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: 811-04119

T. Rowe Price High Yield Fund, Inc.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in charter)

100 East Pratt Street, Baltimore, MD 21202

(Address of principal executive offices)

David Oestreicher

100 East Pratt Street, Baltimore, MD 21202

(Name and address of agent for service)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (410) 345-2000

Date of fiscal year end: May 31

Date of reporting period: May 31, 2018

*Certain mutual fund accounts that are assessed an annual account service fee can also save money by switching to e-delivery.

Your fund’s fiscal year ended in May was marked by a broadly positive environment for most financial assets. Stocks outperformed bonds, and investors were also rewarded for taking a more aggressive stance in both of the broad asset classes—highly valued growth stocks outpaced value shares and higher-yielding, lower-quality bonds outperformed safer issues.

The synchronized global expansion, with all of the major economies growing in tandem, deserved part of the credit for the outperformance of risk assets. European economic growth remained on track as the Continent moved firmly beyond its banking crisis earlier in the decade. After notching its longest stretch of growth since the late 1980s, the Japanese economy contracted slightly in the first quarter, but most observers expect the dip to be temporary. Meanwhile, China beat elevated growth expectations even as the country’s leadership tightened environmental rules and clamped down on financial excesses.

The U.S. economy seemed to be shifting into higher gear as the period drew to a close, helped in part by fiscal stimulus from the tax cuts passed in December 2017. This proved a mixed blessing for investors, as corporate earnings were robust but long-term interest rates moved sharply higher. The yield on the benchmark 10-year Treasury note rose from around 2.40% at the start of December to almost 3% in late March, when Congress passed a spending bill that raised concerns about further increasing the federal deficit. In May, the 10-year yield briefly touched 3.12%—its highest level in seven years.

Long-term Treasury bonds performed particularly poorly as rates rose, while corporate bonds and riskier securities whose repayment depends more on healthy earnings held up somewhat better. The threat of higher rates also increased volatility in the stock market. This was particularly true in February, when a jump in wage inflation (which later proved temporary) sparked a sell-off on Wall Street and in global markets.

The prospects for faster growth in the U.S. reinforced expectations for tighter monetary policy relative to the rest of the world, which caused the gap to widen between interest rates in the U.S. and most other countries. The Federal Reserve raised official short-term interest rates three times over the past 12 months, while the Bank of Japan (BoJ) and the European Central Bank (ECB) kept rates near zero. The BoJ and ECB also continued buying long-term assets in their respective markets, keeping a lid on long-term interest rates. A notable exception was Italy, where bond yields spiked in response to worries that a new populist government might adopt less fiscally sound policies.

Relatively higher U.S. interest rates pulled in assets from other markets and contributed to a rise in the dollar relative to many other currencies in April and May, reversing a stretch of dollar weakness in 2017. The greenback’s strength could pose a problem for emerging markets by driving up import costs and making the repayment of dollar-denominated debt more difficult. Countries that are more exposed to those risks, such as Argentina and Turkey, experienced bigger downturns.

Investors clearly grew more cautious late in the period. Worries deepened in particular about a rising tide of protectionism as President Trump pivoted toward a populist trade agenda, announcing a series of new tariffs following the departures of some important free trade advocates from his administration. U.S. trading partners responded with tariffs of their own, and it remains unclear as of this writing how much further tensions will intensify. Indeed, U.S. markets fell sharply on May 31, the last day of your fund’s fiscal year, after the Trump administration announced that it would impose previously delayed aluminum and steel tariffs on Canada, Mexico, and the European Union.

The central question for investors now appears to be whether the global expansion and the related global bull market in risk assets has entered its later stages, ushering in higher interest rates and inflation, along with potentially lower profit margins. The answer is far from clear, but you can rest assured that your fund manager is drawing on the collaboration and insights of T. Rowe Price’s extensive team of worldwide investment professionals to navigate the complex currents of the global economy.

The U.S. High Yield Fund returned 2.31% in the 12 months ended May 31, 2018. The fund performed in line with its benchmark, The BofA Merrill Lynch US High Yield Constrained Index, and outperformed the Lipper peer group average. (Returns for Advisor and I Class shares varied slightly, reflecting their different fee structures. Past performance cannot guarantee future results.)

The fund benefited from its credit quality positioning versus the benchmark. We were significantly overweight in CCC securities and underweight BB rated securities during the 12-month period. Security selection was particularly good within B rated bond holdings. Selection within the BB credit tier was also strong, and our underweight to that segment contributed to relative results. Within the CCC tier, the best performers were lower-quality bonds, and our security selection was neutral to slightly negative due to our higher-quality bias. Although we posted good results from our overweight allocation to lower-quality bonds, we believe that it is late in the credit cycle, and we have maintained a somewhat conservative approach to security selection.

While we do not actively manage the fund’s duration—it is a credit-focused strategy—we benefited from our shorter-than-benchmark duration as rates rose throughout the year. (Duration is a measure of a bond’s interest rate sensitivity.) This duration difference versus the benchmark was almost entirely the result of credit selection in the BB and CCC segments.

The fund generated strong results from its roughly 7% allocation to bank (aka leveraged) loans. These are out-of-benchmark instruments but are usually offered by the same companies that issue high yield bonds. Leveraged loans posted solid gains during the past 12 months thanks to strong demand stemming from their floating rate feature, and their floating rate coupons trended higher with market short-term interest rates. While we can also invest in other out-of-benchmark areas, such as European high yield and emerging markets debt, we avoided non-U.S. holdings based on valuations. Both European high yield and emerging markets bonds underperformed the U.S. high yield market during our fiscal year.

The fund’s best relative performance contributors on an industry basis during the fiscal year were health care, basic industry, and retail. The health care segment is dominated by a handful of hospitals, and we benefited from good credit selection in the space. We owned Tenet Healthcare, which has made prudent diversifying acquisitions and operational improvements, and underweighted HCA, the largest hospital chain in the U.S., which performed poorly. (Please refer to the portfolio of investments for a complete list of holdings and the amount each represents in the portfolio.)

The industries that hurt our relative performance included energy, media, and financial services. The main culprit in the energy space was Jonah Energy, a natural gas producer in the Rockies region that suffered from pricing pressure due to an oversupply of natural gas in the Permian Basin and pipeline capacity constraints. In the media group, the significant underperformer was satellite television company Dish DBS, which sold off due to higher-than-anticipated video subscriber losses and the possibility that it would issue more debt.

Over the past 12 months, we attempted to maintain a yield premium of about 0.75 percentage points versus our benchmark. This reflects our credit tier positioning—overweighting CCC rated bonds and underweighting BB rated bonds. We continue to see limited risk-adjusted value opportunities in off-benchmark areas such as European high yield, emerging markets debt, and convertible bonds. While we would like to structurally employ more floating rate exposure in the fund, we maintained a somewhat modest allocation to leveraged loans because of our concerns about elevated valuations. It is important to note that while we were overweight to the CCC credit tier, our allocation was tilted heavily toward the higher-quality part of this tier as we continued to avoid the distressed segment.

