fomncsr-070.htm - Generated by SEC Publisher for SEC Filing

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			811-7512

	Dreyfus Premier Worldwide Growth Fund, Inc.
	(Exact name of Registrant as specified in charter)

	c/o The Dreyfus Corporation 200 Park Avenue New York, New York 10166
	(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip code)

	John Pak, Esq. 200 Park Avenue New York, New York 10166
	(Name and address of agent for service)

Registrant's telephone number, including area code:				(212) 922-6000

Date of fiscal year end:		10/31
Date of reporting period:		10/31/13

	Contents
	THE FUND
2	A Letter from the President
3	Discussion of Fund Performance
6	Fund Performance
8	UnderstandingYour Fund’s Expenses
8	ComparingYour Fund’s Expenses With Those of Other Funds
9	Statement of Investments
13	Statement of Assets and Liabilities
14	Statement of Operations
15	Statement of Changes in Net Assets
17	Financial Highlights
21	Notes to Financial Statements
32	Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
33	Important Tax Information
34	Information About the Renewal of the Fund’s Management and Sub-Investment Advisory Agreements
40	Board Members Information
42	Officers of the Fund
	FOR MORE INFORMATION
	Back Cover

Dreyfus
Worldwide Growth Fund

The Fund

A LETTER FROM THE PRESIDENT

Dear Shareholder:

We are pleased to present this annual report for Dreyfus Worldwide Growth Fund, covering the 12-month period from November 1, 2012, through October 31, 2013. For information about how the fund performed during the reporting period, as well as general market perspectives, we provide a Discussion of Fund Performance on the pages that follow.

Improving global economic conditions drove developed stock markets higher over much of the reporting period. Europe appeared to put the worst of its sovereign debt and banking crises behind it, and Japan embarked on a new economic course designed to reflate its long-stagnant domestic economy. However, the world’s emerging markets struggled with the effects of local economic slowdowns. As a result, equity market returns varied widely from one country to another over the past 12 months.

We currently expect global economic conditions to continue to improve in 2014, with stronger growth in many developed countries fueled by past and continuing monetary ease. The emerging markets seem poised for moderate economic expansion despite recently negative investor sentiment. In the United States, we anticipate accelerating growth supported by the fading drags of tighter federal fiscal policies and downsizing on the state and local levels. For more information on how these observations may affect your investments, we encourage you to speak with your financial advisor.

Thank you for your continued confidence and support.

Sincerely,

J. Charles Cardona
President
The Dreyfus Corporation
November 15, 2013

DISCUSSION OF FUND PERFORMANCE

For the reporting period of November 1, 2012, through October 31, 2013, as provided by Fayez Sarofim, Portfolio Manager of Fayez Sarofim & Co., Sub-Investment Adviser

Fund and Market Performance Overview

For the 12-month period ended October 31, 2013, DreyfusWorldwide Growth Fund’s Class A shares produced a total return of 16.81%, Class C shares returned 15.92%, and Class I shares returned 17.10%.¹For the same period, the fund’s benchmark, the Morgan Stanley Capital InternationalWorld Index (“MSCIWorld Index”), produced a 25.77% total return.²The fund’s ClassY shares produced a total return of 8.41% for the period since its inception of July 1, 2013, through October 31, 2013.

Equities responded positively to a recovering global economy during the reporting period.While the fund’s Class A, C and I shares produced double-digit returns, its performance underperformed the benchmark when its high-quality holdings fell out of favor among investors.

The Fund’s Investment Approach

The fund invests primarily in large, well-established, multinational companies that we believe are well positioned to weather difficult economic climates and thrive during favorable times. We focus on purchasing large-cap, blue-chip stocks at a price we consider to be justified by a company’s fundamentals.The result is a portfolio of stocks of prominent companies selected for what we consider to be sustained patterns of profitability, strong balance sheets, expanding global presence and above-average earnings growth potential.The fund pursues a “buy-and-hold” investment strategy in which we typically buy and sell relatively few stocks during the course of the year, which may help to reduce investors’ tax liabilities and the fund’s trading costs.³

Recovering Economy Fueled Market Gains

The reporting period began soon after the start of sustained stock market rallies driven by improved U.S. and global economic data. Investors were particularly encouraged by a new round of quantitative easing from the Federal Reserve Board (the “Fed”). Improving conditions in Europe and Japan also contributed to greater investor optimism.

The Fund 3

DISCUSSION OF FUND PERFORMANCE (continued)

Economic data continued to improve, and global stocks generally continued to rally, through the spring of 2013. However, in late May, remarks by Fed chairman Ben Bernanke were widely interpreted as a signal that U.S. monetary policymakers would back away from their quantitative easing program sooner than expected, sparking market volatility that erased some earlier gains. Markets generally stabilized over the summer, and stocks advanced strongly in September when the Fed refrained from tapering its bond purchasing program. Even a 16-day U.S. government shutdown in October failed to derail the rally, enabling some broad measures of stock market performance to reach record highs by the reporting period’s end.

Focus on Quality Dampened Relative Results

The fund’s emphasis on high-quality, globally dominant companies undermined relative performance during the reporting period when smaller, riskier companies fared better. In addition, economically sensitive companies led the market’s advance, but the fund focused on companies whose earnings tend to be less sensitive to economic conditions. This strategic positioning led to overweighted exposure to the lagging consumer staples sector which was penalized by weak global economic conditions.An overweighted position in the energy sector, particularly large integrated oil producers, also hurt results. Other weak performers included metals-and-mining companies Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold and RioTinto ADR, which struggled with sluggish demand in the emerging markets. In the information technology sector, consumer electronics giant Apple suffered earnings shortfalls amid intensifying competitive pressures, and International Business Machines reported disappointing results in its software and services segments.

