(d)
Name Year of Birth(b)	Position(s) Held (Length of Service)(c)	Principal Occupation(s) During Past Five Years	Number of BlackRock-Advised Registered Investment Companies (“RICs”) Consisting of Investment Portfolios (“Portfolios”) Overseen	Public Company and Other Investment Company Directorships Held During Past Five Years
Robert Fairbairn(e) 1965	Director (Since 2021)	Vice Chairman of BlackRock, Inc. since 2019; Member of BlackRock’s Global Executive and Global Operating Committees; Co-Chair of BlackRock’s Human Capital Committee; Senior Managing Director of BlackRock, Inc. from 2010 to 2019;oversaw BlackRock’s Strategic Partner Program and Strategic Product Management Group from 2012 to 2019; Member of the Board of Managers of BlackRock Investments, LLC from 2011 to 2018; Global Head of BlackRock’s Retail and iShares® businesses from 2012 to 2016.	103 RICs consisting of 262 Portfolios	None
John M. Perlowski(d) 1964	Director (since 2021) and President and Chief Executive Officer (Since 2021)	Managing Director of BlackRock, Inc. since 2009; Head of BlackRock Global Accounting and Product Services since 2009; Advisory Director of Family Resource Network (charitable foundation) since 2009.	105 RICs consisting of 264 Portfolios	None
(a) The address of each Trustee is c/o BlackRock, Inc., 55 East 52nd Street, New York, New York 10055. (b) Each Independent Trustee holds office until his or her successor is duly elected and qualifies or until his or her earlier death, resignation, retirement or removal as provided by the Trust’s by-laws or charter or statute, or until December 31 of the year in which he or she turns 75. Trustees who are “interested persons,” as defined in the 1940 Act, serve until their successor is duly elected and qualifies or until their earlier death, resignation, retirement or removal as provided by the Trust’s by-laws or statute, or until December 31 of the year in which they turn 72. The Board may determine to extend the terms of Independent Trustees on a case-by-case basis, as appropriate. (c)  Following the combination of Merrill Lynch Investment Managers, L.P. (“MLIM”) and BlackRock, Inc. in September 2006, the various legacy MLIM and legacy BlackRock fund boards were realigned and consolidated into three new fund boards in 2007. In addition, effective January 1, 2019, three BlackRock Fund Complexes were realigned and consolidated into two BlackRock Fund Complexes. As a result, although the chart shows the year that each Independent Trustee joined the Board, certain Independent Trustees first became members of the boards of other BlackRock-advised Funds, legacy MLIM funds or legacy BlackRock funds as follows: Bruce R. Bond, 2005; Susan J. Carter, 2016; Collette Chilton, 2015; Neil A. Cotty, 2016; Cynthia A. Montgomery, 1994; Joseph P. Platt, 1999; Mark Stalnecker, 2015; Kenneth L. Urish, 1999; Claire A. Walton, 2016. (d) Dr. Fabozzi, Dr. Kester, Ms. Lynch and Mr. Perlowski are also trustees of the BlackRock Credit Strategies Fund and BlackRock Private Investments Fund. (e) Mr. Fairbairn and Mr. Perlowski are both “interested persons,” as defined in the 1940 Act, of the Trust based on their positions with BlackRock, Inc. and its affiliates. Mr. Fairbairn and Mr. Perlowski are also board members of the BlackRock Fixed-Income Complex.

T R U S T E E  A N D  O F F I C E R  I N F O R M A T I O N 29

Trustee and Officer Information  (continued)

Officers Who Are Not Trustees(a)
Name Year of Birth(b)	Position(s) Held (Length of Service)	Principal Occupation(s) During Past Five Years
Jonathan Diorio 1980	Vice President (Since 2021)	Managing Director of BlackRock, Inc. since 2015; Director of BlackRock, Inc. from 2011 to 2015.
Trent Walker 1974	Chief Financial Officer (Since 2021)	Managing Director of BlackRock, Inc. since September 2019; Executive Vice President of PIMCO from 2016 to 2019; Senior Vice President of PIMCO from 2008 to 2015; Treasurer from 2013 to 2019 and Assistant Treasurer from 2007 to 2017 of PIMCO Funds, PIMCO Variable Insurance Trust, PIMCO ETF Trust, PIMCO Equity Series, PIMCO Equity Series VIT, PIMCO Managed Accounts Trust, 2 PIMCO-sponsored interval funds and 21 PIMCO-sponsored closed-end funds.
Jay M. Fife 1970	Treasurer (Since 2021)	Managing Director of BlackRock, Inc. since 2007.
Charles Park 1967	Chief Compliance Officer (Since 2021)	Anti-Money Laundering Compliance Officer for certain BlackRock-advised Funds from 2014 to 2015; Chief Compliance Officer of BlackRock Advisors, LLC and the BlackRock-advised Funds in the BlackRock Multi Asset Complex and the BlackRock Fixed-Income Complex since 2014; Principal of and Chief Compliance Officer for iShares® Delaware Trust Sponsor LLC since 2012 and BlackRock Fund Advisors (“BFA”) since 2006; Chief Compliance Officer for the BFA-advised iShares® exchange traded funds since 2006; Chief Compliance Officer for BlackRock Asset Management International Inc. since 2012.
Lisa Belle 1968	Anti-Money Laundering Compliance Officer (Since 2021)	Managing Director of BlackRock, Inc. since 2019; Global Financial Crime Head for Asset and Wealth Management of JP Morgan from 2013 to 2019; Managing Director of RBS Securities from 2012 to 2013; Head of Financial Crimes for Barclays Wealth Americas from 2010 to 2012.
Janey Ahn 1975	Secretary (Since 2021)	Managing Director of BlackRock, Inc. since 2018; Director of BlackRock, Inc. from 2009 to 2017.
(a) The address of each Officer is c/o BlackRock, Inc., 55 East 52nd Street, New York, New York 10055.
(b) Officers of the Fund serve at the pleasure of the Board.

Further information about the Fund’s Trustees and Officers is available in the Fund’s Statement of Additional Information, which can be obtained without charge by calling (800) 441-7762.

Effective June 10, 2021, Stayce D. Harris and J. Phillip Holloman were each appointed to serve as a Trustee of the Trust. Effective July 30, 2021, Lorenzo A. Flores was appointed to serve as a Trustee of the Trust.

Effective December 31, 2021, Richard E. Cavanagh and Michael J. Castellano retired as Trustees of the Trust.

Ms. Robards intends to retire as a Trustee of the Trust and, in that regard, has resigned as a Trustee of the Trust effective as of May 31, 2022.

30 2 0 2 2   B L A C K R O C K   A N N U A L    R E P O R T   T O   S H A R E H O L D E R S

Additional Information

Regulation Regarding Derivatives

On October 28, 2020, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) adopted new regulations governing the use of derivatives by registered investment companies (“Rule 18f-4”). The Fund will be required to implement and comply with Rule 18f-4 by August 19, 2022. Once implemented, Rule 18f-4 will impose limits on the amount of derivatives a fund can enter into, eliminate the asset segregation framework currently used by funds to comply with Section 18 of the 1940 Act, treat derivatives as senior securities and require funds whose use of derivatives is more than a limited specified exposure amount to establish and maintain a comprehensive derivatives risk management program and appoint a derivatives risk manager.

General Information

Except if noted otherwise herein, there were no changes to the Fund’s charters or by-laws that would delay or prevent a change of control of the Fund that were not approved by the shareholders. Except if noted otherwise herein, there have been no changes in the persons who are primarily responsible for the day-to-day management of the Fund.

The Fund calculates its NAV as of the close of business on the last Business Day of each calendar month, within approximately 25 calendar days after the last Business Day of such month, and at such other times as the Board may determine. Shareholders desiring to obtain the Fund’s most recently calculated NAV may contact The Bank of New York Mellon, at 1-888-919-6902.

In accordance with Section 23(c) of the Investment Company Act of 1940, the Fund may from time to time purchase shares of its common stock in the open market or in private transactions.

Quarterly performance, semi-annual and annual reports, current net asset value and other information regarding the Fund may be found on BlackRock’s website, which can be accessed at blackrock.com. Any reference to BlackRock’s website in this report is intended to allow investors public access to information regarding the Fund and does not, and is not intended to, incorporate BlackRock’s website in this report.

Electronic Delivery

Shareholders can sign up for e-mail notifications of quarterly statements, annual and semi-annual shareholder reports and prospectuses by enrolling in the electronic delivery program. Electronic copies of shareholder reports and prospectuses are available on BlackRock’s website.

To enroll in electronic delivery:

Shareholders Who Hold Accounts with Investment Advisers, Banks or Brokerages:

Please contact your financial adviser. Please note that not all investment advisers, banks or brokerages may offer this service.

Householding

The Fund will mail only one copy of shareholder documents, including prospectuses, annual and semi-annual reports, Rule 30e-3 notices and proxy statements, to shareholders with multiple accounts at the same address. This practice is commonly called “householding” and is intended to reduce expenses and eliminate duplicate mailings of shareholder documents. Mailings of your shareholder documents may be householded indefinitely unless you instruct us otherwise. If you do not want the mailing of these documents to be combined with those for other members of your household, please call the Fund at (800) 882-0052.

Availability of Quarterly Schedule of Investments

The Fund files its complete schedule of portfolio holdings with the SEC for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year as an exhibit to its reports on Form N-PORT. The Fund’s Form N-PORT is available on the SEC’s website at sec.gov. Additionally, the Fund makes its portfolio holdings for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year available at blackrock.com/fundreports.

Availability of Proxy Voting Policies, Procedures and Voting Records

A description of the policies and procedures that the Fund uses to determine how to vote proxies relating to portfolio securities and information about how the Fund voted proxies relating to securities held in the Fund’s portfolios during the most recent 12-month period ended June 30 is available without charge, upon request (1) by calling (800) 882-0052; (2) on the BlackRock website at blackrock.com; and (3) on the SEC’s website at sec.gov.

Availability of Fund Updates

BlackRock will update performance and certain other data for the Fund on a monthly basis on its website in the “Closed-end Funds” section of blackrock.com as well as certain other material information as necessary from time to time. Investors and others are advised to check the website for updated performance information and the release of other material information about the Funds. This reference to BlackRock’s website is intended to allow investors public access to information regarding the Funds and does not, and is not intended to, incorporate BlackRock’s website in this report.

A D D I T I O N A L  I N F O R M A T I O N 31

Additional Information  (continued)

BlackRock Privacy Principles

BlackRock is committed to maintaining the privacy of its current and former fund investors and individual clients (collectively, “Clients”) and to safeguarding their non-public personal information. The following information is provided to help you understand what personal information BlackRock collects, how we protect that information and why in certain cases we share such information with select parties.

If you are located in a jurisdiction where specific laws, rules or regulations require BlackRock to provide you with additional or different privacy-related rights beyond what is set forth below, then BlackRock will comply with those specific laws, rules or regulations.

BlackRock obtains or verifies personal non-public information from and about you from different sources, including the following: (i) information we receive from you or, if applicable, your financial intermediary, on applications, forms or other documents; (ii) information about your transactions with us, our affiliates, or others; (iii) information we receive from a consumer reporting agency; and (iv) from visits to our websites.

BlackRock does not sell or disclose to non-affiliated third parties any non-public personal information about its Clients, except as permitted by law or as is necessary to respond to regulatory requests or to service Client accounts. These non-affiliated third parties are required to protect the confidentiality and security of this information and to use it only for its intended purpose.

We may share information with our affiliates to service your account or to provide you with information about other BlackRock products or services that may be of interest to you. In addition, BlackRock restricts access to non-public personal information about its Clients to those BlackRock employees with a legitimate business need for the information. BlackRock maintains physical, electronic and procedural safeguards that are designed to protect the non-public personal information of its Clients, including procedures relating to the proper storage and disposal of such information.

Fund and Service Providers
Investment Adviser	Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
BlackRock Advisors, LLC	Deloitte & Touche LLP
Wilmington, DE 19809	Boston, MA 02116
Accounting Agent and Transfer Agent	Distributor
BNY Mellon Investment Servicing (US) Inc.	BlackRock Investments, LLC
Wilmington, DE 19809	New York, NY 10022
Custodian	Legal Counsel
The Bank of New York Mellon	Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP
New York, NY 10286	New York, NY 10019
	Address of the Fund
	100 Bellevue Parkway
	Wilmington, DE 19809

32 2 0 2 2   B L A C K R O C K   A  N N U A L   R E P O R T   T O   S H A R E H O L D E  R S

Want to know more?

blackrock.com | 800-441-7762

This report is intended for current holders. It is not authorized for use as an offer of sale or a solicitation of an offer to buy shares of the Fund unless preceded or accompanied by the Fund’s current prospectus. Past performance results shown in this report should not be considered a representation of future performance. Investment returns and principal value of shares will fluctuate so that shares, if repurchased by the Fund in connection with any applicable tender offer, may be worth more or less than their original cost. Statements and other information herein are as dated and are subject to change.

GPS-3/22-AR

(b) Not Applicable

Item 2 – Code of Ethics – The registrant (or the “Fund”) has adopted a code of ethics, as of the end of the period covered by this report, applicable to the registrant’s principal executive officer, principal financial officer, principal accounting officer or controller, or persons performing similar functions. During the period covered by this report, the code of ethics was amended to update certain information and to make other non-material changes. During the period covered by this report, there have been no waivers granted under the code of ethics. The registrant undertakes to provide a copy of the code of ethics to any person upon request, without charge, who calls 1-800-882-0052, option 4.

Item 3 – Audit Committee Financial Expert – The registrant’s board of directors (the “board of directors”), has determined that (i) the registrant has the following audit committee financial experts serving on its audit committee and (ii) each audit committee financial expert is independent:

Frank J. Fabozzi

Lorenzo A. Flores

Catherine A. Lynch

Karen P. Robards

The registrant’s board of directors has determined that Karen P. Robards qualifies as an audit committee financial expert pursuant to Item 3(c)(4) of Form N-CSR.

Ms. Robards has a thorough understanding of generally accepted accounting principles, financial statements and internal control over financial reporting as well as audit committee functions. Ms. Robards has been President of Robards & Company, a financial advisory firm, since 1987. Ms. Robards was formerly an investment banker for more than 10 years where she was responsible for evaluating and assessing the performance of companies based on their financial results. Ms. Robards has over 30 years of experience analyzing financial statements. She also is a member of the audit committee of one publicly held company and a non-profit organization.

Under applicable securities laws, a person determined to be an audit committee financial expert will not be deemed an “expert” for any purpose, including without limitation for the purposes of Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933, as a result of being designated or identified as an audit committee financial expert. The designation or identification of a person as an audit committee financial expert does not impose on such person any duties, obligations, or liabilities greater than the duties, obligations, and liabilities imposed on such person as a member of the audit committee and board of directors in the absence of such designation or identification. The designation or identification of a person as an audit committee financial expert does not affect the duties, obligations, or liability of any other member of the audit committee or board of directors.

