open/document-extraction

Added by Kamaji | Added: 2026-10-23 22:19 | Edited: 2026-10-23 22:21 | Views: 9 | Model: dorsalhub/pdf-extractor

This view of the annotation often reflects the precision of the extraction model or annotator, as well as the complexity of the document.

G u i n n e s s _ I n t e r i m _ 2 0 2 6 0 6 3 0 _ v 2 . 0 . d o c x

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc (an umbrella fund with segregated liability between sub-funds)

Interim Report and

Condensed Unaudited

Financial Statements

For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Page 2

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc

Table of contents Page

Company information 3 Investment Manager's report 4 Statement of financial position 46 Statement of comprehensive income 50 Statement of changes in net assets attributable to holders of redeemable participating shares 54 Statement of cashflows 56 Notes to the financial statements 60 Schedule of Investments 108 Statement of significant portfolio movements 142 Appendix 1 – Fund performance and Total Expense Ratio 160 Appendix 2 – Portfolio Turnover Ratio (PTR) 164

Page 3

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc

Company information

Directors of the Company Johnny McClintock (Irish) (Independent) David McGeough (Irish) (Independent) Noel Lamb (British) (Independent) Edward Guinness 1 (British) Andrew E. Martin Smith 1 (British) Timothy W.N. Guinness 1 (British) (Alternate Director to Edward Guinness) Registered Office 4 th Floor, The Sidings 2 Grand Canal Quay Dublin 2 D02 E7K8 Ireland Manager Waystone Management Company (IE) Limited 35 Shelbourne Road Ballsbridge Dublin 4 D04 A4E0 Ireland Depositary Brown Brothers Harriman Trustee Services (Ireland) Limited 30 Herbert Street Dublin 2 D02 W329 Ireland Investment Manager and Global Distributor Guinness Asset Management Limited 18 Smith Square Westminster London SW1P 3HZ United Kingdom Sub-Investment Manager Guinness China RMB Income Fund EPIC Markets (UK) LLP 200 Aldersgate Street London EC1A 4HD United Kingdom Administrator and Registrar Waystone Administration Solutions (IE) Limited 35 Shelbourne Road Ballsbridge Dublin 4 D04 A4E0 Ireland Independent Auditor Grant Thornton Chartered Accountants and Statutory Audit Firm 13-18 City Quay Dublin 2 D02 ED70 Ireland Irish Legal Advisors Dillon Eustace 33-34 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay Grand Canal Dock Dublin 2 D02 XK09 Ireland Company Secretary CSC Finance Holding Ireland Limited 2 4 th Floor, The Sidings Grand Canal Quay Dublin 2 D02 E7K8 Ireland Company number 450670 (Registered in Ireland)

_____________________ 1 Employee of the Investment Manager 2 Effective 18 May 2026, the Registered Office address of the Company and Company Secretary changed.

Page 4

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc

Investment Manager's report For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Global Energy Fund (the “Fund”) Performance The Fund in the first six months of 2026 produced a total return of +20.4% in USD. This compares to a total return of +18.5% for the Fund’s benchmark, the MSCI World Energy Index (net), and the MSCI World Index’s total return (net) of 9.7%. Performance summary in US Dollars: Class Y compared with MSCI World Energy Net Return Index

Annualised Calendar years 6 months 1 year 3 years 5 years 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Fund 20.4% 33.9% 14.5% 15.2% 44.5% 32.4% 2.6% -1.3% 17.1% Index 18.5% 28.4% 13.7% 16.9% 40.1% 46.0% 2.5% 2.7% 13.3%

Review Over the first six months of 2026, the energy market moved from a position of comfortable supply into one of material disruption. At the start of the year, the oil market was oversupplied, inventories were robust, and Brent oil traded just above $60/bl. OPEC+ had unwound a significant proportion of its voluntary cuts during 2025, non-OPEC supply was still growing, and the market only had limited focus on possible issues in the Middle East. By the end of February, geopolitical risk around Iran had intensified and the outbreak of war in the Middle East turned the Strait of Hormuz from a theoretical risk into the central constraint for global oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) markets. The scale of the disruption has been extraordinary. The Strait of Hormuz normally handles around 20m b/day of crude oil, condensate and oil products, as well as around 20% of global LNG trade. Since the outbreak of conflict, tanker traffic through the Strait has fallen to a fraction of normal levels. Pipeline re-routing through Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Iraq, strategic inventory releases, de-sanctioned barrels and the rebalancing of trade flows have helped to reduce the net disruption, but the market has still been left with a very large supply shortfall. By the end of June, we estimate that around 1.3bn barrels of oil supply has been shut-in over the course of the conflict equivalent to around 16% of global oil and product inventories.

Brent oil price and Brent five year forward oil price (US$/bl)

Source: Bloomberg; Guinness Global Investors Oil prices have therefore been volatile but, perhaps surprisingly, not as high as the scale of disruption might imply. Brent started the year at around $62/bl, rose above $120/bl during the first phase of the conflict, and then fell back as investors anticipated a reopening of the Strait and as evidence emerged that the system was finding short-term ways to cope. By the end of June, Brent stood at $72/bl, up 14% since the start of the year but well down on the April peak. Brent oil has averaged $93/bl so far in 2026. Four main factors have helped to limit the price response: i. The market entered the year with large buffers, including elevated oil and oil product inventories and substantial oil on the water; ii. Repeated optimism that a reopening of the Strait was imminent has weighed on forward prices, particularly because the Brent contract reflects delivery some weeks in the future; iii. Trade flows adjusted rapidly: US seaborne net exports increased sharply and China reduced net oil imports, helping to reduce stress in the physical system; and iv. It also looks likely that global oil demand has fallen sharply, as another adjustment to cushion the loss of Middle East supply. The IEA estimated that global oil demand was down around 4.6m b/day in April and 5.4m b/day in May. Nonetheless, the cost of this adjustment has been a heavy drawdown in inventories. We estimate that oil and product inventories have been drawing at around 7m b/day, or around 200m barrels per month. As of the end of June, around 1.3bn barrels had already been lost to the market, and the total loss is likely to exceed 2bn barrels once the disruption and recovery phase are taken into account.

Page 5

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Global Energy Fund (the “Fund”) (continued) Review (continued)

Global observed oil & product inventories (m barrels)

Source: IEA Away from the Middle East, and we saw notable geopolitical developments in Venezuela and Russia also affecting the oil market during the first half of the year. In Venezuela, the removal of Nicolás Maduro raised the possibility of a medium-term recovery in oil production from a very depleted base. Venezuelan production remains only around 1% of world supply and any meaningful recovery will require political stability, improved contract sanctity, sanctions relief, and significant foreign investment. In Russia, meanwhile, Ukraine intensified its campaign against oil infrastructure, with drone strikes hitting a range of refineries and export terminals. The effect has been less about crude production itself and more about Russia’s ability to process crude into diesel, gasoline and other refined products. In April, Russia’s refined product exports were reported to drop to 4.7m b/day, the lowest level in 16 years. The OPEC+ framework saw a material change, with the UAE announcing at the end of April that it would leave the group effective 1 May 2026. The immediate price impact was limited because the Strait of Hormuz remained the dominant issue and because the UAE cannot materially increase exports while flows are constrained. Longer term, the decision reduces OPEC spare capacity outside the UAE and raises questions about group cohesion. Saudi remains the central actor in OPEC+, but it may now face both simpler decision-making and a greater share of responsibility for balancing the market. Natural gas markets have also been affected by the Iran conflict. The Strait of Hormuz normally carries around 10-11 Bcf/day of LNG, representing around 20% of global LNG supply. QatarEnergy shut in production early in the conflict, with two Qatari processing lines damaged and likely offline for three to five years. International LNG prices rose sharply, with Europe and Asia competing for non-Middle Eastern cargoes at a time when European inventories were already lower than normal after winter. UK natural gas prices, a proxy for the European market, rose by 34% over the period, whilst Japanese LNG prices were up by 67%. The US gas market has been somewhat insulated from the direct LNG disruption, though it has still been influenced by weather, LNG export demand and the broader global gas arbitrage. Henry Hub began the year strongly as winter storm Fern caused widespread wellhead freeze-offs and a record weekly inventory withdrawal, before prices moderated as weather normalised and inventories rebuilt. At the end of June, Henry Hub stood at $3.29/Mcf, down by around 11% since the start of the year. Global natural gas prices (US$/mcf)

Source: Bloomberg; Guinness Global Investors

Page 6

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Global Energy Fund (the “Fund”) (continued) Portfolio performance The first half of 2026 saw strong absolute performance for energy equities, though the path was volatile. By the end of June, the MSCI World Energy Index had returned 18.5% in USD, versus +9.7% for the MSCI World Index, while the Fund had returned +20.4% in USD. Performance was strongest during the initial escalation in March, but energy equities then underperformed the broader market in April and May as investors questioned why oil prices were not higher.

Within the Fund portfolio over the period, stronger performers included:  European mid-cap integrateds: Repsol, GALP, Eni and OMV were among the strongest contributors during the first phase of the Iran conflict, helped by higher Brent-linked earnings and elevated refining margins.

 Oil services: Baker Hughes, Schlumberger and Halliburton performed well, supported at different points by expectations of higher service activity outside the Middle East, a rebuilding of damaged Gulf-based oil & gas facilities, plus growth of LNG demand.

 Canadian integrateds and oil sands: Canadian Natural Resources, Suncor, Cenovus and Imperial Oil benefited from stronger oil prices and a renewed appreciation of secure, non-Middle Eastern supply.

 US refining: Valero and refining-linked parts of the majors (e.g. Exxon) were supported by tight product markets and the increasing importance of refinery flexibility as crude flows altered. Sectors in the portfolio that were relatively weaker over the period included:  Emerging market oils: PetroChina and Sinopec lagged over the period as Chinese government caps on refined product prices resulted in lower profitability for the Chinese majors versus Western peers.

 North American midstream: Enbridge, Kinder Morgan and TC Energy performed respectably in absolute terms, but with lower operating leverage to rising oil and gas prices than upstream focused companies, were relative underperformers.

Outlook As ever, the outcomes for spot oil prices in the short term are hard to predict. What is clearer is that the range of outcomes has shifted higher and that the market is underestimating the time required for the system to normalize, even if the peace agreement between the US and Iran does progress. The industry will need to rebuild working inventories, reposition tankers, repair infrastructure and restart fields. The market will also need to rebuild confidence in Gulf supply reliability. We therefore expect a tighter market into 2027 than was envisioned before the conflict. To expand on the Hormuz reopening issues, we summarise them broadly as follows:

 Confidence. Shipowners and crude shippers will need to be confident that the Strait is a genuinely safe place to operate. While the ceasefire now under question, that any confidence that has been building will be shaken. The passage of time, the safe passage of vessels and positive political momentum will be needed. In practical terms, a safe – mine free – route through the strait needs to be delivered, and this could easily take weeks and months to achieve.

 Tanker logistics. Tankers are now in the wrong places as many empty tankers have transited from outside the Gulf to West Africa or the United States to pick up other cargo rather than sitting idle outside the Strait. Getting tankers back into the right places will also take a number of weeks and, on its 1Q26 earnings call, Saudi Aramco's CEO called this "the biggest issue", adding that "even in the most optimistic scenario, the energy and commodity supply chains will need several months to return to their pre-conflict traffic, as vessels reroute or avoid being idle”.  Field restarts. Many shut-in oil fields will have to be restarted very carefully, even when storage is available. With many fields now static, reservoir pressures and wellbore temperatures will have fallen, allowing wax and asphaltenes to build up and plug production tubing. These effects and other equipment-related issues will be overcome with time and money, but recovery is likely to be uneven across fields and countries.

 Infrastructure damage. We understand that physical infrastructure damage is mostly related to downstream facilities such as refineries, export/storage terminals and LNG facilities. These can also be resolved with time and money. As with vessels passing through the Strait, we imagine that downstream operators will want to see high levels of confidence before completing the rebuilding process, so near-term processing volumes will be constrained. Putting all this together, we do not expect the oil export system in the Gulf to return to normality before the end of 2026. This is a view mirrored by a number of Middle East oil companies, most recently by Sultan Ahmed Al Jaber, CEO of ADNOC (Abu Dhabi National Oil Company): “Even if this conflict ends tomorrow… full flows will not return before the first or even second quarter of 2027”. As Saudi Aramco CEO Amin Nasser commented in early June, “If the Strait of Hormuz opens today, it will still take months for the market to rebalance, and if its opening is delayed by a few more weeks, then normalization will last into 2027”.

In fact, we do not expect that we will return to the previous ‘normal’ for a significant period. A combination of longer-term reservoir damage, delayed infrastructure restarts and potentially restricted flow through the Strait itself means that the Gulf’s oil export system is unlikely to be considered as safe and reliable as it was. On the other hand, alternative export routes (e.g. pipelines) will be explored, albeit with high cost and complexity. When we look back on this conflict in the future, it seems likely that it will have redrawn the Gulf energy system very significantly, affecting supply and supply egress from the region in both positive and negative ways.

Looking beyond the Middle East crisis, the IEA recently published their first oil demand forecast for 2027. After an expected demand decline of 1.1m b/day (to 103.3m b/day) in 2026, the IEA are forecasting demand to rebound by 2m b/day in 2027 to 105.3m b/day. This would take global oil demand to a new high, surpassing 2025 demand by around 1m b/day. Demand growth of 2m b/day in 2027 is predicated on a normalization of Gulf supply and an improving economic outlook, with global GDP growth assumed to rise to 3.3%. In addition, any decision by governments or companies to replenish strategic and commercial stocks would add further demand: replacing 2bn barrels over, say, the next two years, would imply around 3m b/day of additional oil purchasing. Non-OPEC+ supply in 2027 is set to rebound by 2.5m b/day, supported by the expected normalization in Gulf output (+1.4m b/day). Outside the Gulf, growth mainly comes from Central and South America. In Brazil, new field start-ups in the large Buzios field are expected to be a main driver for growth, whilst the Exxon-led consortium in Guyana brings further growth in Guyana. Considering supply developments in the Gulf, the likely shape of supply elsewhere in the world plus the picture for global demand, and we maintain our Brent price forecast for 2027 of $80/bl (vs 2026 forecast of $90/bl). Moves in energy equities so far this year have lifted valuations, but not excessively. At the start of 2026, we estimated that the portfolio reflected a long-term Brent oil price of around $67/bl. As a result of the conflict, we increased our 2026 Brent assumption to $90/bl. By the end of June, the portfolio's valuation implied a long-term Brent price of around $70/bl, still below the $80/bl level that we consider a reasonable long-term incentive price. We keep a close eye on the relationship between the P/B ratio for the energy sector and return on capital employed (ROCE), which historically shows a high correlation. The sharp rise in near-term oil prices should support reported earnings and cashflow in 2026 and 2027, but equity valuations still appear to discount a lower long-term commodity price than we think is realistic. If ROCE remains in a mid-cycle range and the market were to pay for it sustainably, we would expect a higher P/B multiple for the portfolio.

Page 7

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Global Energy Fund (the “Fund”) (continued) Outlook (continued) The higher ROCE is being supported by robust free cash generation. With our current 2026 and 2027 oil price assumptions, the portfolio should generate substantial free cashflow after capital expenditure, supporting fixed dividends, share buybacks and balance sheet improvement. In 2026, assuming a Brent oil price of $90/bl, we estimate a gross free cashflow yield for the portfolio of around 10%. To consider valuation another way, we are often asked what oil price is implied in the portfolio, as a barometer of the expectation priced into the equities. At the end of June, we estimated that the valuation of our portfolio of energy equities reflected a long-term Brent oil price of around $70/bl. If the market were to price in a long-term oil price of $80/bl, we see around 30% further upside. In summary, the first half of 2026 has seen extraordinary fundamental moves in the energy market. The year began with oversupply and low valuations; it has moved into a period of major supply disruption, rapid inventory draws and a reassessment of the reliability of Middle Eastern exports. Oil and gas prices have risen, but not to levels that fully reflect the risk of inventory operating stress, the length of the recovery process or the need to rebuild stocks. Energy equities have performed strongly in absolute terms, but valuations still appear to reflect a conservative long-term oil price. We therefore continue to see attractive upside in the Fund, supported by robust free cashflow and disciplined capital allocation from our portfolio companies.

Guinness Asset Management Limited

Page 8

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Sustainable Energy Fund (the “Fund”) Performance In the first half of 2026 the Fund produced a total return (USD) of +14.8% vs the MSCI World Index (net return) of +9.7%. The Fund therefore outperformed the index by 5.1 percentage points over the period. Performance summary in US Dollars: Class Y compared with MSCI World Net Return Index

Annualised Calendar years 6 months 1 year 3 years 5 years 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Fund 14.8% 30.4% 5.3% 2.9% 10.4% -12.5% -0.4% -11.8% 26.9% Index 9.7% 21.3% 19.2% 11.5% 21.8% -18.1% 23.8% 18.7% 21.1%

Review The key events that have affected the energy transition, company profitability and share price performance in the first half of 2026 are discussed below:

Iran shock : The Middle East crisis triggered a material disruption to global energy markets, removing around 14m b/day of oil and oil products from global supply. This represents the second global energy shock in just four years, underscoring and strengthening the case for sustainable energy technologies as a way to improve both energy security and energy flexibility, especially in economies reliant on energy imports such as Europe.

Secular growth: Demand for electricity continues to rise. Having grown at 2.8% per annum over the past decade, global electrification is expected to accelerate to 3.6% per annum to 2030. According to the IEA, 2024 was the first year in three decades that global electricity demand outpaced GDP growth, and this gap is expected to persist over at least the next five years thanks to three structural drivers.

• The first is regional. Developed markets are seeing the return of electricity demand growth after nearly 20 years of stagnation. In Europe and the United States, power consumption is expected to grow at around 2% per annum out to 2030.

• The second is sectoral. New, durable sources of demand are complementing established ones. Data centres and AI are an important driver in the United States but at a global level are surpassed by the electrification of transport at 12% of incremental demand growth. Industry and Buildings are the largest contributors at 36% and 27% respectively.

• The third is transitional, with electricity winning share from hydrocarbons in the global energy mix. Electricity consumption is now projected to grow at least 2.5 times faster than overall energy demand out to 2030. This is reflected in investment into sustainable energy technologies now accounting for almost two-thirds of total energy spending in 2026, totalling $2.2 trillion across clean energy generation, grids and efficiency technologies. Policy stability: After the tariff and tax credit uncertainty of 2025, policy headwinds in the United States have eased. A year ago, sustainable energy equities faced pressure from both tariffs and the downsizing of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) into the One Big Beautiful Bill (OBBB). This year, the threat of structurally higher US tariffs was mitigated by a Supreme Court judgment.

The resolution of the OBBB has also provided the industry with much needed clarity. Although the bill is objectively less favourable to clean energy than the IRA (eliminating EV and residential solar tax credits and speeding up the phase-out of utility solar and wind tax credits) the final cuts were not as bad as expected, with support for solar and battery manufacturing even being enhanced. With policy clarity now in place, developers have returned to the market, resulting in strong orders for clean energy equipment names like Vestas which reported one of its highest-ever order intakes in North American in the second quarter of 2026.

In Europe, policy remains supportive. In late April, the European Commission published AccelerateEU, its response to the energy crisis, building on the existing REPowerEU and Clean Industrial Deal frameworks. Of its five pillars, three directly support the energy transition: ‘more homegrown clean energy’, ‘stepping up our energy system’, and ‘boosting investment’. The plan reaffirms existing EU ambitions while signalling a more ambitious electrification agenda and introducing a new objective for installed energy storage capacity.

In China, the Energy Sector’s 15th Five-Year Plan (FYP), sets out national targets including reaching 50% non-fossil electricity generation by 2030, with energy security stated as the plan’s primary objective. On the demand side, electricity’s share of final consumption is targeted to rise from 30% to 35% by 2030, alongside a 30% increase in transmission and distribution spending. The new targets sit alongside China’s “anti-involution” drive which is supportive for both the size and profitability of its clean energy industry.

Within our portfolio, whilst the majority of our top performers have benefited from improving data centre spending in the half, we are encouraged by the diversity of business models which they represent:

• Our power electronics names (Infineon, NXP, Amphenol, Sensata) performed well on account of substantial growth in their AI data centre offerings and order intake, supplemented by recovering automotive and industrial end markets. Over the last 12 months, top performer Infineon has emerged as a key AI beneficiary with AI and data centre revenues expected to grow from approximately € 700m in 2025 to € 2.5bn in 2027.

• The electrical infrastructure companies all performed well, driven by an acceleration in global electrification activity, grid spending and, in certain cases, exposure to the data centre sub-sector. Top contributor Prysmian saw a data centre-driven recovery in its telecom fibre business and three contract awards for large subsea high voltage cables. • Buildings names demonstrated resilience in the half, despite subdued newbuild activity in the US and Europe. Trane Technologies maintained strong order intake for its efficient commercial cooling solutions in the US, while Owens Corning rallied sharply after receiving a $10bn takeover offer from fellow portfolio holding Carlisle to create a ‘one-stop shop’ for commercial and residential roofing and insulation products. • Poorer contributors covered various themes and end markets. Chinese clean energy names (Canadian Solar, Xinyi Solar, China Longyuan) continue to suffer the aftereffects of China’s transition from fixed feed-in tariffs to market pricing mechanisms for renewables, putting downward pressure on generator margins and reducing demand for equipment. AECOM, added in April, has performed poorly year-to-date despite record margins and strong bookings on fears that its use of AI tools might interfere with its current business model based on billable hours.

Page 9

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Sustainable Energy Fund (the “Fund”) (continued) Activity In the first half of the year there were two purchases, SSE and Aecom, and we sold out of two positions, OnSemi and Installed Building Products. The portfolio was also actively rebalanced.

Buys: • SSE is a leading UK integrated utility offering exposure to the UK electricity network build-out and broader electrification. The company has a fully funded multi-year investment plan that is driving rapid, inflation-linked growth in its regulated asset base and providing strong earnings visibility. We believe the market underappreciates the scale and duration of the UK transmission investment opportunity, allowing us to acquire a high-quality business with an attractive growth for quality profile. • AECOM is a global engineering firm which offers access to building efficiency and the renewable energy build-out alongside the strong global infrastructure market. The stock represented attractive growth for value upon entry, having sold off on fears over AI disrupting its business models. We are encouraged by the strong order intake of the business amidst these concerns, and its continual margin improvement. Sells: • We exited our position in OnSemi following a period of strong performance which saw the company outperform its peers. Over time, we became increasingly cautious on its longer-term competitive positioning across silicon carbide, power semiconductors and advanced driver assistance (ADAS) sensors, particularly with growing competition from Chinese players. As a result, we had less conviction in the extent to which the company would participate in a broader recovery across automotive and industrial end markets.

• We exited our position in Installed Building Products following a strong run of performance that resulted in the company trading at valuations not seen since 2021. Against the backdrop of a softening housing market in the US, we recycled the capital into AECOM, which we felt offered better risk/reward and exposure to attractive infrastructure end markets. In the quarter, we also received shares in Versigent, as Aptiv spun off its Electrical Distribution Systems business. Portfolio positioning At 30 June 2026, the Fund traded on a 2026/27 price/earnings ratio of 22.0x/18.2x. On a 12-month forward view, the Fund trades at about a 5% P/E premium to the MSCI World Index, with consensus forecasts suggesting it will deliver similar earnings growth (15.3% per annum vs the MSCI World at 15.1% per annum). Despite offering comparable valuation and earnings growth characteristics in the near term, we continue to believe that the durability of our portfolio’s earnings growth is underappreciated, as we expect companies providing decarbonisation solutions to benefit from multi-decade growth tailwinds from the energy transition.

Valuation and earnings growth of the Guinness Sustainable Energy Fund

Source: Guinness Global Investors (30 June 2026)

Following almost two years of de-rating, the 12-month forward P/E of the Fund has now re-rated to trade at a small premium to the MSCI World Index, reflecting improving policy clarity in the United States, the structural inflection in electricity demand, and the demonstrated improvement in sector profitability. 12-month forward P/E relative of Guinness Sustainable Energy Fund vs MSCI World Index

Source: Guinness Global Investors (30 June 2026)

Page 10

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Sustainable Energy Fund (the “Fund”) (continued) Portfolio positioning (continued) The Fund has a broad exposure to the sustainable energy universe and is split by theme below: Key themes in the Guinness Sustainable Energy Fund

Source: Guinness Global Investors (30 June 2026) Outlook Looking to the remainder of 2026 and beyond, we expect momentum to continue for energy transition equities, with macro and market conditions supportive of robust longer term growth:

 Renewable power generation is expected to grow by 8% per year out to 2030 with renewables and nuclear expected to account for around half of global power supply by that time.

 Grid investment will increase to support this, driven by both corporates and governments. In the US, utilities are expected to spend as much in the next five years ($1.4tn) as they did in the preceding decade, with distribution and transmission now making up 50% of the budget, up from 45% a decade ago.

 Building efficiency and electrification spending is expected to rise 5% from around $370bn last year to over $390bn in 2026, marking a return to growth, following a year of weak construction activity in 2025.

 Electric vehicle sales likely grow by around 11% to 23 million units, with EV penetration reaching 27% globally despite the removal of purchase tax credits in the US and scrappage schemes in China. Early 2026 data shows signs of stabilization in China with a return to growth expected in 2H 2026. Longer term, we see global EV penetration continuing to increase, reaching 45% by 2030.

 Battery prices remain supportive to our electric vehicle forecasts, with average pack prices expected to fall 3% in 2026 to $105/kWh – just above the $100/kWh threshold at which electric vehicles become cost competitive with internal combustion engines – continuing on a journey to $70-80/kWh by 2030.

 Solar installations are expected to fall for the first time on record as the Chinese market, responsible for just under 60% of demand, transitions from feed-in-tariffs to a market-based pricing system for generators. We continue to see growth elsewhere and stronger module prices supported by higher raw material costs (e.g. silver) and China’s anti-involution efforts. Beyond 2026, we expect solar PV’s positioning at the bottom of the cost curve to drive continued share gain in the energy mix.

 The global wind industry is on track to deliver c.154 GW of installations in 2026. Whilst headline installations are set to contract by around 10%, this is primarily driven by China, following a surge in deployments in 2025 to lock in more favourable power price guarantees. European wind installations are set to rise by around 60% in 2026. We expect similarly strong growth in North America as developers return to the market following the passing of the OBBB.