The fund achieved better results from industry leaders in Europe, where stocks rebounded sharply from depressed levels. European pharmaceutical companies, such as Roche Holding ADR, proved particularly advantageous due to attractive valuations and improved research-and-development efforts. Similar factors supported gains in U.S. pharmaceutical developer Johnson & Johnson.The fund also benefited from lack of exposure to the telecommunications services and utilities sectors, which ranked among the weaker segments of the MSCI World Index.Among consumer companies, luxury goods purveyors Christian Dior and L’Oreal,ADR saw robust spending from

their affluent customers, and pharmacy chainWalgreen resolved a dispute with a major pharmacy benefits provider and reported progress in its global expansion.

We made a number of changes to the fund’s portfolio over the reporting period, eliminating three holdings that failed to meet our expectations and adding three new positions in companies that we believe are poised for growth.

A Constructive Outlook for Multinationals

Despite some persistent headwinds, most regions of the world have exhibited encouraging signs of renewed economic strength.A firming world economy would provide welcome support for corporate profits in 2014 and could be a catalyst for higher stock prices. In our analysis, the industry-leading multinationals in which the fund invests are well positioned for a stronger world backdrop. With their solid balance sheets and strong, recurring cash flows, multinational companies have ample financial resources to fund growth while returning cash to shareholders.Therefore, we have maintained the fund’s emphasis on large companies with a robust global presence, low debt levels, and dominant brands.

November 15, 2013

Please note, the position in any security highlighted with italicized typeface was sold during the reporting period.

Equity funds are subject generally to market, market sector, market liquidity, issuer, and investment style risks, among

other factors, to varying degrees, all of which are more fully described in the fund’s prospectus.

1 Total return includes reinvestment of dividends and any capital gains paid, and does not take into consideration the

maximum initial sales charge in the case of Class A shares, or the applicable contingent deferred sales charge imposed

on redemptions in the case of Class C shares. Had these charges been reflected, returns would have been lower. Past

performance is no guarantee of future results. Share price and investment return fluctuate such that upon redemption,

fund shares may be worth more or less than their original cost.

2 SOURCE: LIPPER INC. – Reflects reinvestment of net dividends and, where applicable, capital gain distributions.

The Morgan Stanley Capital International (MSCI) World Index is an unmanaged index of global stock market

performance, including the United States, Canada, Europe,Australia, New Zealand and the Far East. Investors

cannot invest directly in any index.

3 Achieving tax efficiency is not a part of the fund’s investment objective, and there can be no guarantee that the fund

will achieve any particular level of taxable distributions in future years. In periods when the manager has to sell

significant amounts of securities (e.g., during periods of significant net redemptions or changes in index components)

the fund can be expected to be less tax efficient than during periods of more stable market conditions and asset flows.

The Fund 5

FUND PERFORMANCE


†	Source: Lipper Inc.
^††	The total return figures presented for ClassY shares of the fund reflect the performance of the fund’s Class A shares
	for the period prior to 7/1/13 (the inception date for ClassY shares).
Past performance is not predictive of future performance.
The above graph compares a $10,000 investment made in each of the Class A, Class C, Class I and ClassY shares of
Dreyfus Worldwide Growth Fund on 10/31/03 to a $10,000 investment made in the Morgan Stanley Capital
International World Index (the “Index”) on that date.All dividends and capital gain distributions are reinvested.
On May 7, 2013, the Board authorized the fund to offer ClassY shares, as a new class of shares, to certain investors,
including certain institutional investors. On July 1, 2013, ClassY shares were offered at net asset value and are not
subject to certain fees, including Distribution Plan and Shareholder Services Plan fees.
The fund’s performance shown in the line graph above takes into account the maximum initial sales charge on Class A
shares and all other applicable fees and expenses on all classes.The Index is an unmanaged index of global stock market
performance, including the United States, Canada,Australia, New Zealand and the Far East and includes net dividends
reinvested. Unlike a mutual fund, the Index is not subject to charges, fees and other expenses. Investors cannot invest
directly in any index. Further information relating to fund performance, including expense reimbursements, if applicable, is
contained in the Financial Highlights section of the prospectus and elsewhere in this report.

UNDERSTANDING YOUR FUND’S EXPENSES (Unaudited)

As a mutual fund investor, you pay ongoing expenses, such as management fees and other expenses. Using the information below, you can estimate how these expenses affect your investment and compare them with the expenses of other funds.You also may pay one-time transaction expenses, including sales charges (loads) and redemption fees, which are not shown in this section and would have resulted in higher total expenses. For more information, see your fund’s prospectus or talk to your financial adviser.

Review your fund’s expenses

The table below shows the expenses you would have paid on a $1,000 investment in Dreyfus Worldwide Growth Fund from May 1, 2013 to October 31, 2013. It also shows how much a $1,000 investment would be worth at the close of the period, assuming actual returns and expenses.

COMPARING YOUR FUND’S EXPENSES
WITH THOSE OF OTHER FUNDS (Unaudited)

Using the SEC’s method to compare expenses

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has established guidelines to help investors assess fund expenses. Per these guidelines, the table below shows your fund’s expenses based on a $1,000 investment, assuming a hypothetical 5% annualized return. You can use this information to compare the ongoing expenses (but not transaction expenses or total cost) of investing in the fund with those of other funds.All mutual fund shareholder reports will provide this information to help you make this comparison. Please note that you cannot use this information to estimate your actual ending account balance and expenses paid during the period.