Item 4 – Principal Accountant Fees and Services

The following table presents fees billed by Deloitte & Touche LLP (“D&T”) in each of the last two fiscal years for the services rendered to the Fund:

	(a) Audit Fees		(b) Audit-Related Fees1		(c) Tax Fees2		(d) All Other Fees
Entity Name	Current   Fiscal Year   End	Previous   Fiscal Year   End	Current   Fiscal Year   End	Previous   Fiscal Year   End	Current   Fiscal Year   End	Previous   Fiscal Year   End	Current   Fiscal Year   End	Previous   Fiscal Year   End
BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution	$44,982	$44,541	$213	$8,500	$22,000	$20,000	$0	$0

The following table presents fees billed by D&T that were required to be approved by the registrant’s audit committee (the “Committee”) for services that relate directly to the operations or financial reporting of the Fund and that are rendered on behalf of BlackRock Advisors, LLC (“Investment Adviser” or “BlackRock”) and entities controlling, controlled by, or under common control with BlackRock (not including any sub-adviser whose role is primarily portfolio management and is subcontracted with or overseen by another investment adviser) that provide ongoing services to the Fund (“Affiliated Service Providers”):

	Current Fiscal Year End	Previous Fiscal Year End
(b) Audit-Related Fees1	$0	$0
(c) Tax Fees2	$0	$0
(d) All Other Fees3	$2,098,000	$2,032,000

¹ The nature of the services includes assurance and related services reasonably related to the performance of the audit or review of financial statements not included in Audit Fees, including accounting consultations, agreed-upon procedure reports, attestation reports, comfort letters, out-of-pocket expenses and internal control reviews not required by regulators.

² The nature of the services includes tax compliance and/or tax preparation, including services relating to the filing or amendment of federal, state or local income tax returns, regulated investment company qualification reviews, taxable income and tax distribution calculations.

³ Non-audit fees of $2,098,000 and $2,032,000 for the current fiscal year and previous fiscal year, respectively, were paid to the Fund’s principal accountant in their entirety by BlackRock, in connection with services provided to the Affiliated Service Providers of the Fund and of certain other funds sponsored and advised by BlackRock or its affiliates for a service organization review and an accounting research tool subscription. These amounts represent aggregate fees paid by BlackRock and were not allocated on a per fund basis.

(e)(1) Audit Committee Pre-Approval Policies and Procedures:

The Committee has adopted policies and procedures with regard to the pre-approval of services. Audit, audit-related and tax compliance services provided to the registrant on an annual basis require specific pre-approval by the Committee. The Committee also must approve other non-audit services provided to the registrant and those non-audit services provided to the Investment Adviser and Affiliated Service Providers that relate directly to the operations and the financial reporting of the registrant. Certain of these non-audit services that the Committee believes are (a) consistent with the SEC’s auditor independence rules and (b) routine and recurring services that will not impair the independence of the independent accountants may be approved by the Committee without consideration on a specific case-by-case basis (“general pre-approval”). The term of any general pre-approval is 12 months from the date of the pre-approval, unless the Committee provides for a different period. Tax or other non-audit services provided to the registrant which have a direct impact on the operations or financial reporting of the registrant will only be deemed pre-approved provided that any individual project does not exceed $10,000 attributable to the registrant or $50,000 per project. For this purpose, multiple projects will be aggregated to determine if they exceed the previously mentioned cost levels.

Any proposed services exceeding the pre-approved cost levels will require specific pre-approval by the Committee, as will any other services not subject to general pre-approval (e.g., unanticipated but permissible services). The Committee is informed of each service approved

subject to general pre-approval at the next regularly scheduled in-person board meeting. At this meeting, an analysis of such services is presented to the Committee for ratification. The Committee may delegate to the Committee Chairman the authority to approve the provision of and fees for any specific engagement of permitted non-audit services, including services exceeding pre-approved cost levels.

(e)(2)  None of the services described in each of Items 4(b) through (d) were approved by the Committee pursuant to the de minimis exception in paragraph (c)(7)(i)(C) of Rule 2-01 of Regulation S-X.

(f) Not Applicable

(g) The aggregate non-audit fees, defined as the sum of the fees shown under “Audit-Related Fees,” “Tax Fees” and “All Other Fees,” paid to the accountant for services rendered by the accountant to the registrant, the Investment Adviser and the Affiliated Service Providers were:

Entity Name	Current Fiscal Year End	Previous Fiscal Year End
BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution	$22,213	$28,500

Additionally, the amounts billed by D&T in connection with services provided to the Affiliated Service Providers of the Fund and of other funds sponsored or advised by BlackRock or its affiliates during the current and previous fiscal years for a service organization review and an accounting research tool subscription were:

Current Fiscal Year End	Previous Fiscal Year End
$2,098,000	$2,032,000

These amounts represent aggregate fees paid by BlackRock and were not allocated on a per fund basis.

(h) The Committee has considered and determined that the provision of non-audit services that were rendered to the Investment Adviser, and the Affiliated Service Providers that were not pre-approved pursuant to paragraph (c)(7)(ii) of Rule 2-01 of Regulation S-X is compatible with maintaining the principal accountant’s independence.

Item 5 – Audit Committee of Listed Registrant

(a) Not Applicable

(b) Not Applicable

Item 6 – Investments

(a) The registrant’s Schedule of Investments is included as part of the Report to Stockholders filed under Item 1(a) of this Form.

(b) Not Applicable due to no such divestments during the semi-annual period covered since the previous Form N-CSR filing.

Item 7 – Disclosure of Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures for Closed-End Management Investment Companies – The board of directors has delegated the voting of proxies for the Fund’s portfolio securities to the Investment Adviser pursuant to the Investment Adviser’s proxy voting guidelines. Under these guidelines, the Investment Adviser will vote proxies related to Fund securities in the best interests of the Fund and its stockholders. From time to time, a vote may present a conflict between the interests of the Fund’s stockholders, on the one hand, and those of the Investment Adviser, or any affiliated person of the Fund or the Investment Adviser, on the other. In such event, provided that the Investment Adviser’s Equity Investment Policy Oversight Committee, or a sub-committee thereof (the “Oversight Committee”) is aware of the real or potential conflict or material non-routine matter and if the Oversight Committee does not reasonably believe it is able to follow its general voting guidelines (or if the particular proxy matter is not addressed in the guidelines) and vote impartially, the Oversight Committee may retain an independent fiduciary to advise the Oversight Committee on how to vote or to cast votes on behalf of the Investment Adviser’s clients. If the Investment Adviser determines not to retain an independent fiduciary, or does not desire to follow the advice of such independent fiduciary, the Oversight Committee shall determine how to vote the proxy after consulting with the Investment Adviser’s Portfolio Management Group and/or the Investment Adviser’s Legal and Compliance Department and concluding that the vote cast is in its client’s best interest notwithstanding the conflict. A copy of the Fund’s Proxy Voting Policy and Procedures are attached as Exhibit 99.PROXYPOL, a copy of the Fund’s Global Corporate Governance  & Engagement Principles are attached as Exhibit 99.GLOBAL.CORP.GOV and a copy of the Fund’s Corporate Governance and Proxy Voting Guidelines for U.S. Securities are attached as Exhibit 99.US.CORP.GOV. Information on how the Fund voted proxies relating to portfolio securities during the most recent 12-month period ended June 30 is available without charge, (i) at www.blackrock.com and (ii) on the SEC’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

Item 8 – Portfolio Managers of Closed-End Management Investment Companies

(a)(1) As of the date of filing this Report:

The registrant is managed by a team of investment professionals comprised of Jeff Dunbar, Managing Director at BlackRock, and Albert Matriotti, Managing Director at BlackRock. Messrs. Dunbar and Matriotti are the Fund’s co-portfolio managers and are responsible for the day-to-day management of the Fund’s portfolio and the selection of its investments. Messrs. Dunbar and Matriotti have been members of the Fund’s management team since 2021.

Portfolio Manager	Biography
Jeff Dunbar	Managing Director of BlackRock since 2007.
Albert Matriotti	Managing Director of BlackRock since 2007.

(a)(2) As of March 31, 2022:

	(ii) Number of Other Accounts Managed and Assets by Account Type			(iii) Number of Other Accounts and Assets for Which Advisory Fee is Performance-Based
(i) Name of Portfolio Manager	Other Registered Investment   Companies	Other Pooled   Investment Vehicles	Other   Accounts	Other       Registered       Investment Companies	Other Pooled       Investment Vehicles	Other   Accounts
Jeff Dunbar	0	13	0	0	6	0
	$0	$2.43 Billion	$0	$0	$599.3 Million	$0
Albert Matriotti	0	20	2	0	5	1
	$0	$4.15 Billion	$324.5 Million	$0	$1.32 Billion	$78.75 Million

(iv) Portfolio Manager Potential Material Conflicts of Interest

BlackRock has built a professional working environment, firm-wide compliance culture and compliance procedures and systems designed to protect against potential incentives that may favor one account over another. BlackRock has adopted policies and procedures that address the allocation of investment opportunities, execution of portfolio transactions, personal trading by employees and other potential conflicts of interest that are designed to ensure that all client accounts are treated equitably over time. Nevertheless, BlackRock furnishes investment management and advisory services to numerous clients in addition to the Fund, and BlackRock may, consistent with applicable law, make investment recommendations to other clients or accounts (including accounts which are hedge funds or have performance or higher fees paid to BlackRock, or in which portfolio managers have a personal interest in the receipt of such fees), which may be the same as or different from those made to the Fund. In addition, BlackRock, Inc., its affiliates and significant shareholders and any officer, director, shareholder or employee may or may not have an interest in the securities whose purchase and sale BlackRock recommends to the Fund. BlackRock, Inc., or any of its affiliates or significant shareholders, or any officer, director, shareholder, employee or any member of their families may take different actions than those recommended to the Fund by BlackRock with respect to the same securities. Moreover, BlackRock may refrain from rendering any advice or services concerning securities of companies of which any of BlackRock, Inc.’s (or its affiliates’ or significant shareholders’) officers, directors or employees are directors or officers, or companies as to which BlackRock, Inc. or any of its affiliates or significant shareholders or the officers, directors and employees of any of them has any substantial economic interest or possesses material non-public information. Certain portfolio managers also may manage accounts whose investment strategies may at times be opposed to the strategy utilized for a fund. It should also be noted that Messrs. Dunbar and Matriotti may be managing hedge fund and/or long only accounts, or may be part of a team managing hedge fund and/or long only accounts, subject to incentive fees. Messrs. Dunbar and Matriotti may therefore be entitled to receive a portion of any incentive fees earned on such accounts.

As a fiduciary, BlackRock owes a duty of loyalty to its clients and must treat each client fairly. When BlackRock purchases or sells securities for more than one account, the trades must be allocated in a manner consistent with its fiduciary duties. BlackRock attempts to allocate investments in a fair and equitable manner among client accounts, with no account receiving preferential treatment. To this end, BlackRock, Inc. has adopted policies that are intended to ensure reasonable efficiency in client

transactions and provide BlackRock with sufficient flexibility to allocate investments in a manner that is consistent with the particular investment discipline and client base, as appropriate.

(a)(3) As of March 31, 2022:

Portfolio Manager Compensation Overview

The discussion below describes the portfolio managers’ compensation as of March 31, 2022.

BlackRock’s financial arrangements with its portfolio managers, its competitive compensation and its career path emphasis at all levels reflect the value senior management places on key resources. Compensation may include a variety of components and may vary from year to year based on a number of factors. The principal components of compensation include a base salary, a performance-based discretionary bonus, participation in various benefits programs and one or more of the incentive compensation programs established by BlackRock.

Base Compensation. Generally, portfolio managers receive base compensation based on their position with the firm.

Discretionary Incentive Compensation

Discretionary incentive compensation is a function of several components: the performance of BlackRock, Inc., the performance of the portfolio manager’s group within BlackRock, the investment performance, including risk-adjusted returns, of the firm’s assets under management or supervision by that portfolio manager, in some cases relative to a predetermined benchmark, and the individual’s performance and contribution to the overall performance of these portfolios and BlackRock. Among other things, BAA’s Compensation Committee makes a subjective determination with respect to each BAA portfolio manager’s compensation based on the performance of the Funds and other accounts managed by each portfolio manager. The performance of these portfolio managers is not measured against a specific benchmark.

Distribution of Discretionary Incentive Compensation. Discretionary incentive compensation is distributed to portfolio managers in a combination of cash, deferred BlackRock, Inc. stock awards, and/or deferred cash awards that notionally track the return of certain BlackRock investment products.

Portfolio managers receive their annual discretionary incentive compensation in the form of cash. Portfolio managers whose total compensation is above a specified threshold also receive deferred BlackRock, Inc. stock awards annually as part of their discretionary incentive compensation. Paying a portion of discretionary incentive compensation in the form of deferred BlackRock, Inc. stock puts compensation earned by a portfolio manager for a given year “at risk” based on BlackRock’s ability to sustain and improve its performance over future periods. In some cases, additional deferred BlackRock, Inc. stock may be granted to certain key employees as part of a long-term incentive award to aid in retention, align interests with long-term shareholders and motivate performance. Deferred BlackRock, Inc. stock awards are generally granted in the form of BlackRock, Inc. restricted stock units that vest pursuant to the terms of the applicable plan and, once

vested, settle in BlackRock, Inc. common stock. The portfolio managers of this Fund have deferred BlackRock, Inc. stock awards.

For certain portfolio managers, a portion of the discretionary incentive compensation is also distributed in the form of deferred cash awards that notionally track the returns of select BlackRock investment products they manage, which provides direct alignment of portfolio manager discretionary incentive compensation with investment product results. Deferred cash awards vest ratably over a number of years and, once vested, settle in the form of cash. Only portfolio managers who manage specified products and whose total compensation is above a specified threshold are eligible to participate in the deferred cash award program.

Other Compensation Benefits. In addition to base salary and discretionary incentive compensation, portfolio managers may be eligible to receive or participate in one or more of the following:

Incentive Savings Plans — BlackRock, Inc. has created a variety of incentive savings plans in which BlackRock, Inc. employees are eligible to participate, including a 401(k) plan, the BlackRock Retirement Savings Plan (RSP), and the BlackRock Employee Stock Purchase Plan (ESPP). The employer contribution components of the RSP include a company match equal to 50% of the first 8% of eligible pay contributed to the plan capped at $5,000 per year, and a company retirement contribution equal to 3-5% of eligible compensation up to the Internal Revenue Service limit ($305,000 for 2022). The RSP offers a range of investment options, including registered investment companies and collective investment funds managed by the firm. BlackRock, Inc. contributions follow the investment direction set by participants for their own contributions or, absent participant investment direction, are invested into a target date fund that corresponds to, or is closest to, the year in which the participant attains age 65. The ESPP allows for investment in BlackRock, Inc. common stock at a 5% discount on the fair market value of the stock on the purchase date. Annual participation in the ESPP is limited to the purchase of 1,000 shares of common stock or a dollar value of $25,000 based on its fair market value on the purchase date. All of the eligible portfolio managers are eligible to participate in these plans.