The outlook we summarise here is broadly consistent with current government activity and observable investment plans. To be clear, however, the growth described falls well short of the energy transition activity needed to achieve a net zero / 1.5 degree scenario in 2050, as targeted by the IPCC and reiterated at COP28. In a net zero scenario, the deployment of renewable generation capacity, penetration of EVs and battery storage, use of alternative fuels and implementation of energy efficiency measures will need to accelerate markedly.

Catalysts for the rest of the year include potential funding announcements related to AccelerateEU. The sector would also be a beneficiary of looser monetary policy, lower inflation and lower US Treasury yields while any disruption to the normalization of energy flows in the Middle East and the higher fossil fuel prices that may accompany it, would further improve the relative economics of renewable technologies. Further, the sector continues to benefit from the deployment of datacentres and further AI capex announcements, which add to the electricity demand pool.

We believe that the Fund’s portfolio of 30 broadly equally weighted positions, chosen from our universe of around 300 companies, provides concentrated exposure to the theme at attractive valuation levels that are particularly attractive relative to consensus earnings growth expectations.

Guinness Asset Management Limited

Page 11

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Global Money Managers Fund (the “Fund”) Performance summary in US Dollars: Class Y compared with MSCI World Net Return Index

Annualised Calendar years 6 months 1 year 3 years 5 years 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Fund 0.2% 13.0% 18.5% 7.3% 42.0% -24.1% 16.3% 23.6% 19.1% Index 9.7% 21.3% 19.2% 11.5% 21.8% -18.1% 23.8% 18.7% 21.1%

The Fund (Class Y) in the six months to 30 June 2026 produced a total return of +0.2% (USD). This compares to the return of the MSCI World Index (net) of +9.7%. Review The first six months of 2026 delivered strong investment returns despite significant geopolitical and economic uncertainty. Global growth remained resilient, supported by robust corporate earnings and a further acceleration in AI-related capital expenditure. However, the outbreak of war between the US and Iran at the end of February, and the resulting disruption to oil supplies through the Strait of Hormuz, produced a sharp increase in energy prices and renewed concerns about inflation. The oil shock raised fears that central banks might have to reverse some of the monetary easing delivered in 2025. Expectations shifted from further interest-rate cuts towards the possibility of renewed tightening, while government bond yields moved higher. These concerns eased towards the end of the period as progress towards a US Iran ceasefire caused oil prices to recede. Equity markets initially fell sharply following the escalation in the Middle East, but subsequently recovered as investors focused on the strength of corporate earnings. Global equities returned almost 10% over the first half, with the S&P 500 also gaining around 10% and reaching new record highs during the second quarter. The technology-heavy Nasdaq rose approximately 20%, as spending on semiconductors, memory, data centres and electrical infrastructure continued to exceed expectations. Emerging markets were the strongest-performing major region, rising around 24%, driven principally by the technology-heavy markets of South Korea and Taiwan. Fixed-income markets produced more subdued returns. Higher energy prices and resilient economic activity caused investors to reassess the likely path of interest rates, pushing sovereign bond yields higher and weighing on bond prices during the early part of the year. Credit markets generally outperformed government bonds, supported by healthy corporate balance sheets and strong earnings growth. The US dollar strengthened modestly over the first half of the year, as the rise in oil prices, resilient US growth and a more hawkish Federal Reserve pushed US interest rate expectations higher. Against this backdrop, the money management sector produced mixed returns, biased weaker. Rising equity markets lifted assets under management, though at the same time, higher bond yields weighed on fixed income assets. The sector was also depressed by concerns around private credit markets and the impact of AI on data-heavy parts of the sector, including stock exchanges. The dispersion within the sector was unusually wide. Custody banks generally performed strongly as higher markets, resilient deposits and higher securities lending boosted earnings. Several traditional managers also benefited from better market levels, cost control and improving flows in selected products, including ETFs, fixed income and alternatives. By contrast, alternative managers were held back by concerns over private-credit liquidity, slower realisations and the timing of performance-related earnings, while exchanges were caught up in the general data/software sell-off. Alternative asset managers entered 2026 with strong long-term structural growth drivers. However, investors focused increasingly on the gap between fundraising and deployment, the slower pace of exits, and in particular the pressure in parts of private credit, reinforcing concerns about liquidity and valuation despite generally limited evidence of broad credit deterioration. In particular, the private credit divisions of these types of businesses have come under increased scrutiny, with investor attention focused on a number of retail and semi liquid credit vehicles experiencing elevated redemption requests The most prominent issue is the prospect of a sector-driven default cycle, concentrated in software, where elevated leverage, weaker credit quality and uncertainty around AI disruption are creating refinancing risks. Software represents a significant share of private credit portfolios— up to a quarter in some segments—and a large proportion of borrowers have lower credit ratings. Two of the weaker alternatives managers in the portfolio were Blackstone (-22%) and Carlyle Group (-28%). Blackstone faced approximately $4.4 billion of redemption requests in its non-traded credit vehicle, with the manager electing to meet only the permitted quarterly amount. The company’s real estate division was also hit by higher interest rate expectations. Meanwhile, Carlyle struggled from a combination of weak management-fee growth, limited fund raising and subdued realisations. In the stock exchange sector, Nasdaq fell by around 18% over 2H 2026. The company saw good growth in profits (Q1 2026 earnings were up 22% year-on-year), but suffered from a relatively full starting valuation, uncertainty around the pace of growth in the Financial Technology division, the continuing integration of Adenza (fintech software), and the general sell-off of software adjacent businesses. The portfolio saw a stock-specific setback on the wealth management side in Rathbones (-15%), with the majority of the weakness occurring after the company disclosed shortcomings identified through a regulatory review of its wealth-management operations. The firm agreed to pause the onboarding of certain higher-risk clients requiring enhanced due diligence for up to twelve months, restrict some additional inflows and stop charging investment-management fees on cash balances. State Street (+33%), our holding in the custody bank sector, was one of the strongest performers as several earnings drivers improved simultaneously. Higher market levels lifted servicing and asset-management fees, while foreign-exchange trading and securities-finance revenues were strong. Net interest income also benefited from higher asset yields and resilient deposits. Second-quarter revenue rose 17% year on year and adjusted earnings per share increased 44%. New servicing wins and the revenue backlog also improved, supporting confidence that growth can continue beyond the immediate market tailwind. In Europe, smaller cap traditional manager Polar Capital (+17%) outperformed. Polar benefited from its meaningful exposure to technology, which drove favourable market performance and flows. AuM was reported for 30 June 2026 to be £45.0bn, an increase of 47% over the quarter. Meanwhile, US traditional manager Franklin Resources (+42%) also performed strongly. Organic growth improved during the period, helped by fixed income, alternatives and ETFs. The company has continued to diversify away from traditional US mutual funds, with alternatives and wealth-oriented products becoming more important. Better markets and disciplined costs also supported margins. The Fund’s holding in Janus Henderson (+9%) was realised in June following completion of the company’s acquisition by a consortium led by Trian Fund Management and General Catalyst. The transaction valued Janus Henderson at approximately $8.0 billion, with shareholders receiving $52 per share in cash. The sale crystallised a strong return in the portfolio, and supports the thesis that undervalued and overlooked traditional managers remain attractive acquisition targets.

Page 12

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Global Money Managers Fund (the “Fund”) (continued) Activity There were no stock switches during the period, but the portfolio was actively rebalanced. Portfolio positioning & outlook Net flows from the active mutual fund sector in the US turned negative in 2022 (having been small positive in 2021), a trend that continued through to 2026. Over the last six months, active equity and hybrid funds have seen further outflows, partially offset by fixed income inflows:

Source: ICI; Guinness Global Investors

Data from the US ETF industry shows inflows across equity ETFs, bond & income ETFs and hybrid ETFs in every quarter since the start of 2017, bar the third quarter of 2025. Over the most recent two quarters, flows into fixed income ETFs have been particularly strong:

Source: ICI; Guinness Global Investors

The outlook for traditional asset managers remains mixed but is improving. The structural pressures are well understood: active mutual funds continue to lose share to lower-cost ETFs and passive products, fee rates remain under pressure, and some managers still face the challenge of weak organic growth. In Q2 2026, for example, industry long-term mutual funds and ETFs attracted approximately $238 billion of net inflows (to end of May), but this comprised $348 billion of ETF inflows offset by $110 billion of mutual-fund outflows. The industry is growing, but a disproportionate share of the growth continues to accrue to passive and ETF vehicles. Nevertheless, the near-term earnings outlook is stronger than these structural headwinds might imply. Rising equity markets lift assets under management and management fee revenues have lifted 2026 and 2027 earnings. And this year is a reminder of the considerable operating leverage available when markets are supportive. Morgan Stanley expect 2026 operating income for the group of US traditional asset managers they cover to rise by 26%, driven by 20% revenue growth against 14% expenses growth. Flow trends also appear somewhat healthier than the market perception of the sector: we expect the majority of US traditional managers to report second quarter inflows. The industry picture remains bifurcated: scaled managers with strong ETF, fixed-income, systematic, solutions and retirement franchises are growing, while firms more heavily exposed to undifferentiated active equity mutual funds continue to struggle. The key implication is that “traditional” asset management is no longer a single homogenous category; product mix, distribution strength and the ability to participate in faster-growing channels matter considerably more than the industry label. The broader industry still offers substantial room for growth. Global asset-management assets reached approximately $147 trillion at the end of 2025, having expanded at roughly a 9% compound annual rate since 2010, while average organic growth has remained positive at around 2%. The industry also remains fragmented: the largest 20 firms account for only approximately 53% of global assets and the largest ten for around 41%. This fragmentation should continue to support consolidation, partnerships and selective acquisitions as firms seek scale, distribution reach, technology investment and access to faster-growing product categories. The recent sale of Janus Henderson is consistent with this trend and demonstrates that well-positioned managers with attractive franchises can command strategic premiums. Valuations in the traditional asset management sector continue to look undemanding. US managers were valued at around 11.8x forward earnings in June 2026, close to their five-year average but at a substantial discount to the broader equity market. On an EV/EBITDA basis, the group was trading at roughly 8.4x, broadly in line with its five year average but below the longer-term historical average of around 9.3x. These valuations already reflect a considerable degree of scepticism over active-management flows and fee compression.

Page 13

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Global Money Managers Fund (the “Fund”) (continued) Portfolio positioning & outlook (continued)

US traditional managers: FY2 P/E

Source: Morgan Stanley, June 2026 The outlook for alternative asset managers has become more controversial, but the long-term growth case remains compelling, we believe. The principal near-term concern is the rise in redemption requests from semi-liquid private-credit vehicles. Individual outcomes varied considerably: Blackstone’s BCRED received requests equal to 10% of NAV, Apollo Debt Solutions 16.8%, Ares Strategic Income Fund 14.4%, and Cliffwater’s CCLF 17%. These requests have created concern over retail appetite, liquidity and the durability of private-credit fundraising. The evidence so far, however, suggests that the issue is concentrated and primarily sentiment-driven rather than evidence of widespread portfolio deterioration. So far, there are limited signs of fundamental credit stress, with redemption behaviour amplified by negative headlines and the mechanics of quarterly tender limits. Requests may also overstate the true desire to exit because investors sometimes submit larger tenders in anticipation of partial fulfilment. It is also important to note the contrast between private credit and the wider private-markets channel. According to Morgan Stanley, credit-product sales fell approximately 71% year on year, whereas fundraising outside credit increased by around 60% in aggregate. For example, Blackstone’s BXPE private-equity product generated roughly $2bn of second-quarter sales, up 63% year on year, while the company’s infrastructure sales (BXINFRA) rose by approximately 42%. This suggests capital is rotating within alternatives rather than leaving the asset class altogether. The structural opportunity in private wealth remains substantial. US retail investors allocate only around 5% of their portfolios to alternatives, compared with approximately 17% for pensions, 36% for sovereign wealth funds and 60% for endowments. Even a modest narrowing of the gap between retail and institutional allocations could generate very significant asset growth. Product innovation is also materially expanding the addressable market. Alternative managers are launching vehicles with lower investment minimums, simplified subscription processes, periodic liquidity, model-portfolio compatibility and broader adviser distribution. The number of retail-oriented product launches accelerated sharply in 2025, with private credit, infrastructure, private equity and multi-strategy vehicles all contributing. Regulatory developments that create a clearer framework for including private assets within defined-contribution retirement plans could add a further significant source of demand.

A recovery in transaction activity should provide an additional cyclical tailwind. Globally announced M&A volumes rose 66% quarter on quarter and 25% year on year in Q2 2026. Improving deal activity supports deployment, exits, carried interest and the return of capital to limited partners, which in turn facilitates further fundraising. The industry has approximately $4.3–4.9 trillion of dry powder, equal to around 30% of private-market assets, and a large inventory of mature portfolio companies awaiting realisation. As capital-market conditions normalise, the combination of pent-up deployment and exit demand could produce a meaningful acceleration in both fee-related earnings and performance fees. Valuations appear to compensate for the near-term uncertainty. Alternative managers’ share prices as a group fell approximately 20% in 1H 2026, compared with a gain of around 10% for the S&P 500, leaving valuations close to 5-year lows. US alternative asset managers: FY2 P/E

Source: Morgan Stanley Stepping back from the near-term issues, we continue to view alternative managers as long-term winners in the money management sector. We expect demand for alternative investments to remain strong, particularly from investors seeking diversification: private markets continue to attract capital as they offer opportunities not available in public markets. Weighing up the challenges faced by the alternatives sector but noting the long-term attractiveness of the sector, and the recent sell-off, we have been increasing our positions in the sector.

Page 14

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Global Money Managers Fund (the “Fund”) (continued) Portfolio positioning & outlook (continued) The overall shape of the portfolio at 30 June 2026, by theme, can be seen below: Guinness Global Money Managers portfolio by theme, 30 June 2026

Source: Guinness Global Investors

At 30 June 2026, the P/E ratio of the Fund was 15.2x 2025 earnings. This sits at a significant discount to the broad market, with the MSCI World trading on a 2025 P/E ratio of 24.5x. Earnings growth for the portfolio is forecast (consensus) to be around 14% in 2026.

Source: Bloomberg; Guinness Global Investors

In the longer term we expect asset managers as a sector (and therefore the Fund) to outperform the broad market, due primarily to the ability of successful asset management companies to grow their earnings more rapidly than the broad market.

The Fund remains positioned to capitalise on the increasing value of successful companies in the sector.

Guinness Asset Management Limited

Theme Example holdings 1 Alternatives 13.2% 2 High active share 18.6% 3 Wealth management 12.0% 4 Secular shift in Europe to equities 16.9% 5 Traditional value 11.8% 6 Support services 11.1% 7 Growth of ETFs/passive distribution 9.4% 8 Asset management consolidators 6.2% 9 Other (incl cash) 3.0%

Weighting (%)

Page 15

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Global Equity Income Fund (the “Fund”) Performance summary (total return in USD): Class Y compared with MSCI World Index

Annualised Calendar years 6 Months 1 year 3 years 5 years 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Fund 6.3% 9.2% +13.9% +8.8% +11.5% +22.2% -9.3% 15.8% 12.6% 11.4% Index 9.7% 21.3% +19.2% +11.5% +15.9% +21.8% -18.1% 23.8% 18.7% 21.1%

Source: FE fundinfo (data as at 30.06.2026)

Review Over the first half of the year, we identified five distinct periods which help us to frame performance across markets. Rather than simply defining these by broad bull and bear market moves, we instead characterise each period by the shifts in leadership between underlying market factors - such as value versus growth, and defensives versus cyclicals - that occurred beneath the surface.

Period 2: The Iran war and oil crisis (27 th February – 30 th March) Sentiment shifted abruptly at the end of February when US and Israeli strikes on Iran escalated into a regional war, with Iranian retaliation hitting Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar. An effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz – through which roughly a fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) supply flows – sent energy and freight markets into turmoil: Brent crude jumped from $72 to $118 a barrel, the WCI freight benchmark rose 20% quarter-on-quarter, and European gas prices climbed nearly 50% after the halt to the flow of Qatar's LNG. The energy shock revived stagflation fears, undermining confidence that inflation was contained just as weak US jobs data and falling business and consumer confidence pressured growth forecasts. Expectations of interest rate cuts reversed sharply from two US 25 basis-point cuts priced in at the beginning of the year to near zero by the end of the period, while Europe swung from a c.50% chance of one cut to pricing three hikes. With yields rising and gold failing to act as a safe haven, Bank of America’s fund manager survey showed the fastest rush into cash since Covid. Defensives and value outperformed, while energy importing markets, especially in Asia, sold off hardest.

-8

-6

-4

-2

3 1 - D e c 0 7 - J a n 1 4 - J a n 2 1 - J a n 2 8 - J a n 0 4 - F e b 1 1 - F e b 1 8 - F e b 2 5 - F e b 0 4 - M a r 1 1 - M a r 1 8 - M a r 2 5 - M a r 0 1 - A p r 0 8 - A p r 1 5 - A p r 2 2 - A p r 2 9 - A p r 0 6 - M a y 1 3 - M a y 2 0 - M a y 2 7 - M a y 0 3 - J u n 1 0 - J u n 1 7 - J u n 2 4 - J u n

To To t a l R e t u r n ( U S D ) %

MSCI World Index - Total Return 31st Dec 2025 - 30th June 2026 Period 1: Geopolitical Noise & Software Scrutiny (31st Dec - 27th Feb)

Period 3: Recovery Rally (30th March - 17th April)

Period 2: Iran War and Oil Crises (27th Feb - 30th March)

Period 5: Shifting Market Leadership (14th May - 30th June)

Period 4: Memory and Earnings Revisions (17th April - 14th May)

US vs World ex US

Growth vs Value

Cyclicals vs Defensives

Quality vs World

-20

-15

-10

-5

R e l a t i ve ve T o t a l R e t u r n ( U S D ) %

MSCI World Indices - Relative Performance

Rising Line = Cyclicals / Growth / Quality/ y/ US Outperformance Falling Line = Defensives /V /Value / Low-Quality/ y/W /World ex US Outperformance

Defensives/ s/V /Value / Quality/ y/W /World ex US Outperformance Defensives/ s/V /Value / Low Quality/ y/ US Outperformance

Cyclicals/ s/ Growth / L ow-Quality/ y/ US Outperformance Cyclicals/ s/ Growth / Low-Quality Outperformance

S i g n i fi c a n t S h i ft ft s I n M a r k e t L e a d e r s h i p - Most factors end roughly where they started

Page 16

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Global Equity Income Fund (the “Fund”) (continued) Review (continued) Period 3: Market recovery rally (30 th March – 17 th April) Markets recovered strongly from late March into mid-April as the absence of further escalation stabilised risk appetite, even though the Middle East conflict remained unresolved. Oil prices eased from March highs, yields stopped rising, and investors unwound defensive positioning. This was more of a relief rally than genuine macro improvement, with growth and cyclicals rebounding while defensives gave back relative gains. Information Technology and Communication Services led, buoyed by renewed interest in AI infrastructure, semiconductors and certain internet names. Software also recovered, although confidence stayed selective due to ongoing concerns over AI disruption, pricing models, and legacy platform durability.

Period 4: Memory, Lower-quality software and earnings revisions (17 th April – 14 th May) The market rally initially reflected a broad recovery in risk appetite post-March, but by mid-April the next phase concentrated in areas seeing most aggressive earnings upgrades, particularly the semiconductor value chain linked to AI infrastructure. Semiconductor industry revenues grew +79% year-on-year in Q1 2026, led by memory, where DRAM and NAND sales surged +271% on soaring prices as AI hardware demand continued to outstrip supply. The AI supply shortage narrative broadened beyond memory and graphics processing units (GPUs) to encompass leading-edge wafer capacity, optical components, and power and cooling infrastructure, with markets rotating towards well-positioned AI infrastructure build-out names. Software had a partial recovery thanks to numerous strong Q1 reports that challenged the AI disintermediation narrative, but performance was heavily bifurcated: gains were largely confined to cash-generative platform software, non-seat-based consumption models and models with deep data repositories – those deemed to be least susceptible to AI disintermediation. Beyond these names, the broader software landscape remained a laggard; companies that missed guidance or expectations or failed to reassure markets over near-term AI risks suffered further double-digit sell-offs.

Period 5: Volatile markets with fast-shifting leadership (14 th May – 30 th June) Macro conditions shifted dramatically in late May. US-Iran tensions unwound somewhat, reducing the conflict's risk premium, with a ceasefire and Memorandum of Understanding allowing for a partial reopening of the Strait of Hormuz. Brent crude prices were driven down to c.$70 per barrel, near pre-war levels. However, market relief was capped by persistent inflation, which reached a three-year high in May. This backdrop supported a perceivably more hawkish tone from new Federal Reserve Chair Kevin Warsh, whose comments focused strictly on price stability. This prompted markets to price in earlier rate hikes including one by the end of 2026. The Magnificent Seven materially underperformed the rest of the market, partly as investor scepticism grew over near-term AI monetisation. Instead, markets rotated towards the chipmakers and semiconductor equipment manufacturers which would benefit from their large capex plans regardless of the level of future AI monetisation. Investors also rotated into areas perceived as more insulated from AI disruption, with Financials, Industrials and Healthcare among the strongest contributors to performance over the period. This broadening of the market allowed the MSCI World Equally Weighted Index to outperform its more familiar counterpart, which is weighted by market capitalisation, from mid May. Overall, while the market remains near all-time highs, this period was marked by multiple shifts in leadership as investors balanced secular AI growth enthusiasm and macro caution, rotating between defensives vs cyclicals and value vs growth although greater emphasis on quality has returned.

Performance In the first half of 2026, the Fund returned 6.3% (in USD) and the MSCI World Index returned 9.7%. The Fund therefore underperformed the Index by 3.4 percentage points (pp) over H1.

The Fund’s performance versus the MSCI World Index can be attributed to the following:  The large overweight allocation to Consumer Staples (up 7.2% in USD) was a headwind to relative performance since the sector underperformed the market, whilst the Fund’s underweight allocation to Communication Services (-0.5%) and Consumer Discretionary (-3.6%) was a tailwind.

 Although the Fund’s underweight allocation to Information Technology (31.2%) was a detractor from the Fund’s relative performance, stock selection more than offset the negative allocation effect. Specifically, Cisco (54.1%), TSMC (57.9%) and Texas Instruments (73.8%) performed strongly over the first half of the year as the holdings benefited from rampant demand for data centre components.  Although the Fund’s overweight allocation to Health Care (2.1%) was a headwind to performance, positive stock selection thanks to Johnson & Johnson (24.1%) and Abbvie (11.9%) reduced much of the negative allocation effect.

 The Fund’s overweight allocation to Industrials was a tailwind to the Fund’s relative performance, with particularly strong performance from ABB (42.2%) and Eaton (33%).

 The Fund’s zero allocation to Utilities, Materials, and Real Estate, acted as a marginal tailwind to relative Fund performance, whereas the Fund’s zero allocation to Energy (15.6%) was a strong headwind to relative performance. The Fund’s dividend yield at the end of H1 was 2.1% (net of withholding tax) vs the MSCI World Index’s 1.5% (gross of withholding tax). So far in 2026, we have had dividend updates from 24 of our 35 holdings. All 24 companies announced increases for their 2026 dividend vs 2025. The average dividend growth of these companies was 8.3%. Activity We made one change to the portfolio in February. We sold our position in Diageo and, as part of our one-in-one-out process, replaced it with a new position in RELX. Our sector allocation was changed by the replacement of a Consumer Staples stock with an Industrials stock. Our geographic allocation has not changed since both businesses are listed in the United Kingdom. We originally bought Diageo in the belief that premiumisation was a structural growth tailwind, supported by the idea that consumers would consistently ‘drink better, not more’. This was a trend that Diageo benefited from meaningfully during the pandemic period as demand shifted towards higher-end spirits. Since Covid, however, a weakening consumer has meant that people are increasingly trading down, and Diageo, given its focus on premium products, has faced clear headwinds in several key markets, most notably the US. At the same time, leverage remained high and above management’s target. Although strategic asset sales were being considered, and the appointment of new CEO Sir Dave Lewis (with a strong turnaround reputation from Tesco) gave us confidence, the most recent quarter marked a fundamental shift. Management highlighted an intention to expand away from premium products to diversify and become more resilient in different economic environments while significantly cutting the dividend to create greater financial flexibility. Although these steps may ultimately prove positive for the business, they represent a clear departure from the premiumisation-driven growth thesis on which we invested and imply a low probability that the company can return to growing its dividend in the medium term. Combined with prolonged weakness in key markets such as the US and lower confidence that the premiumisation tailwind would soon rebound, the shift in management focus away from premium products meant our original thesis no longer held, leading us to sell the position.

Page 17

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Global Equity Income Fund (the “Fund”) (continued) Activity (continued) RELX is a leading provider of information-based analytics and decision tools, serving a wide range of customers across the legal, insurance, science, and financial services sectors. The company has been caught up in the so-called SaaSpocalypse, with the Anthropic Cowork legal tool released on 12th January driving a sharp sell-off in the stock and a significant de-rating in the valuation. In the month afterwards to 12th February, the share price fell 31.1% (in GBP); the one-year forward P/E ratio fell from 22.4x to 14.4x, and the dividend yield jumped to 3.3%. The company had been on our watchlist for some time. We felt the sell-off appeared overdone and therefore presented a good opportunity to add RELX to the portfolio. RELX’s products facilitate decision-making for business-critical processes, making them deeply embedded in client workflows. RELX has established contributory databases in its various end-markets, and to gain access to a RELX solution, any new participant must provide all its own private data relevant to the service. The network effects associated with this are powerful; adding datapoints from new customers improves the predictive power of RELX’s models, increasing their value-add and ability to attract additional users, who then share more unique data. This closed loop means the majority of RELX's content repositories cannot be replicated by AI scraping the web for publicly available information. Even in the niches where the raw underlying data may be more widely accessible, such as law statutes, RELX has created a moat through secondary content including expert commentaries, citation networks and data structuring. Reliability is crucial in the industries its serves, and RELX products are typically a negligible part of a customer's total cost base, meaning clients are unlikely to risk switching away from these well-trusted and proven solutions. RELX has been augmenting its flagship products with AI and recently announced a partnership with Anthropic, further supporting our view that it is more likely to be an AI beneficiary than displaced by the pure-plays. We believe the recent sell-off is overdone and presents a rare opportunity to buy the shares at an attractive valuation. Portfolio positioning We continue to maintain a fairly even balance between quality defensive and quality cyclical/growth companies. We have approximately 40% in quality defensive companies (e.g., Consumer Staples and Healthcare companies) and around 60% in quality cyclical or growth ‐ oriented companies (e.g., Industrials, Financials, Information Technology).