†	From July 1, 2013 (commencement of initial offering) to October 31, 2013 for ClassY shares.
††	Expenses are equal to the fund’s annualized expense ratio of 1.19% for Class A, 1.94% for Class C and.92% for
	Class I, multiplied by the average account value over the period, multiplied by 184/365 (to reflect the one-half year
	period). Expenses are equal to the fund’s annualized expense ratio of .79% for Class Y, multiplied by the average
	account value over the period, multiplied by 122/365 (to reflect the actual days in the period).
†††	Please note that while ClassY shares commenced operations on July 1, 2013, the hypothetical expenses paid during
	the period reflect projected activity for the full six month period for purposes of comparability.This projection assumes
	that annualized expense ratios were in effect during the period May 1, 2013 to October 31, 2013.
^††††Expenses are equal to the fund’s annualized expense ratio of 1.19% for Class A, 1.94% for Class C, .92% for
	Class I and .79% for Class Y, multiplied by the average account value over the period, multiplied by 184/365 (to
	reflect the one-half year period).

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

NOTE 1—Significant Accounting Policies:

Dreyfus Worldwide Growth Fund (the “fund”) is the sole series of Dreyfus Premier Worldwide Growth Fund, Inc. (the “Company”), which is registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “Act”), as a diversified open-end management investment company. The fund’s investment objective is to seek long-term capital appreciation consistent with the preservation of capital. The Dreyfus Corporation (the “Manager” or “Dreyfus”), a wholly owned subsidiary of The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation (“BNY Mellon”), serves as the fund’s investment adviser. Fayez Sarofim & Co. (“Sarofim & Co.”) serves as the fund’s sub-investment adviser.

At a meeting held on May 7, 2013, the Company’s Board of Directors (the “Board”) approved, effective July 1, 2013: (a) for the fund to offer Class Y shares, and (b) an increase in the authorized shares of the fund from 300 million to 400 million and authorized 100 million Class Y shares.

MBSC Securities Corporation (the “Distributor”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Dreyfus, is the distributor of the fund’s shares.The fund is authorized to issue 100 million shares of $.001 par value Common Stock in each of the following classes of shares: Class A, Class C, Class I and ClassY. Class A shares generally are subject to a sales charge imposed at the time of purchase. Class C shares are subject to a contingent deferred sales charge (“CDSC”) imposed on Class C shares redeemed within one year of purchase. Class I shares are sold at net asset value per share only to institutional investors. Class Y shares are sold at net asset value per share to certain investors, including certain institutional investors. Other differences between the classes include the services offered to and the expenses borne by each class, the allocation of certain transfer agency costs and certain voting rights. Income, expenses (other than expenses attributable to a specific class), and realized and unrealized gains or losses on investments are allocated to each class of shares based on its relative net assets.

The Fund 21

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

As of October 31, 2013, MBC Investments Corp., an indirect subsidiary of BNY Mellon, held all of the outstanding ClassY shares of the fund.

The Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification is the exclusive reference of authoritative U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) recognized by the FASB to be applied by nongovernmental entities. Rules and interpretive releases of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) under authority of federal laws are also sources of authoritative GAAP for SEC registrants. The fund’s financial statements are prepared in accordance with GAAP, which may require the use of management estimates and assumptions.Actual results could differ from those estimates.

The Company enters into contracts that contain a variety of indemnifications. The fund’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown.The fund does not anticipate recognizing any loss related to these arrangements.

(a) Portfolio valuation: The fair value of a financial instrument is the amount 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 (i.e., the exit price). GAAP establishes a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs of valuation techniques used to measure fair value. This 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).

Additionally, GAAP provides guidance on determining whether the volume and activity in a market has decreased significantly and whether such a decrease in activity results in transactions that are not orderly. GAAP requires enhanced disclosures around valuation inputs and techniques used during annual and interim periods.

Various inputs are used in determining the value of the fund’s investments relating to fair value measurements.These inputs are summarized in the three broad levels listed below:

Level 1—unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical investments.

Level 2—other significant observable inputs (including quoted prices for similar investments, interest rates, prepayment speeds, credit risk, etc.).

Level 3—significant unobservable inputs (including the fund’s own assumptions in determining the fair value of investments).

The inputs or methodology used for valuing securities are not necessarily an indication of the risk associated with investing in those securities.

Changes in valuation techniques may result in transfers in or out of an assigned level within the disclosure hierarchy. Valuation techniques used to value the fund’s investments are as follows:

Investments in securities are valued at the last sales price on the securities exchange or national securities market on which such securities are primarily traded. Securities listed on the National Market System for which market quotations are available are valued at the official closing price or, if there is no official closing price that day, at the last sales price. Securities not listed on an exchange or the national securities market, or securities for which there were no transactions, are valued at the average of the most recent bid and asked prices, except for open short positions, where the asked price is used for valuation purposes. Bid price is used when no asked price is available. Registered investment companies that are not traded on an exchange are valued at their net asset value. All of the preceding securities are categorized within Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy.

The Fund 23

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

Fair valuing of securities may be determined with the assistance of a pricing service using calculations based on indices of domestic securities and other appropriate indicators, such as prices of relevant ADRs and financial futures. Utilizing these techniques may result in transfers between Level 1 and Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.

When market quotations or official closing prices are not readily available, or are determined not to reflect accurately fair value, such as when the value of a security has been significantly affected by events after the close of the exchange or market on which the security is principally traded (for example, a foreign exchange or market), but before the fund calculates its net asset value, the fund may value these investments at fair value as determined in accordance with the procedures approved by the Board. Certain factors may be considered when fair valuing investments such as: fundamental analytical data, the nature and duration of restrictions on disposition, an evaluation of the forces that influence the market in which the securities are purchased and sold, and public trading in similar securities of the issuer or comparable issuers. These securities are either categorized within Level 2 or 3 of the fair value hierarchy depending on the relevant inputs used.