(a)(4) Beneficial Ownership of Securities – As of March 31, 2022.

Portfolio Manager	Dollar Range of Equity Securities of the Fund Beneficially Owned
Jeff Dunbar	None
Albert Matriotti	None

(b) Not Applicable

Item 9 – Purchases of Equity Securities by Closed-End Management Investment Company and Affiliated Purchasers – Not Applicable due to no such purchases during the period covered by this report.

Item 10 – Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders – There have been no material changes to these procedures.

Item 11 – Controls and Procedures

(a) The registrant’s principal executive and principal financial officers, or persons performing similar functions, have concluded that the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rule 30a-3(c) under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”)) are effective as of a date within 90 days of the filing of this report based on the evaluation of these controls and procedures required by Rule 30a-3(b) under the 1940 Act and Rule 13a-15(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

(b) There were no changes in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rule 30a-3(d) under the 1940 Act) that occurred during the period covered by this report that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

Item 12 – Disclosure of Securities Lending Activities for Closed-End Management Investment Companies – Not Applicable

Item 13 – Exhibits attached hereto

(a)(2) Section 302 Certifications are attached

(a)(3) Any written solicitation to purchase securities under Rule 23c-1 – Not Applicable

(a)(4) Change in Registrant’s independent public accountant – Not Applicable

(b) Section 906 Certifications are attached

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Investment Company Act of 1940, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution

By:	/s/ John M. Perlowski
	John M. Perlowski
	Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer) of
	BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution

Date: May 20, 2022

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Investment Company Act of 1940, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.

By:	/s/ John M. Perlowski
	John M. Perlowski
	Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer) of
	BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution

Date: May 20, 2022

By:	/s/ Trent Walker
	Trent Walker
	Chief Financial Officer (principal financial officer) of
	BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution

Date: May 20, 2022

EX-99.CERT

EX-99. CERT

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 30a-2(a) UNDER THE 1940 ACT AND SECTION 302 OF THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, John M. Perlowski, Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer) of BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution, certify that:

1.            I have reviewed this report on Form N-CSR of BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution;

2.            Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.            Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations, changes in net assets, and cash flows (if the financial statements are required to include a statement of cash flows) of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.            The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rule 30a-3(c) under the Investment Company Act of 1940) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rule 30a-3(d) under the Investment Company Act of 1940) for the registrant and have:

a)            designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b)            designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;

c)            evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this report based on such evaluation; and

d)            disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by this report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5.            The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a)            all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize, and report financial information; and

b)            any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

Date: May 20, 2022

/s/ John M. Perlowski        

John M. Perlowski

Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer) of

BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution

EX-99. CERT

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 30a-2(a) UNDER THE 1940 ACT AND SECTION 302 OF THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Trent Walker, Chief Financial Officer (principal financial officer) of BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution, certify that:

1.            I have reviewed this report on Form N-CSR of BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution;

2.            Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.            Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations, changes in net assets, and cash flows (if the financial statements are required to include a statement of cash flows) of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.            The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rule 30a-3(c) under the Investment Company Act of 1940) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rule 30a-3(d) under the Investment Company Act of 1940) for the registrant and have:

a)            designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b)            designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;

c)            evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this report based on such evaluation; and

d)            disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by this report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5.            The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a)            all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize, and report financial information; and

b)            any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

Date: May 20, 2022

/s/ Trent Walker        

Trent Walker

Chief Financial Officer (principal financial officer) of

BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution

EX-99.906CERT

Exhibit 99.906CERT

Certification Pursuant to Rule 30a-2(b) under the 1940 Act and

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the undersigned officer of BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution (the “Registrant”), hereby certifies, to the best of his knowledge, that the Registrant’s Report on Form N-CSR for the period ended March 31, 2022 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.

Date: May 20, 2022

/s/ John M. Perlowski        

John M. Perlowski

Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer) of

BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the undersigned officer of BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution (the “Registrant”), hereby certifies, to the best of his knowledge, that the Registrant’s Report on Form N-CSR for the period ended March 31, 2022 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.

Date: May 20, 2022

/s/ Trent Walker        

Trent Walker

Chief Financial Officer (principal financial officer) of

BlackRock Hedge Fund Guided Portfolio Solution

This certification is being furnished pursuant to Rule 30a-2(b) under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, and 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Form N-CSR with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

EX-99.PROXYPOL

Closed-End Fund Proxy Voting Policy

August 1, 2021

Closed-End Fund Proxy Voting Policy

Procedures Governing Delegation of Proxy Voting to Fund Adviser

  Effective Date: August 1, 2021

Applies to the following types of Funds registered under the 1940 Act:

☐ Open-End Mutual Funds (including money market funds)

☐ Money Market Funds Only

☐ iShares and BlackRock ETFs

☒ Closed-End Funds

☐ Other

Objective and Scope

Set forth below is the Closed-End Fund Proxy Voting Policy.

Policy / Document Requirements and Statements

The Boards of Trustees/Directors (the “Directors”) of the closed-end funds advised by BlackRock Advisors, LLC (“BlackRock”) (the “Funds”) have the responsibility for the oversight of voting proxies relating to portfolio securities of the Funds, and have determined that it is in the best interests of the Funds and their shareholders to delegate that responsibility to BlackRock as part of BlackRock’s authority to manage, acquire and dispose of account assets, all as contemplated by the Funds’ respective investment management agreements.

BlackRock has adopted guidelines and procedures (together and as from time to time amended, the “BlackRock Proxy Voting Guidelines”) governing proxy voting by accounts managed by BlackRock. BlackRock will cast votes on behalf of each of the Funds on specific proxy issues in respect of securities held by each such Fund in accordance with the BlackRock Proxy Voting Guidelines; provided, however, that in the case of underlying closed-end funds (including business development companies and other similarly-situated asset pools) held by the Funds that have, or are proposing to adopt, a classified board structure, BlackRock will typically (a) vote in favor of proposals to adopt classification and against proposals to eliminate classification, and (b) not vote against directors as a result of their adoption of a classified board structure.

BlackRock will report on an annual basis to the Directors on (1) a summary of all proxy votes that BlackRock has made on behalf of the Funds in the preceding year together with a representation that all votes were in accordance with the BlackRock Proxy Voting Guidelines (as modified pursuant to the immediately preceding paragraph), and (2) any changes to the BlackRock Proxy Voting Guidelines that have not previously been reported.

Public Page 1 of 1

EX-99.GLOBAL.CORP.GO

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Global Principles Effective as of January 2022

Contents

Introduction to BlackRock	3
Philosophy on investment stewardship	3
Key themes	5
Boards and directors	6
Auditors and audit-related issues	9
Capital structure, mergers, asset sales, and other special transactions	10
Compensation and benefits	10
Environmental and social issues	11
General corporate governance matters and shareholder protections	13
Shareholder proposals	14
BlackRock’s oversight of its investment stewardship activities	15
Vote execution	16
Conflicts management policies and procedures	16
Securities lending	18
Voting guidelines	19
Reporting and vote transparency	19

The purpose of this document is to provide an overarching explanation of BlackRock’s approach globally to our responsibilities as a shareholder on behalf of our clients, our expectations of companies, and our commitments to clients in terms of our own governance and transparency.

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Global Principles  |  2

Introduction to BlackRock

BlackRock’s purpose is to help more and more people experience financial well-being. We manage assets on behalf of institutional and individual clients, across a full spectrum of investment strategies, asset classes, and regions. Our client base includes pension plans, endowments, foundations, charities, official institutions, insurers, and other financial institutions, as well as individuals around the world. As part of our fiduciary duty to our clients, we have determined that it is generally in the best long-term interest of our clients to promote sound corporate governance as an informed, engaged shareholder. At BlackRock, this is the responsibility of the Investment Stewardship team.

Philosophy on investment stewardship

Companies are responsible for ensuring they have appropriate governance structures to serve the interests of shareholders and other key stakeholders. We believe that there are certain fundamental rights attached to shareholding. Companies and their boards should be accountable to shareholders and structured with appropriate checks and balances to ensure that they operate in shareholders’ best interests to create sustainable value. Shareholders should have the right to vote to elect, remove, and nominate directors, approve the appointment of the auditor, and amend the corporate charter or by-laws. Shareholders should be able to vote on key board decisions that are material to the protection of their investment, including but not limited to, changes to the purpose of the business, dilution levels and pre-emptive rights, and the distribution of income and capital structure. In order to make informed decisions, we believe that shareholders have the right to sufficient and timely information. In addition, shareholder voting rights should be proportionate to their economic ownership—the principle of “one share, one vote” helps achieve this balance.

Consistent with these shareholder rights, we believe BlackRock has a responsibility to monitor and provide feedback to companies in our role as stewards of our clients’ investments. Investment stewardship is how we use our voice as an investor to promote sound corporate governance and business practices to help maximize long-term shareholder value for our clients, the vast majority of whom are investing for long-term goals such as retirement. BlackRock Investment Stewardship (“BIS”) does this through engagement with management teams and/or board members on material business issues, including but not limited to environmental, social, and governance (“ESG”) matters and, for those clients who have given us authority, through voting proxies in their best long-term economic interests. We also participate in the public dialogue to help shape global norms and industry standards with the goal of supporting a policy framework consistent with our clients’ interests as long-term shareholders.

BlackRock looks to companies to provide timely, accurate, and comprehensive disclosure on all material governance and business matters, including ESG-related issues. This transparency allows shareholders to appropriately understand and assess how relevant risks and opportunities are being effectively identified and managed. Where company reporting and disclosure is inadequate or we believe the approach taken may be inconsistent with sustainable, long-term value creation, we will engage with a company and/or vote in a manner that encourages progress.

BlackRock views engagement as an important activity; engagement provides us with the opportunity to improve our understanding of the business and risks and opportunities that are material to the companies in which our clients invest, including those related to ESG. Engagement also informs our voting decisions. As long-term investors on behalf of clients, we seek to have regular and continuing dialogue with executives and board directors to advance sound governance and sustainable business practices, as well as to understand the effectiveness of the company’s management and oversight of

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Global Principles  |  3

material issues. Engagement is an important mechanism for providing feedback on company practices and disclosures, particularly where we believe they could be enhanced. Similarly, it provides us an opportunity to hear directly from company boards and management on how they believe their actions are aligned with sustainable, long-term value creation. We primarily engage through direct dialogue, but may use other tools such as written correspondence, to share our perspectives.

We generally vote in support of management and boards that demonstrate an approach consistent with creating sustainable, long-term value. If we have concerns about a company’s approach, we may choose to explain our expectations to the company’s board and management. Following our engagement, we may signal through our voting that we have outstanding concerns, generally by voting against the re-election of directors we view as having responsibility for an issue. We apply our regional proxy voting guidelines to achieve the outcome we believe is most aligned with our clients’ long-term economic interests.

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Global Principles  |  4

Key themes

We recognize that accepted standards and norms of corporate governance can differ between markets. However, we believe there are certain fundamental elements of governance practice that are intrinsic globally to a company’s ability to create long-term value. This set of global themes are set out in this overarching set of principles (the “Principles”), which are anchored in transparency and accountability. At a minimum, we believe companies should observe the accepted corporate governance standards in their domestic market and ask that, if they do not, they explain how their approach better supports sustainable long-term value creation.

These Principles cover seven key themes:

• Boards and directors

• Auditors and audit-related issues

• Capital structure, mergers, asset sales, and other special transactions

• Compensation and benefits

• Environmental and social issues

• General corporate governance matters and shareholder protections

• Shareholder proposals

Our regional and market-specific voting guidelines explain how these Principles inform our voting decisions in relation to specific ballot items for shareholder meetings.

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Global Principles  |  5

Boards and directors

Our primary focus is on the performance of the board of directors. The performance of the board is critical to the economic success of the company and the protection of shareholders’ interests. As part of their responsibilities, board members owe fiduciary duties to shareholders in overseeing the strategic direction and operation of the company. For this reason, BIS sees engaging with and the election of directors as one of our most important and impactful responsibilities.

We support boards whose approach is consistent with creating sustainable, long-term value. This includes the effective management of strategic, operational, financial, and material ESG factors and the consideration of key stakeholder interests. The board should establish and maintain a framework of robust and effective governance mechanisms to support its oversight of the company’s strategic aims. We look to the board to articulate the effectiveness of these mechanisms in overseeing the management of business risks and opportunities and the fulfillment of the company’s purpose. Disclosure of material issues that affect the company’s long-term strategy and value creation, including material ESG factors, is essential for shareholders to be able to appropriately understand and assess how risks are effectively identified, managed and mitigated.

Where a company has not adequately disclosed and demonstrated it has fulfilled these responsibilities, we will consider voting against the re-election of directors whom we consider having particular responsibility for the issue. We assess director performance on a case-by-case basis and in light of each company’s circumstances, taking into consideration our assessment of their governance, business practices that support sustainable, long-term value creation, and performance. In serving the interests of shareholders, the responsibility of the board of directors includes, but is not limited to, the following:

• Establishing an appropriate corporate governance structure

• Supporting and overseeing management in setting long-term strategic goals and applicable measures of value-creation and milestones that will demonstrate progress, and taking steps to address anticipated or actual obstacles to success

• Providing oversight on the identification and management of material, business operational, and sustainability-related risks

• Overseeing the financial resilience of the company, the integrity of financial statements, and the robustness of a company’s Enterprise Risk Management¹ framework

• Making decisions on matters that require independent evaluation, which may include mergers, acquisitions and dispositions, activist situations or other similar cases

¹ Enterprise risk management is a process, effected by the entity’s board of directors, management, and other personnel, applied in strategy setting and across the enterprise, designed to identify potential events that may affect the entity, and manage risk to be within the risk appetite, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the achievement of objectives. (Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO), Enterprise Risk Management — Integrated Framework, September 2004, New York, NY).

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Global Principles  |  6

• Establishing appropriate executive compensation structures

• Addressing business issues, including environmental and social risks and opportunities, when they have the potential to materially impact the company’s long-term value

There should be clear definitions of the role of the board, the committees of the board, and senior management. Set out below are ways in which boards and directors can demonstrate a commitment to acting in the best long-term economic interests of all shareholders.

We will seek to engage with the appropriate directors where we have concerns about the performance of the company, board, or individual directors and may signal outstanding concerns in our voting.

Regular accountability

BlackRock believes that directors should stand for re-election on a regular basis, ideally annually. In our experience, annual re-elections allow shareholders to reaffirm their support for board members or hold them accountable for their decisions in a timely manner. When board members are not re-elected annually, we believe it is good practice for boards to have a rotation policy to ensure that, through a board cycle, all directors have had their appointment re-confirmed, with a proportion of directors being put forward for re-election at each annual general meeting.