Whilst the defensive names tend to have lower beta and hold up better when markets are falling, the cyclical holdings allow the Fund to maintain performance when markets are rebounding and rising. We believe that within these more cyclical sectors we are owning the ‘quality’ businesses. All the companies we seek to invest in have strong balance sheets and a history of performing well in difficult market environments. Within Financials, for example, whilst we do not own any banks, which helps to dampen the cyclicality of our Financials, we do own exchange groups such as CME and Deutsche Boerse (which do well in periods of market volatility as volumes tend to increase, resulting in higher revenues).

The Fund also has zero weighting to Energy, Utilities, Materials, and Real Estate. The largest overweight is to Industrials. In terms of geographic exposure (shown below), the largest difference between the Fund and the benchmark is our exposure to the US (as measured by country of domicile). The Fund at H1 end had c.57% weighting to North America, which compares to the index at c.76%. The largest geographic overweight remains Europe ex-UK and the UK, though we are diversified around the world with 57% in the US, 35% in Europe and 7% in Asia Pacific. Within Asia Pacific we have one company listed in Taiwan (Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing) and one company listed in Hong Kong (Anta Sports). Outlook The Fund tends to trade at a discount to the broader market and, at the end of the first half of the year, this was the case with the Fund trading on 20.1x 2026 expected earnings; a modest 1.6% discount to the broader market.

Despite the valuation discount on a PE basis, the Fund has companies which are on average far better quality with a higher dividend yield. At the end of H1 the Fund’s average return on capital was at 22.4% vs 9.6% for the Index and the Fund also commanded a respectable dividend yield premium of c.40%. The Fund continues to hold consistently highly profitable companies with strong balance sheets and pricing power to pass on higher costs. We believe there is a strong case for dividend investing in general, and particularly given uncertain growth environments such as the one we are experiencing today. Further, we believe that sustainable and growing dividends may offer better opportunities than a ‘high-yield’ dividend approach, as ‘high-yield’ stocks can often be in more economically sensitive sectors or those with greater regulatory influence, which have historically performed poorly in recessionary or near-recessionary environments.

As ever, we believe our unchanging approach of focusing on quality compounders and dividend growers should continue to stand us in good stead in our search for rising income streams and long-term capital growth.

Guinness Asset Management Limited

Page 18

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Asian Equity Income Fund (the “Fund”) Performance summary in US Dollars: Class Y compared with MSCI AC Asia Pacific ex Japan Net Return Index

Annualised Calendar years 6 months 1 year 3 years 5 years 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Fund 2.9% 8.2% 14.8% 5.6% 11.1% -16.8% 12.7% 12.8% 21.0% Index 23.9% 40.8% 22.6% 7.3% -2.9% -17.5% 7.4% 10.2% 29.6%

Review Year-to-date, the Fund rose 4.3% (Y share class, in GBP) underperforming the MSCI AC Asia Pacific ex Japan Net Total Return Index benchmark, which rose 25.6%. The Fund distributed an interim dividend for the first half of 2026 of £0.2652, which is 34% higher than the 2025 equivalent dividend. The first half of 2026 was dominated by two macro stories. Firstly, global and Asian equity markets came under pressure as the escalation of the US-Iran conflict pushed energy prices sharply higher, with Brent crude rising materially in March after the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz. This created a new source of macro uncertainty for Asia, given the region’s reliance on imported energy, particularly for energy-importing markets such as Taiwan, Korea and India. Markets then moved back into a risk-on environment as the conflict de-escalated and crude prices retreated from their April peaks. At the same time, investor enthusiasm around AI continued to build, supported by rising US hyperscaler capital expenditure guidance and expectations of a multi-year data centre and infrastructure investment cycle. This led to a powerful rebound in Emerging Asia, which rose by more than 30% over the quarter, led by semiconductor-related technology names in Korea and Taiwan. The first half was challenging from a relative performance perspective, driven by the Fund’s significant underweight to Asian AI beneficiaries, which continued to dominate benchmark returns. The benchmark’s return profile became increasingly concentrated as the half progressed. This was a difficult environment for the Fund’s quality income style, particularly as the strongest benchmark returns came from names and sectors where the Fund is structurally underweight or unable to invest. Year-to-date, relative performance was hurt by both allocation and selection effects, primarily from being underweight Technology and not holding SK Hynix or Samsung Electronics, both of which do not qualify for the Fund’s investment universe. We note that these two names, along with TSMC (which we do hold, but at a c10% underweight to the benchmark due to our equal-weighting strategy), have accounted for over 78% of the benchmark’s total performance in 1H26. Country performance was also highly uneven. China remained weak through the first half, initially due to weak consumption, property-sector fragility and limited evidence of broad-based demand stimulus, and later because it did not participate meaningfully in the AI-led rally. Hong Kong faced many of the same China-related concerns, as well as financial-sector sensitivity and worries about tighter scrutiny of cross-border capital flows. Indonesia was another major laggard in Q2, hit by currency pressure, foreign outflows, and concerns about market structure and index classification risks. Activity There were no changes to the portfolio during the period. Portfolio positioning The Fund's largest country exposures are to China (33%), Taiwan (22%), and Singapore (9%). The Fund is overweight in China by 14%, and underweight in Korea by 21% and India by 9%. Our allocation to Singapore remains 6% overweight versus the benchmark. We also have 8% of the Fund allocated to US-listed companies that generate at least half of their revenues from Asia. These companies are Aflac (an insurance company), Broadcom, and Qualcomm. The chart below shows the Fund’s sector exposures:

Sources: MSCI, Bloomberg, Guinness Global Investors. Data as of 30 June 2026 As a reminder, we do not hold the big technology or e-commerce names that dominate the Chinese benchmark because they either do not pay dividends or pay only a small one. The three largest sector exposures are 31% in Financials, 27% in Technology, and 15% in Consumer Discretionary. Financials and Consumer Discretionary are overweight the benchmark by 12% and 8% respectively, whilst Technology is underweight 17%. We also have 8% in Real Estate, making it 6% overweight, of which 5% is in Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs).

Page 19

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Asian Equity Income Fund (the “Fund”) (continued) Outlook For the second half of 2026, the outlook for Asian equities remains constructive, but more finely balanced. Globally, earnings momentum continues to be supported by the AI capex cycle, particularly across semiconductors, infrastructure, industrials and power-related areas. However, valuations have become fuller, leaving markets more exposed both to disappointment on AI spending and to broader macro risks such as inflation, interest rates and geopolitics. Asia remains attractive relative to developed markets, supported by cheaper valuations and more direct exposure to the AI supply chain through Taiwan and Korea. The earnings yield picture is also supportive. Asian equities offer an expected 2026 earnings yield of around 7.4%, comfortably above the aggregate yield on Asian government bonds, whereas the US equity earnings yield is broadly in line with the US 10-year bond yield. This suggests Asia offers a more attractive equity risk premium and a stronger valuation cushion. Earnings delivery will be the key differentiator. Taiwan and Korea should continue to benefit from AI-related demand, though both markets have already re-rated and may be more vulnerable to profit-taking. China and Hong Kong look cheaper but need clearer policy support and better earnings visibility. India's longer-term structural story remains intact, though its near-term progress will hinge on earnings delivery. Overall, returns are likely to become more selective, and the key question is whether performance broadens beyond semiconductors into banks, healthcare, consumer, industrials and domestic-demand names. As at the end of June, the Fund traded on a 2026e P/E of 11.7x, a 15% discount to the benchmark, while offering a historic ROE of 17% against the benchmark's 13%.

Guinness Asset Management Limited

Page 20

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness European Equity Income Fund (the “Fund”) Performance summary in US Dollars: Class Y compared with MSCI Europe ex UK Index

Annualised Calendar years 6 months 1 year 3 years 5 years 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Fund 1.2% 6.5% 13.7% 7.9% 16.4% -14.9% 24.2% 3.1% 30.4% Index* 8.3% 18.1% 15.8% 8.7% 15.7% -18.0% 21.7% 0.2% 35.5% Source: FE Analytics (data as at 30.06.2026) *Comparator Benchmark. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future results. Investors are reminded that the price of units and the revenue derived from them is not guaranteed and may go down as well as up. Review Overall, markets were up in the first half of 2026. The MSCI World Index was up 9.7% (USD) while the MSCI Europe ex UK Index was up 8.3% (USD). European equities were remarkably resilient as they navigated an eventful first half of 2026. Earlier in H1, jitters over Greenland and Venezuela proved short-lived, with markets differentiating by sector rather than selling off broadly, unlike the indiscriminate correction triggered by the April 2025 tariff announcement. The real test came with the outbreak of the conflict in the Middle East, Initially, European equities sold off sharply on rising risk aversion and Europe’s vulnerability to yet another energy price shock and the associated potential impact on growth and inflation. Markets staged a recovery through the second quarter on signs that tensions were subsiding as well as that the worst fears around the trajectory of the oil price were not realised. The European Central Bank held rates steady for most of H1 before reversing course in June, hiking 25 basis points to 2.25% — its first increase since 2023 — as eurozone inflation hit 3.2% in May, prompting the Bank to abandon its wait-and-see stance amid the Iran war's energy shock. In June, US and Iran reached what feels like a fragile truce with the formal signing of the memorandum of understanding following a few days later with the oil price falling sharply to pre-war levels offering some relief to European policymakers and markets.

Source: Guinness Global Investors, Bloomberg (data as of 30.06.2026)

Within the broader global recovery, Europe ex UK lagged most other regions in Q2, even with a return of +13.0% in USD (13.9% in EUR) and +8.3% for H1 (or 11.2% in EUR). Despite a strong rebound from a weak Q1 (-4.2%), it trailed Asia Pac ex Japan (+24.7%), EM (+24.1%), the US (+15.2%), Japan (+14.2%), and World (+13.8%). In addition to the geopolitical crosswinds, two global themes stood out. First, the big four hyperscalers (Amazon, Microsoft, Alphabet and Meta) guided to combined 2026 capital expenditure of $650-725 billion, up approximately 60-77% year-on-year. Second, a wave of IPO activity reinforced AI as the market's defining narrative through H1. SpaceX led the way, followed by confidential filings from Anthropic and OpenAI. This drove strength in European AI-exposed names, and Technology was the stand-out sector. Europe's softer performance is explained to some extent by two factors. First, Europe's index is comparatively light on the pure AI-infrastructure names that drove the US and Asia Pac ex Japan rallies; Taiwan and Korea benefited from continued strength in semiconductors and AI-related supply chains, while Europe's index skews towards banks, luxury, industrials, and healthcare. Second, Asia Pacific ex Japan and Emerging Markets, as larger net energy importers, saw a greater relief effect from the oil price decline. Performance In H1 2026, The Fund was up 1.2% in USD (4.0% in EUR) versus the MSCI Europe ex UK Index which was up 8.3% in USD (11.2% in EUR). During this period, the top three contributors to returns were BE Semiconductor, Melexis and Banca Generali. BE Semiconductor returned 116.0% in EUR terms, rallying on exceptional Q1 results and a major upgrade to its 2030 targets, driven by accelerating hybrid bonding adoption across logic and memory. Melexis returned 40.2%. Its Q2 rally followed a strong Q1 print on 29 April, beating on both margin and order intake, particularly in China, where the historically volatile demand pattern showed signs of stabilising. The results, along with early diversification into data centre and robotics applications, prompted a broader re-rating across European analogue semiconductors. Banca Generali returned 20.0%. On 3 June, the bank reported May net inflows of € 1.05 billion, up 72% from a year earlier, taking year-to-date inflows to € 3.8 billion, up 41%. What stood out was the mix: managed solutions alone brought in € 894 million, nearly five times what they brought in a year ago, driven by new in-house fund launches.

Page 21

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness European Equity Income Fund (the “Fund”) (continued) Performance (continued) The three biggest detractors were Partners Group, Royal Unibrew and Kaufman & Broad. Partners Group fell 28.4% after capping redemptions on its flagship fund, a move that signalled outflows to the market and put downward pressure on the shares. The pressure appears industry-wide rather than specific to any operational issue at Partners. Locking up capital is, after all, what makes private equity work: investors trade liquidity for higher returns, and gating protects that trade when redemptions spike. This does not change our view, but we continue to watch closely and always ask where we could be wrong. Royal Unibrew fell 22.2% after losing its PepsiCo licence to Carlsberg, overshadowing an otherwise strong quarter. Kaufman & Broad slipped 7.7% on a soft French housing market. Activity In H1 2026, we made the following changes to the portfolio:

We sold Nestlé and initiated a position in L'Oréal , reflecting our stronger conviction in L'Oréal's business model: its ability to control its own destiny, innovate continuously and defend its market position. The switch increases the portfolio's quality, moving from a company managing leverage and volume pressures to one with a stronger balance sheet and superior organic growth.

We exited Mapfre , held since the Fund's launch in 2013, after a strong re-rating from 2020 onwards, and redeployed the proceeds into Partners Group. We favour the long-term structural growth opportunity in private markets, and believe the business is less reliant on external factors such as interest rates, currencies or wider insurance pricing dynamics. Near-term concerns around private credit had also created a valuation opportunity that we felt undervalued both the strength of the franchise and the sustainability of its returns.

We sold Helvetia Baloise after last year's strong run pushed valuations to a level where we preferred to redeploy capital into Fineco Bank , which we can hold with higher conviction. Helvetia Baloise’s announced merger has introduced execution risk, and further re-rating increasingly depends on delivering merger synergies and cost cuts to meet profitability targets. Fineco, by contrast, benefits from more visible structural growth, driven by a compelling customer value proposition and a consistent record of market share gains. It is well placed to benefit from the ongoing democratisation of retail investment, reinforced by the move toward the Savings and Investment Union, a cornerstone of the EU's efforts to unlock long-term capital.

Lastly, we exited Universal Music Group on governance concerns including excessive management pay, a strategy we felt was too reliant on unproven monetisation in western markets, and structural pressures such as the growing tendency for artists retain ownership of their master recordings and the shift in listeners’ music discovery to algorithm-driven platforms. We replaced it with Rational AG , the German combi-oven manufacturer. Rational’s stock had de-rated to an attractive entry point for a business we see as a quality compounder with disciplined capital allocation, high returns on capital and a customer-centric philosophy. Outlook

Portfolio metrics versus MSCI World Index Fund MSCI Europe ex UK Index

Quality Return on Equity (12 month forward) 25.4% 13.8% Debt / Equity (weighted average, last financial year) 70.1% 185.6%

Valuation Price/Earnings ratio (2026e) 17.4x 17.2x EV/EBIT (2026e) 13.0x 15.4x FCF yield (2026e) 6.5% 4.5% Dividend Dividend yield (2026e) 3.4% 2.8% Dividend Payout Ratio 72.7% 69.9%

Conviction Number of stocks 30 331 Active share 88% Source: Guinness Global Investors, Bloomberg, as of 30 th June 2026

The European region remains cheap relative to the US on earnings, and even more so on cash flow. Europe trades at 0.73 times the price-earnings ratio of the S&P 500, below its long-run average of 0.79 times, while its free-cash-flow yield is around 1.71 times the US level, compared with a long-run average of 1.20. Put simply, investors are paying less than usual for European earnings, while receiving more cash generation per unit of price than they typically have relative to the US.

For our portfolio, the philosophy remains the same. We look for high-quality, dividend-paying businesses that control their own destiny: they have pricing power, strong balance sheets, and high cash flow returns on the capital they employ, and are run by people who spend that capital wisely.

Guinness Asset Management Limited

Page 22

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Global Innovators Fund (the “Fund”) Performance summary in US Dollars: Class Y compared with MSCI World Net Return Index

Annualised Calendar years 6 months 1 year 3 years 5 years 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Fund 7.2% 17.2% 19.6% 10.1% 21.5% -29.6% 40.0% 19.7% 20.4% Index 9.7% 21.3% 19.2% 11.5% 21.8% -18.1% 23.8% 18.7% 21.1% Source: FE fundinfo (data as at 30.06.2026) Review Over the first half of the year, we identify five periods which help us to frame market performance. Rather than defining these simply by broad bull and bear-market moves, we instead characterise them by the shifts in leadership among underlying market factors, such as value versus growth, and defensives versus cyclicals, that occurred beneath the surface.

Source: Bloomberg, Guinness Global Investors, as of 30 th June 2026

Period 1: Geopolitical noise and software scrutiny (31 st December – 27 th February) Markets navigated much geopolitical noise in January and February, from regime uncertainty in Venezuela following American forces’ capture of President Maduro, to Trump's Greenland ambitions straining relations in NATO, mutual tariff threats across Europe and Canada, and spiking Japanese yields on fiscal stimulus concerns. Despite this, the MSCI World Index climbed to all-time highs, led by international (ex-US) stocks, while the US underperformed as investors rotated out of mega-caps and AI-exposed software. Global software stocks fell 21% over the two months amid a structural reassessment of software economics as affected by AI, with DIY build risk and disintermediation alongside the erosion of seat-based pricing. Markets instead looked to 'HALO' stocks (Heavy Assets, Low Obsolescence), prioritising companies perceived to possess a level of natural immunity to AI-driven technological disruption. Whilst equities reached all-time highs, this was anything but a broad-based rally. Instead, the period was defined by a sharp and deliberate rotation away from US growth, mega-caps and software and into more defensive areas of the market alongside value and international equities – and more AI-immune HALO stocks in particular. Period 2: The Iran war and oil crisis (27 th February – 30 th March) Sentiment shifted abruptly at the end of February when US and Israeli strikes on Iran escalated into a regional war, with Iranian retaliation hitting Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar. An effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz – through which roughly a fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) supply flows – sent energy and freight markets into turmoil: Brent crude jumped from $72 to $118 a barrel, the WCI freight benchmark rose 20% quarter-on-quarter, and European gas prices climbed nearly 50% after the halt to the flow of Qatar's LNG. The energy shock revived stagflation fears, undermining confidence that inflation was contained just as weak US jobs data and falling business and consumer confidence pressured growth forecasts. Expectations of interest rate cuts reversed sharply from two US 25 basis-point cuts priced in at the beginning of the year to near zero by the end of the period, while Europe swung from a c.50% chance of one cut to pricing three hikes. With yields rising and gold failing to act as a safe haven, Bank of America’s fund manager survey showed the fastest rush into cash since Covid. Defensives and value outperformed, while energy importing markets, especially in Asia, sold off hardest.

-8

-6

-4

-2

To To t a l R e t u r n ( U S D ) %

MSCI World Index - Total Return 31st Dec 2025 - 30th June 2026 Period 1: Geopolitical Noise & Software Scrutiny (31st Dec - 27th Feb)

Period 3: Recovery Rally (30th March - 17th April)

Period 2: Iran War and Oil Crises (27th Feb - 30th March)

Period 5: Shifting Market Leadership (14th May - 30th June)

Period 4: Memory and Earnings Revisions (17th April - 14th May)

US vs World ex US

Growth vs Value

Cyclicals vs Defensives

Quality vs World

-20

-15

-10

-5

R e l a t i v e T o t a l R e t u r n ( U S D ) %

MSCI World Indices - Relative Performance

Rising Line = Cyclicals /G /Growth /Q /Quality/ y/ US Outperformance Falling Line = Defensives /V /Value / Low-Quality/ y/ World ex US Outperformance

Defensives/ s/V /Value / Quality/ y/W /World ex US Outperformance Defensives/ s/V /Value / Low Quality/ y/ US Outperformance

Cyclicals/ s/ Growth / L ow-Quality/ y/ US Outperformance Cyclicals / Growth / Low-Quality Outperformance S i g n i fi c a n t S h i ft ft s I n M a r k e t L e a d e r s h i p - Most factors end roughly where they started

Page 23

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Global Innovators Fund (the “Fund”) (continued) Review (continued) Period 3: Market recovery rally (30 th March – 17 th April) Markets recovered strongly from late March into mid-April as the absence of further escalation stabilised risk appetite, even though the Middle East conflict remained unresolved. Oil prices eased from March highs, yields stopped rising, and investors unwound defensive positioning. This was more of a relief rally than genuine macro improvement, with growth and cyclicals rebounding while defensives gave back relative gains. Information Technology and Communication Services led, buoyed by renewed interest in AI infrastructure, semiconductors and certain internet names. Software also recovered, although confidence stayed selective due to ongoing concerns over AI disruption, pricing models, and legacy platform durability.

The Fund’s relative performance over the first half of the year can be attributed to the following:

 The Fund benefited from its overweight position to the Information Technology sector, which outperformed the broader index (+21.6% vs +9.7% in USD). This was supported by positive stock selection within the sector as Fund holdings including Applied Materials (+181.8%), KLA (+148.8%), and Lam Research (+153.5%) delivered robust returns above the MSCI World Information Technology sector.  From an asset allocation perspective, the Fund’s overweight position to Communication Services was a drag as the sector underperformed the wider benchmark (-0.2% vs +9.7%). Further, Fund holding Netflix (-23.8%) disappointed by not raising its full year guidance. This created a stock selection headwind, despite the company recently printing a positive set of quarterly results.  The Fund saw a tailwind from a zero-weight allocation to some of the benchmark's weaker sectors including Utilities (+8.9%), Real Estate (+6.6%), and Materials (+9.3%). The headwind faced in the first quarter from having no exposure to Energy partially reversed in the second quarter, with investors rotating away from the sector as progress was made towards de-escalating the US-Iran conflict that has affected energy supplies.  Activity

In H1 2026, we made two switches to the portfolio. Buys:

Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) is a fabless semiconductor company focused on high-performance and AI computing. It designs and sells a broad portfolio of AI-optimised processors and networking chips, positioning itself as a full-stack solutions provider across cloud and AI infrastructure while maintaining strong competitive positioning in PC and gaming end-markets. AMD has notably closed the performance gap with Nvidia in recent years, driven by targeted acquisitions and sustained software investment. The Helios platform, built on AMD’s acquisition of systems integrator ZT Systems, is AMD’s first rack-scale system unifying graphical processing units (GPUs), computer processing units (CPUs) and Pensando networking into a frontier AI infrastructure solution, and should be a material growth driver from 2027 onwards. AMD is also structurally advantaged by a shift in data centre computational architecture. Its EPYC server CPUs offer industry-leading performance-per-dollar and have taken substantial share from Intel in enterprise and cloud deployments. The rapid build-out of AI infrastructure is driving demand for high core-density server CPUs to meet the orchestration requirements of agentic workloads, and the rise of AI agents could push the CPU-to-GPU deployment ratio toward parity, representing a four-times to eight-times increase from current levels. Beyond the data centre, AMD’s edge AI and FPGA franchises represent underappreciated optionality, with meaningful exposure to inference at the edge as AI workloads migrate beyond centralised infrastructure. AMD’s transformation is largely the product of its CEO, Lisa Su, whose tenure since 2014 represents one of the most consequential leadership runs in semiconductor history. She converted an underfunded, unfocused company with a deteriorating PC CPU franchise and no credible path to profitability into a high-quality, profitable, diversified semiconductor powerhouse. Looking ahead, we expect significant top-line growth as the AI build-out progresses and, importantly, even stronger bottom-line expansion. AMD’s operating margin opportunity is compelling, driven by improving unit economics and operating leverage as volumes scale. At 45x one-year forward price-earnings ratio, the valuation is objectively demanding but not excessive given the potential for 50% annualised earnings growth to 2030. Importantly, the market has a consistent track record of underestimating structural inflection points in AI infrastructure, with GPU and memory demand being the clearest precedents. We believe server CPU is in the early stages of the same pattern and poised to accelerate meaningfully over the coming years, making AMD an attractive investment opportunity.

Page 24

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Global Innovators Fund (the “Fund”) (continued) Performance (continued)

Nasdaq is best understood not as a traditional exchange but as a global technology, data, and analytics company that happens to own a major stock exchange, a positioning it has deliberately built since its 2017 strategic pivot away from transaction-driven revenue towards higher-growth, higher-margin software and analytics. Nasdaq’s business is diversified across three segments. Through its Financial Technology segment, the firm is strategically positioned to benefit from a structural rise in compliance and transparency requirements as regulators demand more granular and frequent reporting from banks globally. This segment also houses Calypso, a trading and risk-management platform whose demand is underpinned by the growing complexity of trading, collateral, and risk requirements at large financial institutions. The Capital Access Platforms segment includes listing fees, market data subscriptions and index licensing on products such as the Nasdaq-100. Lastly, its exchange business, although originally the direct driver of the business, has become more of an enabler for other business segments, as trading activity generates proprietary pricing data that the company repackages and monetises, while providing the firm with a partial hedge during periods of heightened market volatility. Further, its 60% recurring revenue mix offers protection against economic downturns. From a growth standpoint, bottom-line growth should outpace top-line growth over the medium and long term due to margin expansion driven by operating leverage, cost synergies and the growing weight of higher-margin solutions. We originally looked at Nasdaq at the end of last year, when the stock traded at around 23x forward price-earnings ratio. Since then, partly driven by the broader ‘SaaSpocalypse’, the stock has de-rated to 19x, which we view as an attractive entry point given the quality and growth characteristics of the business. We believe Nasdaq being caught up in this sell-off is not justified, since its business is built on data, analytics, and exchange infrastructure rather than the kind of seat-based enterprise software which AI agents might displace. While AI is not expected to be a primary driver, we have more confidence Nasdaq will be a net beneficiary of AI than we did with Intuit, which we have sold. Precision requirements, high switching costs, data ownership, security, and domain expertise all limit AI-driven disintermediation risk, whilst its structured data delivery positions Nasdaq as a critical input provider for AI systems rather than a casualty of them.