For restricted securities where observable inputs are limited, assumptions about market activity and risk are used and are categorized within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy.

Investments denominated in foreign currencies are translated to U.S. dollars at the prevailing rates of exchange.

The following is a summary of the inputs used as of October 31, 2013 in valuing the fund’s investments:


†	See Statement of Investments for additional detailed categorizations.

At October 31, 2013, there were no transfers between Level 1 and Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.

(b) Foreign currency transactions: The fund does not isolate that portion of the results of operations resulting from changes in foreign exchange rates on investments from the fluctuations arising from changes in the market prices of securities held. Such fluctuations are included with the net realized and unrealized gain or loss on investments.

Net realized foreign exchange gains or losses arise from sales of foreign currencies, currency gains or losses realized on securities transactions between trade and settlement date, and the difference between the amounts of dividends, interest and foreign withholding taxes recorded on the fund’s books and the U.S. dollar equivalent of the amounts actually received or paid. Net unrealized foreign exchange gains and losses arise from changes in the value of assets and liabilities other than investments resulting from changes in exchange rates. Foreign currency gains and losses on foreign currency transactions are also included with net realized and unrealized gain or loss on investments.

(c) Securities transactions and investment income: Securities transactions are recorded on a trade date basis. Realized gains and losses from securities transactions are recorded on the identified cost basis. Dividend income is recognized on the ex-dividend date and interest income, including, where applicable, accretion of discount and amortization of premium on investments, is recognized on the accrual basis.

The Fund 25

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

Pursuant to a securities lending agreement with The Bank of NewYork Mellon, a subsidiary of BNY Mellon and an affiliate of Dreyfus, the fund may lend securities to qualified institutions. It is the fund’s policy that, at origination, all loans are secured by collateral of at least 102% of the value of U.S. securities loaned and 105% of the value of foreign securities loaned. Collateral equivalent to at least 100% of the market value of securities on loan is maintained at all times. Collateral is either in the form of cash, which can be invested in certain money market mutual funds managed by Dreyfus or U.S. Government and Agency securities. The fund is entitled to receive all dividends, interest and distributions on securities loaned, in addition to income earned as a result of the lending transaction. Should a borrower fail to return the securities in a timely manner,The Bank of NewYork Mellon is required to replace the securities for the benefit of the fund or credit the fund with the market value of the unreturned securities and is subrogated to the fund’s rights against the borrower and the collateral. During the period ended October 31, 2013, The Bank of New York Mellon earned $10,673 from lending portfolio securities, pursuant to the securities lending agreement.

(d) Affiliated issuers: Investments in other investment companies advised by Dreyfus are defined as “affiliated” under the Act. Investments in affiliated investment companies during the period ended October 31, 2013 were as follows:

(e) Dividends to shareholders: Dividends are recorded on the ex-dividend date. Dividends from investment income-net are normally declared and paid quarterly. Dividends from net realized capital gains, if any, are normally declared and paid annually, but the fund may make distributions on a more frequent basis to comply with the distribution requirements of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”).To the extent that net realized capital gains can be offset by capital loss carryovers, it is the policy of the fund not to distribute such gains. Income and capital gain distributions are determined in accordance with income tax regulations, which may differ from GAAP.

(f) Federal income taxes: It is the policy of the fund to continue to qualify as a regulated investment company, if such qualification is in the best interests of its shareholders, by complying with the applicable provisions of the Code, and to make distributions of taxable income sufficient to relieve it from substantially all federal income and excise taxes.

As of and during the period ended October 31, 2013, the fund did not have any liabilities for any uncertain tax positions.The fund recognizes interest and penalties, if any, related to uncertain tax positions as income tax expense in the Statement of Operations. During the period ended October 31, 2013, the fund did not incur any interest or penalties.

Each tax year in the four-year period ended October 31, 2013 remains subject to examination by the Internal Revenue Service and state taxing authorities.

At October 31, 2013, the components of accumulated earnings on a tax basis were as follows: undistributed ordinary income $2,367,087, accumulated capital losses $196,164 and unrealized appreciation $379,782,625.

Under the Regulated Investment Company Modernization Act of 2010 (the “2010 Act”), the fund is permitted to carry forward capital losses incurred in taxable years beginning after December 22, 2010 (“post-enactment losses”) for an unlimited period. Furthermore, post-

The Fund 27

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

enactment capital loss carryovers retain their character as either short-term or long-term capital losses rather than short-term as they were under previous statute.

The accumulated capital loss carryover is available for federal income tax purposes to be applied against future net realized capital gains, if any, realized subsequent to October 31, 2013.The fund has $196,164 of post-enactment long-term capital losses which can be carried forward for an unlimited period.

The tax character of distributions paid to shareholders during the fiscal periods ended October 31, 2013 and October 31, 2012 were as follows: ordinary income $9,001,797 and $10,404,395, and long-term capital gains $2,588,539 and $12,974,638, respectively.

During the period ended October 31, 2013, as a result of permanent book to tax differences, primarily due to the tax treatment for foreign currency gains and losses and dividend reclassification, the fund decreased accumulated undistributed investment income-net by $3,098 and increased accumulated net realized gain (loss) on investments by the same amount. Net assets and net asset value per share were not affected by this reclassification.