Effective board composition

Regular director elections also give boards the opportunity to adjust their composition in an orderly way to reflect the evolution of the company’s strategy and the market environment. BlackRock believes it is beneficial for new directors to be brought onto the board periodically to refresh the group’s thinking and in a manner that supports both continuity and appropriate succession planning. We consider the average overall tenure of the board, where we are seeking a balance between the knowledge and experience of longer-serving members and the fresh perspectives of newer members. We expect companies to keep under regular review the effectiveness of their board (including its size), and assess directors nominated for election or re-election in the context of the composition of the board as a whole. This assessment should consider a number of factors, including the potential need to address gaps in skills, experience, diversity, and independence.

When nominating new directors to the board, we ask that there is sufficient information on the individual candidates so that shareholders can assess the suitability of each individual nominee and the overall board composition. These disclosures should give an understanding of how the collective experience and expertise of the board aligns with the company’s long-term strategy and business model.

We are interested in diversity in the board room as a means to promoting diversity of thought and avoiding ‘group think’. We ask boards to disclose how diversity is considered in board composition, including demographic characteristics such as gender, race/ethnicity and age; as well as professional characteristics, such as a director’s industry experience, specialist areas of expertise and geographic location. We assess a board’s diversity in the context of a company’s domicile, business model and strategy. Self-identified board demographic diversity can usefully be disclosed in aggregate, consistent with local law. We believe boards should aspire to meaningful diversity of membership, at least consistent with local regulatory requirements and best practices, while recognizing that building a strong, diverse board can take time.

This position is based on our view that diversity of perspective and thought – in the board room, in the management team and throughout the company – leads to better long term economic outcomes for

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Global Principles  |  7

companies. Academic research already reveals correlations between specific dimensions of diversity and effects on decision-making processes and outcomes.² In our experience, greater diversity in the board room contributes to more robust discussions and more innovative and resilient decisions. Over time, greater diversity in the board room can also promote greater diversity and resilience in the leadership team, and the workforce more broadly. That diversity can enable companies to develop businesses that more closely reflect and resonate with the customers and communities they serve.

We expect there to be a sufficient number of independent directors, free from conflicts of interest or undue influence from connected parties, to ensure objectivity in the decision-making of the board and its ability to oversee management. Common impediments to independence may include but are not limited to:

• Current or recent employment at the company or a subsidiary

• Being, or representing, a shareholder with a substantial shareholding in the company

• Interlocking directorships

• Having any other interest, business, or other relationship which could, or could reasonably be perceived to, materially interfere with a director’s ability to act in the best interests of the company and its shareholders.

BlackRock believes that boards are most effective at overseeing and advising management when there is a senior independent board leader. This director may chair the board, or, where the chair is also the CEO (or is otherwise not independent), be designated as a lead independent director. The role of this director is to enhance the effectiveness of the independent members of the board through shaping the agenda, ensuring adequate information is provided to the board, and encouraging independent participation in board deliberations. The lead independent director or another appropriate director should be available to shareholders in those situations where an independent director is best placed to explain and contextualize a company’s approach.

There are matters for which the board has responsibility that may involve a conflict of interest for executives or for affiliated directors. BlackRock believes that objective oversight of such matters is best achieved when the board forms committees comprised entirely of independent directors. In many markets, these committees of the board specialize in audit, director nominations, and compensation matters. An ad hoc committee might also be formed to decide on a special transaction, particularly one involving a related party, or to investigate a significant adverse event.

Sufficient capacity

As the role and expectations of a director are increasingly demanding, directors must be able to commit an appropriate amount of time to board and committee matters. It is important that directors have the

² For example, the role of gender diversity on team cohesion and participative communication is explored by: Post, C., 2015, When is female leadership an advantage? Coordination requirements, team cohesion, and team interaction norms, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36, 1153-1175. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.2031.

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Global Principles  |  8

capacity to meet all of their responsibilities - including when there are unforeseen events – and therefore, they should not take on an excessive number of roles that would impair their ability to fulfill their duties.

Auditors and audit-related issues

BlackRock recognizes the critical importance of financial statements, which should provide a true and fair picture of a company’s financial condition. Accordingly, the assumptions made by management and reviewed by the auditor in preparing the financial statements should be reasonable and justified.

The accuracy of financial statements, inclusive of financial and non-financial information, is of paramount importance to BlackRock. Investors increasingly recognize that a broader range of risks and opportunities have the potential to materially impact financial performance. Over time, we expect increased scrutiny of the assumptions underlying financial reports, particularly those that pertain to the impact of the transition to a low carbon economy on a company’s business model and asset mix.

In this context, audit committees, or equivalent, play a vital role in a company’s financial reporting system by providing independent oversight of the accounts, material financial and non-financial information, internal control frameworks, and in the absence of a dedicated risk committee, Enterprise Risk Management systems. BlackRock believes that effective audit committee oversight strengthens the quality and reliability of a company’s financial statements and provides an important level of reassurance to shareholders.    

We hold members of the audit committee or equivalent responsible for overseeing the management of the audit function. Audit committees or equivalent should have clearly articulated charters that set out their responsibilities and have a rotation plan in place that allows for a periodic refreshment of the committee membership to introduce fresh perspectives to audit oversight.

We take particular note of critical accounting matters, cases involving significant financial restatements, or ad hoc notifications of material financial weakness. In this respect, audit committees should provide timely disclosure on the remediation of Key and Critical Audit Matters identified either by the external auditor or Internal Audit function.

The integrity of financial statements depends on the auditor being free of any impediments to being an effective check on management. To that end, we believe it is important that auditors are, and are seen to be, independent. Where an audit firm provides services to the company in addition to the audit, the fees earned should be disclosed and explained. Audit committees should have in place a procedure for assessing annually the independence of the auditor and the quality of the external audit process.

Comprehensive disclosure provides investors with a sense of the company’s long-term operational risk management practices and, more broadly, the quality of the board’s oversight. The audit committee or equivalent, or a dedicated risk committee, should periodically review the company’s risk assessment and risk management policies and the significant risks and exposures identified by management, the internal auditors or the independent accountants, and management’s steps to address them. In the absence of robust disclosures, we may reasonably conclude that companies are not adequately managing risk.

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Global Principles  |  9

Capital structure, mergers, asset sales, and other special transactions

The capital structure of a company is critical to shareholders as it impacts the value of their investment and the priority of their interest in the company relative to that of other equity or debt investors. Pre-emptive rights are a key protection for shareholders against the dilution of their interests.

Effective voting rights are basic rights of share ownership. We believe strongly in one vote for one share as a guiding principle that supports effective corporate governance. Shareholders, as the residual claimants, have the strongest interest in protecting company value, and voting power should match economic exposure.

In principle, we disagree with the creation of a share class with equivalent economic exposure and preferential, differentiated voting rights. In our view, this structure violates the fundamental corporate governance principle of proportionality and results in a concentration of power in the hands of a few shareholders, thus disenfranchising other shareholders and amplifying any potential conflicts of interest. However, we recognize that in certain markets, at least for a period of time, companies may have a valid argument for listing dual classes of shares with differentiated voting rights. We believe that such companies should review these share class structures on a regular basis or as company circumstances change. Additionally, they should seek shareholder approval of their capital structure on a periodic basis via a management proposal at the company’s shareholder meeting. The proposal should give unaffiliated shareholders the opportunity to affirm the current structure or establish mechanisms to end or phase out controlling structures at the appropriate time, while minimizing costs to shareholders.    

In assessing mergers, asset sales, or other special transactions, BlackRock’s primary consideration is the long-term economic interests of our clients as shareholders. Boards proposing a transaction need to clearly explain the economic and strategic rationale behind it. We will review a proposed transaction to determine the degree to which it can enhance long-term shareholder value. We would prefer that proposed transactions have the unanimous support of the board and have been negotiated at arm’s length. We may seek reassurance from the board that executives’ and/or board members’ financial interests in a given transaction have not adversely affected their ability to place shareholders’ interests before their own. Where the transaction involves related parties, we would expect the recommendation to support it to come from the independent directors, and ideally, the terms also have been assessed through an independent appraisal process. In addition, it is good practice that it be approved by a separate vote of the non-conflicted parties.

BlackRock believes that shareholders have a right to dispose of company shares in the open market without unnecessary restriction. In our view, corporate mechanisms designed to limit shareholders’ ability to sell their shares are contrary to basic property rights. Such mechanisms can serve to protect and entrench interests other than those of the shareholders. We believe that shareholders are broadly capable of making decisions in their own best interests. We expect any so-called ‘shareholder rights plans’ proposed by a board to be subject to shareholder approval upon introduction and periodically thereafter.

Compensation and benefits

BlackRock expects a company’s board of directors to put in place a compensation structure that incentivizes and rewards executives appropriately. There should be a clear link between variable pay and operational and financial performance. Performance metrics should be stretching and aligned with a

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Global Principles  |  10

company’s strategy and business model. BIS does not have a position on the use of ESG-related criteria, but believes that where companies choose to include them, they should be as rigorous as other financial or operational targets. Long-term incentive plans should vest over timeframes aligned with the delivery of long-term shareholder value. Compensation committees should guard against contractual arrangements that would entitle executives to material compensation for early termination of their employment. Finally, pension contributions and other deferred compensation arrangements should be reasonable in light of market practice.

We are not supportive of one-off or special bonuses unrelated to company or individual performance. Where discretion has been used by the compensation committee or its equivalent, we expect disclosure relating to how and why the discretion was used, and how the adjusted outcome is aligned with the interests of shareholders. We acknowledge that the use of peer group evaluation by compensation committees can help ensure competitive pay; however, we are concerned when the rationale for increases in total compensation at a company is solely based on peer benchmarking rather than a rigorous measure of outperformance. We encourage companies to clearly explain how compensation outcomes have rewarded outperformance against peer firms.

We believe consideration should be given to building claw back provisions into incentive plans such that executives would be required to forgo rewards when they are not justified by actual performance and/or when compensation was based on faulty financial reporting or deceptive business practices. We also favor recoupment from any senior executive whose behavior caused material financial harm to shareholders, material reputational risk to the company, or resulted in a criminal investigation, even if such actions did not ultimately result in a material restatement of past results.

Non-executive directors should be compensated in a manner that is commensurate with the time and effort expended in fulfilling their professional responsibilities. Additionally, these compensation arrangements should not risk compromising directors’ independence or aligning their interests too closely with those of the management, whom they are charged with overseeing.

We use third party research, in addition to our own analysis, to evaluate existing and proposed compensation structures. We may vote against members of the compensation committee or equivalent board members for poor compensation practices or structures.

Environmental and social issues

We believe that well-managed companies will deal effectively with material environmental and social (“E&S”) factors relevant to their businesses. Governance is the core structure by which boards can oversee the creation of sustainable, long-term value. Appropriate risk oversight of E&S considerations stems from this construct.    

Robust disclosure is essential for investors to effectively evaluate companies’ strategy and business practices related to material E&S risks and opportunities. Given the increased understanding of material sustainability risks and opportunities, and the need for better information to assess them, BlackRock will advocate for continued improvement in companies’ reporting, where necessary, and will express any concerns through our voting where a company’s actions or disclosures are inadequate.    

BlackRock encourages companies to use the framework developed by the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) to disclose their approach to ensuring they have a sustainable business model and to supplement that disclosure with industry-specific metrics such as those identified by the

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Global Principles  |  11

Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB).³ While the TCFD framework was developed to support climate-related risk disclosure, the four pillars of the TCFD Governance, Strategy, Risk Management, and Metrics and Targets are a useful way for companies to disclose how they identify, assess, manage, and oversee a variety of sustainability-related risks and opportunities. SASB’s industry-specific guidance (as identified in its materiality map) is beneficial in helping companies identify key performance indicators (KPIs) across various dimensions of sustainability that are considered to be financially material and decision-useful within their industry. We recognize that some companies may report using different standards, which may be required by regulation, or one of a number of private standards. In such cases, we ask that companies highlight the metrics that are industry- or company-specific.

Companies may also adopt or refer to guidance on sustainable and responsible business conduct issued by supranational organizations such as the United Nations or the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Further, industry-specific initiatives on managing specific operational risks may be useful. Companies should disclose any global standards adopted, the industry initiatives in which they participate, any peer group benchmarking undertaken, and any assurance processes to help investors understand their approach to sustainable and responsible business practices.

Climate risk

BlackRock believes that climate change has become a defining factor in companies’ long-term prospects. We ask every company to help its investors understand how it may be impacted by climate-related risk and opportunities, and how these factors are considered within their strategy in a manner consistent with the company’s business model and sector. Specifically, we ask companies to articulate how their business model is aligned to a scenario in which global warming is limited to well below 2°C, moving towards global net zero emissions by 2050.

In Stewardship, we understand that climate change can be very challenging for many companies, as they seek to drive long-term value by mitigating risks and capturing opportunities. A growing number of companies, financial institutions, as well as governments, have committed to advancing net zero. There is growing consensus that companies can benefit from the more favorable macro-economic environment under an orderly, timely and just transition to net zero.⁴ Many companies are asking what their role should be in contributing to a just transition – in ensuring a reliable energy supply and protecting the most vulnerable from energy price shocks and economic dislocation. They are also seeking more clarity as to the public policy path that will help align greenhouse gas reduction actions with commitments.

In this context, we ask companies to disclose a business plan for how they intend to deliver long-term financial performance through the transition to global net zero, consistent with their business model and sector. We encourage companies to demonstrate that their plans are resilient under likely

³ The International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) Foundation announced in November 2021 the formation of an International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) to develop a comprehensive global baseline of high-quality sustainability disclosure standards to meet investors’ information needs. The IFRS Foundation plans to complete consolidation of the Climate Disclosure Standards Board (CDSB—an initiative of CDP) and the Value Reporting Foundation (VRF—which houses the Integrated Reporting Framework and the SASB Standards) by June 2022.

⁴ For example, BlackRock’s Capital Markets Assumptions anticipate 25 points of cumulative economic gains over a 20-year period in an orderly transition as compared to the alternative. This better macro environment will support better economic growth, financial stability, job growth, productivity, as well as ecosystem stability and health outcomes.

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Global Principles  |  12

decarbonization pathways, and the global aspiration to limit warming to 1.5°C.⁵ We also encourage companies to disclose how considerations related to having a reliable energy supply and just transition affect their plans.

We look to companies to set short-, medium- and long-term science-based targets, where available for their sector, for greenhouse gas reductions and to demonstrate how their targets are consistent with the long-term economic interests of their shareholders. Companies have an opportunity to use and contribute to the development of alternative energy sources and low-carbon transition technologies that will be essential to reaching net zero. We also recognize that some continued investment is required to maintain a reliable, affordable supply of fossil fuels during the transition. We ask companies to disclose how their capital allocation across alternatives, transition technologies, and fossil fuel production is consistent with their strategy and their emissions reduction targets.

Key stakeholder interests

We believe that, to advance long-term shareholders’ interests, companies should consider the interests of their key stakeholders. It is for each company to determine its key stakeholders based on what is material to its business, but they are likely to include employees, business partners (such as suppliers and distributors), clients and consumers, government, and the communities in which they operate.