Sells:

We initially bought Adobe for its high-quality fundamentals: a subscription-based model that generated over 96% of revenue, profit margins approaching 30%, and a deep distribution network supported by strong brand equity. We believed these attributes would provide a durable competitive edge and saw potential for Adobe to expand into historically underpenetrated segments such as non-traditional enterprise users and individual creators to enable deeper monetisation. However, the shares have struggled recently due to the rapidly changing and increasingly competitive landscape in the creative design and data analytics markets. Initially, Adobe was seen as a beneficiary of the AI boom as its flagship tool Firefly quickly gained momentum, generated over 16 billion creative outputs and set adoption records. Despite this early promise, the picture has since been muddied by a disconnect between upbeat management commentary and the lack of a growth inflection that would be expected to follow. While Adobe was focusing on the longer term by prioritising user proliferation rather than immediate product monetisation, we felt achieving an inflection in the backlog and sales growth through pricing was going to be more difficult than previously envisioned. In particular, the potential need to adapt the industry-standard SaaS model to incorporate the token intensity of AI product presents a real challenge for the company. This has been compounded by the announced retirement of long-time CEO Shantanu Narayen and company changes to segment reporting, further complicating analysts' ability to assess performance over time. In light of these ongoing headwinds and the lack of clarity over how Adobe might have to adapt their model in the future, we saw better opportunities elsewhere and decided to exit the position.

We initially bought Intuit for its market-leading position in mission-critical tax and accounting software, a deeply embedded QuickBooks platform with significant switching costs, and a strong consumer brand in TurboTax. QuickBooks’ c.80% market share, high customer retention and accountant-led distribution created a durable competitive advantage, while Intuit’s expanding ecosystem across payments, payroll, lending, Mailchimp, and tax services provided a clear runway for long-term growth and further monetisation. Toward the end of 2025 and in early 2026, markets became increasingly concerned with the ‘Saaspocalypse’, the implications of AI disruption of the software sector, causing sentiment on the stock to sour. While Intuit continued to deliver resilient results overall, its most recent earnings print changed the thesis for us. Revenue and earnings were modestly ahead of consensus, but the quarter was overshadowed by disappointing TurboTax performance, where revenue growth of 7% fell short of expectations (c.8%) and paid DIY returns declined sharply, particularly among price-sensitive, lower-income filers. This reignited concerns that Intuit’s pricing power and share at the lower end of the tax market may be more vulnerable than previously anticipated. Although QuickBooks remains a high-quality asset, embedded in small business workflows and supported by a growing services layer, we felt the quarter weakened the durability of the broader Intuit thesis. In particular, TurboTax’s DIY weakness, combined with management’s shift toward ‘value-based’ pricing, suggests that the moat around simple tax filing may be eroding faster than expected. This further complicated the potential for re-rating as we believe AI does not need to fully displace TurboTax to create a problem; it only needs to pressure willingness to pay in commoditised filing use cases. While other products, namely QuickBooks Online Advanced and Intuit Enterprise Suite, continue to offer attractive growth opportunities, the risk of a faster-than-expected plateau in TurboTax, alongside limited near-term clarity on AI monetisation, led us to conclude that there were better opportunities elsewhere and we decided to exit the position.

Page 25

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Global Innovators Fund (the “Fund”) (continued) Outlook The table below shows the fund valuation in terms of forward (analyst consensus estimates) price/earnings ratios versus the MSCI World Index. The Fund at quarter end was trading on 23.5x 2026 expected earnings; a premium of 15.2% to the broad market.

Portfolio metrics versus MSCI World Index Fund MSCI World Index

Growth Trailing 5-year sales growth (annualised) 14.3% 5.5% Estimated earnings growth (12M forward) 20.7% 19.4%

Quality Median Return-on-Capital 24.5% 9.6% Median net debt / equity 19.5% 39.4% Valuation Price/Earnings ratio (2026e) 23.5x 20.4x Price/Earnings (2027e) 20.1x 17.9x

Conviction Number of stocks 30 1283 Active share 77% Source: Guinness Global Investors, Bloomberg, as of 30 th June 2026

The current market environment has been shaped by heightened geopolitical tensions, including the ongoing conflict involving Iran, rising inflationary pressures and evolving monetary policy expectations. At the same time, weakness across parts of the software sector has tempered what had previously been very strong enthusiasm for AI-related stocks, while growing debate around whether the AI trade has entered bubble territory has added another layer of caution to investor sentiment. These dynamics have contributed to increased market volatility and a more uncertain backdrop for global equities. Despite a complex macro-economic setting, stock fundamentals have shown resilience, giving us reassurance in our bottom-up approach to stock-picking. We are confident that the Fund’s focus on high-quality growth stocks, underpinned by structural innovation themes, stands us in good stead. Our research process helps to identify these quality growth companies whilst also maintaining a valuation discipline, which is particularly important in the context of a market where valuation is front of mind. In addition, our equally weighted positions limit over-reliance on any single company. We continue to focus on these key tenets in the Fund and remain confident of this process over the long term.

Guinness Asset Management Limited

Page 26

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Greater China Fund (the “Fund”) Performance summary in US Dollars: Class Y compared with MSCI Golden Dragon Net Return Index

Annualised Calendar years 6 months 1 year 3 years 5 years 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

Fund -2.7% 14.0% 7.3% -3.1% 0.1% -23.0% -9.9% 4.5% 30.4%

Index 16.6% 36.5% 23.5% 4.7% -9.5% -22.3% -0.9% 22.5% 34.4%

Review Year-to-date, the Fund (Y class, USD) fell by 2.7%, while the benchmark, the MSCI Golden Dragon Index, rose by 16.6%, and the MSCI China Index fell by 15.0%. Therefore, the Fund underperformed the MSCI Golden Dragon Index by 19.4 percentage points (pp) and outperformed the MSCI China Index by 12.3pp. The underperformance versus the MSCI Golden Dragon Index was mainly driven by the Fund’s underweight to Taiwan. The MSCI Golden Dragon Index is a weighted average of the MSCI China, Taiwan and Hong Kong indexes, and Taiwan accounted for 55% of the benchmark at the end of June. By contrast, the Fund held two Taiwan listed positions, with a combined weight of 13.7%. As Taiwan performed strongly over the period, this underweight was a drag on Fund performance. The largest effect came from TSMC, which represented 30.5% of the benchmark at quarter-end, compared with a 6.0% position in the Fund. We estimate this underweight detracted 10.0pp from relative performance. The absence of positions in MediaTek, Delta Electronics, ASE Technology and Yageo Corporation also detracted. Year-to-date, relative to the MSCI China Index, areas which helped the Fund’s performance were:

 A combination of the overweight in Information Technology and stock selection, driven by Elite Material and TSMC.  The structural underweight to Tencent and Alibaba. The Fund is run on an equally weighted basis, and so each position has a neutral weight of c.3.3%. As Tencent and Alibaba underperformed, the structural underweight position benefited the Fund in relative terms, by 3.4pp and 2.9pp, respectively.  The underweight in Materials, which underperformed. Year-to-date, the area which detracted from the Fund’s relative performance was:

 Stock selection in Healthcare, driven by Sino Biopharmaceutical. Activity Sells China Merchants Bank was sold during the period. The bank continues to have one of China’s strongest retail and wealth management franchises, but we became less comfortable with the direction of asset quality. The retail non-performing loan (NPL) ratio increased to 1.14%, led by credit cards, where both non-performing and special mention loan ratios rose. Newly formed credit-card NPLs also rose materially. Expected credit losses increased 16%, far outpacing profit growth of 2%. While the franchise remains strong, we believe the deteriorating retail credit cycle could lead to higher provisions and constrain future returns, making the risk-reward less attractive. Buys We initiated a position in Weichai Power, a leading manufacturer of heavy-duty engines, where we see an opportunity to benefit from growing demand for power solutions linked to data centre expansion. In our view, the market does not fully reflect this potential, continuing to value the business largely as a traditional engine manufacturer while overlooking its aftermarket servicing arm, a source of high-margin, recurring revenue. Its capability across both diesel- and gas-powered generation positions it well for the rising demand for flexible, reliable on-site power in both primary and backup roles. Himile Mechanical is an industrial company operating across three segments: tyre moulds, large mechanical components and computer numerical control (CNC) machines. Tyre moulds remain the core business, accounting for 50% of revenue in 2025. This is a high-quality, cash-generative business, supported by replacement demand and the increasing complexity of tyres as electric vehicles become more popular. Himile has used its precision casting capabilities to expand into large mechanical components, which accounted for 36% of revenue in 2025. This segment supplies gas turbine components to manufacturers such as GE Vernova, Siemens Energy and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, as well as wind turbine components, including hubs, bases and gearbox parts. Demand should be supported by China’s continued investment in natural gas capacity, with an additional tailwind from AI-related power demand as data centres increasingly require reliable on-site power. As a precision components supplier within the major turbine supply chains, Himile is well placed to benefit from this capacity crunch. The CNC machine business remains small, at 9% of revenue, but could become more meaningful over time. Himile has spent 30 years developing CNC machines for internal use and now believes it can compete at the higher end of the market, where China remains reliant on imports. Portfolio Positioning

On a sector basis, the Fund’s largest exposures are to the Consumer Discretionary, Industrials and Information Technology sectors. Relative to the MSCI China Index, the Fund is overweight in Industrials and Consumer Discretionary. The Fund is underweight in Financials and Communication Services.

Data as of 30/06/26, source: Guinness Global Investors calculations, Bloomberg

0% 20% 40%

Consumer… Information… Financials Real Estate Utilities Materials Cash

Fund Sector Allocation vs MSCI China Index

Guinness Greater China Fund MSCI China Index -20% -10% 0% 10% 20%

Industrials Consumer… Information… Real Estate Consumer Staples Utilities Health Care Energy Materials Communication… Financials

Fund over/underweights

Page 27

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Greater China Fund (the “Fund”) (continued) Activity (continued) On a listing basis, the Fund has 49% exposure to stocks listed in Hong Kong, 32% exposure to the A share market and a 14% allocation to Taiwan. Relative to the MSCI China Index, this makes the Fund 12% overweight to the A share market and 28% underweight to stocks listed in Hong Kong.

Data as of 30/06/26, source: Guinness Global Investors calculations, Bloomberg Outlook The Fund’s quality growth holdings had begun to re-rate relative to the MSCI China Index from September 2025, but this was interrupted by a surge in enthusiasm for AI related companies in the second quarter. The Fund’s valuation premium has since fallen back to 15%, compared with a long-term average of 34%, while the Fund’s current holdings trade on 11.6x forward earnings, below their ten-year average of 15.3x. With valuations in parts of the AI market now requiring very optimistic growth assumptions, we do not expect the current concentration of returns to persist indefinitely. As enthusiasm moderates, we believe investor attention should broaden towards cheaper parts of the market, including Industrials and Consumer Discretionary, where the Fund is overweight. This creates an attractive starting point for long-term investors. Onshore AI-related companies have risen sharply, supported by strong investment in computing infrastructure, domestic supply chain localisation and upward earnings revisions. But in many cases, the proportion of these valuations that rests on growth yet to be delivered has returned to levels last seen at the 2021 peak of the Chinese market. That was a period defined by globally low interest rates and, with the benefit of hindsight, excessive market optimism. We believe the long-term opportunity is genuine, but valuations in parts of the market now require the investment cycle to remain strong, earnings to grow rapidly and margins to stay resilient. At these levels there is limited protection if expectations are not fully met. We are therefore maintaining our valuation discipline rather than increasing exposure simply because these companies have recently performed well. Our investment process begins with quality as we look for companies capable of earning returns on capital above their cost of capital and sustaining those returns over time. We then assess whether the business is exposed to a structural growth opportunity and whether the current valuation leaves sufficient upside. On this basis, we currently see better risk-reward in selected Industrials and Consumer Discretionary companies than in the most highly valued parts of the technology sector.

Guinness Asset Management Limited

0% 50% 100%

Hong Kong A-Share Taiwan US ADR

Cash

Fund Listing Allocation vs MSCI China Index

Guinness Greater China Fund MSCI China Index -40% -20% 0% 20%

Taiwan

A-Share

US ADR

Hong Kong

Fund over/underweights

Page 28

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Emerging Markets Equity Income Fund (the “Fund”) Performance summary in US Dollars: Class Y compared with the MSCI Emerging Markets Index

Annualised Calendar years 6 months 1 year 3 years 5 years 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Fund 2.8% 7.7% 13.6% 5.7% 3.1% -12.6% 12.9% 10.9% 22.9% Index 23.9% 43.5% 23.0% 7.2% -2.5% -20.1% 9.8% 7.5% 33.6%

Review In the first half of 2026, the Fund (Class Y, USD) rose 2.8%, underperforming the benchmark, which was up 23.9%. Underperformance was mainly driven by very strong returns from benchmark stocks not held in the Fund, principally Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix. Gains in TSMC also contributed (it is held in the Fund but underweight relative to the benchmark). Emerging markets outperformed developed markets, with the MSCI Emerging Markets Index up 23.9%, the MSCI World Index up 9.7%, and the S&P 500 in the US rising 10.2%. Within emerging markets, Asia was the best performer, up 28.2%, driven by Korea and Taiwan in particular, both of which benefited from their exposure to the AI supply chain. Latin America was next, rising 10.5%, supported by good performance from Mexico and Brazil. EMEA (Europe, Middle East and Africa) was the worst performer, rising 2.3%, impacted by weakness in South Africa and volatility driven by conflict in the Middle East. Within the portfolio, the best-performing stock was Elite Material, which rallied amid continued excitement about the AI capital expenditure super-cycle. The company is a leading manufacturer of premium copper-clad laminates used in AI servers, switches, and data centre infrastructure. Strong AI server demand, tight high-end laminate supply, and repeated industry price increases have driven a powerful earnings upgrade cycle and a major valuation rerating for the company. The weakest performer was Suofeiya Home Collection. As a custom cabinet and home furnishing company, it is exposed to one of the weakest parts of China’s economy: residential property and home renovation demand, with sales being closely linked to housing transactions, renovation activity and consumer confidence. 1Q26 revenues fell 25% year-on-year, and the company went from a profit in the previous year to a loss of RMB38m. With China’s property market still struggling, home prices weak, and households cautious, investors have remained sceptical that demand for big-ticket home improvement products can recover quickly, leading to earnings downgrades. The Fund declared a distribution of £0.3 (Class Y) shortly following the end of the first half. From 2017 to 2025, the annual distribution grew at a 6.8% compound annual rate in sterling terms. Activity In the first six months of 2026, we added one new position to the Fund and sold one position. The effect of the switch during the year was to increase exposure to Consumer Discretionary by one position (2.75% at neutral weight) and to decrease exposure to Consumer Staples by one position. Geographic exposures shifted slightly over the course of the year. The switch during the year increased exposure to Malaysia and reduced exposure to Taiwan. Portfolio positioning The Fund is overweight the Consumer Discretionary, Consumer Staples, Financials and Health Care sectors. The Fund has no holdings in the Materials, Energy, Utilities or Real Estate sectors, and is also underweight Information Technology, Industrials and Communication Services. Excluding the positions listed in developed markets, the Fund is most overweight in China, Brazil and Mexico. The Fund is most underweight in South Korea (no holdings), Taiwan and India. Outlook The ongoing conflict in the Middle East still exerts a big influence on the outlook, in our opinion. Any threatened price spikes in energy or food could disrupt the low-inflation, low-rate environment the market is pricing in. The recent resurgence in the conflict has been accompanied by a rise in market volatility, reflecting the increased uncertainty. Generally, the Fund is well-positioned for a higher energy price environment, given that we don’t tend to have as much exposure to energy-intensive industries. Countries such as China have so far demonstrated resilience – partly due to having oil reserves and inventories of other input commodities. These have provided a degree of insulation, but can only last so long before the effects of further disruption are felt. Should we face a situation where the inflation outlook starts to move higher, we look to similar past periods when the portfolio has demonstrated resilience amid higher rates. The main second-order risk, if the conflict continues, is the potential impact on consumer spending. If energy and food cost inflation begins to bite, consumer budgets could start to be squeezed, prompting reductions in discretionary spending. We have not seen widespread signs of this yet, but it is an area we will continue to watch closely. And while the market’s enthusiasm for AI-related companies seems unstoppable, we think there are signs of complacency among investors amid extremely optimistic investor sentiment. We have seen signs of this being reflected in large price swings (both up and down) in large-cap stocks and increased volatility. We note at the time of writing that the large Korean memory stocks Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix, having both enjoyed very strong performance this year, are currently experiencing significant drawdowns from their highs. July in particular has seen much greater price volatility. The emphasis we place on the underlying quality of a business, earning high returns on capital and generating cash, provides the underpinning for rewarding shareholders with dividends while seeking to compound their earnings over the long term. And we believe it is this process of cash generation and reinvestment that is likely to be the determinant of returns over the long term. Companies with such a track record have shown the ability to navigate periods of uncertainty in the past, and we think they are well-positioned to do so again. It is this combination, embedded in an equally weighted portfolio, that we believe works particularly well in an emerging market context and provides investors with access to a disciplined strategy for navigating uncertain environments.

Guinness Asset Management Limited

Page 29

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Best of Asia Fund (the “Fund”) Performance summary in US Dollars: Class Y compared with MSCI AC Asia Pacific ex Japan Net Return Index

Annualised Calendar years 6 months 1 year 3 years 5 years 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Fund 9.8% 21.5% 15.0% 3.0% 2.8% -23.7% 6.6% 13.3% 20.9% Index 23.9% 40.8% 22.6% 7.3% -2.9% -17.5% 7.4% 10.2% 29.6%

Review Year-to-date, the Fund rose 11.3% (Y share class, in GBP) compared to its benchmark, the MSCI AC Asia Pacific ex Japan Net Total Return Index, which rose 23.9%. The first half of 2026 was dominated by two macro stories. Firstly, global and Asian equity markets came under pressure as the escalation of the US-Iran conflict pushed energy prices sharply higher, with Brent crude rising materially in March after the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz. This created a new source of macro uncertainty for Asia, given the region’s reliance on imported energy, particularly for energy-importing markets such as Taiwan, Korea and India. Markets then moved back into a risk-on environment as the conflict de-escalated and crude prices retreated from their April peaks. At the same time, investor enthusiasm around AI continued to build, supported by rising US hyperscaler capital expenditure guidance and expectations of a multi-year data centre and infrastructure investment cycle. This led to a powerful rebound in Emerging Asia, which rose by more than 30% over the quarter, led by semiconductor-related technology names in Korea and Taiwan. Relative performance was challenging in the first half, driven by the Fund's significant underweight to Asian AI beneficiaries, which continued to outperform the benchmark. The benchmark’s return profile became increasingly concentrated as the half progressed. This was a difficult environment for the Fund’s quality income style, particularly as the strongest benchmark returns came from names and sectors where the Fund is structurally underweight or unable to invest. Year-to-date, relative performance was hurt by both allocation and selection effects, primarily from being underweight Technology and not holding Samsung Electronics, which does not qualify for the Fund’s investment universe. Whilst we do hold SK Hynix and TSMC, both are underweight to the benchmark (c3% and c10% respectively) due to our equal-weighting strategy. These three companies alone have accounted for over 78% of the benchmark’s total performance in 1H26. Country performance was also highly uneven. China remained weak through the first half, initially due to weak consumption, property-sector fragility and limited evidence of broad-based demand stimulus, and later because it did not participate meaningfully in the AI-led rally. Hong Kong suffered from many of the same China-related concerns, as well as financial-sector sensitivity and worries over tighter scrutiny of cross-border capital flows. Activity In the quarter, we added three positions to the Fund and sold two. Buy SK Hynix ¸a Korean maker of memory chips, was added to the Fund in Q2. Over the years, management has skewed the mix towards higher-margin products. This has resulted in SK Hynix dominating the HBM (High Bandwidth Memory) space, where it holds over 50% market share. HBM is a specific type of DRAM (dynamic random access memory) designed to improve latency and reduce power consumption. These chips are in high demand as they improve the performance of AI applications, leading to a favourable supply-demand imbalance and pricing power for SK Hynix. Shenzhen Inovance gives exposure to several structural growth trends within Chinese manufacturing. The core thesis is domestic substitution in industrial automation, where Inovance continues to gain share from foreign competitors across servos, drives and programmable logic controllers (PLCs), supported by a broad product range, integrated solutions and faster customer response. Recent order growth of more than 30%, ahead of revenue growth, suggests that the automation cycle is improving and that the company remains well placed in advanced manufacturing, including semiconductors, batteries and AI-related capital expenditure. The electric vehicle (EV) powertrain provides a second growth engine, with Inovance increasing content per vehicle as it moves from individual components to integrated powertrain and smart chassis solutions. Overseas expansion and emerging areas such as humanoid robotics are expected to drive further long-term growth. Short-term margins are under pressure from EV pricing and raw material inflation, but price increases, capacity expansion and a better business mix should support recovery. Overall, we believe Inovance offers attractive structural growth, sustained market-share gains, and a credible path to stronger earnings at a very compelling valuation. Himile Mechanical is an industrial company operating across three segments: tyre moulds, large mechanical components and computer numerical control (CNC) machines. Tire moulds remain the core business, accounting for 50% of revenue in 2025. This is a high-quality, cash-generative business, supported by replacement demand and the increasing complexity of tyres as EVs become more popular. Himile has used its precision casting capabilities to expand into large mechanical components, which accounted for 36% of revenue in 2025. This segment supplies gas turbine components to manufacturers such as GE Vernova, Siemens Energy and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, as well as wind turbine components, including hubs, bases and gearbox parts. Demand should be supported by China’s continued investment in natural gas capacity, with an additional tailwind from AI-related power demand as data centres increasingly require reliable on-site power. As a precision components supplier within the major turbine supply chains, Himile is well placed to benefit from this capacity crunch. The CNC machine business remains small, at 9% of revenue, but could become more meaningful over time. Himile has spent 30 years developing CNC machines for internal use and now believes it can compete at the higher end of the market, where China remains reliant on imports. Sell Our original thesis for Autohome rested on a scale-driven network effect in Chinese auto leads, supported by strong cash returns during a transitional period. We believe this network effect is eroding rather than cyclically depressed. As demand mix shifts from internal combustion engines (ICE) to new energy vehicles (NEVs), original equipment manufacturer (OEM) marketing spend is moving from vertical leads platforms to content-driven social media. Recent results confirm the strain, margins across the auto-leads sector are compressing, and management has guided to further pressure on profit. Additionally, the company is transitioning to a transaction platform with O2O (online-to-offline) capabilities to fuel its next leg of growth. However, whilst this is expected to be revenue accretive in the long term, O2O has yet to generate meaningful revenue, is likely to be margin dilutive in the near term due to investments in offline stores, and faces growing competition. Finally, whilst Autohome has a high total shareholder yield, we do not think this adequately compensates for a deteriorating legacy business and the likelihood of several quarters of limited visibility on the new O2O (online-to-offline) venture, especially given the more attractive risk-adjusted opportunities available elsewhere in the universe.

Page 30

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Best of Asia Fund (the “Fund”) (continued) Activity (continued) China Merchants Bank is a state-owned Chinese bank that has historically catered towards more affluent Chinese clients. This has, in the past, been beneficial for the bank, helping it maintain a healthy balance sheet even through periods of volatility. The current environment has made it more difficult for China Merchants Bank to repeat this performance. Macro conditions within China remain depressed, affecting much of the bank’s client base, and leading to weaker retail loans, as well as rising Non Performing Loans related to consumption and mortgages. We believe this environment is likely to persist in the near to medium term. This may push management to keep tightening retail underwriting, which would, in turn, compress net interest margins, as these segments contribute higher yields. Outlook For the second half of 2026, the outlook for Asian equities remains constructive, but more finely balanced. Globally, earnings momentum continues to be supported by the AI capex cycle, particularly across semiconductors, infrastructure, industrials and power-related areas. However, valuations have become fuller, leaving markets more exposed to disappointment around AI spending, as well as broader macro risks including inflation, interest rates and geopolitics. Asia remains attractive relative to developed markets, supported by cheaper valuations and more direct exposure to the AI supply chain through Taiwan and Korea. The region also looks appealing from an earnings yield perspective: Asian equities offer an expected 2026 earnings yield of around 7.4%, comfortably above the aggregate yield on Asian government bonds, while the US equity earnings yield is broadly in line with the US 10-year bond yield. This suggests Asia offers a more attractive equity risk premium and a stronger valuation cushion. Earnings delivery will be the key differentiator. Taiwan and Korea should continue to benefit from AI-related demand, though both markets have already re-rated and may be more vulnerable to profit-taking. China and Hong Kong look cheaper but need clearer policy support and better earnings visibility, while India’s longer-term structural story remains intact but depends on near-term earnings delivery. Overall, returns are likely to become more selective, and the key question is whether performance broadens beyond semiconductors into banks, healthcare, consumer, industrials and domestic-demand names.

Guinness Asset Management Limited

Page 31

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Global Quality Mid Cap Fund (the “Fund”) Performance summary in US Dollars: Class Y compared with MSCI World Mid Cap Net Return Index

Annualised Calendar years 6 months 1 year 3 years 5 years 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Fund 27.8% 40.3% 14.2% 6.7% 26.7% -25.7% 16.4% 3.9% 8.1% Index 10.1% 17.0% 15.2% 6.9% 17.6% -19.1% 15.5% 10.7% 17.2% Source: FE fundinfo (data as at 30.06.2026) Review Over the first half of the year, we identified five distinct periods which help us to frame performance across markets. Rather than simply defining these by broad bull and bear market moves, we instead characterise each period by the shifts in leadership between underlying market factors - such as value versus growth, and defensives versus cyclicals - that occurred beneath the surface.

Source: Guinness Global Investors , Bloomberg, as of 30.06.2026

Period 1 – Geopolitical Noise & Software Scrutiny (31 st Dec – 27 th Feb) Markets navigated heavy geopolitical noise in January and February - from regime uncertainty in Venezuela following the US capture of Maduro, to Trump's Greenland ambitions straining NATO, mutual tariff threats across Europe and Canada, and spiking Japanese yields on fiscal stimulus concerns. Despite this, the MSCI World Index climbed to all-time highs, led by international (ex-US) stocks, while the US underperformed as investors rotated out of mega-caps and AI-exposed software. Global software fell 21% over the two months amid a structural reassessment of software economics under AI (DIY build risk and disintermediation, alongside the erosion of seat-based pricing). Markets instead looked to 'HALO' stocks (Heavy Assets, Low Obsolescence), prioritising companies perceived to possess a level of natural immunity to AI-driven technological disruption. Whilst equities reached all-time highs, this was anything but a broad-based rally. Instead, the period was defined by a sharp and deliberate rotation away from US growth, mega-caps and software and into more defensive areas of the market alongside value and international equities – and more AI-immune HALO stocks in particular.