NOTE 2—Bank Lines of Credit:

The fund participates with other Dreyfus-managed funds in a $265 million unsecured credit facility led by Citibank, N.A. and a $300 million unsecured credit facility provided by The Bank of New York Mellon (each, a “Facility”), each to be utilized primarily for temporary or emergency purposes, including the financing of redemptions. Prior to October 9, 2013, the unsecured credit facility with Citibank, N.A. was $210 million. In connection therewith, the fund has agreed to pay its pro rata portion of commitment fees for each Facility. Interest is charged to the fund based on rates determined pursuant to the terms of the respective Facility at the time of borrowing.

The average amount of borrowings outstanding under the Facilities during the period ended October 31, 2013 was approximately $17,000 with a related weighted average annualized interest rate of 1.12%.

NOTE 3—Management Fee, Sub-Investment Advisory Fee and Other Transactions with Affiliates:

(a) Pursuant to a management agreement with the Manager, the management fee is computed at the annual rate of .75% of the value of the fund’s average daily net assets and is payable monthly.

Pursuant to a sub-investment advisory agreement between Dreyfus and Sarofim & Co., Dreyfus pays Sarofim & Co. a fee at the annual rate of .2175% of the value of the fund’s average daily net assets and is payable monthly.

During the period ended October 31, 2013, the Distributor retained $64,989 from commissions earned on sales of the fund’s Class A shares and $6,172 from CDSCs on redemptions of the fund’s Class C shares.

(b) Under the Distribution Plan adopted pursuant to Rule 12b-1 under the Act, Class C shares pay the Distributor for distributing its shares at an annual rate of .75% of the value of its average daily net assets. During the period ended October 31, 2013, Class C shares were charged $506,408, pursuant to the Distribution Plan.

(c) Under the Shareholder Services Plan, Class A and Class C shares pay the Distributor at an annual rate of .25% of the value of their average daily net assets for the provision of certain services. The services provided may include personal services relating to shareholder accounts, such as answering shareholder inquiries regarding the fund and providing reports and other information, and services related to the maintenance of shareholder accounts. The Distributor may make payments to Service Agents (securities dealers, financial institutions or other industry professionals) with respect to these services. The

The Fund 29

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

Distributor determines the amounts to be paid to Service Agents. During the period ended October 31, 2013, Class A and Class C shares were charged $1,166,277 and $168,803, respectively, pursuant to the Shareholder Services Plan.

The fund has arrangements with the transfer agent and the custodian whereby the fund may receive earnings credits when positive cash balances are maintained, which are used to offset transfer agency and custody fees. For financial reporting purposes, the fund includes net earnings credits as an expense offset in the Statement of Operations.

The fund compensates DreyfusTransfer, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Dreyfus, under a transfer agency agreement for providing transfer agency and cash management services for the fund. The majority of transfer agency fees are comprised of amounts paid on a per account basis, while cash management fees are related to fund subscriptions and redemptions. During the period ended October 31, 2013, the fund was charged $244,719 for transfer agency services and $10,945 for cash management services.These fees are included in Shareholder servicing costs in the Statement of Operations. Cash management fees were partially offset by earnings credits of $1,361.

The fund compensates The Bank of NewYork Mellon under a custody agreement for providing custodial services for the fund.These fees are determined based on net assets, geographic region and transaction activity. During the period ended October 31, 2013, the fund was charged $65,586 pursuant to the custody agreement.

The fund compensated The Bank of New York Mellon under a cash management agreement that was in effect until September 30, 2013 for performing certain cash management services related to fund subscriptions and redemptions. During the period ended October 31, 2013, the fund was charged $5,493 pursuant to the cash management agreement, which is included in Shareholder servicing costs in the Statement of Operations.These fees were partially offset by earnings credits of $10.

During the period ended October 31, 2013, the fund was charged $8,887 for services performed by the Chief Compliance Officer and his staff.

The components of “Due to The Dreyfus Corporation and affiliates” in the Statement of Assets and Liabilities consist of: management fees $421,472, Distribution Plan fees $44,419, Shareholder Services Plan fees $117,289, custodian fees $22,825, Chief Compliance Officer fees $7,445 and transfer agency fees $82,262.

(d) Each Board member also serves as a Board member of other funds within the Dreyfus complex. Annual retainer fees and attendance fees are allocated to each fund based on net assets.

NOTE 4—Securities Transactions:

The aggregate amount of purchases and sales of investment securities, excluding short-term securities, during the period ended October 31, 2013, amounted to $25,893,252 and $18,568,681, respectively.

At October 31, 2013, the cost of investments for federal income tax purposes was $294,978,245; accordingly, accumulated net unrealized appreciation on investments was $379,782,625, consisting of $384,988,155 gross unrealized appreciation and $5,205,530 gross unrealized depreciation.

The Fund 31

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED
PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

Shareholders and Board of Directors Dreyfus Worldwide Growth Fund

We have audited the accompanying statement of assets and liabilities, including the statement of investments, of Dreyfus Worldwide Growth Fund (the sole series comprising Dreyfus Premier Worldwide Growth Fund, Inc.) as of October 31, 2013 and the related statement of operations for the year then ended, the statement of changes in net assets for each of the two years in the period then ended, and the financial highlights for each of the periods indicated therein. These financial statements and financial highlights are the responsibility of the Fund’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements and financial highlights based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States).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.We were not engaged to perform an audit of the Fund’s internal control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, 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. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements and financial highlights, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our procedures included confirmation of securities owned as of October 31, 2013 by correspondence with the custodian and others.We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements and financial highlights referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Dreyfus Worldwide Growth Fund at October 31, 2013, the results of its operations for the year then ended, the changes in its net assets for each of the two years in the period then ended, and the financial highlights for each of the indicated periods, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.