Considering the interests of key stakeholders recognizes the collective nature of long-term value creation and the extent to which each company’s prospects for growth are tied to its ability to foster strong sustainable relationships with and support from those stakeholders. Companies should articulate how they address adverse impacts that could arise from their business practices and affect critical business relationships with their stakeholders. We expect companies to implement, to the extent appropriate, monitoring processes (often referred to as due diligence) to identify and mitigate potential adverse impacts and grievance mechanisms to remediate any actual adverse material impacts. The maintenance of trust within these relationships can be equated with a company’s long-term success.

To ensure transparency and accountability, companies should disclose how they have identified their key stakeholders and considered their interests in business decision-making, demonstrating the applicable governance, strategy, risk management, and metrics and targets. This approach should be overseen by the board, which is well positioned to ensure that the approach taken is informed by and aligns with the company’s strategy and purpose.

General corporate governance matters and shareholder protections

BlackRock believes that shareholders have a right to material and timely information on the financial performance and viability of the companies in which they invest. In addition, companies should publish information on the governance structures in place and the rights of shareholders to influence these

⁵ The global aspiration is reflective of aggregated efforts; companies in developed and emerging markets are not equally equipped to transition their business and reduce emissions at the same rate—those in developed markets with the largest market capitalization are better positioned to adapt their business models at an accelerated pace. Government policy and regional targets may be reflective of these realities.

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Global Principles  |  13

structures. The reporting and disclosure provided by companies help shareholders assess whether their economic interests have been protected and the quality of the board’s oversight of management. We believe shareholders should have the right to vote on key corporate governance matters, including changes to governance mechanisms, to submit proposals to the shareholders’ meeting, and to call special meetings of shareholders.

Corporate Form

We believe it is the responsibility of the board to determine the corporate form that is most appropriate given the company’s purpose and business model.⁶ Companies proposing to change their corporate form to a public benefit corporation or similar entity should put it to a shareholder vote if not already required to do so under applicable law. Supporting documentation from companies or shareholder proponents proposing to alter the corporate form should clearly articulate how the interests of shareholders and different stakeholders would be impacted as well as the accountability and voting mechanisms that would be available to shareholders. As a fiduciary on behalf of clients, we generally support management proposals if our analysis indicates that shareholders’ interests are adequately protected. Relevant shareholder proposals are evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

Shareholder proposals

In most markets in which BlackRock invests on behalf of clients, shareholders have the right to submit proposals to be voted on by shareholders at a company’s annual or extraordinary meeting, as long as eligibility and procedural requirements are met. The matters that we see put forward by shareholders address a wide range of topics, including governance reforms, capital management, and improvements in the management or disclosure of E&S risks.

BlackRock is subject to certain requirements under antitrust law in the United States that place restrictions and limitations on how BlackRock can interact with the companies in which we invest on behalf of our clients, including our ability to submit shareholder proposals. As noted above, we can vote on proposals put forth by others.

When assessing shareholder proposals, we evaluate each proposal on its merit, with a singular focus on its implications for long-term value creation. We consider the business and economic relevance of the issue raised, as well as its materiality and the urgency with which we believe it should be addressed. We take into consideration the legal effect of the proposal, as shareholder proposals may be advisory or legally binding depending on the jurisdiction. We would not support proposals that we believe would result in over-reaching into the basic business decisions of the issuer.

Where a proposal is focused on a material business risk that we agree needs to be addressed and the intended outcome is consistent with long-term value creation, we will look to the board and management to demonstrate that the company has met the intent of the request made in the shareholder proposal. Where our analysis and/or engagement indicate an opportunity for improvement in the company’s approach to the issue, we may support shareholder proposals that are reasonable and not unduly constraining on management. Alternatively, or in addition, we may vote against the re-election of one or

⁶ Corporate form refers to the legal structure by which a business is organized.

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Global Principles  |  14

more directors if, in our assessment, the board has not responded sufficiently or with an appropriate sense of urgency. We may also support a proposal if management is on track, but we believe that voting in favor might accelerate progress.

BlackRock’s oversight of its investment stewardship activities

Oversight

We hold ourselves to a very high standard in our investment stewardship activities, including proxy voting. To meet this standard, BIS is comprised of BlackRock employees who do not have other responsibilities other than their roles in BIS. BIS is considered an investment function.

BlackRock maintains three regional advisory committees (“Stewardship Advisory Committees”) for (a) the Americas; (b) Europe, the Middle East and Africa (“EMEA”); and (c) Asia-Pacific, generally consisting of senior BlackRock investment professionals and/or senior employees with practical boardroom experience. The regional Stewardship Advisory Committees review and advise on amendments to BIS proxy voting guidelines covering markets within each respective region (“Guidelines”). The advisory committees do not determine voting decisions, which are the responsibility of BIS.

In addition to the regional Stewardship Advisory Committees, the Investment Stewardship Global Oversight Committee (“Global Committee”) is a risk-focused committee, comprised of senior representatives from various BlackRock investment teams, a senior legal representative, the Global Head of Investment Stewardship (“Global Head”), and other senior executives with relevant experience and team oversight. The Global Oversight Committee does not determine voting decisions, which are the responsibility of BIS.    

The Global Head has primary oversight of the activities of BIS, including voting in accordance with the Guidelines, which require the application of professional judgment and consideration of each company’s unique circumstances. The Global Committee reviews and approves amendments to these Principles. The Global Committee also reviews and approves amendments to the regional Guidelines, as proposed by the regional Stewardship Advisory Committees.

In addition, the Global Committee receives and reviews periodic reports regarding the votes cast by BIS, as well as updates on material process issues, procedural changes, and other risk oversight considerations. The Global Committee reviews these reports in an oversight capacity as informed by the BIS corporate governance engagement program and the Guidelines.

BIS carries out engagement with companies, monitors and executes proxy votes, and conducts vote operations (including maintaining records of votes cast) in a manner consistent with the relevant Guidelines. BIS also conducts research on corporate governance issues and participates in industry discussions to contribute to and keep abreast of important developments in the corporate governance field. BIS may utilize third parties for certain of the foregoing activities and performs oversight of those third parties. BIS may raise complicated or particularly controversial matters for internal discussion with the relevant investment teams and governance specialists for discussion and guidance prior to making a voting decision.

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Global Principles  |  15

Vote execution

We carefully consider proxies submitted to funds and other fiduciary account(s) (“Fund” or “Funds”) for which we have voting authority. BlackRock votes (or refrains from voting) proxies for each Fund for which we have voting authority based on our evaluation of the best long-term economic interests of our clients as shareholders, in the exercise of our independent business judgment, and without regard to the relationship of the issuer of the proxy (or any shareholder proponent or dissident shareholder) to the Fund, the Fund’s affiliates (if any), BlackRock or BlackRock’s affiliates, or BlackRock employees (see “Conflicts management policies and procedures”, below).

When exercising voting rights, BlackRock will normally vote on specific proxy issues in accordance with the Guidelines for the relevant market. The Guidelines are reviewed annually and are amended consistent with changes in the local market practice, as developments in corporate governance occur, or as otherwise deemed advisable by the applicable Stewardship Advisory Committees. BIS analysts may, in the exercise of their professional judgment, conclude that the Guidelines do not cover the specific matter upon which a proxy vote is required or that an exception to the Guidelines would be in the best long-term economic interests of BlackRock’s clients.

In the uncommon circumstance of there being a vote with respect to fixed income securities or the securities of privately held issuers, the decision generally will be made by a Fund’s portfolio managers and/or BIS based on their assessment of the particular transactions or other matters at issue.

In certain markets, proxy voting involves logistical issues which can affect BlackRock’s ability to vote such proxies, as well as the desirability of voting such proxies. These issues include, but are not limited to: (i) untimely notice of shareholder meetings; (ii) restrictions on a foreigner’s ability to exercise votes; (iii) requirements to vote proxies in person; (iv) “share-blocking” (requirements that investors who exercise their voting rights surrender the right to dispose of their holdings for some specified period in proximity to the shareholder meeting); (v) potential difficulties in translating the proxy; (vi) regulatory constraints; and (vii) requirements to provide local agents with unrestricted powers of attorney to facilitate voting instructions. We are not supportive of impediments to the exercise of voting rights such as share-blocking or overly burdensome administrative requirements.

As a consequence, BlackRock votes proxies in these situations on a “best-efforts” basis. In addition, BIS may determine that it is generally in the best interests of BlackRock’s clients not to vote proxies (or not to vote our full allocation) if the costs (including but not limited to opportunity costs associated with share-blocking constraints) associated with exercising a vote are expected to outweigh the benefit the client would derive by voting on the proposal.

Portfolio managers have full discretion to vote the shares in the Funds they manage based on their analysis of the economic impact of a particular ballot item on their investors. Portfolio managers may, from time to time, reach differing views on how best to maximize economic value with respect to a particular investment. Therefore, portfolio managers may, and sometimes do, vote shares in the Funds under their management differently from BIS or from one another. However, because BlackRock’s clients are mostly long-term investors with long-term economic goals, ballots are frequently cast in a uniform manner.    

Conflicts management policies and procedures

BIS maintains policies and procedures that seek to prevent undue influence on BlackRock’s proxy voting activity. Such influence might stem from any relationship between the investee company (or any

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Global Principles  |  16

shareholder proponent or dissident shareholder) and BlackRock, BlackRock’s affiliates, a Fund or a Fund’s affiliates, or BlackRock employees. The following are examples of sources of perceived or potential conflicts of interest:

• BlackRock clients who may be issuers of securities or proponents of shareholder resolutions

• BlackRock business partners or third parties who may be issuers of securities or proponents of shareholder resolutions

• BlackRock employees who may sit on the boards of public companies held in Funds managed by BlackRock

• Significant BlackRock, Inc. investors who may be issuers of securities held in Funds managed by BlackRock

• Securities of BlackRock, Inc. or BlackRock investment funds held in Funds managed by BlackRock

• BlackRock, Inc. board members who serve as senior executives or directors of public companies held in Funds managed by BlackRock

BlackRock has taken certain steps to mitigate perceived or potential conflicts including, but not limited to, the following:

• Adopted the Guidelines which are designed to advance our clients’ interests in the companies in which BlackRock invests on their behalf.

• Established a reporting structure that separates BIS from employees with sales, vendor management, or business partnership roles. In addition, BlackRock seeks to ensure that all engagements with corporate issuers, dissident shareholders or shareholder proponents are managed consistently and without regard to BlackRock’s relationship with such parties. Clients or business partners are not given special treatment or differentiated access to BIS. BIS prioritizes engagements based on factors including, but not limited to, our need for additional information to make a voting decision or our view on the likelihood that an engagement could lead to positive outcome(s) over time for the economic value of the company. Within the normal course of business, BIS may engage directly with BlackRock clients, business partners and/or third parties, and/or with employees with sales, vendor management, or business partnership roles, in discussions regarding our approach to stewardship, general corporate governance matters, client reporting needs, and/or to otherwise ensure that proxy-related client service levels are met.

• Determined to engage, in certain instances, an independent fiduciary to vote proxies as a further safeguard to avoid potential conflicts of interest, to satisfy regulatory compliance requirements, or as may be otherwise required by applicable law. In such circumstances, the independent fiduciary provides BlackRock’s proxy voting agent with instructions, in accordance with the Guidelines, as to how to vote such proxies, and BlackRock’s proxy voting agent votes the proxy in accordance with the independent fiduciary’s determination. BlackRock uses an independent fiduciary to vote proxies of BlackRock, Inc. and companies affiliated with BlackRock, Inc. BlackRock may also use an independent fiduciary to vote proxies of:

o public companies that include BlackRock employees on their boards of directors,

o public companies of which a BlackRock, Inc. board member serves as a senior executive or a member of the board of directors,

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Global Principles  |  17

o public companies that are the subject of certain transactions involving BlackRock Funds,

o public companies that are joint venture partners with BlackRock, and

o public companies when legal or regulatory requirements compel BlackRock to use an independent fiduciary.

In selecting an independent fiduciary, we assess several characteristics, including but not limited to: independence, an ability to analyze proxy issues and vote in the best economic interest of our clients, reputation for reliability and integrity, and operational capacity to accurately deliver the assigned votes in a timely manner. We may engage more than one independent fiduciary, in part to mitigate potential or perceived conflicts of interest at an independent fiduciary. The Global Committee appoints and reviews the performance of the independent fiduciaries, generally on an annual basis.

Securities lending

When so authorized, BlackRock acts as a securities lending agent on behalf of Funds. Securities lending is a well-regulated practice that contributes to capital market efficiency. It also enables funds to generate additional returns for a fund, while allowing fund providers to keep fund expenses lower.

With regard to the relationship between securities lending and proxy voting, BlackRock’s approach is informed by our fiduciary responsibility to act in our clients’ best interests. In most cases, BlackRock anticipates that the potential long-term value to the Fund of voting shares would be less than the potential revenue the loan may provide the Fund. However, in certain instances, BlackRock may determine, in its independent business judgment as a fiduciary, that the value of voting outweighs the securities lending revenue loss to clients and would therefore recall shares to be voted in those instances.

The decision to recall securities on loan as part of BlackRock’s securities lending program in order to vote is based on an evaluation of various factors that include, but are not limited to, assessing potential securities lending revenue alongside the potential long-term value to clients of voting those securities (based on the information available at the time of recall consideration).⁷ BIS works with colleagues in the Securities Lending and Risk and Quantitative Analysis teams to evaluate the costs and benefits to clients of recalling shares on loan.

Periodically, BlackRock reviews our process for determining whether to recall securities on loan in order to vote and may modify it as necessary.

⁷ Recalling securities on loan can be impacted by the timing of record dates. In the United States, for example, the record date of a shareholder meeting typically falls before the proxy statements are released. Accordingly, it is not practicable to evaluate a proxy statement, determine that a vote has a material impact on a fund and recall any shares on loan in advance of the record date for the annual meeting. As a result, managers must weigh independent business judgement as a fiduciary, the benefit to a fund’s shareholders of recalling loaned shares in advance of an estimated record date without knowing whether there will be a vote on matters which have a material impact on the fund (thereby forgoing potential securities lending revenue for the fund’s shareholders) or leaving shares on loan to potentially earn revenue for the fund (thereby forgoing the opportunity to vote).

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Global Principles  |  18

Voting guidelines

The issue-specific Guidelines published for each region/country in which we vote are intended to summarize BlackRock’s general philosophy and approach to issues that may commonly arise in the proxy voting context in each market where we invest. The Guidelines are not intended to be exhaustive. BIS applies the Guidelines on a case-by-case basis, in the context of the individual circumstances of each company and the specific issue under review. As such, the Guidelines do not indicate how BIS will vote in every instance. Rather, they reflect our view about corporate governance issues generally, and provide insight into how we typically approach issues that commonly arise on corporate ballots.