Period 2 - The Iran War & Oil Crisis (27 th Feb – 30 th March) Sentiment shifted abruptly at the end of February when US and Israeli strikes on Iran escalated into a regional war, with Iranian retaliation hitting Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar. An effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz - roughly a fifth of global oil and LNG flows - sent energy and freight markets into turmoil: Brent crude jumped from $72 to $118 a barrel, the WCI freight benchmark rose 20% quarter-on-quarter, and European gas prices climbed nearly 50% after Qatar's LNG halt. The energy shock revived stagflation fears, undermining confidence that inflation was contained just as weak US jobs data and falling business and consumer confidence pressured growth expectations. Rate-cut expectations reversed sharply, with the market pricing two US 25bp cuts at the beginning of the year to near zero by the end of the period, while Europe swung from a c.50% chance of one cut to pricing three hikes. With yields rising and gold failing as a safe haven, BofA's fund manager survey showed the fastest rush into cash since Covid. Defensives and value outperformed, while energy-importing markets, especially in Asia, sold off hardest.

Period 3 – Market Recovery Rally (30 March – 17th April) Markets recovered strongly from late March into mid-April as the absence of further escalation stabilised risk appetite, even though the Middle East conflict remained unresolved. Oil eased from March highs, yields stopped rising, and investors unwound defensive positioning. This was more of a relief rally than genuine macro improvement, with growth and cyclicals rebounding while defensives gave back relative gains. Information Technology and Communication Services led, buoyed by renewed interest in AI infrastructure, semiconductors and select internet/platform names. Software also recovered, though confidence stayed selective given ongoing concerns over AI disruption, pricing models, and legacy platform durability.

Period 4 – Memory, Lower-Quality Software and Earnings Revisions (17th April – 14th May) The market rally initially reflected a broad recovery in risk appetite post-March, but by mid-April the next phase concentrated in areas seeing most aggressive earnings upgrades, particularly the semiconductor value-chain linked to AI infrastructure. Semiconductor industry revenues grew +79% y/y in Q1 2026, led by memory, where DRAM and NAND sales surged +271% on soaring prices, as AI hardware demand continued outstripping supply. The AI supply shortage narrative broadened beyond memory and GPUs to encompass leading-edge wafer capacity, optical components, and power and cooling infrastructure, with markets rotating towards well-positioned AI infrastructure buildout names. Software saw a partial recovery off the back of numerous strong Q1 reports that challenged the AI disintermediation narrative, but performance was heavily bifurcated: gains were largely confined to cash-generative platform software, non-seat-based consumption models, and models with deep data repositories – those deemed to be least susceptible to AI disintermediation. Beyond these names, the broader software landscape remained a laggard - companies that missed guidance/expectations or failed to reassure markets over near-term AI risks suffered further double-digit sell-offs.

-8

-6

-4

-2

3 1 - D e c 0 7 - J a n 1 4 - J a n 2 1 - J a n 2 8 - J a n 0 4 - F e b 1 1 - F e b 1 8 - F e b 2 5 - F e b 0 4 - M a r 1 1 - M a r 1 8 - M a r 2 5 - M a r 0 1 - A p r 0 8 - A p r 1 5 - A p r 2 2 - A p r 2 9 - A p r 0 6 - M a y

1 3 - M a y 2 0 - M a y

2 7 - M a y 0 3 - J u n 1 0 - J u n 1 7 - J u n 2 4 - J u n

To To t a l R e t u r n ( U S D ) %

MSCI World Index - Total Return 31st Dec 2025 - 30th June 2026

Period 1: Geopolitical Noise & Software Scrutiny (31st Dec - 27th Feb)

Period 3: Recovery Rally (30th March 17th April)

Period 2: Iran War and Oil Crises (27th Feb - 30th March)

Period 5: Shifting Market Leadership (14th May - 30th June)

Period 4: Memory and Earnings Revisions (17th April - 14th May)

Page 32

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Global Quality Mid Cap Fund (the “Fund”) (continued) Review (continued) Period 5 – Volatile Markets with Fast Shifting Leadership (14 th May – 30 th June) Macro conditions shifted dramatically in late May. US-Iran tensions unwound somewhat, reducing the conflict's risk premium, with a ceasefire/MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) allowing for a partial reopening of the Strait of Hormuz. Brent crude prices were driven down to c.$70 per barrel, near pre-war levels. However, market relief was capped by persistent inflation, which reached a three-year high in May. This backdrop supported a perceivably more hawkish tone from new Fed Chair Kevin Warsh, whose comments focused strictly on price stability, prompting markets to price in earlier rate hikes, with more than one hike priced in by 2026-year end. The Magnificent Seven materially underperformed the rest of the market, partly as investor scepticism grew over near-term AI capex monetisation. Instead, markets rotated towards the chipmakers and semiconductor equipment manufacturers who would benefit from their large capex plans – regardless the level of AI monetisation. Investors also rotated into areas perceived as more insulated from AI disruption, with Financials, Industrials and Healthcare among the strongest contributors to performance over the period. This broadening of the market allowed the MSCI World Equally Weighted Index to outperform its market weighted counterpart since mid-May. Overall, whilst the market remains near all-time highs, this period was marked by multiple shifts in leadership, as investors balanced secular AI growth enthusiasm and macro caution - rotating between defensives vs cyclicals, and value vs growth – although greater emphasis on quality has returned. Performance Year-to-date, the Fund has returned 27.8% (in USD), whilst the MSCI World Mid Cap Index has returned 10.1%. The Fund has therefore outperformed the benchmark by 17.7%.

The Fund’s relative performance over the first half of the year can be attributed to the following:

 Significant outperformance for the Fund came primarily in April and was driven by our overweight positioning to IT and in particular, AI infrastructure and semiconductor stocks. o A strong allocation effect was accompanied by positive stock selection as Fund holdings such as Inficon, Teradyne, BE Semiconductor Industries, Entegris, and Delta Electronics all posted very strong share price gains.  Strong performance in the quarter also came via good stock selection within the Health Care sector, with the likes of Jazz Pharmaceutical up and Revvity.  The Fund benefitted from having no allocation to Energy, Materials and Utilities, which were amongst the weakest performing sectors in the quarter. Investors rotated away as progress was made towards de-escalating the US-Iran conflict that affected energy supplies. Activity In H1 2026, we made three switches to the portfolio. selling our positions in Sonova, Checkpoint and DiaSorin, whilst initiating positions in Adyen, Nasdaq and BESI.

Adyen is a digital-first, end-to-end payments platform connecting merchants directly to card networks — delivering higher authorisation rates, lower false positives, and a unified view of the customer across channels and geographies. It is a smaller-cap alternative to Visa and Mastercard but sits closer to the merchant and offers genuine software value-add on top of pure processing. Both large-cap peers have faced multiple compression from regulatory pressure on interchange fees, while the broader payments sector has been weighed down by stablecoin fears — the prospect of peer-to-peer digital settlement bypassing card networks entirely. Adyen is better positioned than most to navigate this, having developed infrastructure to accept stablecoin payments and positioning itself as network-agnostic. Over 80% of volume growth comes from existing merchants, with further runway from POS expansion and the secular shift to cashless commerce. The stock de-rated sharply after the recent quarterly earnings narrowly missed expectations, whilst broader weakness in payment businesses (given their software nature) left the valuation at a fraction of historical levels and as such, created a compelling entry point into a highly cash-generative business.

Nasdaq is better understood as a financial technology and data company than a traditional exchange, with around 80% of revenues non-transactional and 60% recurring across regulatory software, anti-financial crime technology, market data, and index licensing. It is a smaller-cap analogue to larger exchanges such as ICE, but has gone further in pivoting away from transaction-driven exchange revenues toward high-margin, SaaS businesses. The stock has been caught in the broader software sell-off, as markets fret that AI will commoditise data and analytics platforms. We think this misses the point - the losers will be software platforms without proprietary data, while those sitting on decades of unique, transactional data will be the beneficiaries. Nasdaq's market data and index IP are precisely that. With the company expecting to continue growing at double-digit rates, EPS growth guided at low-double-digits through 2028, and net debt improving from 5.2x to 3x post the Adenza acquisition, the fundamental trajectory is positive, whilst the recent software-related market sell off provides a strong entry point.

Besi is the undisputed leader in hybrid bonding - the most advanced semiconductor packaging technology available. Where ASML pushes front-end scaling by cramming more transistors onto a single die, Besi enables back-end system scaling by connecting chiplets with direct copper-to-copper bonds, delivering orders-of-magnitude improvements in interconnect density, bandwidth, and energy efficiency.

The stock fell over 15% in early March 2026 after a report that JEDEC - the semiconductor standards body whose members include Nvidia, Samsung, and SK Hynix - was discussing decreasing the minimum thickness limit for memory chips. The concern is that hybrid bonding derives part of its value from enabling thinner chip stacks (used to create high bandwidth memory, HBM) by eliminating solder bumps. Hence, relaxing the thickness constraint may allow memory makers to achieve HBM stacks using cheaper thermocompression bonding without needing to adopt hybrid bonding in the near term. We view this as a timing debate, not a structural one. Industry consensus holds that hybrid bonding will ultimately be unavoidable, with SK Hynix's VP of Package Development stating it will be essential for HBM stacks of 20 layers or more. Critically, Besi's logic chiplet exposure - where hybrid bonding is already in commercial production at AMD, Intel, and TSMC - is entirely unaffected by HBM standards discussions. With industry-leading margins, and growth predicted to continue at 20+%, we see good upside to a stock providing a critical innovation at a time when the AI industry is facing increasing energy bottlenecks.

Sonova is the one of the world's largest hearing aid companies operating through its Phonak, Unitron, and AudioNova brands across hearing instruments, audiological care, and cochlear implants. We bought it as a high-quality compounder with an attractive razor-and-blade model - a large installed base driving recurring consumable and service revenues - underpinned by structural tailwinds from an ageing global population and low hearing aid penetration in emerging markets. However, the FDA's approval of over the-counter hearing aids opened the US market to consumer electronics players and eroded the premium positioning whilst Sonova’s acquisition of the Sennheiser consumer hearing division introduced exposure to a structurally difficult market - low switching costs, commoditising technology, and intense competition from well-resourced consumer brands. With the moat appearing narrower than originally assessed and capital deployed into a lower-quality segment, we decided to exit our position.

Page 33

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Global Quality Mid Cap Fund (the “Fund”) (continued) Activity (continued) Check Point Software is one of the world's largest pure-play cybersecurity companies, offering network security, endpoint, and cloud security solutions to enterprise and government clients globally. We held it for its exceptional financial quality — with around 83% recurring revenues and operating margins of approximately 40%. The core concern was growth. Check Point has lagged faster-moving peers such as Palo Alto Networks and CrowdStrike, which have taken share with more modern, platform-native architectures better suited to cloud and zero-trust security. We held the position on the basis that an increasingly hostile threat environment would push Check Point toward sustained double-digit revenue growth. That inflection never materialised with consistency and as such, we concluded that there were better investment opportunities.

DiaSorin is one of the world's leading speciality diagnostics companies, offering immunodiagnostics and molecular diagnostics solutions to hospitals and laboratories globally, with a particularly strong franchise in infectious disease, oncology, and neurology testing. We bought it as a high-quality compounder with a defensible niche - long term reagent rental contracts with hospital laboratories, and a sticky installed base of analysers that generate recurring consumable revenues across an ageing and chronically ill patient population.

The core concern for us was long-term growth. DiaSorin's revenue profile was materially inflated during the COVID-19 pandemic as demand for infectious disease testing surged, and the subsequent normalisation proved more prolonged and more damaging to the underlying growth algorithm than initially anticipated. With revenue growth expectations revised down repeatedly and the pathway back to double-digit organic growth remaining uncertain, the quality-growth combination that underpinned our original thesis had deteriorated. Outlook The table below illustrates the four key tenets of our approach: quality, growth/value, and conviction. We follow these metrics at the portfolio level to make sure we are providing what we say we will. At quarter end, we are pleased to report that the portfolio continues to deliver on all three of these measures relative to the MSCI World Mid Cap Index as well as the MSCI World Index:

Source: Guinness Global Investors , Bloomberg, as of 30.06.2026

Despite market volatility over the first half of 2026, the Fund’s focus on quality growth remained well-positioned. Midcaps have outperformed large-caps year-to-date, having seen underperformance for the last three calendar years. We are yet to see whether this is a sustained inflection, but it is notable that the mega-cap Magnificent 7 stocks are experiencing diverging share price performances. Their concentration in market indices also remains at elevated levels and we believe this makes a strong case for investors to diversify into the often-overlooked mid-cap space - where companies combine the resilience of established businesses with the dynamism of growth-oriented firms. Further we believe that quality remains key. As a factor, Quality had its worst performance in 2025, in 30 years, relative to the broader market. We believe interest rates are unlikely to return to ultra-low levels, and global economic growth is expected to remain challenged. As such, businesses with strong balance sheets - those not reliant on excessive debt for growth - and companies benefiting from structural growth drivers are likely to be best positioned

Guinness Asset Management Limited

Page 34

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Pan-European Equity Income Fund (the “Fund”) Performance summary in US Dollars: Class Y compared with MSCI Europe Index* Annualised Calendar years 6 months 1 year 3 years 5 years 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Fund 2.4% 7.0% - - - - - - Index* 7.8% 18.6% - - - - - - Source: FE Analytics (data as at 30.06.2026) *Comparator Benchmark. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future results. Investors are reminded that the price of units and the revenue derived from them is not guaranteed and may go down as well as up. Review Overall, markets were up in the first half of 2026. The MSCI World Index was up 9.7% (USD) versus the MSCI Europe Index up 7.8% (USD). European equities were remarkably resilient as they navigated an eventful first half of 2026. Earlier in H1, jitters over Greenland and Venezuela proved short-lived, with markets differentiating by sector rather than selling off broadly, unlike the indiscriminate correction triggered by the April 2025 tariff announcement. The real test came with the outbreak of the conflict in the Middle East, Initially, European equities sold off sharply on rising risk aversion and Europe’s vulnerability to yet another energy price shock and the associated potential impact on growth and inflation. Markets staged a recovery through the second quarter on signs that tensions were subsiding as well as that the worst fears around the trajectory of the oil price were not realised. The European Central Bank held rates steady for most of H1 before reversing course in June, hiking 25 basis points to 2.25% — its first increase since 2023 — as eurozone inflation hit 3.2% in May, prompting the Bank to abandon its wait-and-see stance amid the Iran war's energy shock. In June, US and Iran reached what feels like a fragile truce with the formal signing of the memorandum of understanding following a few days later with the oil price falling sharply to pre-war levels offering some relief to European policymakers and markets.

Source: Guinness Global Investors, Bloomberg (data as of 30.06.2026)

Within the broader global recovery, Europe lagged most other regions in Q2, even with a return of +10.9% in USD and +8.3% for. Despite this strong rebound from a weak Q1 (-4.2%), it trailed Asia Pac ex Japan (+24.7%), EM (+24.1%), the US (+15.2%), Japan (+14.2%), and World (+13.8%). In addition to the geopolitical crosswinds, two global themes stood out. First, the big four hyperscalers (Amazon, Microsoft, Alphabet and Meta) guided to combined 2026 capex of $650-725 billion, up approximately 60-77% year-on-year. Second, a wave of IPO activity reinforced AI as the market's defining narrative through H1. SpaceX led the way, followed by confidential filings from Anthropic and OpenAI. This drove strength in European AI-exposed names, and Technology was the stand-out sector. Europe's softer performance is explained to some extent by two factors. First, Europe's index is comparatively light on the pure AI-infrastructure names that drove the US and Asia Pac ex Japan rallies; Taiwan and Korea benefited from continued strength in semiconductors and AI-related supply chains, while Europe's index skews towards banks, luxury, industrials, and healthcare. Second, Asia Pacific ex Japan and Emerging Markets, as larger net energy importers, saw a greater relief effect from the oil price decline. Performance The Fund was up 2.4% in USD (5.2% in EUR) versus the MSCI Europe Index which was up 7.8% in USD (10.8% in EUR). In H1 2026, the top three contributors to returns were BE Semiconductor, Melexis and Banca Generali.

BE Semiconductor returned 116.0% in EUR terms, rallying on exceptional Q1 results and a major upgrade to its 2030 targets, driven by accelerating hybrid bonding adoption across logic and memory. Melexis returned 40.2%. Its Q2 rally followed a strong Q1 print on 29 April, beating on both margin and order intake, particularly in China, where the historically volatile demand pattern showed signs of stabilising. The results, along with early diversification into data centre and robotics applications, prompted a broader re-rating across European analogue semiconductors. DCC was up +39.9%, re-rating on sustained private equity interest in the UK stock. An initial approach from KKR and Energy Capital Partners at 5,800p was rejected in April. By June, the board had indicated it would recommend an improved £5.7 billion offer, though DCC's largest shareholder, Fidelity International, then pushed back publicly, arguing the price still undervalues the business.

The three biggest detractors were Partners Group, Royal Unibrew and Kaufman & Broad. Partners Group fell 28.4% after capping redemptions on its flagship fund, a move that signalled outflows to the market and put downward pressure on the shares. The pressure appears industry-wide rather than specific to any operational issue at Partners. Locking up capital is, after all, what makes private equity work: investors trade liquidity for higher returns, and gating protects that trade when redemptions spike. This does not change our view, but we continue to watch closely and always ask where we could be wrong. Royal Unibrew fell 22.2% after losing its PepsiCo licence to Carlsberg, overshadowing an otherwise strong quarter. UMG ’s total portfolio return in H1 until sale in March was around -20%.

Page 35

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Pan-European Equity Income Fund (the “Fund”) (continued) Activity In H1 2026, we made the following changes to the portfolio.

We sold Informa and initiated RELX , following the latter’s c.50% drawdown from its share price peak. Informa's growth has become increasingly dependent on M&A, its Exhibitions arm remains exposed to demand cyclicality, and last year's TechTarget write-down raised questions about capital discipline in its digital acquisitions. RELX, by contrast, offered higher quality at a discount: returns on capital exceed 20%, cash return on investment has compounded from the low 20s to around 35% today, and over 60% of revenue is recurring and subscription-based. Its dividend has not been cut or suspended in over a decade, alongside a buyback programme scaling to a committed £2.25bn for 2026. The sell-off, driven by what we see as an overstated AI disruption narrative, gave us the chance to buy this structurally superior business at a meaningful discount to its own 10-year valuation history.

We sold Nestlé and initiated L'Oréal , reflecting our stronger conviction in L'Oréal's business model: its ability to control its own destiny, innovate continuously and defend its market position. The switch increases the portfolio's quality, moving from a company managing leverage and volume pressures to one with a stronger balance sheet and superior organic growth.

We exited Mapfre after its strong re-rating and redeployed the proceeds into Partners Group. We favour the long-term structural growth opportunity in private markets and believe the business is less reliant on external factors such as interest rates, currencies or wider insurance pricing dynamics. Near-term concerns around private credit had also created a valuation opportunity that we felt undervalued both the strength of the franchise and the sustainability of its returns.

We sold Recordati and bought Games Workshop . Recordati was trading close to its takeover bid price from CVC and GBL, so the remaining upside looked limited and holding on carried an opportunity cost against a name in which we have more conviction. Nottingham-based Games Workshop designs, manufactures and sells its Warhammer miniatures in-house and through licensing at high margins, with cash flow returns on investment above 20%, a conservative management team, a healthy balance sheet, and pricing power strong enough to push through price rises this year without hurting volumes. We saw an attractive entry point at a free cash flow yield above 4.5%, for a business compounding free cash flow per share near 29% a year and growing its dividend near 19% a year.

In June, we sold Intertek and bought Diploma . Intertek was sold on the day EQT's recommended £61.08 per share cash takeover was agreed, following three prior rejected approaches. With a confirmed offer in hand, we saw little value in holding out for the final few percent against the completion risk of a months-long approval process. We replaced it with Diploma, a decentralised distributor of low-cost, high-cost-of-failure parts in Controls, Seals and Life Sciences. We like its culture of accountability and disciplined, culture-driven M&A, its best-in-class economics, with operating margin near 24.5% and returns on capital near 22.7%, its resilience through past downturns, and a valuation that remains below quality compounder peers such as Halma and Experian. Outlook

Portfolio metrics versus MSCI World Index Fund MSCI Europe Index

Quality Return on Equity (12 month forward) 28.2% 14.3% Debt / Equity (weighted average, last financial year) 73.1% 178.9%

Valuation Price/Earnings ratio (2026e) 17.3x 16.1x EV/EBIT (2026e) 13.0x 14.0x FCF yield (2026e) 6.5% 4.6% Dividend Dividend yield (2026e) 3.4% 2.9% Dividend Payout Ratio 69.5% 68.9%

Conviction Number of stocks 36 331 Active share 90%

Source: Guinness Global Investors, Bloomberg, as of 30 th June 2026

Macroeconomics is not what drives our stock selection, and the businesses we own are largely insulated from the fortunes of any one economy because their revenues are global. That said, we welcome any tailwinds: rising fiscal spending in Germany and efforts to mobilise Europe's € 12 trillion of idle household savings should help address Europe's lack of growth over time. For our portfolio, the philosophy remains the same. We look for high-quality, dividend-paying businesses that control their own destiny: they have pricing power, strong balance sheets, and high cash flow returns on the capital they employ, and are run by people who spend that capital wisely.

Guinness Asset Management Limited

Page 36

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Global Real Assets Fund (the Fund”) Performance summary in USD, Y Class compared with MSCI World Core Infrastructure Net Return Index

Calendar years 6 Months (30/06/2026)

Since Launch (07/07/2025) 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Fund +10.2% +11.8% - - - - Index +9.0% +12.2% - - - - -

The Fund was launched on 7th July 2025. Review Infrastructure and real estate equities delivered a strong first half of 2026. The Fund’s benchmark, the MSCI World Core Infrastructure Index (net return), rose 9.0% over the period. Performance was especially strong in the first quarter, when the Index returned 7.8% in US dollar terms and outperformed the broader MSCI World Index by 11.4 percentage points. The sector’s resilience and its exposure to long-term growth themes were rewarded during a volatile and eventful six months. That early lead then narrowed, as a more risk-on mood and a sharp fall in the oil price helped the wider market recover some ground over the second quarter.

The year began with a burst of volatility as the US captured Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro and President Trump threatened Europe with fresh tariffs over Greenland – a threat he later withdrew after his speech at Davos. The resulting risk-off mood drove a rally in precious metals and bouts of equity-market volatility. Even so, the Index rose 3.7% in January and a further 8.7% in February (both in US dollars), comfortably ahead of the MSCI World Index in both months, as investors continued to favour the defensiveness of the sector. Coming into the year, the prevailing view had been one of easing inflation and continued interest-rate cuts across developed markets.

That view was upended by the outbreak of war in the Middle East late in the first quarter. The conflict triggered a major global energy shock: oil prices spiked, the Strait of Hormuz was effectively closed, and energy prices stayed high and volatile for the rest of the half. The prospect of fresh, energy-driven inflation put the falling-rate narrative into reverse, and expectations shifted away from further cuts and towards possible rate hikes.

A second defining theme of the half was the market’s evolving response to artificial intelligence. As concerns grew about the disruptive potential of AI for “asset-light” sectors such as software, investors rotated towards capital-intensive, hard-asset businesses in what has become known as the “HALO” trade (“Heavy Assets, Low Obsolescence”). Real asset sub-sectors – utilities, energy infrastructure, transport and real estate – benefited from this shift. Data centre REITs were particular beneficiaries, recognised as both positively exposed to AI-driven growth and difficult to displace, while the enormous capital-expenditure plans announced by hyperscalers increasingly translated into real contracts for the companies that own and operate digital infrastructure.

Sector performance within the MSCI World Core Infrastructure Index reflected these forces. Energy was the standout sector, rising over 22% in the first quarter alone (in USD) as the oil-price spike fed through to the pipeline and midstream businesses that dominate the benchmark’s Energy exposure. Utilities offered a reliable refuge amid the volatility, while Real Estate – concentrated in telecommunications tower REITs – lagged early on before leading the index higher in April, when a rumoured private equity approach for the US tower operator SBA Communications (reportedly at around USD250 per share) lifted a sub-sector that had been trading at historically low valuations. The picture shifted in May, as the conflict moved from combat towards diplomacy, risk appetite improved and the oil price retreated sharply. That fall in oil left Utilities (-4.9%) and Energy (-4.4%) as the weakest sectors – Energy because its pipeline and midstream revenues are tied closely to oil volumes and prices, and Utilities as the defensive premium accumulated during the crisis partially unwound. Industrials rose during May (+1.9%), dominated by transport assets such as roads, rail and airports, and was in fact the only sector in positive territory during May. Over the half as a whole, Energy, Utilities and Industrials delivered the strongest returns for the benchmark, underpinned by their first-quarter gains, while Real Estate saw the widest swings, rallying strongly in April before holding broadly flat in May.

Interest rates and government bond yields were a central focus throughout the half. Having entered 2026 expecting the rate-cutting cycle to continue, markets were forced to reassess as the energy shock revived inflationary pressures. Government bond yields, which had drifted lower early in the year, moved sharply higher from late February and, despite easing back towards the end of the half, finished higher than they began across both the UK and the US and across both 10- and 30-year maturities.

Rising yields and the prospect of higher-for-longer rates are an important consideration for infrastructure and real estate companies, many of which rely on debt financing and can be sensitive to upward moves in rates. However, the essential nature of the services these companies provide, together with the inflation-linked nature of much of their revenue, leaves them well placed on a relative basis. Companies with the strongest balance sheets – in terms of flexibility, staggered refinancing profiles and investment grade credit ratings – should be best positioned to protect returns and outperform their peers in this environment. Performance For the half-year period to 30 June 2026, the Fund produced a total return of 10.2% (in USD), compared to the MSCI World Core Infrastructure Index return of 9.0% (in USD). The Fund therefore outperformed the Index by 1.2% over the period.