Our sector weightings did not change drastically in the fiscal year, and we don’t expect them to change significantly in the next 12 months. We continued to underweight financial services because most of the high yield issuers in this segment rely heavily on wholesale (non-deposit) funding to finance their business models. We also remained underweight in technology as many of the companies that populate this sector are highly leveraged software companies. At 15%, energy is still the largest segment of the U.S. high yield market. Within energy, we remain cautious on the service side and neutral on the exploration and production side.

While we think that it is late in an extended credit cycle, with yields near historically low levels, we remain constructive on credit fundamentals and believe that there is a low probability of a significant increase in defaults over the next 12 months. As we examine the overall market, we see that the next significant level of high yield bond market maturities appear in the 2022 to 2023 time frame. The technical conditions for high yield bonds are strong as the market continues to shrink compared with leveraged loans. Most issuers are migrating to the loan market to exploit excessive demand caused by rising interest rate expectations. Furthermore, fixed income investors realize that a rising rate environment still favors leveraged loans and high yield bonds because they have the lowest duration within the overall global fixed income landscape.

Although we are generally constructive in our outlook for the year ahead, we should also highlight some of the risks on the horizon, the most pervasive being rising interest rates. This risk is particularly acute for the bank loan market. Many issuers have up to half of their capital structures financed with floating rate loans, but it is unclear how many have actually hedged the floating rate risk. The fear of higher inflation that is highlighted in the equity market is less of a concern in the high yield market—in fact, higher inflation is a good thing for borrowers that have locked in low-coupon, fixed rate debt.

The prospect of a stronger dollar and trade wars has minimal impact on the U.S. high yield bond market, which has less exposure to foreign revenue than the investment-grade corporate bond market. A further increase in the level of merger and acquisition activity could be both positive and negative for the high yield bond market; however, at this stage in the credit cycle we see it as more of a risk because an increasing amount of the merger activity employs significant financial leverage. The longer-term risk that we see on the horizon is that many of these companies will have to refinance their debt into a higher interest rate environment when large volumes of debt start to mature in 2022.

Combining the opportunities and risks suggests that our most important determinant for generating outperformance remains security selection.

The views expressed reflect the opinions of T. Rowe Price as of the date of this report and are subject to change based on changes in market, economic, or other conditions. These views are not intended to be a forecast of future events and are no guarantee of future results.

Bonds are subject to interest rate risk, the decline in bond prices that usually accompanies a rise in interest rates, and credit risk, the chance that any fund holding could have its credit rating downgraded or that a bond issuer will default (fail to make timely payments of interest or principal), potentially reducing the fund’s income level and share price. High yield corporate bonds could have greater price declines than funds that invest primarily in high-quality bonds. Companies issuing high yield bonds are not as strong financially as those with higher credit ratings, so the bonds are usually considered to be speculative investments. Bank loans may at times become difficult to value and highly illiquid; they are subject to credit risk, such as nonpayment of principal or interest, and risks of bankruptcy and insolvency.

Investing in the securities of non-U.S. issuers involves special risks not typically associated with investing in U.S. issuers. Foreign securities tend to be more volatile and less liquid than investments in U.S. securities and may lose value because of adverse local, political, social, or economic developments overseas or due to changes in the exchange rates between foreign currencies and the U.S. dollar. In addition, foreign investments are subject to settlement practices and regulatory and financial reporting standards that differ from those of the U.S. These risks are heightened for the fund’s investments in emerging markets, which are more susceptible to governmental interference, less efficient trading markets, and the imposition of local taxes or restrictions on gaining access to sales proceeds for foreign investors.

This chart shows the value of a hypothetical $10,000 investment in the fund over the past 10 fiscal year periods or since inception (for funds lacking 10-year records). The result is compared with benchmarks, which includes a broad-based market index and may also include a peer group average or index. Market indexes do not include expenses, which are deducted from fund returns as well as mutual fund averages and indexes.

As a mutual fund shareholder, you may incur two types of costs: (1) transaction costs, such as redemption fees or sales loads, and (2) ongoing costs, including management fees, distribution and service (12b-1) fees, and other fund expenses. The following example is intended to help you understand your ongoing costs (in dollars) of investing in the fund and to compare these costs with the ongoing costs of investing in other mutual funds. The example is based on an investment of $1,000 invested at the beginning of the most recent six-month period and held for the entire period.

Please note that the fund has three share classes: The original share class (Investor Class) charges no distribution and service (12b-1) fee, the Advisor Class shares are offered only through unaffiliated brokers and other financial intermediaries and charge a 0.25% 12b-1 fee, and I Class shares are available to institutionally oriented clients and impose no 12b-1 or administrative fee payment. Each share class is presented separately in the table.

Actual Expenses
The first line of the following table (Actual) provides information about actual account values and expenses based on the fund’s actual returns. You may use the information on this line, together with your account balance, to estimate the expenses that you paid over the period. Simply divide your account value by $1,000 (for example, an $8,600 account value divided by $1,000 = 8.6), then multiply the result by the number on the first line under the heading “Expenses Paid During Period” to estimate the expenses you paid on your account during this period.

Hypothetical Example for Comparison Purposes
The information on the second line of the table (Hypothetical) is based on hypothetical account values and expenses derived from the fund’s actual expense ratio and an assumed 5% per year rate of return before expenses (not the fund’s actual return). You may compare the ongoing costs of investing in the fund with other funds by contrasting this 5% hypothetical example and the 5% hypothetical examples that appear in the shareholder reports of the other funds. The hypothetical account values and expenses may not be used to estimate the actual ending account balance or expenses you paid for the period.

Note: T. Rowe Price charges an annual account service fee of $20, generally for accounts with less than $10,000. The fee is waived for any investor whose T. Rowe Price mutual fund accounts total $50,000 or more; accounts electing to receive electronic delivery of account statements, transaction confirmations, prospectuses, and shareholder reports; or accounts of an investor who is a T. Rowe Price Personal Services or Enhanced Personal Services client (enrollment in these programs generally requires T. Rowe Price assets of at least $250,000). This fee is not included in the accompanying table. If you are subject to the fee, keep it in mind when you are estimating the ongoing expenses of investing in the fund and when comparing the expenses of this fund with other funds.

You should also be aware that the expenses shown in the table highlight only your ongoing costs and do not reflect any transaction costs, such as redemption fees or sales loads. Therefore, the second line of the table is useful in comparing ongoing costs only and will not help you determine the relative total costs of owning different funds. To the extent a fund charges transaction costs, however, the total cost of owning that fund is higher.

T. Rowe Price High Yield Fund, Inc. (the corporation) is registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the 1940 Act). The U.S. High Yield Fund (the fund) is a diversified, open-end management investment company established by the corporation. The fund incepted on May 19, 2017. The fund seeks total return, and secondarily, current income. The fund has three classes of shares: the U.S. High Yield Fund (Investor Class), the U.S. High Yield Fund–Advisor Class (Advisor Class), and the U.S. High Yield Fund–I Class (I Class). Advisor Class shares are sold only through unaffiliated brokers and other unaffiliated financial intermediaries. I Class shares generally are available only to investors meeting a $1,000,000 minimum investment or certain other criteria. The Advisor Class operates under a Board-approved Rule 12b-1 plan pursuant to which the class compensates financial intermediaries for distribution, shareholder servicing, and/or certain administrative services; the Investor and I Classes do not pay Rule 12b-1 fees. Each class has exclusive voting rights on matters related solely to that class; separate voting rights on matters that relate to all classes; and, in all other respects, the same rights and obligations as the other classes.