Reporting and vote transparency

We are committed to transparency in the stewardship work we do on behalf of clients. We inform clients about our engagement and voting policies and activities through direct communication and through disclosure on our website. Each year we publish an annual report that provides a global overview of our investment stewardship engagement and voting activities. Additionally, we make public our market-specific voting guidelines for the benefit of clients and companies with whom we engage. We also publish commentaries to share our perspective on market developments and emerging key themes.

At a more granular level, we publish quarterly our vote record for each company that held a shareholder meeting during the period, showing how we voted on each proposal and explaining any votes against management proposals or on shareholder proposals. For shareholder meetings where a vote might be high profile or of significant interest to clients, we may publish a vote bulletin after the meeting, disclosing and explaining our vote on key proposals. We also publish a quarterly list of all companies with which we engaged and the key topics addressed in the engagement meeting.    

In this way, we help inform our clients about the work we do on their behalf in promoting the governance and business models that support long-term sustainable value creation.

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Global Principles  |  19

Want to know more?

blackrock.com/stewardship | contactstewardship@blackrock.com

This document is provided for information and educational purposes only. Investing involves risk, including the loss of principal.

Prepared by BlackRock, Inc.

©2022 BlackRock, Inc. All rights reserved. BLACKROCK is a trademark of BlackRock, Inc., or its subsidiaries in the United States and elsewhere. All other trademarks are those of their respective owners.

EX-99.US.CORP.GOV

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities Effective as of January 2022

Contents

Introduction	3
Voting guidelines	3
Boards and directors	3
Auditors and audit-related issues	11
Capital structure proposals	11
Mergers, acquisitions, asset sales, and other special transactions	12
Executive compensation	13
Environmental and social issues	16
General corporate governance matters	19
Shareholder protections	20

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities  |  2

These guidelines should be read in conjunction with the BlackRock Investment Stewardship Global Principles.

Introduction

We believe BlackRock has a responsibility to monitor and provide feedback to companies, in our role as stewards of our clients’ investments. BlackRock Investment Stewardship (“BIS”) does this through engagement with management teams and/or board members on material business issues, including environmental, social, and governance (“ESG”) matters and, for those clients who have given us authority, through voting proxies in the best long-term economic interests of their assets.

The following issue-specific proxy voting guidelines (the “Guidelines”) are intended to summarize BIS’ regional philosophy and approach to engagement and voting on ESG factors, as well as our expectations of directors, for U.S. securities. These Guidelines are not intended to limit the analysis of individual issues at specific companies or provide a guide to how BIS will engage and/or vote in every instance. They are applied with discretion, taking into consideration the range of issues and facts specific to the company, as well as individual ballot items at annual and special meetings.

Voting guidelines

These guidelines are divided into eight key themes, which group together the issues that frequently appear on the agenda of annual and extraordinary meetings of shareholders:

• Boards and directors

• Auditors and audit-related issues

• Capital structure

• Mergers, acquisitions, asset sales, and other special transactions

• Executive compensation

• Environmental and social issues

• General corporate governance matters

• Shareholder protections

Boards and directors

The effective performance of the board is critical to the economic success of the company and the protection of shareholders’ interests. As part of their responsibilities, board members owe fiduciary duties to shareholders in overseeing the strategic direction, operations, and risk management of the company. For this reason, BIS sees engagement with and the election of directors as one of our most critical responsibilities.

Disclosure of material issues that affect the company’s long-term strategy and value creation, including material ESG factors, is essential for shareholders to appropriately understand and assess how effectively the board is identifying, managing, and mitigating risks.

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities  |  3

Where we conclude that a board has failed to address or disclose one or more material issues within a specified timeframe, we may hold directors accountable or take other appropriate action in the context of our voting decisions.

Director elections

Where a board has not adequately demonstrated, through actions and company disclosures, how material issues are appropriately identified, managed, and overseen, we will consider voting against the re-election of those directors responsible for the oversight of such issues, as indicated below.

Independence

We expect a majority of the directors on the board to be independent. In addition, all members of key committees, including audit, compensation, and nominating/ governance committees, should be independent. Our view of independence may vary from listing standards.

Common impediments to independence may include:

• Employment as a senior executive by the company or a subsidiary within the past five years

• An equity ownership in the company in excess of 20%

• Having any other interest, business, or relationship (professional or personal) which could, or could reasonably be perceived to, materially interfere with the director’s ability to act in the best interests of the company

We may vote against directors serving on key committees who we do not consider to be independent, including at controlled companies.

Oversight

We expect the board to exercise appropriate oversight of management and the business activities of the company. Where we believe a board has failed to exercise sufficient oversight, we may vote against the responsible committees and/or individual directors. The following illustrates common circumstances:

• With regard to material ESG risk factors, or where the company has failed to provide shareholders with adequate disclosure to conclude appropriate strategic consideration is given to these factors by the board, we may vote against directors of the responsible committee, or the most relevant director

• With regard to accounting practices or audit oversight, e.g., where the board has failed to facilitate quality, independent auditing. If substantial accounting irregularities suggest insufficient oversight, we will consider voting against the current audit committee, and any other members of the board who may be responsible

• During a period in which executive compensation appears excessive relative to the performance of the company and compensation paid by peers, we may vote against the members of the compensation committee

• Where a company has proposed an equity compensation plan that is not aligned with shareholders’ interests, we may vote against the members of the compensation committee

• Where the board is not comprised of a majority of independent directors (this may not apply in the case of a controlled company), we may vote against the chair of the nominating/governance

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities  |  4

committee, or where no chair exists, the nominating/governance committee member with the longest tenure

• Where it appears the director has acted (at the company or at other companies) in a manner that compromises their ability to represent the best long-term economic interests of shareholders, we may vote against that individual

• Where a director has a multi-year pattern of poor attendance at combined board and applicable committee meetings, or a director has poor attendance in a single year with no disclosed rationale, we may vote against that individual. Excluding exigent circumstances, BIS generally considers attendance at less than 75% of the combined board and applicable committee meetings to be poor attendance

• Where a director serves on an excessive number of boards, which may limit their capacity to focus on each board’s needs, we may vote against that individual. The following identifies the maximum number of boards on which a director may serve, before BIS considers them to be over-committed:

	Public Company Executive		# Outside Public Boards1		Total # of Public Boards
Director A		✓		1		2
Director B2				3		4

Responsiveness to shareholders

We expect a board to be engaged and responsive to its shareholders, including acknowledging voting outcomes for director elections, compensation, shareholder proposals, and other ballot items. Where we believe a board has not substantially addressed shareholder concerns, we may vote against the responsible committees and/or individual directors. The following illustrates common circumstances:

• The independent chair or lead independent director, members of the nominating/governance committee, and/or the longest tenured director(s), where we observe a lack of board responsiveness to shareholders, evidence of board entrenchment, and/or failure to plan for adequate board member succession

• The chair of the nominating/governance committee, or where no chair exists, the nominating/governance committee member with the longest tenure, where board member(s) at the most recent election of directors have received against votes from more than 25% of shares voted, and the board has not taken appropriate action to respond to shareholder concerns. This may not apply in cases where BIS did not support the initial against vote

¹ In addition to the company under review.

² Including fund managers whose full-time employment involves responsibility for the investment and oversight of fund vehicles, and those who have employment as professional investors and provide oversight for those holdings.

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities  |  5

• The independent chair or lead independent director and/or members of the nominating/governance committee, where a board fails to consider shareholder proposals that receive substantial support, and the proposals, in our view, have a material impact on the business, shareholder rights, or the potential for long-term value creation

Shareholder rights

We expect a board to act with integrity and to uphold governance best practices. Where we believe a board has not acted in the best interests of its shareholders, we may vote against the appropriate committees and/or individual directors. The following illustrates common circumstances:

• The independent chair or lead independent director and members of the nominating/governance committee, where a board implements or renews a poison pill without shareholder approval

• The independent chair or lead independent director and members of the nominating/governance committee, where a board amends the charter/articles/bylaws and where the effect may be to entrench directors or to significantly reduce shareholder rights

• Members of the compensation committee where the company has repriced options without shareholder approval

If a board maintains a classified structure, it is possible that the director(s) with whom we have a particular concern may not be subject to election in the year that the concern arises. In such situations, if we have a concern regarding the actions of a committee and the responsible member(s), we will generally register our concern by voting against all available members of the relevant committee.

Board composition and effectiveness

We encourage boards to periodically refresh their membership to ensure relevant skills and experience within the boardroom. To this end, regular performance reviews and skills assessments should be conducted by the nominating/governance committee or the lead independent director. When nominating new directors to the board, we ask that there is sufficient information on the individual candidates so that shareholders can assess the suitability of each individual nominee and the overall board composition. Where boards find that age limits or term limits are the most efficient and objective mechanism for ensuring periodic board refreshment, we generally defer to the board’s determination in setting such limits. BIS will also consider the average board tenure to evaluate processes for board renewal. We may oppose boards that appear to have an insufficient mix of short-, medium-, and long-tenured directors.

Furthermore, we expect boards to be comprised of a diverse selection of individuals who bring their personal and professional experiences to bear in order to create a constructive debate of a variety of views and opinions in the boardroom. We are interested in diversity in the board room as a means to promoting diversity of thought and avoiding “group think”. We ask boards to disclose how diversity is considered in board composition, including demographic factors such as gender, race, ethnicity, and age; as well as professional characteristics, such as a director’s industry experience, specialist areas of expertise, and geographic location. We assess a board’s diversity in the context of a company’s domicile, business model, and strategy. We believe boards should aspire to 30% diversity of membership and encourage

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities  |  6

companies to have at least two directors on their board who identify as female and at least one who identifies as a member of an underrepresented group.³

We ask that boards disclose:

• The aspects of diversity that the company believes are relevant to its business and how the diversity characteristics of the board, in aggregate, are aligned with a company’s long-term strategy and business model

• The process by which candidates are identified and selected, including whether professional firms or other resources outside of incumbent directors’ networks have been engaged to identify and/or assess candidates, and whether a diverse slate of nominees is considered for all available board nominations

• The process by which boards evaluate themselves and any significant outcomes of the evaluation process, without divulging inappropriate and/or sensitive details

This position is based on our view that diversity of perspective and thought – in the boardroom, in the management team, and throughout the company – leads to better long-term economic outcomes for companies. Academic research already reveals correlations between specific dimensions of diversity and effects on decision-making processes and outcomes.⁴ In our experience, greater diversity in the boardroom contributes to more robust discussions and more innovative and resilient decisions. Over time, it can also promote greater diversity and resilience in the leadership team and workforce more broadly, enabling companies to develop businesses that more closely reflect and resonate with the customers and communities they serve.

To the extent that, based on our assessment of corporate disclosures, a company has not adequately accounted for diversity in its board composition within a reasonable timeframe, we may vote against members of the nominating/governance committee for an apparent lack of commitment to board effectiveness. We recognize that building high-quality, diverse boards can take time. We will look to the largest companies (e.g., S&P 500) for continued leadership. Our publicly available commentary provides more information on our approach to board diversity.

Board size

We typically defer to the board in setting the appropriate size and believe directors are generally in the best position to assess the optimal board size to ensure effectiveness. However, we may oppose boards that appear too small to allow for the necessary range of skills and experience or too large to function efficiently.

³ Including, but not limited to, individuals who identify as Black or African American, Hispanic or Latinx, Asian, Native American or Alaska Native, or Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander; individuals who identify as LGBTQ+; individuals who identify as underrepresented based on national, Indigenous, religious, or cultural identity; individuals with disabilities; and veterans.

⁴ For example, the role of gender diversity on team cohesion and participative communication is explored by Post, C., 2015, When is female leadership an advantage? Coordination requirements, team cohesion, and team interaction norms, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36, 1153-1175.

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities  |  7

CEO and management succession planning

There should be a robust CEO and senior management succession plan in place at the board level that is reviewed and updated on a regular basis. We expect succession planning to cover scenarios over both the long-term, consistent with the strategic direction of the company and identified leadership needs over time, as well as the short-term, in the event of an unanticipated executive departure. We encourage the company to explain its executive succession planning process, including where accountability lies within the boardroom for this task, without prematurely divulging sensitive information commonly associated with this exercise.

Classified board of directors/staggered terms

We believe that directors should be re-elected annually; classification of the board generally limits shareholders’ rights to regularly evaluate a board’s performance and select directors. While we will typically support proposals requesting board de-classification, we may make exceptions, should the board articulate an appropriate strategic rationale for a classified board structure. This may include when a company needs consistency and stability during a time of transition, e.g., newly public companies or companies undergoing a strategic restructuring. A classified board structure may also be justified at non-operating companies, e.g., closed-end funds or business development companies (“BDC”),⁵ in certain circumstances. We would, however, expect boards with a classified structure to periodically review the rationale for such structure and consider when annual elections might be more appropriate.

Without a voting mechanism to immediately address concerns about a specific director, we may choose to vote against the directors up for election at the time (see “Shareholder rights” for additional detail).

Contested director elections

The details of contested elections, or proxy contests, are assessed on a case-by-case basis. We evaluate a number of factors, which may include: the qualifications of the dissident and management candidates; the validity of the concerns identified by the dissident; the viability of both the dissident’s and management’s plans; the ownership stake and holding period of the dissident; the likelihood that the dissident’s solutions will produce the desired change; and whether the dissident represents the best option for enhancing long-term shareholder value.

Cumulative voting

We believe that a majority vote standard is in the best long-term interests of shareholders. It ensures director accountability through the requirement to be elected by more than half of the votes cast. As such, we will generally oppose proposals requesting the adoption of cumulative voting, which may disproportionately aggregate votes on certain issues or director candidates.

Director compensation and equity programs

We believe that compensation for directors should be structured to attract and retain directors, while also aligning their interests with those of shareholders. We believe director compensation packages that are

⁵A BDC is a special investment vehicle under the Investment Company Act of 1940 that is designed to facilitate capital formation for small and middle-market companies.

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities  |  8

based on the company’s long-term value creation and include some form of long-term equity compensation are more likely to meet this goal. In addition, we expect directors to build meaningful share ownership over time.

Majority vote requirements

BIS believes that directors should generally be elected by a majority of the shares voted and will normally support proposals seeking to introduce bylaws requiring a majority vote standard for director elections. Majority vote standards assist in ensuring that directors who are not broadly supported by shareholders are not elected to serve as their representatives. Some companies with a plurality voting standard have adopted a resignation policy for directors who do not receive support from at least a majority of votes cast. Where we believe that the company already has a sufficiently robust majority voting process in place, we may not support a shareholder proposal seeking an alternative mechanism.

We note that majority voting may not be appropriate in all circumstances, for example, in the context of a contested election, or for majority-controlled companies.

Risk oversight

Companies should have an established process for identifying, monitoring, and managing business and material ESG risks. Independent directors should have access to relevant management information and outside advice, as appropriate, to ensure they can properly oversee risk. We encourage companies to provide transparency around risk management, mitigation, and reporting to the board. We are particularly interested in understanding how risk oversight processes evolve in response to changes in corporate strategy and/or shifts in the business and related risk environment. Comprehensive disclosure provides investors with a sense of the company’s long-term risk management practices and, more broadly, the quality of the board’s oversight. In the absence of robust disclosures, we may reasonably conclude that companies are not adequately managing risk.