NewYork, NewYork
December 27, 2013

IMPORTATION TAX INFORMATION (Unaudited)

In accordance with federal tax law, the fund hereby reports 100% of the ordinary dividends paid during the fiscal year ended October 31, 2013 as qualifying for the corporate dividends received deduction. For the fiscal year ended October 31, 2013, certain dividends paid by the fund may be subject to a maximum tax rate of 15%, as provided for by the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003. Of the distributions paid during the fiscal year, $9,001,797 represents the maximum amount that may be considered qualified dividend income. Shareholders will receive notification in early 2014 of the percentage applicable to the preparation of their 2013 income tax returns. Also, the fund hereby designates $.2000 per share as a long-term capital gain distribution paid on December 18, 2012.

The Fund 33

INFORMATION ABOUT THE RENEWAL OF THE
FUND’S MANAGEMENT AND SUB-INVESTMENT
ADVISORY AGREEMENTS (Unaudited)

At a meeting of the fund’s Board of Directors held on July 23, 2013, the Board considered the renewal of the fund’s Management Agreement, pursuant to which Dreyfus provides the fund with investment advisory and administrative services (the “Agreement”), and the Sub-Investment Advisory Agreement (together, the “Agreements”), pursuant to which Fayez Sarofim & Co. (the “Sub-Adviser”) provides day-to-day management of the fund’s investments.The Board members, none of whom are “interested persons” (as defined in the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended) of the fund, were assisted in their review by independent legal counsel and met with counsel in executive session separate from representatives of Dreyfus and the Sub-Adviser. In considering the renewal of the Agreements, the Board considered all factors that it believed to be relevant, including those discussed below.The Board did not identify any one factor as dispositive, and each Board member may have attributed different weights to the factors considered.

Analysis of Nature, Extent, and Quality of Services Provided to the Fund. The Board considered information provided to them at the meeting and in previous presentations from Dreyfus representatives regarding the nature, extent, and quality of the services provided to funds in the Dreyfus fund complex. Dreyfus provided the number of open accounts in the fund, the fund’s asset size and the allocation of fund assets among distribution channels. Dreyfus also had previously provided information regarding the diverse intermediary relationships and distribution channels of funds in the Dreyfus fund complex (such as retail direct or intermediary, in which intermediaries typically are paid by the fund and/or Dreyfus) and Dreyfus’ corresponding need for broad, deep, and diverse resources to be able to provide ongoing shareholder services to each intermediary or distribution channel, as applicable to the fund.

The Board also considered research support available to, and portfolio management capabilities of, the fund’s portfolio management personnel and that Dreyfus also provides oversight of day-to-day fund operations, including fund accounting and administration and assistance in meeting

legal and regulatory requirements.The Board also considered Dreyfus’ extensive administrative, accounting, and compliance infrastructures, as well as Dreyfus’ supervisory activities over the Sub-Adviser.The Board also considered portfolio management’s brokerage policies and practices (including policies and practices regarding soft dollars) and the standards applied in seeking best execution.

Comparative Analysis of the Fund’s Performance and Management Fee and Expense Ratio. The Board reviewed reports prepared by Lipper, Inc. (“Lipper”), an independent provider of investment company data, which included information comparing (1) the fund’s performance with the performance of a group of comparable funds (the “Performance Group”) and with a broader group of funds (the “Performance Universe”), all for various periods ended May 31, 2013, and (2) the fund’s actual and contractual management fees and total expenses with those of a group of comparable funds (the “Expense Group”) and with a broader group of funds (the “Expense Universe”), the information for which was derived in part from fund financial statements available to Lipper as of the date of its analysis. Dreyfus previously had furnished the Board with a description of the methodology Lipper used to select the Performance Group and Performance Universe and the Expense Group and Expense Universe.

Dreyfus representatives stated that the usefulness of performance comparisons may be affected by a number of factors, including different investment limitations that may be applicable to the fund and comparison funds.

They also noted that performance generally should be considered over longer periods of time, although it is possible that long-term performance can be adversely affected by even one period of significant underperformance so that a single investment decision or theme has the ability to affect disproportionately long-term performance. The Board discussed the results of the comparisons and noted that the fund’s total return performance was above the Performance Group

The Fund 35

INFORMATION ABOUT THE RENEWAL OF THE FUND’S MANAGEMENT
AND SUB-INVESTMENT ADVISORY AGREEMENTS (Unaudited) (continued)

and Performance Universe medians for the various periods, except for the one-year period when the fund’s performance was below the Performance Group and Performance Universe medians and the ten-year period when the fund’s performance was below the Performance Universe median. Dreyfus also provided a comparison of the fund’s calendar year total returns to the returns of the fund’s benchmark index.

The Board also reviewed the range of actual and contractual management fees and total expenses of the Expense Group and Expense Universe funds and discussed the results of the comparisons.The Board noted that the fund’s contractual management fee was below the Expense Group median and the fund’s actual management fee and total expenses were below the Expense Group and Expense Universe medians.

Dreyfus representatives reviewed with the Board the management or investment advisory fees (1) paid by funds advised or administered by Dreyfus that are in the same Lipper category as the fund and (2) paid to Dreyfus or the Sub-Adviser or its affiliates for advising any separate accounts and/or other types of client portfolios that are considered to have similar investment strategies and policies as the fund (the “Similar Clients”), and explained the nature of the Similar Clients.They discussed differences in fees paid and the relationship of the fees paid in light of any differences in the services provided and other relevant factors.The Board considered the relevance of the fee information provided for the Similar Clients to evaluate the appropriateness and reasonableness of the fund’s management fee.