On May 22, 2017 (the Reorganization Date), the fund, a newly organized series with no investment operations prior to the Reorganization Date, acquired all of the assets of the Henderson High Yield Opportunities Fund (the Predecessor Fund) in exchange for shares of the fund and assumption by the fund of substantially all of the Predecessor Fund’s liabilities. The exchange was accomplished as a tax-free reorganization (the Reorganization) in accordance with the Amended Agreement and Plan of Reorganization (the Reorganization Agreement), which was approved by the shareholders of the Predecessor Fund on May 15, 2017. Under the Reorganization, all outstanding shares of the Predecessor Fund were exchanged for shares of the fund. The exchange was based on values of the Predecessor Fund as of the close of business on the immediately preceding business day, May 19, 2017 (the Valuation Date). The fund has substantially similar investment objectives, principal investment strategies, and risks as the Predecessor Fund, and the portfolio management team of the Predecessor Fund has transitioned to the fund.

On May 22, 2017, Price Associates made a voluntary payment to the fund of $207,710 (the payment) to fully reimburse the fund for the effect of differences in valuation techniques between the fund and the Predecessor Fund. The payment from Price Associates was received in cash on May 23, 2017. The payment increased total return for the period ended May 31, 2017, by 0.33%, 0.40%, and 0.41% for the Investor Class, Advisor Class, and I Class, respectively.

The fund is the surviving legal entity, but has adopted the performance and financial history of the Predecessor Fund, which is included in these financial statements. Class A and Class I of the Predecessor Fund became the Advisor Class and I Class, respectively, of the fund. In addition, Class C shareholders of the Predecessor Fund received Advisor Class shares of the fund and Class R6 shareholders of the Predecessor Fund received I Class shares of the fund. After inclusion of the payment from Price Associates, the value of shares received was equal in value to the shares of the respective class of the Predecessor Fund on the Valuation Date.

The following is a summary of the shares issued to Class C and Class R6 of the Predecessor Fund in the Reorganization:

Basis of Preparation The fund is an investment company and follows accounting and reporting guidance in the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Accounting Standards Codification Topic 946 (ASC 946). The accompanying financial statements were prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAP), including, but not limited to, ASC 946. GAAP requires the use of estimates made by management. Management believes that estimates and valuations are appropriate; however, actual results may differ from those estimates, and the valuations reflected in the accompanying financial statements may differ from the value ultimately realized upon sale or maturity. A short-period annual report for the 10-month period from August 1, 2016 through May 31, 2017 is presented, reflecting the change from the Predecessor Fund’s fiscal year-end of July 31 to the fund’s fiscal year of May 31.

Investment Transactions, Investment Income, and Distributions Investment transactions are accounted for on the trade date basis. Income and expenses are recorded on the accrual basis. Realized gains and losses are reported on the identified cost basis. Premiums and discounts on debt securities are amortized for financial reporting purposes. Dividends received from mutual fund investments are reflected as dividend income; capital gain distributions are reflected as realized gain/loss. Dividend income and capital gain distributions are recorded on the ex-dividend date.

Income tax-related interest and penalties, if incurred, are recorded as income tax expense. Income distributions are declared by each class daily and paid monthly. Prior to the Reorganization, income distributions of the Predecessor Fund were declared and paid monthly. Distributions to shareholders are recorded on the ex-dividend date. A capital gain distribution may also be declared and paid by the fund annually.

Class Accounting Shareholder servicing, prospectus, and shareholder report expenses incurred by each class are charged directly to the class to which they relate. Expenses common to all classes and investment income are allocated to the classes based upon the relative daily net assets of each class’s settled shares; realized and unrealized gains and losses are allocated based upon the relative daily net assets of each class’s outstanding shares. To the extent any expenses are waived or reimbursed in accordance with an expense limitation (see Note 5), the waiver or reimbursement is charged to the applicable class or allocated across the classes in the same manner as the related expense. The Advisor Class pays Rule 12b-1 fees, in an amount not exceeding 0.25% of the class’s average daily net assets.

Redemption Fees A 2% fee is assessed on redemptions of fund shares held for 90 days or less to deter short-term trading and to protect the interests of long-term shareholders. However, all shares of the fund received in connection with the Reorganization will not be subject to the redemption fee. Any fund shares purchased after the Reorganization and any shares exchanged from the fund to another fund that charges a redemption fee will be subject to the redemption fee, if applicable, upon redemption. Redemption fees are withheld from proceeds that shareholders receive from the sale or exchange of fund shares. The fees are paid to the fund and are recorded as an increase to paid-in capital. The fees may cause the redemption price per share to differ from the net asset value per share.

New Accounting Guidance In March 2017, the FASB issued amended guidance to shorten the amortization period for certain callable debt securities held at a premium. The guidance is effective for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2018. Adoption will have no effect on the fund’s net assets or results of operations.

On August 1, 2017, the fund implemented amendments to Regulation S-X, issued by the Securities and Exchange Commission, which require standardized, enhanced disclosures, particularly related to derivatives, in investment company financial statements. Adoption had no effect on the fund’s net assets or results of operations.

Indemnification In the normal course of business, the fund may provide indemnification in connection with its officers and directors, service providers, and/or private company investments. The fund’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown; however, the risk of material loss is currently considered to be remote.

The fund’s financial instruments are valued and each class’s net asset value (NAV) per share is computed at the close of the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE), normally 4 p.m. ET, each day the NYSE is open for business. However, the NAV per share may be calculated at a time other than the normal close of the NYSE if trading on the NYSE is restricted, if the NYSE closes earlier, or as may be permitted by the SEC.

Fair Value The fund’s financial instruments are reported at fair value, which GAAP defines as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. The T. Rowe Price Valuation Committee (the Valuation Committee) is an internal committee that has been delegated certain responsibilities by the fund’s Board of Directors (the Board) to ensure that financial instruments are appropriately priced at fair value in accordance with GAAP and the 1940 Act. Subject to oversight by the Board, the Valuation Committee develops and oversees pricing-related policies and procedures and approves all fair value determinations. Specifically, the Valuation Committee establishes procedures to value securities; determines pricing techniques, sources, and persons eligible to effect fair value pricing actions; oversees the selection, services, and performance of pricing vendors; oversees valuation-related business continuity practices; and provides guidance on internal controls and valuation-related matters. The Valuation Committee reports to the Board and has representation from legal, portfolio management and trading, operations, risk management, and the fund’s treasurer.

Various valuation techniques and inputs are used to determine the fair value of financial instruments. GAAP establishes the following fair value hierarchy that categorizes the inputs used to measure fair value:

Level 1 – quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical financial instruments that the fund can access at the reporting date

Level 2 – inputs other than Level 1 quoted prices that are observable, either directly or indirectly (including, but not limited to, quoted prices for similar financial instruments in active markets, quoted prices for identical or similar financial instruments in inactive markets, interest rates and yield curves, implied volatilities, and credit spreads)

Observable inputs are developed using market data, such as publicly available information about actual events or transactions, and reflect the assumptions that market participants would use to price the financial instrument. Unobservable inputs are those for which market data are not available and are developed using the best information available about the assumptions that market participants would use to price the financial instrument. GAAP requires valuation techniques to maximize the use of relevant observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs. When multiple inputs are used to derive fair value, the financial instrument is assigned to the level within the fair value hierarchy based on the lowest-level input that is significant to the fair value of the financial instrument. Input levels are not necessarily an indication of the risk or liquidity associated with financial instruments at that level but rather the degree of judgment used in determining those values.