Separation of chair and CEO

We believe that independent leadership is important in the boardroom. There are two commonly accepted structures for independent board leadership: 1) an independent chair; or 2) a lead independent director when the roles of chair and CEO are combined.

In the absence of a significant governance concern, we defer to boards to designate the most appropriate leadership structure to ensure adequate balance and independence.⁶

In the event that the board chooses a combined chair/CEO model, we generally support the designation of a lead independent director if they have the power to: 1) provide formal input into board meeting agendas; 2) call meetings of the independent directors; and 3) preside at meetings of independent directors. Furthermore, while we anticipate that most directors will be elected annually, we believe an

⁶ To this end, we do not view shareholder proposals asking for the separation of chair and CEO to be a proxy for other concerns we may have at the company for which a vote against directors would be more appropriate. Rather, support for such a proposal might arise in the case of overarching and sustained governance concerns such as lack of independence or failure to oversee a material risk over consecutive years.

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities  |  9

element of continuity is important for this role to provide appropriate leadership balance to the chair/CEO.

The following table illustrates examples of responsibilities under each board leadership model:

	Combined Chair/CEO Model		Separate Chair Model
	Chair/CEO	Lead Independent Director	Chair
	Authority to call full meetings of the board of directors	Attends full meetings of the board of directors	Authority to call full meetings of the board of directors
Board Meetings		Authority to call meetings of independent directors
		Briefs CEO on issues arising from executive sessions
Agenda	Primary responsibility for shaping board agendas, consulting with the lead independent director	Collaborates with chair/CEO to set board agenda and board information	Primary responsibility for shaping board agendas, in conjunction with CEO
Board Communications	Communicates with all directors on key issues and concerns outside of full board meetings	Facilitates discussion among independent directors on key issues and concerns outside of full board meetings, including contributing to the oversight of CEO and management succession planning	Facilitates discussion among independent directors on key issues and concerns outside of full board meetings, including contributing to the oversight of CEO and management succession planning

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities  |  10

Auditors and audit-related issues

BIS recognizes the critical importance of financial statements to provide a complete and accurate portrayal of a company’s financial condition. Consistent with our approach to voting on directors, we seek to hold the audit committee of the board responsible for overseeing the management of the audit function at a company. We may vote against the audit committee members where the board has failed to facilitate quality, independent auditing. We look to public disclosures for insight into the scope of the audit committee responsibilities, including an overview of audit committee processes, issues on the audit committee agenda, and key decisions taken by the audit committee. We take particular note of cases involving significant financial restatements or material weakness disclosures, and we expect timely disclosure and remediation of accounting irregularities.

The integrity of financial statements depends on the auditor effectively fulfilling its role. To that end, we favor an independent auditor. In addition, to the extent that an auditor fails to reasonably identify and address issues that eventually lead to a significant financial restatement, or the audit firm has violated standards of practice, we may also vote against ratification.

From time to time, shareholder proposals may be presented to promote auditor independence or the rotation of audit firms. We may support these proposals when they are consistent with our views as described above.

Capital structure proposals

Equal voting rights

BIS believes that shareholders should be entitled to voting rights in proportion to their economic interests. We believe that companies that look to add or that already have dual or multiple class share structures should review these structures on a regular basis, or as company circumstances change. Companies with multiple share classes should receive shareholder approval of their capital structure on a periodic basis via a management proposal on the company’s proxy. The proposal should give unaffiliated shareholders the opportunity to affirm the current structure or establish mechanisms to end or phase out controlling structures at the appropriate time, while minimizing costs to shareholders.

Blank check preferred stock

We frequently oppose proposals requesting authorization of a class of preferred stock with unspecified voting, conversion, dividend distribution, and other rights (“blank check” preferred stock) because they may serve as a transfer of authority from shareholders to the board and as a possible entrenchment device. We generally view the board’s discretion to establish voting rights on a when-issued basis as a potential anti-takeover device, as it affords the board the ability to place a block of stock with an investor sympathetic to management, thereby foiling a takeover bid without a shareholder vote.

Nonetheless, we may support the proposal where the company:

• Appears to have a legitimate financing motive for requesting blank check authority

• Has committed publicly that blank check preferred shares will not be used for anti-takeover purposes

• Has a history of using blank check preferred stock for financings

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities  |  11

• Has blank check preferred stock previously outstanding such that an increase would not necessarily provide further anti-takeover protection but may provide greater financing flexibility

Increase in authorized common shares

BIS will evaluate requests to increase authorized shares on a case-by-case basis, in conjunction with industry-specific norms and potential dilution, as well as a company’s history with respect to the use of its common shares.

Increase or issuance of preferred stock

We generally support proposals to increase or issue preferred stock in cases where the company specifies the voting, dividend, conversion, and other rights of such stock and where the terms of the preferred stock appear reasonable.

Stock splits

We generally support stock splits that are not likely to negatively affect the ability to trade shares or the economic value of a share. We generally support reverse stock splits that are designed to avoid delisting or to facilitate trading in the stock, where the reverse split will not have a negative impact on share value (e.g., one class is reduced while others remain at pre-split levels). In the event of a proposal for a reverse split that would not proportionately reduce the company’s authorized stock, we apply the same analysis we would use for a proposal to increase authorized stock.

Mergers, acquisitions, asset sales, and other special transactions

In assessing mergers, acquisitions, asset sales, or other special transactions – including business combinations involving Special Purpose Acquisition Companies (“SPACs”) – BIS’ primary consideration is the long-term economic interests of our clients as shareholders. We expect boards proposing a transaction to clearly explain the economic and strategic rationale behind it. We will review a proposed transaction to determine the degree to which it enhances long-term shareholder value. While mergers, acquisitions, asset sales, business combinations, and other special transaction proposals vary widely in scope and substance, we closely examine certain salient features in our analyses, such as:

• The degree to which the proposed transaction represents a premium to the company’s trading price. We consider the share price over multiple time periods prior to the date of the merger announcement. We may consider comparable transaction analyses provided by the parties’ financial advisors and our own valuation assessments. For companies facing insolvency or bankruptcy, a premium may not apply

• There should be clear strategic, operational, and/or financial rationale for the combination

• Unanimous board approval and arm’s-length negotiations are preferred. We will consider whether the transaction involves a dissenting board or does not appear to be the result of an arm’s-length bidding process. We may also consider whether executive and/or board members’ financial interests appear likely to affect their ability to place shareholders’ interests before their own

• We prefer transaction proposals that include the fairness opinion of a reputable financial advisor assessing the value of the transaction to shareholders in comparison to recent similar transactions

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities  |  12

Poison pill plans

Where a poison pill is put to a shareholder vote by management, our policy is to examine these plans individually. Although we have historically opposed most plans, we may support plans that include a reasonable “qualifying offer clause.” Such clauses typically require shareholder ratification of the pill and stipulate a sunset provision whereby the pill expires unless it is renewed. These clauses also tend to specify that an all-cash bid for all shares that includes a fairness opinion and evidence of financing does not trigger the pill, but forces either a special meeting at which the offer is put to a shareholder vote or requires the board to seek the written consent of shareholders, where shareholders could rescind the pill at their discretion. We may also support a pill where it is the only effective method for protecting tax or other economic benefits that may be associated with limiting the ownership changes of individual shareholders.

We generally vote in favor of shareholder proposals to rescind poison pills.

Reimbursement of expense for successful shareholder campaigns

We generally do not support shareholder proposals seeking the reimbursement of proxy contest expenses, even in situations where we support the shareholder campaign. We believe that introducing the possibility of such reimbursement may incentivize disruptive and unnecessary shareholder campaigns.

Executive compensation

BIS expects a company’s board of directors to put in place a compensation structure that incentivizes and rewards executives appropriately and is aligned with shareholder interests, particularly the generation of sustainable long-term value.

We expect the compensation committee to carefully consider the specific circumstances of the company and the key individuals the board is focused on incentivizing. We encourage companies to ensure that their compensation plans incorporate appropriate and rigorous performance metrics consistent with corporate strategy and market practice. Performance-based compensation should include metrics that are relevant to the business and stated strategy or risk mitigation efforts. Goals, and the processes used to set these goals, should be clearly articulated and appropriately rigorous. We use third party research, in addition to our own analysis, to evaluate existing and proposed compensation structures. We hold members of the compensation committee, or equivalent board members, accountable for poor compensation practices or structures.

BIS believes that there should be a clear link between variable pay and company performance that drives value creation for our clients as shareholders. We are generally not supportive of one-off or special bonuses unrelated to company or individual performance. Where discretion has been used by the compensation committee, we expect disclosure relating to how and why the discretion was used and further, how the adjusted outcome is aligned with the interests of shareholders.

We acknowledge that the use of peer group evaluation by compensation committees can help calibrate competitive pay; however, we are concerned when the rationale for increases in total compensation is solely based on peer benchmarking, rather than absolute outperformance.

We support incentive plans that foster the sustainable achievement of results – both financial and non-financial, including ESG – consistent with the company’s strategic initiatives. The vesting and holding timeframes associated with incentive plans should facilitate a focus on long-term value creation. Compensation committees should guard against contractual arrangements that would entitle executives

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities  |  13

to material compensation for early termination of their contract. Finally, pension contributions and other deferred compensation arrangements should be reasonable in light of market practices. Our publicly available commentary provides more information on our approach to executive compensation.

“Say on Pay” advisory resolutions

In cases where there is a “Say on Pay” vote, BIS will respond to the proposal as informed by our evaluation of compensation practices at that particular company and in a manner that appropriately addresses the specific question posed to shareholders. Where we conclude that a company has failed to align pay with performance, we will vote against the management compensation proposal and relevant compensation committee members.

Frequency of “Say on Pay” advisory resolutions

BIS will generally support annual advisory votes on executive compensation. We believe shareholders should have the opportunity to express feedback on annual incentive programs and changes to long-term compensation before multiple cycles are issued.

Clawback proposals

We generally favor recoupment from any senior executive whose compensation was based on faulty financial reporting or deceptive business practices. We also favor recoupment from any senior executive whose behavior caused material financial harm to shareholders, material reputational risk to the company, or resulted in a criminal proceeding, even if such actions did not ultimately result in a material restatement of past results. This includes, but is not limited to, settlement agreements arising from such behavior and paid for directly by the company. We typically support shareholder proposals on these matters unless the company already has a robust clawback policy that sufficiently addresses our concerns.

Employee stock purchase plans

We believe employee stock purchase plans (“ESPP”) are an important part of a company’s overall human capital management strategy and can provide performance incentives to help align employees’ interests with those of shareholders. The most common form of ESPP qualifies for favorable tax treatment under Section 423 of the Internal Revenue Code. We will typically support qualified ESPP proposals.

Equity compensation plans

BIS supports equity plans that align the economic interests of directors, managers, and other employees with those of shareholders. We believe that boards should establish policies prohibiting the use of equity awards in a manner that could disrupt the intended alignment with shareholder interests (e.g., the use of stock as collateral for a loan; the use of stock in a margin account; the use of stock in hedging or derivative transactions). We may support shareholder proposals requesting the establishment of such policies.

Our evaluation of equity compensation plans is based on a company’s executive pay and performance relative to peers and whether the plan plays a significant role in a pay-for-performance disconnect. We generally oppose plans that contain “evergreen” provisions, which allow for the unlimited increase of shares reserved without requiring further shareholder approval after a reasonable time period. We also generally oppose plans that allow for repricing without shareholder approval. We may also oppose plans that provide for the acceleration of vesting of equity awards even in situations where an actual change of control may not occur. We encourage companies to structure their change of control provisions to require

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities  |  14

the termination of the covered employee before acceleration or special payments are triggered (commonly referred to as “double trigger” change of control provisions).

Golden parachutes

We generally view golden parachutes as encouragement to management to consider transactions that might be beneficial to shareholders. However, a large potential pay-out under a golden parachute arrangement also presents the risk of motivating a management team to support a sub-optimal sale price for a company.    

When determining whether to support or oppose an advisory vote on a golden parachute plan, BIS may consider several factors, including:

• Whether we believe that the triggering event is in the best interests of shareholders

• Whether management attempted to maximize shareholder value in the triggering event

• The percentage of total premium or transaction value that will be transferred to the management team, rather than shareholders, as a result of the golden parachute payment

• Whether excessively large excise tax gross-up payments are part of the pay-out

• Whether the pay package that serves as the basis for calculating the golden parachute payment was reasonable in light of performance and peers

• Whether the golden parachute payment will have the effect of rewarding a management team that has failed to effectively manage the company

It may be difficult to anticipate the results of a plan until after it has been triggered; as a result, BIS may vote against a golden parachute proposal even if the golden parachute plan under review was approved by shareholders when it was implemented.

We may support shareholder proposals requesting that implementation of such arrangements require shareholder approval.

Option exchanges

We believe that there may be legitimate instances where underwater options create an overhang on a company’s capital structure and a repricing or option exchange may be warranted. We will evaluate these instances on a case-by-case basis. BIS may support a request to reprice or exchange underwater options under the following circumstances:

• The company has experienced significant stock price decline as a result of macroeconomic trends, not individual company performance

• Directors and executive officers are excluded; the exchange is value neutral or value creative to shareholders; tax, accounting, and other technical considerations have been fully contemplated

• There is clear evidence that absent repricing, the company will suffer serious employee incentive or retention and recruiting problems

BIS may also support a request to exchange underwater options in other circumstances, if we determine that the exchange is in the best interests of shareholders.

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities  |  15

Supplemental executive retirement plans

BIS may support shareholder proposals requesting to put extraordinary benefits contained in supplemental executive retirement plans (“SERP”) to a shareholder vote unless the company’s executive pension plans do not contain excessive benefits beyond what is offered under employee-wide plans.

Environmental and social issues

We believe that well-managed companies deal effectively with material ESG factors relevant to their businesses. Governance is the core means by which boards can oversee the creation of sustainable long-term value. Appropriate risk oversight of environmental and social (“E&S”) considerations stems from this construct.

Robust disclosure is essential for investors to effectively gauge the impact of companies’ business practices and strategic planning related to E&S risks and opportunities. When a company’s reporting is inadequate, investors, including BlackRock, will increasingly conclude that the company is not appropriately managing risk. Given the increased understanding of material sustainability risks and opportunities, and the need for better information to assess them, BIS will advocate for continued improvement in companies’ reporting and will express concerns through our voting where disclosures or the business practices underlying them are inadequate.    