The Board considered the fee to the Sub-Adviser in relation to the fee paid to Dreyfus by the fund and the respective services provided by the Sub-Adviser and Dreyfus.The Board also noted the Sub-Adviser’s fee is paid by Dreyfus (out of its fee from the fund) and not the fund.

Analysis of Profitability and Economies of Scale. Dreyfus representatives reviewed the expenses allocated and profit received by Dreyfus and the resulting profitability percentage for managing the fund and

the aggregate profitability percentage to Dreyfus of managing the funds in the Dreyfus fund complex, and the method used to determine the expenses and profit. The Board concluded that the profitability results were not unreasonable, given the services rendered and service levels provided by Dreyfus. The Board also had been provided with information prepared by an independent consulting firm regarding Dreyfus’ approach to allocating costs to, and determining the profitability of, individual funds and the entire Dreyfus fund complex.The consulting firm also had analyzed where any economies of scale might emerge in connection with the management of a fund.

The Board considered on the advice of its counsel the profitability analysis (1) as part of its evaluation of whether the fees under the Agreements bear a reasonable relationship to the mix of services provided by Dreyfus and the Sub-Adviser, including the nature, extent and quality of such services, and (2) in light of the relevant circumstances for the fund and the extent to which economies of scale would be realized if the fund grows and whether fee levels reflect these economies of scale for the benefit of fund shareholders. Since Dreyfus, and not the fund, pays the Sub-Adviser pursuant to the Sub-Investment Advisory Agreement, the Board did not consider the Sub-Adviser’s profitability to be relevant to its deliberations. Dreyfus representatives also noted that, as a result of shared and allocated costs among funds in the Dreyfus fund complex, the extent of economies of scale could depend substantially on the level of assets in the complex as a whole, so that increases and decreases in complex-wide assets can affect potential economies of scale in a manner that is disproportionate to, or even in the opposite direction from, changes in the fund’s asset level.The Board also considered potential benefits to Dreyfus and the Sub-Adviser from acting as investment adviser and sub-investment adviser, respectively, and noted the soft dollar arrangements in effect for trading the fund’s investments.

The Fund 37

INFORMATION ABOUT THE RENEWAL OF THE FUND’S MANAGEMENT
AND SUB-INVESTMENT ADVISORY AGREEMENTS (Unaudited) (continued)

At the conclusion of these discussions, the Board agreed that it had been furnished with sufficient information to make an informed business decision with respect to the renewal of the Agreements. Based on the discussions and considerations as described above, the Board concluded and determined as follows.

• The Board concluded that the nature, extent and quality of the services provided by Dreyfus and the Sub-Adviser are adequate and appropriate.

• The Board generally was satisfied with the fund’s overall performance.

• The Board concluded that the fees paid to Dreyfus and the Sub-Adviser were reasonable in light of the considerations described above.

• The Board determined that the economies of scale which may accrue to Dreyfus and its affiliates in connection with the management of the fund had been adequately considered by Dreyfus in connection with the fee rate charged to the fund pursuant to the Agreement and that, to the extent in the future it were determined that material economies of scale had not been shared with the fund, the Board would seek to have those economies of scale shared with the fund.

In evaluating the Agreements, the Board considered these conclusions and determinations and also relied on its previous knowledge, gained through meetings and other interactions with Dreyfus and its affiliates and the Sub-Adviser, of the fund and the services provided to the fund by Dreyfus and the Sub-Adviser.The Board also relied on information received on a routine and regular basis throughout the year relating to the operations of the fund and the investment management and other services provided under the Agreements, including information on the investment performance of the fund in comparison to

Item 2. Code of Ethics.

The Registrant has adopted a code of ethics that applies to the Registrant's principal executive officer, principal financial officer, principal accounting officer or controller, or persons performing similar functions. There have been no amendments to, or waivers in connection with, the Code of Ethics during the period covered by this Report.

Item 3. Audit Committee Financial Expert.

The Registrant's Board has determined that Joseph S. DiMartino, a member of the Audit Committee of the Board, is an audit committee financial expert as defined by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC"). Mr. DiMartino is "independent" as defined by the SEC for purposes of audit committee financial expert determinations.

Item 4. Principal Accountant Fees and Services.

(a) Audit Fees. The aggregate fees billed for each of the last two fiscal years (the "Reporting Periods") for professional services rendered by the Registrant's principal accountant (the "Auditor") for the audit of the Registrant's annual financial statements or services that are normally provided by the Auditor in connection with the statutory and regulatory filings or engagements for the Reporting Periods, were $ 41,624 in 2012 and $42,576 in 2013.

(b) Audit-Related Fees. The aggregate fees billed in the Reporting Periods for assurance and related services by the Auditor that are reasonably related to the performance of the audit of the Registrant's financial statements and are not reported under paragraph (a) of this Item 4 were $6,000 in 2012 (17f-2 fees) and $7,200 in 2013 ($6,000-17f-2 fees and $1,200-non-17f-2 fees). These services consisted of one or more of the following: (i) agreed upon procedures related to compliance with Internal Revenue Code section 817(h), (ii) security counts required by Rule 17f-2 under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, (iii) advisory services as to the accounting or disclosure treatment of Registrant transactions or events and (iv) advisory services to the accounting or disclosure treatment of the actual or potential impact to the Registrant of final or proposed rules, standards or interpretations by the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Financial Accounting Standards Boards or other regulatory or standard-setting bodies.