Valuation Techniques Debt securities generally are traded in the over-the-counter (OTC) market and are valued at prices furnished by dealers who make markets in such securities or by an independent pricing service, which considers the yield or price of bonds of comparable quality, coupon, maturity, and type, as well as prices quoted by dealers who make markets in such securities. Generally, debt securities are categorized in Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy; however, to the extent the valuations include significant unobservable inputs, the securities would be categorized in Level 3.

Investments in mutual funds are valued at the mutual fund’s closing NAV per share on the day of valuation and are categorized in Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy. Assets and liabilities other than financial instruments, including short-term receivables and payables, are carried at cost, or estimated realizable value, if less, which approximates fair value.

Thinly traded financial instruments and those for which the above valuation procedures are inappropriate or are deemed not to reflect fair value are stated at fair value as determined in good faith by the Valuation Committee. The objective of any fair value pricing determination is to arrive at a price that could reasonably be expected from a current sale. Financial instruments fair valued by the Valuation Committee are primarily private placements, restricted securities, warrants, rights, and other securities that are not publicly traded.

Subject to oversight by the Board, the Valuation Committee regularly makes good faith judgments to establish and adjust the fair valuations of certain securities as events occur and circumstances warrant. For instance, in determining the fair value of troubled or thinly traded debt instruments, the Valuation Committee considers a variety of factors, which may include, but are not limited to, the issuer’s business prospects, its financial standing and performance, recent investment transactions in the issuer, strategic events affecting the company, market liquidity for the issuer, and general economic conditions and events. In consultation with the investment and pricing teams, the Valuation Committee will determine an appropriate valuation technique based on available information, which may include both observable and unobservable inputs. The Valuation Committee typically will afford greatest weight to actual prices in arm’s length transactions, to the extent they represent orderly transactions between market participants; transaction information can be reliably obtained, and prices are deemed representative of fair value. However, the Valuation Committee may also consider other valuation methods such as a discount or premium from market value of a similar, freely traded security of the same issuer; discounted cash flows; yield to maturity; or some combination. Fair value determinations are reviewed on a regular basis and updated as information becomes available, including actual purchase and sale transactions of the issue. Because any fair value determination involves a significant amount of judgment, there is a degree of subjectivity inherent in such pricing decisions, and fair value prices determined by the Valuation Committee could differ from those of other market participants. Depending on the relative significance of unobservable inputs, including the valuation technique(s) used, fair valued securities may be categorized in Level 2 or 3 of the fair value hierarchy.

Valuation Inputs The following table summarizes the fund’s financial instruments, based on the inputs used to determine their fair values on May 31, 2018 (for further detail by category, please refer to the accompanying Portfolio of Investments):

There were no material transfers between Levels 1 and 2 during the year ended May 31, 2018.

Consistent with its investment objective, the fund engages in the following practices to manage exposure to certain risks and/or to enhance performance. The investment objective, policies, program, and risk factors of the fund are described more fully in the fund’s prospectus and Statement of Additional Information.

Noninvestment-Grade Debt At May 31, 2018, approximately 76% of the fund’s net assets were invested, either directly or through its investment in T. Rowe Price institutional funds, in noninvestment-grade debt, including “high yield” or “junk” bonds or leveraged loans. The noninvestment-grade debt market may experience sudden and sharp price swings due to a variety of factors, including changes in economic forecasts, stock market activity, large sustained sales by major investors, a high-profile default, or a change in market sentiment. These events may decrease the ability of issuers to make principal and interest payments and adversely affect the liquidity or value, or both, of such securities. Investments in noninvestment-grade holdings may be considered speculative.

Restricted Securities The fund may invest in securities that are subject to legal or contractual restrictions on resale. Prompt sale of such securities at an acceptable price may be difficult and may involve substantial delays and additional costs.

Bank Loans The fund may invest in bank loans, which represent an interest in amounts owed by a borrower to a syndicate of lenders. Bank loans are generally noninvestment grade and often involve borrowers whose financial condition is highly leveraged. Bank loans may be in the form of either assignments or participations. A loan assignment transfers all legal, beneficial, and economic rights to the buyer, and transfer typically requires consent of both the borrower and agent. In contrast, a loan participation generally entitles the buyer to receive the cash flows from principal, interest, and any fee payments on a portion of a loan; however, the seller continues to hold legal title to that portion of the loan. As a result, the buyer of a loan participation generally has no direct recourse against the borrower and is exposed to credit risk of both the borrower and seller of the participation. Bank loans often have extended settlement periods, generally may be repaid at any time at the option of the borrower, and may require additional principal to be funded at the borrowers’ discretion at a later date (e.g. unfunded commitments and revolving debt instruments). Until settlement, the fund maintains liquid assets sufficient to settle its unfunded loan commitments. The fund reflects both the funded portion of a bank loan as well as its unfunded commitment in the Portfolio of Investments. However, if a credit agreement provides no initial funding of a tranche and funding of the full commitment at a future date(s) is at the borrower’s discretion and considered uncertain, a loan is reflected in the Portfolio of Investments only if, and only to the extent that, the fund has actually settled a funding commitment.

Other Purchases and sales of portfolio securities other than short-term securities aggregated $274,875,000 and $202,965,000, respectively, for the year ended May 31, 2018.

No provision for federal income taxes is required since the fund intends to continue to qualify as a regulated investment company under Subchapter M of the Internal Revenue Code and distribute to shareholders all of its taxable income and gains. Distributions determined in accordance with federal income tax regulations may differ in amount or character from net investment income and realized gains for financial reporting purposes. Financial reporting records are adjusted for permanent book/tax differences to reflect tax character but are not adjusted for temporary differences.

The fund files U.S. federal, state, and local tax returns as required. The fund’s tax returns are subject to examination by the relevant tax authorities until expiration of the applicable statute of limitations, which is generally three years after the filing of the tax return but which can be extended to six years in certain circumstances. Tax returns for open years have incorporated no uncertain tax positions that require a provision for income taxes.

Reclassifications to paid-in capital relate primarily to a tax practice that treats a portion of the proceeds from each redemption of capital shares as a distribution of taxable net investment income or realized capital gain. Reclassifications between income and gain relate primarily to per-share rounding of distributions. For the year ended May 31, 2018, the following reclassifications were recorded to reflect tax character (there was no impact on results of operations or net assets):

Distributions during the year ended May 31, 2018, period ended May 31, 2017 and the year ended July 31, 2016, were characterized for tax purposes as follows:

At May 31, 2018, the tax-basis cost of investments and components of net assets were as follows:

The difference between book-basis and tax-basis net unrealized appreciation (depreciation) is attributable to the deferral of losses from wash sales for tax purposes.

The fund intends to retain realized gains to the extent of available capital loss carryforwards. Net realized capital losses may be carried forward indefinitely to offset future realized capital gains.