Utilities were the largest contributor to performance for both the Fund and the benchmark and the Fund’s Utilities holdings modestly outperformed those of the benchmark. Real Estate was the second-largest contributor and outperformed the benchmark’s Real Estate exposure by a wide margin. Whilst the benchmark’s real estate holdings concentrated in telecommunications tower REITs – fell over the period, the Fund benefited from a lower weighting in towers and from strong performance across its data centre and healthcare REITs. The main drag on relative performance was the Fund’s underweight to Energy, the benchmark’s strongest-performing sector, as oil prices spiked following the outbreak of war in the Middle East. The single largest individual contributor was Infratil, the New Zealand-listed infrastructure investor. In broad terms, the themes behind the strongest performers included:

 Regulated and network utilities (e.g. Elia Group, American Electric Power, Alliant Energy and Iberdrola)  Digital and healthcare real estate (e.g. Equinix, Digital Realty, Welltower and Ventas)

Page 37

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Global Real Assets Fund (the Fund”) (continued) Performance (continued) Sector contribution and sector performance for the Fund is shown below:

Government bond yields rose over the first half of 2026. Yields drifted lower early in the year but moved markedly higher following the outbreak of war in the Middle East, as the associated energy shock revived inflation concerns and reduced the scope for rate cuts. Both UK and US 10 and 30-year yields ended the period higher than they started it. All else being equal, rising government bond yields represent a headwind for the sector and the Fund, however the Fund’s positive total return performance over the period is reflective of strong fundamentals and the fact that several areas portfolio entered 2026 on comparatively low valuations.

A resumption of disinflation and a return to falling policy rates would, in time, provide a tailwind for the portfolio.

Communication Services Energy Financials Industrials Real Estate Utilities Sector -0.14% +0.42% +1.09% +1.15% +2.05% +5.96%

-1.00%

0.00%

1.00%

2.00%

3.00%

4.00%

5.00%

6.00%

7.00%

T o t a l C o n t r i b u t i o n t o R e t u r n i n U S D

Sector Contribution First Half 2026 (to 30 June 2026)

Communication Services Real Estate Industrials Utilities Energy Financials Sector -5.89% +6.64% +10.17% +12.25% +15.40% +38.81%

-10.00%

-5.00%

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%

40.00%

45.00%

T o t a l R e t u r n i n U S D

Sector Performance First Half 2026 (to 30 June 2026)

3.80

4.30

4.80

5.30

5.80

6.30

Y i e l d %

US and UK Government Bond Yields (H1 2026)

UK30yr US30yr UK10yr US10yr

Page 38

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Global Real Assets Fund (the Fund”) (continued) Activity During the first half of 2026 we sold two positions (Healthpeak Properties and Engie) and replaced them with two new holdings (Welltower and Public Service Enterprise Group), leaving the portfolio with 35 positions at the end of the period.

Both changes were broadly neutral for the Fund’s sector allocation. Healthpeak was replaced by Welltower – both US-listed healthcare REITs – leaving the Fund’s Real Estate and US exposure unchanged. In Utilities, we sold Engie, a French-listed utility, and bought Public Service Enterprise Group, a US-listed utility; this left the Fund’s overall Utilities weighting broadly unchanged while modestly increasing North American exposure at the expense of Europe.

Portfolio positioning We consider the Fund’s Utilities, Industrials, Financials, Energy and Communication Services exposures as comprising its Infrastructure allocation. On this basis, we hold a broad 70:30 balance between Infrastructure and Real Estate.

Relative to the benchmark, the Fund is currently overweight Utilities, Real Estate, Financials and Communication Services, and underweight Industrials and Energy.

Sector breakdown of the Fund versus the MSCI World Core Infrastructure Index. Source: Guinness Global Investors, Bloomberg. Data as of 30 th June 2026

In terms of geographic exposure (chart below), relative to benchmark the largest overweight is the UK, with the US representing the largest underweight. Within the Asia Pacific region, we hold three companies listed in Singapore and New Zealand.

Outlook The physical build-out of infrastructure in support of AI remains one of the most important structural themes for real asset companies as we move into the second half of the year. Whilst the ability of hyperscalers to translate capex into revenues remains a question for many investors, we are seeing revenue-accretive projects continued to crystallise for companies in the Fund’s portfolio. The most noteworthy example of this came during the second quarter, as New Zealand-listed infrastructure fund Infratil announced a flagship project from its portfolio company CDC. The deal announced was a 555MW, 30-year contract in Australia with a leading US hyperscaler. On its own, this deal represents 40% of the current Australian data market and will lift CDC's total contracted capacity beyond 1GW. The news led Infratil’s share price to rally 20% in response.

In many markets, this expansion of data centres capacity is putting unprecedented strain on the supply of power required to operate. In the US, for example, after decades of fairly stagnant electricity demand growth, data centres are leading an acceleration of demand and growing their overall share of consumption. As the chart below shows, data centres could represent as much as a third of all electricity demand by the middle of the next decade.

The subsequent challenge for the grid is being able to supply electricity to the locations, and in the quantum, that expected data centre growth currently implies. New generation and grid connections can take years to deliver, and the wait to connect a project into the US grid has stretched to between three and six years, roughly double what it was two decades ago. The supply lead times for gas turbines often used to accelerate new generation have stretched to five-years, and costs have spiked. A steepening demand curve set against a supply side under pressure is leaving a widening gap. PJM (one of the network areas in the US) offers a useful insight into this fundamental challenge. PJM is the largest grid in the US and is home to the Northern Virginia cluster, through which an estimated 70% of the world’s internet traffic flows. PJM runs an annual capacity auction, which is separate from the market for electricity itself. Its purpose is to secure enough generating capacity to meet demand at its peak, ahead of the delivery period. Generators are paid not for the electricity they produce, but for their commitment to be available when called upon; in effect, the grid operator is buying a guarantee of reliability on consumers' behalf. Each generator offers the price at which it will provide that availability, and the auction clears at a single price, set by the last megawatt required to meet the reliability target and paid to every provider that clears. Whilst this mechanism has long operated quietly in the background, surging data-centre demand set against a shortage of new supply has changed that: the clearing price has risen roughly tenfold in two years, from USD29 to USD329 per MW-day, reaching the market's cap. The next auction is expected to clear at a similar level.

Page 39

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Global Real Assets Fund (the Fund”) (continued) Outlook (continued) This has led to questions around affordability and fairness. Because capacity is procured through a single auction that clears at one price paid by every user, the arrival of a small number of very large loads (i.e data centres) is enough to raise that price for all of them. Ordinary households could, in effect, end up subsidising the reliability costs created by data centres, and as bills rise the political pressure also rises.

PJM's response to this is the Reliability Backstop Procurement, approved on 30th June 2026. Under this new arrangement, large new loads must commit in advance to fund the reserve capacity their connection requires, rather than drawing on the shared auction. The cost now falls to the load that creates it, and the auction clears on lower demand, easing the burden on consumers.

For the Fund's regulated utility holdings, the change is significant. It converts a politically contentious cost into a clearer, regulated revenue stream, easing one source of opposition to the build-out and helping to make the resulting earnings steadier and more dependable.

Guinness Asset Management Limited

Page 40

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Global Environment Fund (the “Fund”) Performance summary in US Dollars: Class Y compared with MSCI World Net Return Index

6 months Since inception Fund 1.6% 0.5% Index 9.7% 8.9%

Review The key events that have impacted the global environment universe, company profitability and share price performance in the first half of 2026 are discussed below. The first half of 2026 was characterised by the tensions in the Middle East and a dramatic acceleration in the semiconductor upcycle driven by AI demand from early April through to the end of May. Against this backdrop, the Fund returned 1.6%, underperforming the MSCI World Index (net return) at 9.7%. The principal driver of underperformance was our underweight to the cyclical AI, semiconductor and datacentre names that led the market. Our holdings in vertical software were an additional headwind.

The picture across the Fund's five themes was as follows. Climate The backdrop was volatile but supportive. Oil spiked on the Hormuz crisis before retracing from c.$126 to c.$80, reinforcing both the fragility of fossil-fuel supply and the importance of energy security, and feeding continued support for electrification and grid investment. Policy followed: the EU published its AccelerateEU plan and China its Energy Sector Five-Year Plan, both setting 2030 targets to raise renewables adoption, economy-wide electrification and battery storage.

Water Execution on the AMI (Advanced Meter Infrastructure) roll-out in the US was mixed in the first half of 2026. Volumes were soft as higher costs of pumps and valves pushed deployment schedules further into the future. Sentiment for names exposed to the roll-out was also weighed down by threats by the Trump administration to cut Environmental Protection Agency funding for water infrastructure.

Waste The year the sector has lagged in the "AI versus everything else" rotation, with defensive landfill names used as a source of funding for additional AI exposure. Volumes remained subdued but pricing discipline was intact (growth of 5-6%).

Food The theme navigated input-price volatility alongside policy support. The closure of the Strait of Hormuz drove a fertiliser price spike, although US farmers had largely pre purchased volumes, dampening their exposure. At the same time, higher Renewable Volume Obligations lifted biogas prices, reinforcing demand for ethanol and biofuels and, by extension, corn prices.

Land The macro picture remained reasonably resilient. Some large-scale Middle East infrastructure projects (such as NEOM) were paused or delayed, weighing on sentiment around the global construction cycle. This however looks like sentiment, not structure: underlying demand for urbanisation and infrastructure maintenance held intact, supporting strong order intake for portfolio holding AECOM (c.1.2x book to bill in Q2’26) even as the stock underperformed on AI disruption fears.

Performance Summary In the first half of 2026 the Fund produced a total return (USD) of +1.6% vs the MSCI World Index (net return) of +9.7%. The Fund therefore underperformed the index by 8.1 percentage points over the period. Activity There were no buys or sells made in the first half of the year. Portfolio positioning On 30 June 2026, the Fund traded on an FY1/FY2 price/earnings ratio of 21.4x/19.0x. On a 12-month forward view, the Fund trades at about a 12% P/E premium to the MSCI World Index, with consensus forecasts suggesting it will deliver superior earnings growth (14.9% per annum vs the MSCI World at 14.4% per annum).

Valuation and earnings growth of the Guinness Global Environment Fund

Source: Guinness Global Investors (30 June 2026)

Page 41

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Global Environment Fund (the “Fund”) Portfolio positioning (continued) The Fund has a broad exposure to the global environment universe and is split by theme as shown below: Key themes in the Guinness Global Environment Fund

Source: Guinness Global Investors (30 June 2026) Outlook Climate Looking ahead, the mid-June peace deal has allowed a gradual reopening of the Strait of Hormuz — vessel transits were back to c.30/day by late June — though violations from both sides of the conflict mean the path from here is not linear. Regardless, the direction of travel is supportive: energy security is now embedded in the political agenda on both sides of the Atlantic and in China, and not just as a wartime reaction.

Water We expect Congress to continue resisting the scale of cuts being proposed, and for sentiment to unwind as the reality sets in: federal money only covers c.10% of the market, with the balance funded by rate payers rather than the federal budget. The bigger picture is also more supportive than the headlines suggest — AMI is only c.40% penetrated in the US, leaving a long multi-year replacement runway before saturation becomes a constraint, and AMI 2.0 deployments are now attaching software at close to 100%, providing a margin-accretive tailwind to earnings as the roll-out continues.

Waste The notable positive in the first half of the year was recycled commodity pricing: Old Corrugated Containers (OCC) – carboard boxes and corrugated board used for shipping containers – prices have risen for several consecutive months, strength that looks durable rather than one-off and supports the earnings outlook into the second half.

Food The RIN bank (of renewable fuel credits or Renewable Identification Numbers) is now expected to be fully drawn by year-end, with 2027 moving into deficit — a dynamic that should support higher RIN prices, biofuel prices, and demand for corn into next year. Portfolio company Deere has called 2026 the cyclical trough, supported by downstream demand signals, with a recovery expected in the coming quarters.

Land As we mentioned in the performance summary, underlying demand for urbanisation and infrastructure maintenance has remained robust, supporting strong order intake for AECOM (c.1.2x book to bill in Q2’26) even as the stock underperformed on AI disruption fears.

The current cyclical, risk-on market remains a challenging environment for defensive quality names. Nonetheless, we continue to believe that the Fund's portfolio of quality compounders should prove more resilient in the event of a sell-off, and offers a lower-volatility route to through-cycle outperformance.

Guinness Asset Management Limited

Page 42

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness China RMB Income Fund (the “Fund”) Performance summary in CNH: Class Y Annualised Calendar years 6 months 1 year 3 years 5 years 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Fund 0.54% 0.96% 1.77% - - - - 2.46% 1.55%

The Fund’s CNH Y class gained +0.54% in the first half of the year. The GACI First Investment Company (GACI) 2027 green bond was the star performer through the period, gaining c.1.2%, the China Government bonds also performed well. The yield on the 2-year benchmark China Government bond closed 13 basis points (bps) lower at 1.23%. The onshore and offshore renminbi returned +3.39% and +3.49%, respectively, against the dollar. Against the euro, the currencies returned +6.30% and +6.41%, respectively. The A1 (WARF) rated portfolio yields 1.69% and has a duration of 1.41 years.

During the period, we rotated proceeds from the maturity of the KfW 2026 issue into the German state-owned development bank KfW 2.75% 2027s bond. In June, the China Government bond matured, we added China Government Bond 3.6% 2027s. Review China’s economy is currently facing a "two-speed" trajectory. Hard data reveals a clear stabilisation pattern; the economy grew by 4.7% in the first half of the year, tracking tightly with Beijing’s lowered 4.5% to 5.0% target. However, this growth remains highly uneven. On the supply side, advanced industrial production is thriving, surging by 5.4%, driven by double-digit spikes in high-tech manufacturing, electric vehicles, lithium batteries, and industrial robotics. Conversely, domestic demand and the private consumer market remain stubborn laggards, heavily weighed down by a five-year long real estate downturn where property investments have collapsed another 18%. Policy-wise, Beijing is resisting consumer-focused large-scale stimuli, choosing instead to double down on supply-side industrial restructuring. The People’s Central Bank of China (PBOC) is executing a "moderately loose" monetary policy, injecting massive liquidity directly into targeted corridors, including over CNY 760bn in low-cost funding to private enterprises and investing hugely in facilities dedicated to tech innovation. Furthermore, state policy has pivoted away from rescuing private mega-developers, and is now focused instead on state-directed absorption of housing inventory while introducing long-term structural targets aimed at lifting total retail sales to CNY 60trn by 2030.

The renminbi (RMB) is navigating domestic depreciation pressures and a massive state-led push for internationalisation. Given internal rate cuts and the dollar's persistent strength, the PBOC has been managing the currency's daily trading band. At the same time, Beijing has leveraged bilateral currency swaps, expanded offshore RMB liquidity, and refined mechanisms like the "Bond Connect" to boost cross-border renminbi usage. This strategic push has elevated the RMB’s role as a resilient, sanction insulated trade settlement tool, particularly as major trade volumes move to independent platforms like China's Cross-Border Interbank Payment System. Outlook The outlook for China through the second half of 2026 remains anchored to its entrenched K-shaped trajectory. Headline real GDP growth is widely projected to sit between 4.4% and 4.8%, aligning smoothly with Beijing's official targets. High-tech manufacturing, green energy infrastructure, and robust exports of AI-related hardware will continue to serve as the economy's primary growth engines. However, the disconnect between macro and micro perspectives is expected to persist. The ongoing property market correction and muted consumer confidence will also continue to drag down domestic retail and local investment. To bridge this gap, policy in the coming months will likely lean on targeted fiscal acceleration over large-scale monetary easing. The central bank is expected to preserve a moderately loose but cautious stance, with analysts forecasting modest, incremental cuts of 20bps to policy rates alongside potential reserve requirement ratio (RRR) reductions later in the year to grease the wheels of liquidity. This conservative pace is designed specifically to underpin the renminbi. Supported by cooling geopolitical friction and structured offshore trading mechanisms, the renminbi is anticipated to trade within a stable, defence-backed range.

Guinness Asset Management Limited

Page 43

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness China A Share Fund (the “Fund”) Performance summary in US Dollars: Class Y compared with MSCI China A Onshore Annualised Calendar years 6 months 1 year 3 years 5 years 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Fund 6.0% 34.5% 4.5% - - - - -2.7% 29.7% Index 15.6% 45.2% 15.7% - - - - 11.6% 29.9%

Review Year-to-date, the Fund (Y class, USD) rose by 6.0%, while the benchmark, the MSCI China A Onshore Index, rose by 15.6%. Therefore, the Fund underperformed by 9.6 percentage points (pp). This environment was challenging for the Fund, given its underweight in Information Technology and overweight in Consumer Discretionary. We remain positive on the long-term opportunity created by China’s technology buildout, but do not believe it is sensible to pursue growth at any price. We currently see a more attractive risk-reward in less expensive suppliers of enabling materials, equipment and infrastructure, as well as selected consumer companies where valuations already reflect a weak domestic environment and leave greater scope for improvement. Relative to the MSCI China A Onshore Index, areas which helped the Fund’s performance were:

 Stock selection in Materials, driven by Shandong Sinocera. Areas which detracted from the Fund’s relative performance were:

 The underweight in Information Technology, which significantly outperformed.  A combination of the overweight to Consumer Discretionary and stock selection, led by China Tourism Group and Suofeiya Home Collection. Activity Buys We initiated a position in Weichai Power, a leading manufacturer of heavy-duty engines, where we see an opportunity to benefit from growing demand for power solutions linked to data centre expansion. In our view, the market does not fully reflect this potential, continuing to value the business largely as a traditional engine manufacturer while overlooking its aftermarket servicing arm, a source of high-margin, recurring revenue. Its capability across both diesel- and gas-powered generation positions it well for the rising demand for flexible, reliable on-site power in both primary and backup roles. Portfolio positioning On a sector basis, the Fund’s largest exposures are to the Industrials, Consumer Discretionary and Information Technology sectors. Relative to the MSCI China A Onshore Index, the Fund is overweight Consumer Discretionary and Industrials, while underweight Information Technology and Financials.

Data as of 30/06/26, source: Guinness Global Investors calculations, Bloomberg Outlook On a forward basis, the Fund’s current holdings trade on 15.8x earnings, below their ten-year average of 19.1x. By contrast, following the sharp onshore rally, the MSCI China A Onshore Index trades on 16.8x, close to two standard deviations above its historical average. The portfolio, therefore, trades at a 6% discount to the market, compared with a substantial premium for most of the past decade. We believe this creates a materially more attractive relative valuation starting point. Onshore AI-related companies have risen sharply, supported by strong investment in computing infrastructure, domestic supply chain localisation and upward earnings revisions. But in many cases, the proportion of these valuations that rests on growth yet to be delivered has returned to levels last seen at the 2021 peak of the Chinese market. That was a period defined by globally low interest rates and, with the benefit of hindsight, excessive market optimism. We believe the long-term opportunity is genuine, but valuations in parts of the market now require the investment cycle to remain strong, earnings to grow rapidly, and margins to stay resilient. At these levels, there is limited protection if expectations are not fully met. We are therefore maintaining our valuation discipline rather than increasing exposure simply because these companies have recently performed well. Our investment process begins with quality as we look for companies capable of earning returns on capital above their cost of capital and sustaining those returns over time. We then assess whether the business is exposed to a structural growth opportunity and whether the current valuation leaves sufficient upside. On this basis, we currently see better risk-reward in selected Industrials and Consumer Discretionary companies than in the most highly valued parts of the technology sector.

Guinness Asset Management Limited

0% 20% 40% 60%

Industrials Information… Materials Communication… Real Estate Energy Cash

Fund Allocation vs MSCI China A Onshore Index

Guinness China A Share Fund MSCI China A Onshore Index -40% -20% 0% 20%

Consumer… Industrials Consumer Staples Health Care Communication… Real Estate Energy Utilities Materials Financials Information…

Fund over/underweights

Page 44

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Multi-Asset Balanced Fund & Guinness Multi-Asset Growth Fund (the “Funds”) Performance summary in £ Sterling: Class Y Annualised Calendar years 6 months 1 year 3 years 5 years 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Guinness Multi-Asset Growth Fund 9.7% 22.3% 12.9% 8.8% 15.5% -5.4% 10.5% 13.5% 8.9% Guinness Multi-Asset Balanced Fund 8.0% 19.3% 11.2% 7.2% 13.1% -5.4% 8.6% 11.7% 7.7%

Background The Funds, which launched 28 December 2018, are designed to provide investors with long-term capital appreciation. They provide exposure to a range of asset classes, focusing on equities, fixed income and property. The underlying funds invested in are mainly passive funds, but there is also some exposure to active products, particularly in the absolute return sector. RBC Brewin Dolphin Limited, a leading UK wealth manager, are appointed as investment advisor to the Funds, providing advice on asset allocation and the choice of underlying funds. This advice is reviewed by the Guinness investment team, who are ultimately responsible for the make-up of the portfolios. Guinness Multi-Asset Growth Fund, which can invest up to 100% in equities, aims to outperform the IA Flexible Investment benchmark over the medium term. Guinness Multi-Asset Balanced Fund, which can invest up to 85% in equities, aims to outperform IA Mixed Investment 40-85% Shares benchmark over the medium term. In late January 2021, the Funds were repositioned from having a relatively high UK exposure to greater international exposure. This change in asset allocation is described further below. The data below shows both performance since launch (28 December 2018) and since the Fund repositioning (31 January 2021). Review The first six months of 2026 delivered strong investment returns despite significant geopolitical and economic uncertainty. Global growth remained resilient, supported by robust corporate earnings and a further acceleration in AI-related capital expenditure. However, the outbreak of war between the US and Iran at the end of February, and the resulting disruption to oil supplies through the Strait of Hormuz, produced a sharp increase in energy prices and renewed concerns about inflation. The oil shock raised fears that central banks might have to reverse some of the monetary easing delivered in 2025. Expectations shifted from further interest-rate cuts towards the possibility of renewed tightening, while government bond yields moved higher. These concerns eased towards the end of the period as progress towards a US Iran ceasefire caused oil prices to recede. Equity markets initially fell sharply following the escalation in the Middle East, but subsequently recovered as investors focused on the strength of corporate earnings. Global equities returned almost 10% over the first half, with the S&P 500 also gaining around 10% and reaching new record highs during the second quarter. The technology-heavy Nasdaq rose approximately 20%, as spending on semiconductors, memory, data centres and electrical infrastructure continued to exceed expectations. Emerging markets were the strongest-performing major region, rising around 24%, driven principally by the technology-heavy markets of South Korea and Taiwan. Fixed income markets produced more subdued returns. Higher energy prices and resilient economic activity caused investors to reassess the likely path of interest rates, pushing sovereign bond yields higher and weighing on bond prices during the early part of the year. Credit markets generally outperformed government bonds, supported by healthy corporate balance sheets and strong earnings growth. The US dollar strengthened modestly over the first half of the year, as the rise in oil prices, resilient US growth and a more hawkish Federal Reserve pushed US interest rate expectations higher. Performance Against this backdrop, Guinness Multi-Asset Growth Fund (Y class), which has a higher weighting to equities, returned 9.7% in GBP terms over the first half of the year, outperforming the IA Flexible Investment benchmark (8.3%) by 1.3%. Guinness Multi-Asset Balanced Fund (Y class) returned 8.0% in GBP terms over the first half of the year, outperforming the IA Mixed Investment 40-85% Shares benchmark (7.6%) by 0.4%.

Activity In the first half of the year, the iShares Core S&P 500 was sold in favour of the cheaper SPDR S&P 500. The JP Morgan Mansart and Winton Enhanced Trend funds were also added to the global equity exposure. Additionally, the holdings of BNY Mellon Global Dynamic Bond (RP6), Winton Trend Fund (RP6) and JPM Global Macro Opportunities Fund (RP6) were sold, whilst Fulcrum Income Fund and Aegon Global Short Dated High Yield were purchased as the Absolute Return asset class was restructured post the SAA review. Portfolio positioning

Guinness Multi-Asset Growth Fund In the first half of 2026, the Fund increased its allocation to Alternatives (+4.5%) and Cash (0.5%), funded by selling down our exposure to Equities (-1.5%) and Fixed Income (-3.5%).  Within Equities, we increased our exposure to the Europe, while reducing exposure to the US, UK, Japan, and Pacific (ex-Japan) Equities.  Within Alternatives, we increased to Absolute Return, Property, and Gold.  Within Fixed Income, we reduced our exposure to Government Bonds, and Corporate Bonds.

Guinness Multi-Asset Balanced Fund A number of similarities can be seen in changes to the Fund year to date. An 8.5% increase in our weighting to Alternatives was funded by a -2.5% reduction in our Equities exposure and a 5.5% reduction in our weighting to Fixed Income. Conversely, the Fund reduced its exposure to cash by 0.5%.  Within Equities, we increased our exposure to the Europe, while reducing exposure to the US, UK, Japan, and Pacific (ex-Japan) Equities.  Within Alternatives, we increased to Absolute Return, Property, and Gold.  Within Fixed Income, we reduced our exposure to Government Bonds, Corporate Bonds, and Inflation-linked Bonds.

Page 45

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc Investment Manager's report (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Multi-Asset Balanced Fund & Guinness Multi-Asset Growth Fund (the “Funds”) Portfolio positioning (continued) These changes are summarised in the table below:

Outlook Despite a period of de-escalation, culminating in an interim agreement to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, the US and Iran are once again engaged in open conflict. The Strait carries around one fifth of global oil and LNG trade, meaning renewed disruption has significant implications for global energy prices. With inventories already depleted by the earlier closure, the oil market is starting from a much tighter position than it did in February. A prolonged disruption could therefore produce a more severe energy shock, adding to inflationary pressure and keeping bond yields and interest rates higher for longer. The outlook for the United States is least sensitive to developments in the Middle East and instead, hinges on continued momentum in the AI investment cycle. Hyperscaler capex commitments continue to rise, supporting earnings throughout the supply chain and driving sharp revisions in the market’s earnings expectations. While index valuations look reasonable, they are anchored by exceptionally strong earnings forecasts from a relatively narrow group of technology companies, meaning any moderation in AI investment could present a meaningful headwind for equity markets. Europe remains the region most exposed to renewed disruption in global energy markets. With the economy still reliant on imported energy, a prolonged conflict in the Middle East risks reigniting inflationary pressures and weakening growth, echoing the effects of the 2022 energy crisis. Although government support has softened the immediate impact, persistent inflation could limit the European Central Bank's scope to ease policy, creating a more challenging backdrop for economic growth and financial markets. The UK continues to face a challenging backdrop, with political uncertainty and its reliance on imported natural gas weighing on investor sentiment. Concerns over the prospect of higher government borrowing and an already stretched fiscal position have added to the pressure on UK assets. However, the market has been supported by strong performance from sectors such as Energy, Health Care and Consumer Staples. While the UK's limited exposure to Information Technology has contributed to relative underperformance this year, it also leaves the market less exposed to an area where valuations and expectations have become increasingly demanding. Emerging markets have outperformed this year, led by Taiwan and Korea as demand for semiconductors and memory chips continues to accelerate. With hyperscaler capital expenditure still rising and AI adoption broadening, we expect this trend to remain supportive through the second half of the year. Elsewhere, many emerging economies continue to benefit from favourable structural growth trends and resilient domestic demand, helping offset the impact of higher energy prices. De-escalation in the Middle East would remove the most significant headwinds to global growth, easing pressure on energy prices, inflation, and bond yields. Despite the renewed uncertainty, the outlook for markets looks moderately positive, supported by resilient economic activity, and the AI investment cycle. However, risks are increasingly concentrated, with global market earnings expectations increasingly dependent on a narrow group of technology companies.