The aggregate fees billed in the Reporting Periods for non-audit assurance and related services by the Auditor to the Registrant's investment adviser (not including any sub-investment adviser whose role is primarily portfolio management and is subcontracted with or overseen by another investment adviser), and any entity controlling, controlled by or under common control with the investment adviser that provides ongoing services to the Registrant ("Service Affiliates"), that were reasonably related to the performance of the annual audit of the Service Affiliate, which required pre-approval by the Audit Committee were $0 in 2012 and $0 in 2013.

(c) Tax Fees. The aggregate fees billed in the Reporting Periods for professional services rendered by the Auditor for tax compliance, tax advice, and tax planning ("Tax Services") were $3,686 in 2012 and $5,951 in 2013. These services consisted of: (i) review or preparation of U.S. federal, state, local and excise tax returns; (ii) U.S. federal, state and local tax planning, advice and assistance regarding statutory, regulatory or administrative developments; (iii) tax advice regarding tax qualification matters and/or treatment of various financial instruments held or proposed to be acquired or held, and (iv) determination of Passive Foreign Investment Companies. The aggregate fees billed in the Reporting Periods for Tax Services by the Auditor to Service Affiliates, which required pre-approval by the Audit Committee were $0 in 2012 and $0 in 2013.

(d) All Other Fees. The aggregate fees billed in the Reporting Periods for products and services provided by the Auditor, other than the services reported in paragraphs (a) through (c) of this Item, were $1,536 in 2012 and $1,571 in 2013. These services consisted of a review of the Registrant's anti-money laundering program.

The aggregate fees billed in the Reporting Periods for Non-Audit Services by the Auditor to Service Affiliates, other than the services reported in paragraphs (b) through (c) of this Item, which required pre-approval by the Audit Committee, were $200,000 in 2012 and $0 in 2013.

(e)(1) Audit Committee Pre-Approval Policies and Procedures. The Registrant's Audit Committee has established policies and procedures (the "Policy") for pre-approval (within specified fee limits) of the Auditor's engagements for non-audit services to the Registrant and Service Affiliates without specific case-by-case consideration. The pre-approved services in the Policy can include pre-approved audit services, pre-approved audit-related services, pre-approved tax services and pre-approved all other services. Pre-approval considerations include whether the proposed services are compatible with maintaining the Auditor's independence. Pre-approvals pursuant to the Policy are considered annually.

(e)(2) Note: None of the services described in paragraphs (b) through (d) of this Item 4 were approved by the Audit Committee pursuant to paragraph (c)(7)(i)(C) of Rule 2-01 of Regulation S-X.

(f) None 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 account's full-time, permanent employees.

Non-Audit Fees. The aggregate non-audit fees billed by the Auditor for services rendered to the Registrant, and rendered to Service Affiliates, for the Reporting Periods were $47,346,640 in 2012 and $53,266,415 in 2013.

Auditor Independence. The Registrant's Audit Committee has considered whether the provision of non-audit services that were rendered to Service Affiliates, which were not pre-approved (not requiring pre-approval), is compatible with maintaining the Auditor's independence.

Item 5. Audit Committee of Listed Registrants.

Not applicable. [CLOSED-END FUNDS ONLY]

Item 6. Investments.

(a) Not applicable.

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

Not applicable. [CLOSED-END FUNDS ONLY]

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

Not applicable. [CLOSED-END FUNDS ONLY, beginning with reports for periods ended on and after December 31, 2005]

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

Not applicable. [CLOSED-END FUNDS ONLY]

Item 10. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders.

There have been no material changes to the procedures applicable to Item 10.

Item 11. Controls and Procedures.

(a) The Registrant's principal executive and principal financial officers have concluded, based on their evaluation of the Registrant's disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days of the filing date of this report, that the Registrant's disclosure controls and procedures are reasonably designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by the Registrant on Form N-CSR is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the required time periods and that information required to be disclosed by the Registrant in the reports that it files or submits on Form N-CSR is accumulated and communicated to the Registrant's management, including its principal executive and principal financial officers, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

(b) There were no changes to the Registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the second fiscal quarter of 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. Exhibits.

(a)(1) Code of ethics referred to in Item 2.

(a)(2) Certifications of principal executive and principal financial officers as required by Rule 30a-2(a) under the Investment Company Act of 1940.

(a)(3) Not applicable.

(b) Certification of principal executive and principal financial officers as required by Rule 30a-2(b) under the Investment Company Act of 1940.

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.

Dreyfus Premier Worldwide Growth Fund, Inc.

By: /s/ Bradley J. Skapyak
Bradley J. Skapyak, President
Date:	December 18, 2013

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/ Bradley J. Skapyak
Bradley J. Skapyak, President
Date:	December 18, 2013

By: /s/ James Windels
James Windels, Treasurer
Date:	December 18, 2013

EXHIBIT INDEX

(a)(1) Code of ethics referred to in Item 2.

(a)(2) Certifications of principal executive and principal financial officers as required by Rule 30a-2(a) under the Investment Company Act of 1940. (EX-99.CERT)

(b) Certification of principal executive and principal financial officers as required by Rule 30a-2(b) under the Investment Company Act of 1940. (EX-99.906CERT)


a	Effective as of the close of business on March 13, 2012, the fund no longer offers Class B shares.
b	During the period ended October 31, 2013, 9,094 Class C shares representing $419,600 were exchanged for
	8,302 Class A shares.
c	During the period ended October 31, 2012, 34,230 Class B shares representing $1,424,882 were automatically
	converted to 32,650 Class A shares.
See notes to financial statements.


a	From July 1, 2013 (commencement of initial offering) to October 31, 2013.
b	Based on average shares outstanding at each month end.
c	Not annualized.
d	Annualized.
See notes to financial statements.


a	Based on average shares outstanding at each month end.
b	Exclusive of sales charge.
See notes to financial statements.