BIS encourages companies to disclose their approach to maintaining a sustainable business model. We believe that reporting aligned with the framework developed by the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (“TCFD”), supported by industry-specific metrics such as those identified by the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (“SASB”), can provide a comprehensive picture of a company’s sustainability approach and performance. While the TCFD framework was developed to support climate-related risk disclosure, the four pillars of the TCFD Governance, Strategy, Risk Management, and Metrics and Targets are a useful way for companies to disclose how they identify, assess, manage, and oversee a variety of sustainability-related risks and opportunities. SASB’s industry-specific guidance (as identified in its materiality map) is beneficial in helping companies identify key performance indicators (“KPIs”) across various dimensions of sustainability that are considered to be financially material and decision-useful within their industry. We recognize that some companies may report using different standards, which may be required by regulation, or one of a number of private standards. In such cases, we ask that companies highlight the metrics that are industry- or company-specific.

Accordingly, we ask companies to:

• Disclose the identification, assessment, management, and oversight of sustainability-related risks in accordance with the four pillars of TCFD

• Publish investor-relevant, industry-specific, material metrics and rigorous targets, aligned with SASB or comparable sustainability reporting standards

Companies should also disclose any supranational standards adopted, the industry initiatives in which they participate, any peer group benchmarking undertaken, and any assurance processes to help investors understand their approach to sustainable and responsible business conduct.

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities  |  16

Climate risk

BlackRock believes that climate change has become a defining factor in companies’ long-term prospects. We ask every company to help its investors understand how it may be impacted by climate-related risk and opportunities, and how these factors are considered within strategy in a manner consistent with the company’s business model and sector. Specifically, we ask companies to articulate how their business model is aligned to a scenario in which global warming is limited to well below 2°C, moving towards global net zero emissions by 2050.

BIS understands that climate change can be very challenging for many companies, as they seek to drive long-term value by mitigating risks and capturing opportunities. A growing number of companies, financial institutions, as well as governments, have committed to advancing net zero. There is growing consensus that companies can benefit from the more favorable macro-economic environment under an orderly, timely, and just transition to net zero.⁷ Many companies are asking what their role should be in contributing to a just transition – in ensuring a reliable energy supply and protecting the most vulnerable from energy price shocks and economic dislocation. They are also seeking more clarity as to the public policy path that will help align greenhouse gas reduction actions with commitments.

In this context, we ask companies to disclose a business plan for how they intend to deliver long-term financial performance through the transition to global net zero, consistent with their business model and sector. We encourage companies to demonstrate that their plans are resilient under likely decarbonization pathways, and the global aspiration to limit warming to 1.5°C.⁸ We also encourage companies to disclose how considerations related to having a reliable energy supply and just transition affect their plans.

We look to companies to set short-, medium-, and long-term science-based targets, where available for their sector, for greenhouse gas reductions and to demonstrate how their targets are consistent with the long-term economic interests of their shareholders. Companies have an opportunity to use and contribute to the development of alternative energy sources and low-carbon transition technologies that will be essential to reaching net zero. We also recognize that some continued investment is required to maintain a reliable, affordable supply of fossil fuels during the transition. We ask companies to disclose how their capital allocation across alternatives, transition technologies, and fossil fuel production is consistent with their strategy and their emissions reduction targets.

In determining how to vote, we will continue to assess whether a company’s disclosures are aligned with the TCFD and provide short-, medium-, and long-term reduction targets for Scope 1 and 2 emissions. We may signal concerns about a company’s plans or disclosures in our voting on director elections, particularly at companies facing material climate risks. We may support shareholder proposals that ask

⁷ For example, BlackRock’s Capital Markets Assumptions anticipate 25 points of cumulative economic gains over a 20-year period in an orderly transition as compared to the alternative. This better macro environment will support better economic growth, financial stability, job growth, productivity, as well as ecosystem stability and health outcomes.

⁸ The global aspiration is reflective of aggregated efforts; companies in developed and emerging markets are not equally equipped to transition their business and reduce emissions at the same rate—those in developed markets with the largest market capitalization are better positioned to adapt their business models at an accelerated pace. Government policy and regional targets may be reflective of these realities.

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities  |  17

companies to disclose climate plans aligned with our expectations. Our publicly available commentary provides more information on our approach to climate risk.

Key stakeholder interests

We believe that in order to deliver long-term value for shareholders, companies should also consider the interests of their key stakeholders. While stakeholder groups may vary across industries, they are likely to include employees; business partners (such as suppliers and distributors); clients and consumers; government and regulators; and the communities in which a company operates. Companies that build strong relationships with their key stakeholders are more likely to meet their own strategic objectives, while poor relationships may create adverse impacts that expose a company to legal, regulatory, operational, and reputational risks and jeopardize their social license to operate. We expect companies to effectively oversee and mitigate these risks with appropriate due diligence processes and board oversight. Our publicly available commentaries provide more information on our approach.

Human capital management

A company’s approach to human capital management (“HCM”) is a critical factor in fostering an inclusive, diverse, and engaged workforce, which contributes to business continuity, innovation, and long-term value creation. Consequently, we expect companies to demonstrate a robust approach to HCM and provide shareholders with disclosures to understand how their approach aligns with their stated strategy and business model.

We believe that clear and consistent disclosures on these matters are critical for investors to make an informed assessment of a company’s HCM practices. We expect companies to disclose the steps they are taking to advance diversity, equity, and inclusion; job categories and workforce demographics; and their responses to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s EEO-1 Survey. Where we believe a company’s disclosures or practices fall short relative to the market or peers, or we are unable to ascertain the board and management’s effectiveness in overseeing related risks and opportunities, we may vote against members of the appropriate committee or support relevant shareholder proposals. Our publicly available commentary provides more information on our approach to HCM.

Corporate political activities

Companies may engage in certain political activities, within legal and regulatory limits, in order to support public policy matters material to the companies’ long-term strategies. These activities can also create risks, including: the potential for allegations of corruption; certain reputational risks; and risks that arise from the complex legal, regulatory, and compliance considerations associated with corporate political spending and lobbying activity. Companies that engage in political activities should develop and maintain robust processes to guide these activities and mitigate risks, including board oversight.

When presented with shareholder proposals requesting increased disclosure on corporate political activities, BIS will evaluate publicly available information to consider how a company’s lobbying and political activities may impact the company. We will also evaluate whether there is general consistency between a company’s stated positions on policy matters material to its strategy and the material positions taken by significant industry groups of which it is a member. We may decide to support a shareholder proposal requesting additional disclosures if we identify a material inconsistency or feel that further transparency may clarify how the company’s political activities support its long-term strategy. Our publicly available commentary provides more information on our approach to corporate political activities.

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities  |  18

General corporate governance matters

Adjourn meeting to solicit additional votes

We generally support such proposals unless the agenda contains items that we judge to be detrimental to shareholders’ best long-term economic interests.

Bundled proposals

We believe that shareholders should have the opportunity to review substantial governance changes individually without having to accept bundled proposals. Where several measures are grouped into one proposal, BIS may reject certain positive changes when linked with proposals that generally contradict or impede the rights and economic interests of shareholders.

Exclusive forum provisions

BIS generally supports proposals to seek exclusive forum for certain shareholder litigation. In cases where a board unilaterally adopts exclusive forum provisions that we consider unfavorable to the interests of shareholders, we will vote against the independent chair or lead independent director and members of the nominating/governance committee.

Multi-jurisdictional companies

Where a company is listed on multiple exchanges or incorporated in a country different from its primary listing, we will seek to apply the most relevant market guideline(s) to our analysis of the company’s governance structure and specific proposals on the shareholder meeting agenda. In doing so, we typically consider the governance standards of the company’s primary listing, the market standards by which the company governs itself, and the market context of each specific proposal on the agenda. If the relevant standards are silent on the issue under consideration, we will use our professional judgment as to what voting outcome would best protect the long-term economic interests of investors. We expect companies to disclose the rationale for their selection of primary listing, country of incorporation, and choice of governance structures, particularly where there is conflict between relevant market governance practices.

Other business

We oppose voting on matters where we are not given the opportunity to review and understand those measures and carry out an appropriate level of shareholder oversight.

Reincorporation

Proposals to reincorporate from one state or country to another are most frequently motivated by considerations of anti-takeover protections, legal advantages, and/or cost savings. We will evaluate, on a case-by-case basis, the economic and strategic rationale behind the company’s proposal to reincorporate. In all instances, we will evaluate the changes to shareholder protections under the new charter/articles/bylaws to assess whether the move increases or decreases shareholder protections. Where we find that shareholder protections are diminished, we may support reincorporation if we determine that the overall benefits outweigh the diminished rights.

IPO governance

We expect boards to consider and disclose how the corporate governance structures adopted upon initial public offering (“IPO”) are in shareholders’ best long-term interests. We also expect boards to conduct a

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities  |  19

regular review of corporate governance and control structures, such that boards might evolve foundational corporate governance structures as company circumstances change, without undue costs and disruption to shareholders. In our letter on unequal voting structures, we articulate our view that “one vote for one share” is the preferred structure for publicly-traded companies. We also recognize the potential benefits of dual class shares to newly public companies as they establish themselves; however, we believe that these structures should have a specific and limited duration. We will generally engage new companies on topics such as classified boards and supermajority vote provisions to amend bylaws, as we believe that such arrangements may not be in the best interest of shareholders in the long-term.

We will typically apply a one-year grace period for the application of certain director-related guidelines (including, but not limited to, responsibilities on other public company boards and board composition concerns), during which we expect boards to take steps to bring corporate governance standards in line with our expectations.

Further, if a company qualifies as an emerging growth company (an “EGC”) under the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012 (the “JOBS Act”), we will give consideration to the NYSE and NASDAQ governance exemptions granted under the JOBS Act for the duration such a company is categorized as an EGC. We expect an EGC to have a totally independent audit committee by the first anniversary of its IPO, with our standard approach to voting on auditors and audit-related issues applicable in full for an EGC on the first anniversary of its IPO.

Corporate form

Proposals to change a corporation’s form, including those to convert to a public benefit corporation (“PBC”) structure, should clearly articulate how the interests of shareholders and different stakeholders would be augmented or adversely affected, as well as the accountability and voting mechanisms that would be available to shareholders. We generally support management proposals if our analysis indicates that shareholders’ interests are adequately protected. Corporate form shareholder proposals are evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

Shareholder protections

Amendment to charter/articles/bylaws

We believe that shareholders should have the right to vote on key corporate governance matters, including changes to governance mechanisms and amendments to the charter/articles/bylaws. We may vote against certain directors where changes to governing documents are not put to a shareholder vote within a reasonable period of time, particularly if those changes have the potential to impact shareholder rights (see “Director elections”). In cases where a board’s unilateral adoption of changes to the charter/articles/bylaws promotes cost and operational efficiency benefits for the company and its shareholders, we may support such action if it does not have a negative effect on shareholder rights or the company’s corporate governance structure.

When voting on a management or shareholder proposal to make changes to the charter/articles/bylaws, we will consider in part the company’s and/or proponent’s publicly stated rationale for the changes; the company’s governance profile and history; relevant jurisdictional laws; and situational or contextual circumstances which may have motivated the proposed changes, among other factors. We will typically support amendments to the charter/articles/bylaws where the benefits to shareholders outweigh the costs of failing to make such changes.

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities  |  20

Proxy access

We believe that long-term shareholders should have the opportunity, when necessary and under reasonable conditions, to nominate directors on the company’s proxy card.    

In our view, securing the right of shareholders to nominate directors without engaging in a control contest can enhance shareholders’ ability to meaningfully participate in the director election process, encourage board attention to shareholder interests, and provide shareholders an effective means of directing that attention where it is lacking. Proxy access mechanisms should provide shareholders with a reasonable opportunity to use this right without stipulating overly restrictive or onerous parameters for use, and also provide assurances that the mechanism will not be subject to abuse by short-term investors, investors without a substantial investment in the company, or investors seeking to take control of the board.    

In general, we support market-standardized proxy access proposals, which allow a shareholder (or group of up to 20 shareholders) holding three percent of a company’s outstanding shares for at least three years the right to nominate the greater of up to two directors or 20% of the board. Where a standardized proxy access provision exists, we will generally oppose shareholder proposals requesting outlier thresholds.

Right to act by written consent

In exceptional circumstances and with sufficiently broad support, shareholders should have the opportunity to raise issues of substantial importance without having to wait for management to schedule a meeting. We therefore believe that shareholders should have the right to solicit votes by written consent provided that: 1) there are reasonable requirements to initiate the consent solicitation process (in order to avoid the waste of corporate resources in addressing narrowly supported interests); and 2) shareholders receive a minimum of 50% of outstanding shares to effectuate the action by written consent. We may oppose shareholder proposals requesting the right to act by written consent in cases where the proposal is structured for the benefit of a dominant shareholder to the exclusion of others, or if the proposal is written to discourage the board from incorporating appropriate mechanisms to avoid the waste of corporate resources when establishing a right to act by written consent. Additionally, we may oppose shareholder proposals requesting the right to act by written consent if the company already provides a shareholder right to call a special meeting that we believe offers shareholders a reasonable opportunity to raise issues of substantial importance without having to wait for management to schedule a meeting.

Right to call a special meeting

In exceptional circumstances and with sufficiently broad support, shareholders should have the opportunity to raise issues of substantial importance without having to wait for management to schedule a meeting. Accordingly, shareholders should have the right to call a special meeting in cases where a reasonably high proportion of shareholders (typically a minimum of 15% but no higher than 25%) are required to agree to such a meeting before it is called. However, we may oppose this right in cases where the proposal is structured for the benefit of a dominant shareholder, or where a lower threshold may lead to an ineffective use of corporate resources. We generally believe that a right to act via written consent is not a sufficient alternative to the right to call a special meeting.

Simple majority voting

We generally favor a simple majority voting requirement to pass proposals. Therefore, we will support the reduction or the elimination of supermajority voting requirements to the extent that we determine shareholders’ ability to protect their economic interests is improved. Nonetheless, in situations where

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities  |  21

there is a substantial or dominant shareholder, supermajority voting may be protective of minority shareholder interests and we may support supermajority voting requirements in those situations.

Virtual meetings

Shareholders should have the opportunity to participate in the annual and special meetings for the companies in which they are invested, as these meetings facilitate an opportunity for shareholders to provide feedback and hear from the board and management. While these meetings have traditionally been conducted in-person, virtual meetings are an increasingly viable way for companies to utilize technology to facilitate shareholder accessibility, inclusiveness, and cost efficiencies. We expect shareholders to have a meaningful opportunity to participate in the meeting and interact with the board and management in these virtual settings; companies should facilitate open dialogue and allow shareholders to voice concerns and provide feedback without undue censorship. Relevant shareholder proposals are assessed on a case-by-case basis.

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities  |  22

Want to know more?

blackrock.com/stewardship | contactstewardship@blackrock.com

This document is provided for information and educational purposes only. Investing involves risk, including the loss of principal.

Prepared by BlackRock, Inc.

©2022 BlackRock, Inc. All rights reserved. BLACKROCK is a trademark of BlackRock, Inc., or its subsidiaries in the United States and elsewhere. All other trademarks are those of their respective owners.