With the environment described, the Funds have adopted the following positioning:

 Overweight cash. We hold an overweight in cash, which provides ammunition we can deploy when the outlook for other typically higher yielding asset classes improves.

 Underweight bonds. Since the Iran war began, oil prices and bond yields have moved closely together, with higher energy prices lifting inflation expectations and pushing yields higher. However, if oil prices remain elevated for long enough, markets would likely shift their focus from inflation to recession risks, limiting further rises in yields. We remain modestly underweight fixed income but overweight UK Gilts, reflecting our view that UK inflation pressures should moderate relative to other regions over time, despite Gilts' sensitivity to oil prices. We continue to favour global inflation linked over conventional government bonds, and government over corporate bonds, where tight credit spreads leave limited value. This positioning provides a partial hedge against a sharper than expected slowdown in global growth.  Overweight global equities. The Fed has begun easing policy and we expect the global economy to continue expanding, a backdrop that has historically been supportive for equities outside of recessionary periods. Combined with the ongoing AI driven data centre build out and expectations of stronger productivity growth, we believe the case for a modest overweight to global equities remains intact. However, elevated earnings expectations, above trend profit margins, rich valuations and rising stagflation risks argue against a larger allocation. We also remain mindful of AI related risks, including pressure on some business models, uncertainty around long term monetisation, increasing equity issuance, and the sector's highly interconnected investment cycle.

 Underweight alternatives. We have recently reduced our tactical gold position to neutral, but continue to see a compelling long term investment case. Central bank demand should remain a key support, particularly as countries such as China continue to diversify reserves away from US dollar assets, with gold still representing a relatively small share of its FX reserves. We also expect the US dollar to weaken over the longer term, which would provide a further tailwind for gold prices.

Guinness Asset Management Limited

Page 46

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc

The accompanying notes form an integral part of these financial statements 46

Statement of financial position (unaudited) As at 30 June 2026

Guinness Global Energy Fund

Guinness Sustainable Energy Fund

Guinness Global Money Managers Fund

Guinness Global Equity Income Fund

Guinness Asian Equity Income Fund

Guinness European Equity Income Fund

Guinness Global Innovators Fund

Guinness Greater China Fund

Guinness Emerging Markets Equity Income Fund Note USD USD USD USD USD USD USD USD USD Assets Financial assets at fair value through profit or loss 3 (ii) - Transferable securities 239,983,065 324,416,213 17,305,816 6,455,021,574 276,260,987 131,639,541 1,382,988,245 12,248,114 22,535,906 - Investment funds - - - - - - - - - Financial derivative instruments 4 1 - 5,297 - - 15 - Spot contract 5 - - 196 80 - - - Cash and cash equivalents 4 1,632,507 12,294,345 171,199 68,639,291 10,326,207 1,092,741 22,072,839 392,269 332,158 Dividends receivable 520,371 316,124 4,972 4,404,314 942,296 - 687,787 39,058 107,542 Interest receivable - - - - - - - - Securities sold receivable - - - - - 550,708 - - 565,871 Subscriptions receivable 428,722 1,363,973 813 8,186,289 927,722 279,016 2,166,644 414 10,703 Total assets 242,564,674 338,390,656 17,482,800 6,536,256,961 288,457,292 133,562,00 6 1,407,915,530 12,679,855 2 3,552,180

Liabilities Financial liabilities at fair value through profit or loss 3 (ii) - Financial derivative instruments 88 70 - 242,498 - - 6,443 - Spot contract - 66 1 - - 68 10,960 5 3,086 Bank overdraft 4 - 28 - 587 - 1,234 4,858 - 174 Securities purchased payable - - - - - 364,438 - - 629,171 Redemptions payable 450,691 2,496,840 95,669 11,741,018 356,530 423,812 57,461,679 31,763 49,287 Management fee payable 5 210,190 263,850 20,250 4,802,069 224,826 68,072 1,474,281 13,998 11,165 Sub - investment manager fee payable 6 - - - - - - - - Amount payable to Global Distributor 7 11,548 6,278 - 11,462 23,808 59,442 16,222 15,026 CGT – Provision - - - - 64,320 - - - 5,406 Other expenses payable - 1 - 788 - - 18 - Total liabilities (excluding net assets attributable to holders of redeemable participating shares) 672,517 2,767,133 115,920 16,798,422 669,484 917,066 58,974,461 60,792 698,289

Net assets attributable to holders of redeemable participating shares 241,892,157 335,623,523 17,366,880 6,519,458,539 287,787,808 132,644,940 1,348,941,069 12,619,063 22,853,891

Page 47

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc

The accompanying notes form an integral part of these financial statements 47

Statement of financial position (unaudited) (continued) As at 30 June 2026

Guinness Best of Asia Fund

Guinness Global Quality Mid Cap Fund

Guinness Pan European Equity Income Fund

Guinness Global Real Assets Fund

Guinness Global Environment Fund

Guinness China RMB Income Fund

Guinness China A Share Fund

Guinness Multi-Asset Balanced Fund

Guinness Multi-Asset Growth Fund Total Company Note USD USD USD USD USD CNH CNH GBP GBP USD Assets Financial assets at fair value through profit or loss 3 (ii) - Transferable securities 3,383,611 15,521,721 4,809,140 10,716,668 508,744 30,549,832 9,339,935 - - 8,903,215,858 - Investment funds - - - - - - - 102,649,652 86,160,275 250,598,161 - Financial derivative instruments - - - - - - - 211,276 341,943 739,577 Spot contract - 113 - - - - - 19 37 468 Cash and cash equivalents 4 90,767 262,988 270,271 85,805 8,570 1,056,695 110,972 4,963,619 5,803,922 132,135,206 Dividends receivable 9,209 4,170 4,076 28,582 568 - - 46,176 44,207 7,189,030 Interest receivable - - - - - 210,035 - - - 30,942 Securities sold receivable - - - - - - - - - 1,116,579 Subscriptions receivable 1,309 200,290 28 31,901 - - - 155,380 157,451 14,013,029 Total assets 3,484,896 15,989,282 5,083,515 10,862,956 517,882 31,816,562 9,450,907 108,026,122 92,507,835 9,309,038,850

Liabilities Financial liabilities at fair value through profit or loss 3 (ii) - Financial derivative instruments - - - - - 6,930 - 126,910 126,710 586,737 Spot contract 2 - 12 28 - - - - - 14, 228 Bank overdraft 4 - 15 4 69 - - 3 - 18 6,993 Securities purchased payable - - 16,947 - - - - - - 1,010,556 Redemptions payable 84,329 10,225 562 14,428 - - 14 25,752 159,384 73,462,557 Management fee payable 5 2,978 11,052 2,096 5,411 161 11,144 5,752 136,742 128,906 7,465,470 Sub - investment manager fee payable 6 - - - - - 5,572 - - - 821 Amount payable to Global Distributor 7 4,725 9,250 - - - - - 21,410 27,849 223,140 CGT – Provision 1,640 - - - - - - - - 71,366 Other expenses payable - - - - - - - 1,418 1,878 5,182 Total liabilities (excluding net assets attributable to holders of redeemable participating shares) 93,674 30,5 4 2 19,6 2 1 19,936 161 2 3 , 646 5,76 9 312,232 444,7 45 82,847,050

Net assets attributable to holders of redeemable participating shares 3,391,222 15,958,740 5,063,894 10,843,020 517,721 31,792,916 9,445,138 107,713,890 92,063,090 9,226,191,800

Page 48

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc

The accompanying notes form an integral part of these financial statements 48

Statement of financial position (audited) (continued) As at 31 December 2025

Guinness Global Energy Fund

Guinness Sustainable Energy Fund

Guinness Global Money Managers Fund

Guinness Global Equity Income Fund

Guinness Asian Equity Income Fund

Guinness European Equity Income Fund

Guinness Global Innovators Fund

Guinness Greater China Fund

Guinness Emerging Markets Equity Income Fund Note USD USD USD USD USD USD USD USD USD Assets Financial assets at fair value through profit or loss 3 (ii) - Transferable securities 165,557,950 291,958,447 21,372,763 6,970,625,993 307,885,603 128,021,808 1,464,554,653 12,445,665 19,507,126 - Investment funds - - - - - - - - - Financial derivative instruments 131 117 - 301,456 - - 347,497 - Spot contract - 9 - - - - - - Cash and cash equivalents 4 4,827,495 4,523,451 887,740 45,145,170 1,699,764 1,795,389 17,788,892 206,934 245,105 Dividends receivable 287,846 158,678 29,756 5,279,112 997,447 - 696,787 1,257 95,675 Interest receivable - - - - - - - - Subscriptions receivable 216,740 312,080 16,469 8,943,940 431,773 168,861 2,441,205 68,712 58,064 Total assets 170,890,162 296,952,782 22,306,728 7,030,295,671 311,014,587 129,986,058 1,485,829,034 12,722,568 19,905,970

Liabilities Financial liabilities at fair value through profit or loss 3 (ii) - Financial derivative instruments 16 12 - 48,365 - - 87,473 - Spot contract 2 - - - 48 - - - Bank overdraft 4 - - - 22 626 9 - - Redemptions payable 113,111 347,008 26,052 12,370,448 1,108,286 83,378 1,759,681 16,233 21,717 Management fee payable 5 145,351 243,784 24,907 5,259,372 236,513 66,497 1,557,443 14,157 9,591 Sub-investment manager fee payable 6 - - - - - - - - Amount payable to Global Distributor 7 - - 5,538 2,421 350 - 5,500 - CGT – Provision - - - - 251,357 - - - 11,329 Other expenses payable 1 1 - 914 - - 1,156 - Total liabilities (excluding net assets attributable to holders of redeemable participating shares) 258,481 590,805 56,497 17,681,542 1,597,180 149,884 3,411,253 30,390 42,637

Net assets attributable to holders of redeemable participating shares 170,631,681 296,361,977 22,250,231 7,012,614,129 309,417,407 129,836,174 1,482,417,781 12,692,178 19,863,333

Page 49

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc

The accompanying notes form an integral part of these financial statements 49

Statement of financial position (audited) (continued) As at 31 December 2025

Guinness Best of Asia Fund

Guinness Global Quality Mid Cap Fund

Guinness Pan European Equity Income Fund

Guinness Global Real Assets Fund

Guinness Global Environment Fund

Guinness China RMB Income Fund

Guinness China A Share Fund

Guinness Multi-Asset Balanced Fund

Guinness Multi-Asset Growth Fund Total Company Note USD USD USD USD USD CNH CNH GBP GBP USD Assets Financial assets at fair value through profit or loss 3 (ii) - Transferable securities 3,019,077 10,356,882 4,524,088 3,996,456 501,907 30,696,393 7,874,063 - - 9,409,854,311 - Investment funds - - - - - - - 98,512,132 74,711,767 232,994,895 - Financial derivative instruments - - - - - 8,768 - 85,977 91,149 888,701 Spot contract - - - - - - - - - 9 Cash and cash equivalents 4 67,713 60,538 82,195 39,945 6,544 706,497 272,134 4,420,822 2,769,730 87,188,737 Dividends receivable 4,253 1,815 - 4,594 41 - - - - 7,557,261 Interest receivable - - - - - 231,290 - - - 33,136 Subscriptions receivable - 406 - 32,690 - - 95,474 401,322 15,675 13,265,500 Total assets 3,091,043 10,419,641 4,606,283 4,073,685 508,492 31,642,948 8,241,671 103,420,253 77,588,321 9,751,782,550

Liabilities Financial liabilities at fair value through profit or loss 3 (ii) - Financial derivative instruments - - - - - - - 475,393 517,734 1,471,672 Spot contract - - - - - - - 79 90 277 Bank overdraft 4 - - - - - 4,377 - - 43 1,342 Redemptions payable 6,564 49 - 4,262 - - 206,544 18,912 2,665 15,915,402 Management fee payable 5 2,707 8,907 1,987 1,459 41 11,431 5,097 136,164 113,009 7,910,234 Sub-investment manager fee payable 6 - - - - - 5,715 - - - 819 Amount payable to Global Distributor 7 - - - - - - - - 4,647 20,059 CGT – Provision 6,205 - - - - - - - - 268,891 Other expenses payable - - - - - - - 2,173 2,231 7,996 Total liabilities (excluding net assets attributable to holders of redeemable participating shares) 15,476 8,956 1,987 5,721 41 21,523 211,641 632,721 640,419 25,596,692

Net assets attributable to holders of redeemable participating shares 3,075,567 10,410,685 4,604,296 4,067,964 508,451 31,621,425 8,030,030 102,787,532 76,947,902 9,726,185,858

Page 50

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc

The accompanying notes form an integral part of these financial statements 50

Statement of comprehensive income (unaudited) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Global Energy Fund

Guinness Sustainable Energy Fund

Guinness Global Money Managers Fund

Guinness Global Equity Income Fund

Guinness Asian Equity Income Fund

Guinness European Equity Income Fund

Guinness Global Innovators Fund

Guinness Greater China Fund

Guinness Emerging Markets Equity Income Fund Note USD USD USD USD USD USD USD USD USD Investment income Dividend i ncome 4,883,837 2,750,985 444,430 108,272,027 6,670,444 3,604,755 7,850,356 221,413 523,209 Interest income 58,948 141,869 9,393 595,601 34,769 7,384 350,849 2,698 6,117 Other income 48 - - - - 71 - - Net gain/(loss) on financial assets and liabilities at fair value through profit or loss and foreign exchange 3 (i) 39,330,747 43,355,025 (279,454) 353,694,350 3,214,299 (957,291) 91,523,497 (533,378) 249,460 Net income/(loss) 44,273,580 46,247,879 174,369 462,561,978 9,919,512 2,654,919 99,724,702 (309,267) 778,786

Expenses Management fee 5 1,203,861 1,417,733 131,795 28,016,181 1,250,831 372,699 8,273,449 80,464 62,023 Sub - i nvestment m anager fee 6 - - - - - - - - Other fees 4 3 - 5,015 - - 2,777 - Total operating expenses 1,203,865 1,417,736 131,795 28,021,196 1,250,831 372,699 8,276,226 80,464 62,023

Operating profit/(loss) 43,069,715 44,830,143 42,574 434,540,782 8,668,681 2,282,220 91,448,476 (389,731) 716,763

Finance costs Dividend distribution 1 3 218,438 - - 33,272,544 3,131,799 496,254 - - 234,778 Interest expense 1,095 89 35 24,058 10,260 317 2,379 117 715 Total finance costs 219,533 89 35 33,296,602 3,142,059 496,571 2,379 117 235,493

Profit/(loss) before taxation 42,850,182 44,830,054 42,539 401,244,180 5,526,622 1,785,649 91,446,097 (389,848) 481,270

Taxation Withholding tax on dividends 751,303 246,933 65,202 19,979,819 755,894 396,179 1,286,110 13,655 52,561 Capital gains tax - - - - (168,698) - - - (5,664) Total taxation costs 751,303 246,933 65,202 19,979,819 587,196 396,179 1,286,110 13,655 46,897

Increase/(decrease) in net assets attributable to holders of redeemable participating shares from continuing operations 42,098,879 44,583,121 (22,663) 381,264,361 4,939,426 1,389,470 90,159,987 (403,503) 434,373

There were no gains/(losses) in the financial period other than the increase/(decrease) in net assets attributable to holders of redeemable participating shares from continuing operations.

Page 51

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc

The accompanying notes form an integral part of these financial statements 51

Statement of comprehensive income (unaudited) (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026

Guinness Best of Asia Fund

Guinness Global Quality Mid Cap Fund

Guinness Pan European Equity Income Fund

Guinness Global Real Assets Fund

Guinness Global Environment Fund

Guinness China RMB Income Fund

Guinness China A Share Fund

Guinness Multi Asset Balanced Fund

Guinness Multi Asset Growth Fund Total Company Note USD USD USD USD USD CNH CNH GBP GBP USD Investment income Dividend i ncome 43,070 57,255 131,751 177,720 3,713 - 138,387 540,713 323,248 136,817,051 Interest income 927 1,437 366 334 100 318,978 10 71,050 52,805 1,423,835 Other income - - 1 19 - 20 - - 79 248 Net gain/(loss) on financial assets and liabilities at fair value through profit or loss and foreign exchange 3 (i) 275,719 2,916,630 6,481 377,311 6,771 (53,291) 191,641 7,238,432 7,675,638 553,257,961 Net income/(loss) 319,716 2,975,322 138,599 555,384 10,584 265,707 330,038 7,850,195 8,051,770 691,499,095

Expenses Management fee 5 16,169 55,114 11,319 18,779 927 62,815 29,908 735,438 661,494 42,803,559 Sub - investment manager fee 6 - - - - - 31,405 - - - 4,576 Other fees - - - - - - - 9,760 11,439 36,309 Total operating expenses 16,169 55,114 11,319 18,779 927 94,220 29,908 745,198 672,933 42,844,444

Operating profit/(loss) 303,547 2,920,208 127,280 536,605 9,657 171,487 300,130 7,104,997 7,378,837 648,654,651

Finance costs Dividend distribution 1 3 - - 914 8,402 - 346,079 - - - 37,413,549 Interest expense 69 566 19 617 - - 202 520 693 41,997 Total finance costs 69 566 933 9,019 - 346,079 202 520 693 37,455,546

Profit/(loss) before taxation 303,478 2,919,642 126,347 527,586 9,657 (174,592) 299,928 7,104,477 7,378,144 611,199,105

Taxation Withholding tax on dividends 3,488 9,929 12,318 24,757 387 - 13,839 - - 23,600,551 Capital gains tax (4,656) - - - - - - - - (179,018) Total taxation costs (1,168) 9,929 12,318 24,757 387 - 13,839 - - 23,421,533

Increase/(decrease) in net assets attributable to holders of redeemable participating shares from continuing operations 304,646 2,909,713 114,029 502,829 9,270 (174,592) 286,089 7,104,477 7,378,144 587,777,572

There were no gains/(losses) in the financial period other than the increase/(decrease) in net assets attributable to holders of redeemable participating shares from continuing operations.

Page 52

Guinness Asset Management Funds plc

The accompanying notes form an integral part of these financial statements 52

Statement of comprehensive income (unaudited) (continued) For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2025

Guinness Global Energy Fund

Guinness Sustainable Energy Fund

Guinness Global Money Managers Fund

Guinness Global Equity Income Fund

Guinness Asian Equity Income Fund

Guinness European Equity Income Fund

Guinness Global Innovators Fund

Guinness Greater China Fund

Guinness Emerging Markets Equity Income Fund Note USD USD USD USD USD USD USD USD USD Investment income Dividend i ncome 4,681,288 3,827,883 291,717 96,992,010 7,297,231 2,211,014 7,815,133 178,374 315,879 Interest income 45,672 140,477 7,260 2,456,479 74,180 5,392 371,516 3,696 4,339 Other income - 69 - - - 6 - - Net gain/(loss) on financial assets at fair value through profit or loss and foreign exchange 3 (i) 6,056,304 28,445,493 712,944 506,914,840 32,468,690 12,466,029 128,476,865 801,843 1,537,544 Net income/(loss) 10,783,264 32,413,922 1,011,921 606,363,329 39,840,101 14,682,441 136,663,514 983,913 1,857,762

Expenses Management fee 5 1,031,967 1,631,118 78,227 28,172,840 1,362,592 184,479 7,531,569 58,256 36,264 Sub - i nvestment m anager fee 6 - - - - - - - - Other fees 4 3 - 5 - - 6 - Total operating expenses 1,031,971 1,631,121 78,227 28,172,845 1,362,592 184,479 7,531,575 58,256 36,264

Operating profit/(loss) 9,751,293 30,782,801 933,694 578,190,484 38,477,509 14,497,962 129,131,939 925,657 1,821,498

Finance costs Dividend distribution 1 3 36,369 - - 30,122,568 3,147,873 179,031 - - 160,099 Interest expense 1,053 313 33 4 5,736 1,967 5,417 15 109 Total finance costs 37,422 313 33 30,122,572 3,153,609 180,998 5,417 15 160,208

Profit/(loss) before taxation 9,713,871 30,782,488 933,661 548,067,912 35,323,900 14,316,964 129,126,522 925,642 1,661,290

Taxation Withholding tax on dividends 491,910 390,961 43,836 20,189,485 739,486 266,542 1,395,979 12,244 31,593 Capital gains tax - - - - (48,383) - -

Truncated: This annotation is too large to fit. View the raw JSON.