The fund is managed by T. Rowe Price Associates, Inc. (Price Associates), a wholly owned subsidiary of T. Rowe Price Group, Inc. (Price Group). The investment management agreement between the fund and Price Associates provides for an annual investment management fee, which is computed daily and paid monthly. The fee consists of an individual fund fee, equal to 0.30% of the fund’s average daily net assets, and a group fee. The group fee rate is calculated based on the combined net assets of certain mutual funds sponsored by Price Associates (the group) applied to a graduated fee schedule, with rates ranging from 0.48% for the first $1 billion of assets to 0.265% for assets in excess of $650 billion. The fund’s group fee is determined by applying the group fee rate to the fund’s average daily net assets. At May 31, 2018, the effective annual group fee rate was 0.29%.

The Investor Class and Advisor Class are each subject to a contractual expense limitation through the limitation dates indicated in the table below. During the limitation period, Price Associates is required to waive its management fee or pay any expenses (excluding interest, expenses related to borrowings, taxes, brokerage, and other non-recurring expenses permitted by the investment management agreement) that would otherwise cause the class’s ratio of annualized total expenses to average net assets (expense ratio) to exceed its expense limitation. Each class is required to repay Price Associates for expenses previously waived/paid to the extent the class’s net assets grow or expenses decline sufficiently to allow repayment without causing the class’s expense ratio (after the repayment is taken into account) to exceed both: (1) the expense limitation in place at the time such amounts were waived; and (2) the class’s current expense limitation. However, no repayment will be made more than three years after the date of a payment or waiver.

The I Class is also subject to an operating expense limitation (I Class limit) pursuant to which Price Associates is contractually required to pay all operating expenses of the I Class, excluding management fees, interest, expenses related to borrowings, taxes, brokerage, and other non-recurring expenses permitted by the investment management agreement, to the extent such operating expenses, on an annualized basis, exceed 0.05% of average net assets. This agreement will continue until September 30, 2019, and may be renewed, revised, or revoked only with approval of the fund’s Board. The I Class is required to repay Price Associates for expenses previously paid to the extent the class’s net assets grow or expenses decline sufficiently to allow repayment without causing the class’s operating expenses (after the repayment is taken into account) to exceed both: (1) the expense limitation in place at the time such amounts were paid; and (2) the class’s current expense limitation. However, no repayment will be made more than three years after the date of a payment or waiver.

Pursuant to these agreements $401,000 of expenses were waived/paid by Price Associates during the year ended May 31, 2018. Including this amount, expenses previously waived/paid by Price Associates in the amount of $465,000 remain subject to repayment by the fund at May 31, 2018.

In addition, the fund has entered into service agreements with Price Associates and a wholly owned subsidiary of Price Associates, each an affiliate of the fund (collectively, Price). Price Associates provides certain accounting and administrative services to the fund. T. Rowe Price Services, Inc., provides shareholder and administrative services in its capacity as the fund’s transfer and dividend-disbursing agent. For the year ended May 31, 2018, expenses incurred pursuant to these service agreements were $91,000 for Price Associates and $67,000 for T. Rowe Price Services, Inc. All amounts due to and due from Price, exclusive of investment management fees payable, are presented net on the accompanying Statement of Assets and Liabilities.

The fund may invest its cash reserves in certain open-end management investment companies managed by Price Associates and considered affiliates of the fund: the T. Rowe Price Government Reserve Fund or the T. Rowe Price Treasury Reserve Fund, organized as money market funds, or the T. Rowe Price Short-Term Fund, a short-term bond fund (collectively, the Price Reserve Funds). The Price Reserve Funds are offered as short-term investment options to mutual funds, trusts, and other accounts managed by Price Associates or its affiliates and are not available for direct purchase by members of the public. Cash collateral from securities lending is invested in the T. Rowe Price Short-Term Fund. The Price Reserve Funds pay no investment management fees.

As of May 31, 2018, T. Rowe Price Group, Inc., or its wholly owned subsidiaries owned 2,147,205 shares of the I Class, representing 52% of the I Class’s net assets.

The fund may participate in securities purchase and sale transactions with other funds or accounts advised by Price Associates (cross trades), in accordance with procedures adopted by the fund’s Board and Securities and Exchange Commission rules, which require, among other things, that such purchase and sale cross trades be effected at the independent current market price of the security. During the year ended May 31, 2018, the fund had no purchases or sales cross trades with other funds or accounts advised by Price Associates.

To the Board of Directors of T. Rowe Price High Yield Fund, Inc. and
Shareholders of T. Rowe Price U.S. High Yield Fund

Opinion on the Financial Statements
We have audited the accompanying statement of assets and liabilities, including the portfolio of investments, of T. Rowe Price U.S. High Yield Fund (one of the funds constituting T. Rowe Price High Yield Fund, Inc., hereafter referred to as the “Fund”) as of May 31, 2018, the related statement of operations for the year ended May 31, 2018, the statement of changes in net assets for each of the periods indicated therein including the related notes, and the financial highlights for each of the periods indicated therein (collectively referred to as the “financial statements”). In our opinion, the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Fund as of May 31, 2018, the results of its operations for the year then ended, the changes in its net assets for each of the periods indicated therein and the financial highlights for each of the periods indicated therein, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Basis for Opinion
These financial statements are the responsibility of the Fund’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Fund’s financial statements based on our audits. 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 audits of these financial statements 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 are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud.

Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, 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. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. Our procedures included confirmation of securities owned as of May 31, 2018 by correspondence with the custodian, transfer agent and brokers; when replies were not received from brokers, we performed other auditing procedures. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

We have served as the auditor of one or more investment companies in the T. Rowe Price group of investment companies since 1973.

We are providing this information as required by the Internal Revenue Code. The amounts shown may differ from those elsewhere in this report because of differences between tax and financial reporting requirements.

A description of the policies and procedures used by T. Rowe Price funds and portfolios to determine how to vote proxies relating to portfolio securities is available in each fund’s Statement of Additional Information. You may request this document by calling 1-800-225-5132 or by accessing the SEC’s website, sec.gov.

The description of our proxy voting policies and procedures is also available on our corporate website. To access it, please visit the following Web page:

Scroll down to the section near the bottom of the page that says, “Proxy Voting Policies.” Click on the Proxy Voting Policies link in the shaded box.

Each fund’s most recent annual proxy voting record is available on our website and through the SEC’s website. To access it through T. Rowe Price, visit the website location shown above, and scroll down to the section near the bottom of the page that says, “Proxy Voting Records.” Click on the Proxy Voting Records link in the shaded box.

The fund files a complete schedule of portfolio holdings with the Securities and Exchange Commission for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year on Form N-Q. The fund’s Form N-Q is available electronically on the SEC’s website (sec.gov); hard copies may be reviewed and copied at the SEC’s Public Reference Room, 100 F St. N.E., Washington, DC 20549. For more information on the Public Reference Room, call 1-800-SEC-0330.

Each year, the fund’s Board of Directors (Board) considers the continuation of the investment management agreement (Advisory Contract) between the fund and its investment advisor, T. Rowe Price Associates, Inc. (Advisor), on behalf of the fund. In that regard, at an in-person meeting held on March 5–6, 2018 (Meeting), the Board, including a majority of the fund’s independent directors, approved the continuation of the fund’s Advisory Contract. At the Meeting, the Board considered the factors and reached the conclusions described below relating to the selection of the Advisor and the approval of the Advisory Contract. The independent directors were assisted in their evaluation of the Advisory Contract by independent legal counsel, from whom they received separate legal advice and with whom they met separately.

In providing information to the Board, the Advisor was guided by a detailed set of requests for information submitted by independent legal counsel on behalf of the independent directors. In considering and approving the Advisory Contract, the Board considered the information it believed was relevant, including, but not limited to, the information discussed below. The Board considered not only the specific information presented in connection with the Meeting but also the knowledge gained over time through interaction with the Advisor about various topics. The Board meets regularly and, at each of its meetings, covers an extensive agenda of topics and materials and considers factors that are relevant to its annual consideration of the renewal of the T. Rowe Price funds’ advisory contracts, including performance and the services and support provided to the funds and their shareholders.

Services Provided by the Advisor
The Board considered the nature, quality, and extent of the services provided to the fund by the Advisor. These services included, but were not limited to, directing the fund’s investments in accordance with its investment program and the overall management of the fund’s portfolio, as well as a variety of related activities such as financial, investment operations, and administrative services; compliance; maintaining the fund’s records and registrations; and shareholder communications. The Board also reviewed the background and experience of the Advisor’s senior management team and investment personnel involved in the management of the fund, as well as the Advisor’s compliance record. The Board concluded that it was satisfied with the nature, quality, and extent of the services provided by the Advisor.

Investment Performance of the Fund
The Board took into account discussions with the Advisor and reports that it receives throughout the year relating to fund performance and compared the fund’s returns (as well as the performance of the Henderson High Yield Opportunities Fund that was assumed by the fund as a result of a tax-free reorganization on May 22, 2017) with the performance of a peer group of funds with similar investment programs and a wide variety of other previously agreed-upon comparable performance measures and market data, including those supplied by Broadridge, which is an independent provider of mutual fund data.

On the basis of this evaluation and the Board’s ongoing review of investment results and factoring in the relative market conditions during certain of the performance periods, the Board concluded that the fund’s performance was satisfactory.

Costs, Benefits, Profits, and Economies of Scale
The Board reviewed detailed information regarding the revenues received by the Advisor under the Advisory Contract and other benefits that the Advisor (and its affiliates) may have realized from its relationship with the fund, including any research received under “soft dollar” agreements and commission-sharing arrangements with broker-dealers. The Board considered that the Advisor may receive some benefit from soft-dollar arrangements pursuant to which research is received from broker-dealers that execute the fund’s portfolio transactions. The Board received information on the estimated costs incurred and profits realized by the Advisor from managing the T. Rowe Price funds. While the Board did not review information regarding profits realized from managing the fund in particular because the fund had either not achieved sufficient portfolio asset size or not recognized sufficient revenues to produce meaningful profit margin percentages, the Board concluded that the Advisor’s profits were reasonable in light of the services provided to the T. Rowe Price funds.

The Board also considered whether the fund benefits under the fee levels set forth in the Advisory Contract from any economies of scale realized by the Advisor. Under the Advisory Contract, the fund pays a fee to the Advisor for investment management services composed of two components—a group fee rate based on the combined average net assets of most of the T. Rowe Price funds (including the fund) that declines at certain asset levels and an individual fund fee rate based on the fund’s average daily net assets—and the fund pays its own expenses of operations (subject to contractual expense limitations agreed to by the Advisor with respect to the Investor Class, Advisor Class, and I Class). The Board concluded that the advisory fee structure for the fund continued to provide for a reasonable sharing of benefits from any economies of scale with the fund’s investors.

Fees and Expenses
The Board was provided with information regarding industry trends in management fees and expenses. Among other things, the Board reviewed data for peer groups that were compiled by Broadridge, which compared: (i) contractual management fees, total expenses, actual management fees, and nonmanagement expenses of the Investor Class of the fund with a group of competitor funds selected by Broadridge (Investor Class Expense Group); (ii) total expenses and actual management fees of the Advisor Class of the fund with a group of competitor funds selected by Broadridge (Advisor Class Expense Group); and (iii) total expenses, actual management fees, and nonmanagement expenses of the Investor Class of the fund with a broader set of funds within the Lipper investment classification (Expense Universe). The Board considered the fund’s contractual management fee rate, actual management fee rate (which reflects the management fees actually received from the fund by the Advisor after any applicable waivers, reductions, or reimbursements), operating expenses, and total expenses (which reflects the net total expense ratio of the fund after any waivers, reductions, or reimbursements) in comparison with the information for the Broadridge peer groups. Broadridge generally constructed the peer groups by seeking the most comparable funds based on similar investment classifications and objectives, expense structure, asset size, and operating components and attributes and ranked funds into quintiles, with the first quintile representing the funds with the lowest relative expenses and the fifth quintile representing the funds with the highest relative expenses. The information provided to the Board indicated that the fund’s contractual management fee ranked in the second quintile (Investor Class Expense Group), the fund’s actual management fee rate ranked in the first quintile (Investor Class Expense Group, Advisor Class Expense Group, and Expense Universe), and the fund’s total expenses ranked in the third quintile (Investor Class Expense Group), first quintile (Advisor Class Expense Group), and second and third quintiles (Expense Universe).

The Board also reviewed the fee schedules for institutional accounts and private accounts with similar mandates that are advised or subadvised by the Advisor and its affiliates. Management provided the Board with information about the Advisor’s responsibilities and services provided to subadvisory and other institutional account clients, including information about how the requirements and economics of the institutional business are fundamentally different from those of the mutual fund business. The Board considered information showing that the Advisor’s mutual fund business is generally more complex from a business and compliance perspective than its institutional account business and considered various relevant factors, such as the broader scope of operations and oversight, more extensive shareholder communication infrastructure, greater asset flows, heightened business risks, and differences in applicable laws and regulations associated with the Advisor’s proprietary mutual fund business. In assessing the reasonableness of the fund’s management fee rate, the Board considered the differences in the nature of the services required for the Advisor to manage its mutual fund business versus managing a discrete pool of assets as a subadvisor to another institution’s mutual fund or for an institutional account and that the Advisor generally performs significant additional services and assumes greater risk in managing the fund and other T. Rowe Price funds than it does for institutional account clients.

On the basis of the information provided and the factors considered, the Board concluded that the fees paid by the fund under the Advisory Contract are reasonable.

Approval of the Advisory Contract
As noted, the Board approved the continuation of the Advisory Contract. No single factor was considered in isolation or to be determinative to the decision. Rather, the Board concluded, in light of a weighting and balancing of all factors considered, that it was in the best interests of the fund and its shareholders for the Board to approve the continuation of the Advisory Contract (including the fees to be charged for services thereunder).

Your fund is overseen by a Board of Directors (Board) that meets regularly to review a wide variety of matters affecting or potentially affecting the fund, including performance, investment programs, compliance matters, advisory fees and expenses, service providers, and business and regulatory affairs. The Board elects the fund’s officers, who are listed in the final table. At least 75% of the Board’s members are independent of the Boards of T. Rowe Price Associates, Inc. (T. Rowe Price), and its affiliates; “inside” or “interested” directors are employees or officers of T. Rowe Price. The business address of each director and officer is 100 East Pratt Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21202. The Statement of Additional Information includes additional information about the fund directors and is available without charge by calling a T. Rowe Price representative at 1-800-638-5660.