{
  "annotation_id": "fecb9231-e557-404b-93b1-6033d0b48055",
  "date_created": "2026-10-23T22:19:59.553000Z",
  "date_modified": "2026-10-23T22:21:26.798000Z",
  "file_hash": "80c51d19e49ae09daa202d479f273b2d3f1870f796a4f19d331a70d6b26410d9",
  "private": false,
  "record": {
    "attributes": {
      "chunk_type": "page_range",
      "end_page": 164,
      "start_page": 1
    },
    "blocks": [
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 9,
          "x": 57,
          "y": 52
        },
        "id": "64b00867-de5a-4d6e-8f67-d130aa22ebdc",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "G"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 5,
          "width": 6,
          "x": 68,
          "y": 54
        },
        "id": "423e682d-d4be-4e28-823f-709c6c1d5f04",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "u"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 2,
          "x": 75,
          "y": 52
        },
        "id": "8bef256b-a878-43ad-b217-91a673d778c4",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "i"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 5,
          "width": 6,
          "x": 78,
          "y": 54
        },
        "id": "cf21d449-7a49-4c34-8fe9-c9730c87e03a",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "n"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 5,
          "width": 6,
          "x": 86,
          "y": 54
        },
        "id": "b5d6e1bd-d73d-4f39-9cf5-1d5b8377ceec",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "n"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 5,
          "width": 7,
          "x": 93,
          "y": 54
        },
        "id": "3fd1c234-0af5-4cd6-8444-6a72c122b7ad",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "e"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 5,
          "width": 6,
          "x": 100,
          "y": 54
        },
        "id": "767626a2-c975-4620-858a-0ef70231a220",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "s"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 5,
          "width": 6,
          "x": 107,
          "y": 54
        },
        "id": "5d0b313d-e29a-4d2a-b3fd-f7221be33832",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "s"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 0,
          "width": 7,
          "x": 114,
          "y": 60
        },
        "id": "4ecfc2bd-ac89-48d5-b7d9-f7fccb5a8c96",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "_"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 2,
          "x": 122,
          "y": 52
        },
        "id": "d04b9c08-2745-4354-9a83-57e0f77180ed",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "I"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 5,
          "width": 5,
          "x": 126,
          "y": 54
        },
        "id": "047c52f9-5e02-4acf-8bbc-630661ee6a2e",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "n"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 4,
          "x": 132,
          "y": 53
        },
        "id": "495b18b2-cca6-45f6-9c2d-015aa2d44808",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "t"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 5,
          "width": 6,
          "x": 137,
          "y": 54
        },
        "id": "76be35da-a9ae-4f15-8a7a-e2e99e5852c7",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "e"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 5,
          "width": 3,
          "x": 145,
          "y": 54
        },
        "id": "ab23ad14-a18e-4d78-8615-751c4f50bd60",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "r"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 1,
          "x": 149,
          "y": 52
        },
        "id": "c047d5a8-d53e-44c7-b314-b8161e2cc5ad",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "i"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 5,
          "width": 9,
          "x": 152,
          "y": 54
        },
        "id": "fafeefd2-ad82-4f58-b728-3806ea52c80c",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "m"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 0,
          "width": 8,
          "x": 162,
          "y": 60
        },
        "id": "733de3ed-829c-4c59-a924-114fc22430c6",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "_"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 7,
          "x": 170,
          "y": 52
        },
        "id": "0b1f2184-c845-4958-a21f-75786a37e420",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "2"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 6,
          "x": 178,
          "y": 52
        },
        "id": "5710395f-0917-4378-86cf-0e54b2231e16",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "0"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 7,
          "x": 185,
          "y": 52
        },
        "id": "db5135dc-ebf4-4702-bb89-7a1f269ffad1",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "2"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 6,
          "x": 193,
          "y": 52
        },
        "id": "92ef64c3-ce03-4c7d-94d0-f6e0769b730f",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "6"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 7,
          "x": 200,
          "y": 52
        },
        "id": "f2184dc9-e271-402d-873e-5601cf87516f",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "0"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 6,
          "x": 208,
          "y": 52
        },
        "id": "45c7e2c7-21a3-445f-adf0-cd13d95c5156",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "6"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 7,
          "x": 215,
          "y": 52
        },
        "id": "4844f0df-07f1-4228-873c-c74852a3c74f",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "3"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 6,
          "x": 223,
          "y": 52
        },
        "id": "8c072932-69fc-45f5-84c8-586bccc2f495",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "0"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 0,
          "width": 7,
          "x": 230,
          "y": 60
        },
        "id": "9f0821d9-5bb0-44c4-aa70-40b433d88c46",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "_"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 5,
          "width": 7,
          "x": 237,
          "y": 54
        },
        "id": "27e5ceec-39b8-43d9-8c7e-145bbf88e87d",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "v"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 7,
          "x": 244,
          "y": 52
        },
        "id": "7e290aa5-919e-43ea-8bec-33cd4fc913f7",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "2"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 1,
          "width": 1,
          "x": 253,
          "y": 58
        },
        "id": "266060e6-e174-40bb-996e-2bcbada83fc1",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "."
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 6,
          "x": 256,
          "y": 52
        },
        "id": "30268c8d-14a8-4431-8123-40b49edfd8ea",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "0"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 1,
          "width": 1,
          "x": 264,
          "y": 58
        },
        "id": "58a15828-1edd-4dd1-aa2b-24af916b0e75",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "."
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 6,
          "x": 267,
          "y": 52
        },
        "id": "2c33fc86-abb3-4d5c-858b-6773033321ed",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "d"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 5,
          "width": 7,
          "x": 274,
          "y": 54
        },
        "id": "f8af4cce-7533-4a7a-87bb-87bc5c4f5ccf",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "o"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 5,
          "width": 6,
          "x": 282,
          "y": 54
        },
        "id": "9a78dd82-f598-4575-8fa5-f35ef42095bc",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "c"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 5,
          "width": 7,
          "x": 288,
          "y": 54
        },
        "id": "c27f6fd7-c70d-4e0f-8dca-d41da29500f8",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "x"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 16,
          "width": 423,
          "x": 526,
          "y": 246
        },
        "id": "322bc475-40ac-485f-ba21-ea21fab56d39",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "Guinness Asset Management Funds plc"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 16,
          "width": 651,
          "x": 298,
          "y": 265
        },
        "id": "deebb161-4cb1-4e12-80ae-7c079d26374b",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "(an umbrella fund with segregated liability between sub-funds)"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 27,
          "width": 375,
          "x": 579,
          "y": 306
        },
        "id": "5d8661bb-98cb-463a-bc03-5d3b62bd5e2c",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "Interim Report and"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 22,
          "width": 446,
          "x": 508,
          "y": 339
        },
        "id": "542194db-9ca0-48fe-8d5c-8311dcc2d4b3",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "Condensed Unaudited"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 22,
          "width": 407,
          "x": 534,
          "y": 373
        },
        "id": "30abb829-e01d-4341-920d-114314c654b3",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "Financial Statements"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 10,
          "width": 363,
          "x": 579,
          "y": 424
        },
        "id": "74813e32-11a5-42dd-af46-d33e4e1fd8e8",
        "page_number": 1,
        "text": "For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 208,
          "x": 730,
          "y": 35
        },
        "id": "c43f97bd-d477-480c-b6c1-40252dcf6b76",
        "page_number": 2,
        "text": "Guinness Asset Management Funds plc"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 6,
          "x": 481,
          "y": 951
        },
        "id": "e9efaf71-407f-4290-a143-00c874ae3df3",
        "page_number": 2,
        "text": "2"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 9,
          "width": 158,
          "x": 57,
          "y": 75
        },
        "id": "d0d048d1-a630-437b-8949-b8c2192965d1",
        "page_number": 2,
        "text": "Table of contents"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 12,
          "width": 48,
          "x": 899,
          "y": 75
        },
        "id": "cb5ac2ab-6d32-46b3-80d2-013a0a5ddbe5",
        "page_number": 2,
        "text": "Page"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 9,
          "width": 127,
          "x": 57,
          "y": 96
        },
        "id": "d959597a-a27f-4771-a6b0-4f98f004d386",
        "page_number": 2,
        "text": "Company information"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 6,
          "x": 935,
          "y": 96
        },
        "id": "2480dc1d-3c03-4fcb-856d-8fd58e4023fc",
        "page_number": 2,
        "text": "3"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 9,
          "width": 169,
          "x": 58,
          "y": 114
        },
        "id": "0f19db84-e451-46b2-82cc-4711924f95fc",
        "page_number": 2,
        "text": "Investment Manager\u0027s report"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 7,
          "x": 934,
          "y": 114
        },
        "id": "5ad1d329-589d-4da9-b681-77f6bfb0b466",
        "page_number": 2,
        "text": "4"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 9,
          "width": 178,
          "x": 57,
          "y": 132
        },
        "id": "5d6601cc-d397-46a7-930e-e498054a8fe4",
        "page_number": 2,
        "text": "Statement of financial position"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 14,
          "x": 927,
          "y": 132
        },
        "id": "e08d42c0-1fe4-41df-974f-9cff7fee484a",
        "page_number": 2,
        "text": "46"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 9,
          "width": 217,
          "x": 57,
          "y": 150
        },
        "id": "8ead283b-25f7-446c-b26d-c0886eb783c0",
        "page_number": 2,
        "text": "Statement of comprehensive income"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 14,
          "x": 927,
          "y": 151
        },
        "id": "6929c881-b63e-4aa9-b402-26ba12ae0844",
        "page_number": 2,
        "text": "50"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 9,
          "width": 552,
          "x": 57,
          "y": 168
        },
        "id": "cbead79a-e91b-4dee-a18f-6aea0b2ce6a9",
        "page_number": 2,
        "text": "Statement of changes in net assets attributable to holders of redeemable participating shares"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 14,
          "x": 927,
          "y": 169
        },
        "id": "065dcaa9-9882-40d9-bff2-16558c671a40",
        "page_number": 2,
        "text": "54"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 138,
          "x": 57,
          "y": 186
        },
        "id": "1484cde9-578f-49c7-9c9b-2707dd9fe2de",
        "page_number": 2,
        "text": "Statement of cashflows"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 14,
          "x": 927,
          "y": 187
        },
        "id": "69dc2b89-e2eb-4a79-934f-9efcb72980f1",
        "page_number": 2,
        "text": "56"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 193,
          "x": 58,
          "y": 204
        },
        "id": "97bdc628-cfd3-4344-849e-2147337f94bb",
        "page_number": 2,
        "text": "Notes to the financial statements"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 14,
          "x": 927,
          "y": 205
        },
        "id": "ab968131-38ec-4a88-ac20-e77d4a4b46d8",
        "page_number": 2,
        "text": "60"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 146,
          "x": 57,
          "y": 222
        },
        "id": "c3236bdf-d1bd-4209-b213-0bc91dad2631",
        "page_number": 2,
        "text": "Schedule of Investments"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 20,
          "x": 921,
          "y": 223
        },
        "id": "1dce0e5e-5f70-4716-906b-9f67f4fc9ad1",
        "page_number": 2,
        "text": "108"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 10,
          "width": 264,
          "x": 57,
          "y": 240
        },
        "id": "9a1177d6-83e7-4795-b115-f70ca7cea199",
        "page_number": 2,
        "text": "Statement of significant portfolio movements"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 20,
          "x": 921,
          "y": 241
        },
        "id": "bfc12407-592b-4931-968c-f9a15566bf0d",
        "page_number": 2,
        "text": "142"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 9,
          "width": 342,
          "x": 57,
          "y": 259
        },
        "id": "4f3115c1-37fe-408c-baac-3cd69c64a5c9",
        "page_number": 2,
        "text": "Appendix 1 \u2013 Fund performance and Total Expense Ratio"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 20,
          "x": 921,
          "y": 259
        },
        "id": "76daf8db-4e3c-48ea-87b3-cfb41d9b142e",
        "page_number": 2,
        "text": "160"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 9,
          "width": 262,
          "x": 57,
          "y": 277
        },
        "id": "bfa7bc17-233a-40b1-989e-da641e5ad74c",
        "page_number": 2,
        "text": "Appendix 2 \u2013 Portfolio Turnover Ratio (PTR)"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 20,
          "x": 921,
          "y": 277
        },
        "id": "a9a4caf9-fbaf-47c9-b342-e1b649c1d09e",
        "page_number": 2,
        "text": "164"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 208,
          "x": 730,
          "y": 35
        },
        "id": "8b226fd1-c9c3-43e8-8d63-e71a599e5034",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Guinness Asset Management Funds plc"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 5,
          "x": 482,
          "y": 951
        },
        "id": "b93f6943-56bb-48b0-bb2d-ff0adf2f338a",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "3"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 13,
          "width": 196,
          "x": 57,
          "y": 45
        },
        "id": "6354904c-1bf3-4d79-a3c4-9c212d589f65",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Company information"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 143,
          "x": 66,
          "y": 69
        },
        "id": "5f465201-ee9e-4528-b32e-16f5ba955dc1",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Directors of the Company"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 207,
          "x": 509,
          "y": 69
        },
        "id": "3aa51350-6530-43e9-b7af-0c8b6afa0f26",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Johnny McClintock (Irish) (Independent)"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 198,
          "x": 510,
          "y": 79
        },
        "id": "76dbbf68-4170-4135-b770-03f12c8861e1",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "David McGeough (Irish) (Independent)"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 176,
          "x": 509,
          "y": 88
        },
        "id": "23476200-71cf-49bb-b88d-c4742d6c0f4d",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Noel Lamb (British) (Independent)"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 91,
          "x": 510,
          "y": 98
        },
        "id": "789fd103-dcaf-4272-a0d7-f7f648d2f5f1",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Edward Guinness"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 4,
          "width": 2,
          "x": 602,
          "y": 97
        },
        "id": "3ffa2e23-c60e-4b3a-8f06-a20081fc004f",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "1"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 38,
          "x": 610,
          "y": 98
        },
        "id": "71f25f88-e91e-44b9-afe9-7a936b80ec4c",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "(British)"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 122,
          "x": 509,
          "y": 107
        },
        "id": "55d73e74-a10c-4e4b-856b-85e91d1e5488",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Andrew E. Martin Smith"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 3,
          "width": 2,
          "x": 633,
          "y": 107
        },
        "id": "f4c6a312-e391-4c52-a354-aa1081b2f2f4",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "1"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 39,
          "x": 640,
          "y": 107
        },
        "id": "912553a8-25a0-443d-bb5b-f482a3b98e15",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "(British)"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 123,
          "x": 509,
          "y": 117
        },
        "id": "db8eff25-ed05-4cb5-a2d5-c4cd8ea19e10",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Timothy W.N. Guinness"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 4,
          "width": 2,
          "x": 633,
          "y": 116
        },
        "id": "9570b29e-dacb-4127-88ac-b5b255a27a59",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "1"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 251,
          "x": 641,
          "y": 117
        },
        "id": "4950e9eb-7835-4d55-ae6a-8d1496ab139a",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "(British) (Alternate Director to Edward Guinness)"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 97,
          "x": 66,
          "y": 136
        },
        "id": "f179f852-d30e-47d9-a4dd-bca1f304bdc4",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Registered Office"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 6,
          "x": 509,
          "y": 136
        },
        "id": "7bfe0387-15b7-4778-a775-0d9c10557bda",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "4"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 4,
          "width": 6,
          "x": 515,
          "y": 135
        },
        "id": "2dca0339-134a-436d-a939-c92883053077",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "th"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 93,
          "x": 526,
          "y": 136
        },
        "id": "dae29886-c309-4c6b-a2e7-2155a3fdcba6",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Floor, The Sidings"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 4,
          "width": 4,
          "x": 620,
          "y": 135
        },
        "id": "52da349f-68d9-4dbf-b43d-c4c8d21af5b7",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "2"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 97,
          "x": 509,
          "y": 145
        },
        "id": "b86e7913-f738-4d00-8e2e-7968688fc99a",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Grand Canal Quay"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 41,
          "x": 510,
          "y": 155
        },
        "id": "d10093da-a250-4764-a0f0-d990ac9c6008",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Dublin 2"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 52,
          "x": 510,
          "y": 165
        },
        "id": "67d7bc20-ebfa-4934-b3fa-e13b9e731c7b",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "D02 E7K8"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 34,
          "x": 510,
          "y": 174
        },
        "id": "40ebc183-a027-45a4-9bdb-629d2e226cfd",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Ireland"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 48,
          "x": 66,
          "y": 194
        },
        "id": "511b7dea-3f56-4406-89a0-f0897dc38012",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Manager"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 240,
          "x": 509,
          "y": 193
        },
        "id": "0c62fc1b-3d41-44c4-8997-d9a0df1d2455",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Waystone Management Company (IE) Limited"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 107,
          "x": 509,
          "y": 203
        },
        "id": "b5fdf568-7d39-4b45-99e0-a87c6a07dc13",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "35 Shelbourne Road"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 57,
          "x": 509,
          "y": 213
        },
        "id": "ee5c7e4f-7f09-4f59-a0a6-4e79c0328721",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Ballsbridge"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 41,
          "x": 510,
          "y": 222
        },
        "id": "707c2879-d1d3-4b1d-84e0-23ba870456d4",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Dublin 4"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 52,
          "x": 510,
          "y": 232
        },
        "id": "baae6812-5982-456d-9d06-4d6358238329",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "D04 A4E0"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 34,
          "x": 510,
          "y": 241
        },
        "id": "867e32a9-d6cd-438c-b49b-144594523ca6",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Ireland"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 60,
          "x": 66,
          "y": 260
        },
        "id": "d6933191-c9c9-41ee-a6de-c2fe3095492b",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Depositary"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 311,
          "x": 509,
          "y": 260
        },
        "id": "9d440c06-e79f-43f7-a621-6dbfa0a2c929",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Brown Brothers Harriman Trustee Services (Ireland) Limited"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 89,
          "x": 509,
          "y": 270
        },
        "id": "60fdf1a6-3e7e-4d1e-a573-61d8d0857d60",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "30 Herbert Street"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 41,
          "x": 510,
          "y": 280
        },
        "id": "e5df5b40-336d-4a1e-89ae-2c37c094ef90",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Dublin 2"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 54,
          "x": 510,
          "y": 289
        },
        "id": "acbb4647-721f-46ae-bd95-0f87e4e2fc29",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "D02 W329"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 34,
          "x": 510,
          "y": 299
        },
        "id": "66db9fc9-42c4-49b1-99d5-ef4f1c60d51b",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Ireland"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 240,
          "x": 66,
          "y": 318
        },
        "id": "dc6211a5-86ae-4252-b49c-2aa0070d71b2",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Investment Manager and Global Distributor"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 194,
          "x": 509,
          "y": 318
        },
        "id": "2748f881-8734-4130-93f3-7ba20137a5c9",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Guinness Asset Management Limited"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 86,
          "x": 510,
          "y": 327
        },
        "id": "a6a3fb1e-4072-4871-8558-41ddfc9f7586",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "18 Smith Square"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 65,
          "x": 509,
          "y": 337
        },
        "id": "2f09a6f8-2aa5-4b9c-b8b9-8c4b7606c0f6",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Westminster"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 101,
          "x": 509,
          "y": 346
        },
        "id": "cb3c6222-c8c8-4745-9965-75334b5565bf",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "London SW1P 3HZ"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 82,
          "x": 509,
          "y": 356
        },
        "id": "3f935657-d6e4-4e3d-9e03-4048a7d4e623",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "United Kingdom"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 139,
          "x": 66,
          "y": 375
        },
        "id": "791997ab-f65b-41fe-b531-af9198604548",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Sub-Investment Manager"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 184,
          "x": 509,
          "y": 375
        },
        "id": "21256eb2-8df7-46cc-b2a1-c14e3f46d6ce",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Guinness China RMB Income Fund"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 122,
          "x": 510,
          "y": 384
        },
        "id": "b499aa45-20b8-489a-8b21-7bf3bd73dd6f",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "EPIC Markets (UK) LLP"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 113,
          "x": 509,
          "y": 394
        },
        "id": "6a2770f7-9d99-4331-a5f7-19c85b8feb84",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "200 Aldersgate Street"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 38,
          "x": 509,
          "y": 404
        },
        "id": "9a234d70-6f1e-44e6-a7b0-46aece0945d0",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "London"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 55,
          "x": 510,
          "y": 413
        },
        "id": "fa4c151b-6b82-43a8-869e-d9f0ca6564e4",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "EC1A 4HD"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 82,
          "x": 509,
          "y": 423
        },
        "id": "ae7f06d7-fa66-448d-bc51-03d5f80e9644",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "United Kingdom"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 155,
          "x": 66,
          "y": 442
        },
        "id": "4a992cf6-0246-42c1-97df-82f79801465f",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Administrator and Registrar"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 244,
          "x": 509,
          "y": 442
        },
        "id": "6f1011f3-b9b2-4cf0-829e-b57d6eedd999",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Waystone Administration Solutions (IE) Limited"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 107,
          "x": 509,
          "y": 451
        },
        "id": "742b6d69-152c-434f-8c94-288b1392527a",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "35 Shelbourne Road"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 57,
          "x": 509,
          "y": 461
        },
        "id": "bf4951a1-0159-41af-9bbf-99d7375f6df7",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Ballsbridge"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 41,
          "x": 510,
          "y": 471
        },
        "id": "7941b545-146f-47dc-9b5f-112450226e0e",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Dublin 4"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 52,
          "x": 510,
          "y": 480
        },
        "id": "29c1761d-3291-4267-b212-e9da8b074db2",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "D04 A4E0"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 34,
          "x": 510,
          "y": 490
        },
        "id": "d49e562b-4475-47e8-8f4f-6edcfc29897c",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Ireland"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 114,
          "x": 66,
          "y": 509
        },
        "id": "24e17558-4dc2-4581-99e9-41ac602f6d83",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Independent Auditor"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 78,
          "x": 509,
          "y": 509
        },
        "id": "72af025b-db77-4f59-88ba-ba27d02336b0",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Grant Thornton"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 249,
          "x": 509,
          "y": 518
        },
        "id": "f3dccc69-6c8d-48bf-a4e5-12b37b1b7225",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Chartered Accountants and Statutory Audit Firm"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 83,
          "x": 510,
          "y": 528
        },
        "id": "1bd1822f-cd2b-472c-a805-e71948d80833",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "13-18 City Quay"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 41,
          "x": 510,
          "y": 538
        },
        "id": "5c21c7d2-c35e-4753-be43-cf4a6d710c33",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Dublin 2"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 52,
          "x": 510,
          "y": 547
        },
        "id": "51af4f44-0416-4998-b7e9-01f574c06561",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "D02 ED70"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 34,
          "x": 510,
          "y": 557
        },
        "id": "16464e48-9577-4b97-9270-8a124c819e68",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Ireland"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 111,
          "x": 66,
          "y": 576
        },
        "id": "488386dc-0e59-4323-adaa-ae97e02571bd",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Irish Legal Advisors"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 73,
          "x": 510,
          "y": 576
        },
        "id": "9e660f09-ab2b-4c31-825e-3f61db47c516",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Dillon Eustace"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 170,
          "x": 509,
          "y": 585
        },
        "id": "82daea47-9b4f-4d80-a785-72e9a4c4b49c",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "33-34 Sir John Rogerson\u2019s Quay"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 96,
          "x": 509,
          "y": 595
        },
        "id": "99ad1ce8-2492-40af-b67b-6b1db37108e3",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Grand Canal Dock"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 41,
          "x": 510,
          "y": 605
        },
        "id": "d21ebf0b-05be-4df6-9f3a-a684751eac2b",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Dublin 2"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 52,
          "x": 510,
          "y": 614
        },
        "id": "c30d2861-667a-4b0b-a190-6164fd819195",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "D02 XK09"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 34,
          "x": 510,
          "y": 624
        },
        "id": "941afd1c-cd73-43c0-9229-09b373ef8798",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Ireland"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 110,
          "x": 66,
          "y": 643
        },
        "id": "db29a366-403c-4571-8041-4d0c5330e2e9",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Company Secretary"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 192,
          "x": 509,
          "y": 643
        },
        "id": "bc7935f1-5404-4dda-8c6d-696e5ec2bd00",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "CSC Finance Holding Ireland Limited"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 4,
          "width": 4,
          "x": 702,
          "y": 642
        },
        "id": "77f424d6-330e-43c4-88dd-d3b7a8210732",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "2"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 5,
          "width": 6,
          "x": 509,
          "y": 653
        },
        "id": "9f73f6a1-e873-4fa4-a0b6-345322392173",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "4"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 4,
          "width": 6,
          "x": 515,
          "y": 651
        },
        "id": "b81b6445-8a73-4436-992a-1a1d07d14a86",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "th"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 93,
          "x": 526,
          "y": 652
        },
        "id": "7a0c2279-0a0a-4350-8248-a7f5885be212",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Floor, The Sidings"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 97,
          "x": 509,
          "y": 662
        },
        "id": "d1f80c44-be3b-490a-a596-38ae5b48d955",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Grand Canal Quay"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 41,
          "x": 510,
          "y": 672
        },
        "id": "766cdd3c-7422-459a-b093-564ead71eaee",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Dublin 2"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 52,
          "x": 510,
          "y": 681
        },
        "id": "95eca19f-6dbf-4a92-a56f-53221028e63b",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "D02 E7K8"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 34,
          "x": 510,
          "y": 691
        },
        "id": "79a50966-fa3f-4070-8b34-aa7c40437b3f",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Ireland"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 99,
          "x": 66,
          "y": 710
        },
        "id": "201d0b4c-01b5-487f-ae14-b8fac536041e",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Company number"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 157,
          "x": 509,
          "y": 710
        },
        "id": "d987b25c-7394-415f-b044-267463f775fd",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "450670 (Registered in Ireland)"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 0,
          "width": 137,
          "x": 57,
          "y": 879
        },
        "id": "7dcf209f-9af3-42b9-99eb-ec467b0b4006",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "_____________________"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 4,
          "width": 2,
          "x": 57,
          "y": 881
        },
        "id": "3d28ebfc-faba-4504-a07f-c3e26a55e17f",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "1"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 166,
          "x": 64,
          "y": 882
        },
        "id": "84538def-433c-44fe-a509-f33fb29fa804",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Employee of the Investment Manager"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 4,
          "width": 3,
          "x": 57,
          "y": 893
        },
        "id": "1aeec2be-c257-4232-b6c1-89d5f9f8fa69",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "2"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 467,
          "x": 63,
          "y": 894
        },
        "id": "cc5bccfd-9792-4bc9-8eef-3119117ee57e",
        "page_number": 3,
        "text": "Effective 18 May 2026, the Registered Office address of the Company and Company Secretary changed."
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 208,
          "x": 730,
          "y": 35
        },
        "id": "b51b0852-45d7-4786-b1c0-f0b637dce2ea",
        "page_number": 4,
        "text": "Guinness Asset Management Funds plc"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 6,
          "x": 481,
          "y": 951
        },
        "id": "f07079ed-2565-4e49-8c53-8247e13f79d1",
        "page_number": 4,
        "text": "4"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 12,
          "width": 255,
          "x": 58,
          "y": 46
        },
        "id": "6b9ae013-fac8-4796-b909-c7a3509b2387",
        "page_number": 4,
        "text": "Investment Manager\u0027s report"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 282,
          "x": 58,
          "y": 60
        },
        "id": "285f1864-e8c7-4fc9-861c-b4b1f20e55f8",
        "page_number": 4,
        "text": "For the six month financial period ended 30 June 2026"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 240,
          "x": 57,
          "y": 83
        },
        "id": "676423f4-5caa-407d-b564-886271868d38",
        "page_number": 4,
        "text": "Guinness Global Energy Fund (the \u201cFund\u201d)"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 71,
          "x": 57,
          "y": 100
        },
        "id": "e62885f3-3b2b-434c-9b99-30a2ce8f0ac4",
        "page_number": 4,
        "text": "Performance"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 881,
          "x": 57,
          "y": 110
        },
        "id": "8f478e10-342b-4a7f-ab9d-aa2eee1cfe7a",
        "page_number": 4,
        "text": "The Fund in the first six months of 2026 produced a total return of +20.4% in USD. This compares to a total return of +18.5% for the Fund\u2019s benchmark, the MSCI World"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 380,
          "x": 58,
          "y": 121
        },
        "id": "2eceb11f-ea7e-429e-a630-9ac530008989",
        "page_number": 4,
        "text": "Energy Index (net), and the MSCI World Index\u2019s total return (net) of 9.7%."
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 8,
          "width": 549,
          "x": 57,
          "y": 139
        },
        "id": "b6fd9944-25fe-44be-b33f-df39ea80ec17",
        "page_number": 4,
        "text": "Performance summary in US Dollars: Class Y compared with MSCI World Energy Net Return Index"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 62,
          "x": 400,
          "y": 166
        },
        "id": "ce79d412-ebd2-4c36-8ade-aa45d883e1a2",
        "page_number": 4,
        "text": "Annualised"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 83,
          "x": 692,
          "y": 166
        },
        "id": "45f795c7-b81a-4eeb-9d77-3e85932813ad",
        "page_number": 4,
        "text": "Calendar years"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 51,
          "x": 165,
          "y": 185
        },
        "id": "ecfb14ec-f6a7-40f1-996d-f206c2596ceb",
        "page_number": 4,
        "text": "6 months"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 33,
          "x": 275,
          "y": 185
        },
        "id": "c9a43c13-61d2-4bd9-94dc-8e9692664e60",
        "page_number": 4,
        "text": "1 year"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 40,
          "x": 363,
          "y": 185
        },
        "id": "c272c4b7-425e-40af-b112-c6504b1621c6",
        "page_number": 4,
        "text": "3 years"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 7,
          "width": 40,
          "x": 459,
          "y": 185
        },
        "id": "a7cb4748-bb2d-4cd5-b609-bf47bff791e0",
        "page_number": 4,
        "text": "5 years"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 24,
          "x": 557,
          "y": 185
        },
        "id": "2ec8a0bb-659b-4397-a2fd-e5ff1ce806b9",
        "page_number": 4,
        "text": "2021"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 25,
          "x": 643,
          "y": 185
        },
        "id": "6ae9941f-3fa6-4eb6-b066-9a57bc1a6d11",
        "page_number": 4,
        "text": "2022"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 25,
          "x": 723,
          "y": 185
        },
        "id": "947ac008-5458-497b-a9ea-0217313c57b7",
        "page_number": 4,
        "text": "2023"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 25,
          "x": 801,
          "y": 185
        },
        "id": "9892717f-b56f-4997-948c-b75d2ba317c5",
        "page_number": 4,
        "text": "2024"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 26,
          "x": 884,
          "y": 185
        },
        "id": "fc87b233-1574-4fdc-8334-964fed71de54",
        "page_number": 4,
        "text": "2025"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 25,
          "x": 67,
          "y": 205
        },
        "id": "6c7a2739-f8dc-494d-8f97-7d89a2bc8259",
        "page_number": 4,
        "text": "Fund"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 32,
          "x": 175,
          "y": 205
        },
        "id": "024ab93c-ffe0-4897-94e8-14ee4bafd4d8",
        "page_number": 4,
        "text": "20.4%"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 33,
          "x": 275,
          "y": 205
        },
        "id": "ceab8ac6-c177-4d43-a150-d0b55d73f49f",
        "page_number": 4,
        "text": "33.9%"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 32,
          "x": 367,
          "y": 205
        },
        "id": "9c29d903-f9d9-46b5-9bd3-91377fc9116a",
        "page_number": 4,
        "text": "14.5%"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
          "width": 32,
          "x": 464,
          "y": 205
        },
        "id": "7e20c44c-09fa-4015-937f-f408f7618d49",
        "page_number": 4,
        "text": "15.2%"
      },
      {
        "block_type": "box",
        "box": {
          "height": 6,
         ...