The registrant has adopted a code of ethics, as defined in Item 2 of Form N-CSR, applicable to its principal executive officer, principal financial officer, principal accounting officer or controller, or persons performing similar functions. A copy of this code of ethics is filed as an exhibit to this Form N-CSR. No substantive amendments were approved or waivers were granted to this code of ethics during the period covered by this report.

The registrant’s Board of Directors/Trustees has determined that Mr. Bruce W. Duncan qualifies as an audit committee financial expert, as defined in Item 3 of Form N-CSR. Mr. Duncan is considered independent for purposes of Item 3 of Form N-CSR.

(a) – (d) Aggregate fees billed for the last two fiscal years for professional services rendered to, or on behalf of, the registrant by the registrant’s principal accountant were as follows:

Audit fees include amounts related to the audit of the registrant’s annual financial statements and services normally provided by the accountant in connection with statutory and regulatory filings. Audit-related fees include amounts reasonably related to the performance of the audit of the registrant’s financial statements and specifically include the issuance of a report on internal controls and, if applicable, agreed-upon procedures related to fund acquisitions. Tax fees include amounts related to services for tax compliance, tax planning, and tax advice. The nature of these services specifically includes the review of distribution calculations and the preparation of Federal, state, and excise tax returns. All other fees include the registrant’s pro-rata share of amounts for agreed-upon procedures in conjunction with service contract approvals by the registrant’s Board of Directors/Trustees.

(e)(1) The registrant’s audit committee has adopted a policy whereby audit and non-audit services performed by the registrant’s principal accountant for the registrant, its investment adviser, and any entity controlling, controlled by, or under common control with the investment adviser that provides ongoing services to the registrant require pre-approval in advance at regularly scheduled audit committee meetings. If such a service is required between regularly scheduled audit committee meetings, pre-approval may be authorized by one audit committee member with ratification at the next scheduled audit committee meeting. Waiver of pre-approval for audit or non-audit services requiring fees of a de minimis amount is not permitted.

(2) No services included in (b) – (d) above were approved pursuant to paragraph (c)(7)(i)(C) of Rule 2-01 of Regulation S-X.

(f) Less than 50 percent of the hours expended on the principal accountant’s engagement to audit the registrant’s financial statements for the most recent fiscal year were attributed to work performed by persons other than the principal accountant’s full-time, permanent employees.

(g) The aggregate fees billed for the most recent fiscal year and the preceding fiscal year by the registrant’s principal accountant for non-audit services rendered to the registrant, its investment adviser, and any entity controlling, controlled by, or under common control with the investment adviser that provides ongoing services to the registrant were $1,874,000 and $1,765,000, respectively.

(h) All non-audit services rendered in (g) above were pre-approved by the registrant’s audit committee. Accordingly, these services were considered by the registrant’s audit committee in maintaining the principal accountant’s independence.

(a) Not applicable. The complete schedule of investments is included in Item 1 of this Form N-CSR.

Item 7. Disclosure of Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures for Closed-End Management Investment Companies.

Item 9. Purchases of Equity Securities by Closed-End Management Investment Company and Affiliated Purchasers.

(a) The registrant’s principal executive officer and principal financial officer have evaluated the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures within 90 days of this filing and have concluded that the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures were effective, as of that date, in ensuring that information required to be disclosed by the registrant in this Form N-CSR was recorded, processed, summarized, and reported timely.

(b) During the period, the Price Funds’ accounting agent, The Bank of New York Mellon (BNYM), converted the fund’s books and records from a legacy fund accounting system / operating model to a BNYM fund accounting system / operating model.

(a)(1) The registrant’s code of ethics pursuant to Item 2 of Form N-CSR is attached.

(2) Separate certifications by the registrant's principal executive officer and principal financial officer, pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and required by Rule 30a-2(a) under the Investment Company Act of 1940, are attached.

(3) Written solicitation to repurchase securities issued by closed-end companies: not applicable.

(b) A certification by the registrant’s principal executive officer and principal financial officer, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and required by Rule 30a-2(b) under the Investment Company Act of 1940, is attached.

SIGNATURES

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.

T. Rowe Price High Yield Fund, Inc.

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/ Edward C. Bernard
			Edward C. Bernard
			Principal Executive Officer

Date	July 19, 2018


		By	/s/ Catherine D. Mathews
			Catherine D. Mathews
			Principal Financial Officer

Date	July 19, 2018

■	The U.S. high yield bond market posted gains in the 12-month period ended May 31, 2018, and outperformed investment-grade asset classes.
■	The U.S. High Yield Fund generated a 2.31% return in our fiscal year. The fund performed in line with the benchmark, The BofA Merrill Lynch US High Yield Constrained Index.
■	The fund benefited from our overweight positioning in CCC bonds, although we focused on the higher-quality part of the rating tier, and our underweight to BB rated issues.
■	Our outlook for the high yield market is generally constructive for the year ahead. The most ominous cloud on the horizon for our market appears to be rising interest rates.

■	$964,000 from short-term capital gains.

■	$119,000 from long-term capital gains, subject to a long-term capital gains tax rate of not greater than 20%.

INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS^(a)

Name
(Year of Birth)
Year Elected
[Number of T. Rowe Price		Principal Occupation(s) and Directorships of Public Companies and
Portfolios Overseen]		Other Investment Companies During the Past Five Years

Teresa Bryce Bazemore*		President, Radian Guaranty (2008 to 2017); Member, Bazemore
(1959)		Consulting LLC (2018 to present); Member, Chimera Investment
2018		Corporation (2017 to present); Member, Federal Home Loan Bank of
[191]		Pittsburgh (2017 to present)

Ronald J. Daniels*		President, The Johns Hopkins University^(b)and Professor, Political
(1959)		Science Department, The Johns Hopkins University (2009 to present);
2018		Director, Lyndhurst Holdings (2015 to present)
[191]

Anthony W. Deering**		Chairman, Exeter Capital, LLC, a private investment firm (2004 to 2017);
(1945)		Director and Advisory Board Member, Deutsche Bank North America
1984		(2004 to 2017); Director, Vornado Real Estate Investment Trust (2004
[0]		to 2012); Director, Under Armour (2008 to 2017); Director, Brixmor Real
		Estate Investment Trust (2012 to 2017)

Bruce W. Duncan		Chief Executive Officer and Director (January 2009 to December
(1951)		2016), Chairman of the Board (January 2016 to present), and President
2013		(January 2009 to September 2016), First Industrial Realty Trust, an
[191]		owner and operator of industrial properties; Chairman of the Board
		(2005 to September 2016) and Director (1999 to September 2016),
		Starwood Hotels & Resorts, a hotel and leisure company; Director,
		Boston Properties (May 2016 to present); Director, Marriott International,
		Inc. (September 2016 to present)

Robert J. Gerrard, Jr.		Advisory Board Member, Pipeline Crisis/Winning Strategies, a
(1952)		collaborative working to improve opportunities for young African
2013		Americans (1997 to January 2016)
[191]

Paul F. McBride		Advisory Board Member, Vizzia Technologies (2015 to present); Board
(1956)		Member, Dunbar Armored (2012 to present)
2013
[191]

Cecilia E. Rouse, Ph.D.		Dean, Woodrow Wilson School (2012 to present); Professor and
(1963)		Researcher, Princeton University (1992 to present); Member of National
2013		Academy of Education (2010 to present); Director, MDRC, a nonprofit
[191]		education and social policy research organization (2011 to present);
		Research Associate of Labor Studies Program at the National Bureau
		of Economic Research (2011 to 2015); Board Member of the National
		Bureau of Economic Research (2011 to present); Chair of Committee
		on the Status of Minority Groups in the Economic Profession of the
		American Economic Association (2012 to 2017); Vice President (2015 to
		2016), American Economic Association

John G. Schreiber		Owner/President, Centaur Capital Partners, Inc., a real estate investment
(1946)		company (1991 to present); Cofounder, Partner, and Cochairman of
1992		the Investment Committee, Blackstone Real Estate Advisors, L.P. (1992
[191]		to 2015); Director, General Growth Properties, Inc. (2010 to 2013);
		Director, Blackstone Mortgage Trust, a real estate finance company
		(2012 to 2016); Director and Chairman of the Board, Brixmor Property
		Group, Inc. (2013 to present); Director, Hilton Worldwide (2013 to
		present); Director, Hudson Pacific Properties (2014 to 2016) ); Director,
		Invitation Homes (2014 to present)

Mark R. Tercek		President and Chief Executive Officer, The Nature Conservancy (2008
(1957)		to present)
2009
[191]

*Effective January 1, 2018, Ms. Bazemore and Mr. Daniels were elected as independent directors of the Price Funds.
**Mr. Deering served as an independent director of the Price Funds until November 17, 2017.
^(a)All information about the independent directors was current as of December 31, 2017, except for the information provided for Ms. Bazemore and Mr. Daniels, which is current as of January 1, 2018.
^(b)William J. Stromberg, president and chief executive officer of T. Rowe Price Group, Inc., the parent company of the Price Funds’ investment advisor, has served on the Board of Trustees of Johns Hopkins University since 2014 and is a member of the Johns Hopkins University Board’s Compensation Committee.

INSIDE DIRECTORS

Name
(Year of Birth)
Year Elected*
[Number of T. Rowe Price		Principal Occupation(s) and Directorships of Public Companies and
Portfolios Overseen]		Other Investment Companies During the Past Five Years

Edward C. Bernard		Director and Vice President, T. Rowe Price; Vice Chairman of the Board,
(1956)		Director, and Vice President, T. Rowe Price Group, Inc.; Chairman of the
2006		Board, Director, and Vice President, T. Rowe Price Investment Services,
[191]		Inc., and T. Rowe Price Services, Inc.; Chairman of the Board and
		Director, T. Rowe Price Retirement Plan Services, Inc.; Chairman of the
		Board, Chief Executive Officer, Director, and President, T. Rowe Price
		International and T. Rowe Price Trust Company; Chairman of the Board,
		all funds

Edward A. Wiese, CFA		Vice President, T. Rowe Price, T. Rowe Price Group, Inc., T. Rowe Price
(1959)		International, and T. Rowe Price Trust Company
2015
[56]

*Each inside director serves until retirement, resignation, or election of a successor.

OFFICERS

Name (Year of Birth)
Position Held With U.S. High Yield Fund		Principal Occupation(s)

Darrell N. Braman (1963)		Vice President, Price Hong Kong, Price Singapore,
Vice President and Secretary		T. Rowe Price, T. Rowe Price Group, Inc., T. Rowe
		Price International, T. Rowe Price Investment
		Services, Inc., and T. Rowe Price Services, Inc.

Charles Devereux (1969)		Vice President, T. Rowe Price and T. Rowe Price
Vice President		Group, Inc.; formerly, Head Analyst, Henderson
		Global Investors (to 2017); Director, Delaware
		Investments (to 2013)

Devon Everhart, CFA (1977)		Vice President, T. Rowe Price and T. Rowe Price
Vice President		Group, Inc.; formerly, Senior Research Analyst,
		Henderson Global Investors (to 2017); Senior
		Research Analyst, Delaware Investments(to 2013)

Matthew Fanandakis, CFA (1983)		Vice President, T. Rowe Price and T. Rowe Price
Vice President		Group, Inc.; formerly, Fixed Income Research
		Analyst, Henderson Global Investors (to 2017);
		Fixed Income Research Analyst, Delaware
		Investments (to 2013)

John R. Gilner (1961)		Chief Compliance Officer and Vice President,
Chief Compliance Officer		T. Rowe Price; Vice President, T. Rowe Price Group,
		Inc., and T. Rowe Price Investment Services, Inc.

Gregg Gola, CFA (1965)		Vice President, T. Rowe Price and T. Rowe
Vice President		Price Group, Inc.; formerly, Trader and Analyst,
		Henderson Global Investors (to 2017); Divisional
		Director, Delaware Investments (to 2013)

Gary J. Greb (1961)		Vice President, T. Rowe Price, T. Rowe Price
Vice President		International, and T. Rowe Trust Company

Paul J. Krug, CPA (1964)		Vice President, T. Rowe Price, T. Rowe Price
Vice President		Group, Inc., and T. Rowe Price Trust Company

Kevin P. Loome, CFA (1967)		Vice President, T. Rowe Price and T. Rowe
Executive Vice President		Price Group, Inc.; formerly, Head of U.S. Credit,
		Henderson Global Investors (to 2017); Head of
		High Yield and Bank Loans, Delaware Investments
		(to 2013)

Catherine D. Mathews (1963)		Vice President, T. Rowe Price, T. Rowe Price
Treasurer and Vice President		Group, Inc., and T. Rowe Price Trust Company

David Oestreicher (1967)		Director and Vice President, T. Rowe Price
Vice President		Investment Services, Inc., T. Rowe Price Retirement
		Plan Services, Inc., T. Rowe Price Services,
		Inc., and T. Rowe Price Trust Company; Chief
		Legal Officer and Vice President, T. Rowe Price
		Group, Inc.; Vice President, T. Rowe Price and
		T. Rowe Price International; Vice President, Price
		Hong Kong and Price Singapore

John W. Ratzesberger (1975)		Vice President, T. Rowe Price, T. Rowe Price
Vice President		Group, Inc., and T. Rowe Price Trust Company;
		formerly, North American Head of Listed
		Derivatives Operation, Morgan Stanley (to 2013)

Shannon Hofher Rauser (1987)		Employee, T. Rowe Price
Assistant Secretary

Megan Warren (1968)		Vice President, T. Rowe Price, T. Rowe Price
Vice President		Group, Inc., T. Rowe Price Retirement Plan
		Services, Inc., T. Rowe Price Services, Inc., and
		T. Rowe Price Trust Company; formerly, Executive
		Director, JP Morgan Chase (to 2017)

Douglas Zinser (1975)		Vice President, T. Rowe Price and T. Rowe Price
Vice President		Group, Inc.; formerly, Senior Research Analyst,
		Henderson Global Investors (to 2017); Analyst,
		Delaware Investments (to 2013)

Unless otherwise noted, officers have been employees of T. Rowe Price or T. Rowe Price International for at least 5 years.

/s/ Edward C. Bernard

Edward C. Bernard

Principal Executive Officer

July 19, 2018