0000884152 false 0000884152 2025-03-01 2026-02-28 0000884152 cik0000884152:NotesMember 2025-03-01 2026-02-28 0000884152 cik0000884152:MarketRiskMember 2025-03-01 2026-02-28 0000884152 cik0000884152:MarketDisruptionRisksRelatedToArmedConflictAndGeopoliticalTensionMember 2025-03-01 2026-02-28 0000884152 cik0000884152:DebtSecuritiesRiskMember 2025-03-01 2026-02-28 0000884152 cik0000884152:MunicipalSecuritiesRiskMember 2025-03-01 2026-02-28 0000884152 cik0000884152:VariableRateDemandNotesRiskMember 2025-03-01 2026-02-28 0000884152 cik0000884152:RepurchaseAgreementRiskMember 2025-03-01 2026-02-28 0000884152 cik0000884152:ValuationRiskMember 2025-03-01 2026-02-28 0000884152 cik0000884152:ManagementRiskMember 2025-03-01 2026-02-28 0000884152 cik0000884152:TobaccoRelatedBondsRiskMember 2025-03-01 2026-02-28 0000884152 cik0000884152:InvestingInUsTerritoriesCommonwealthsAndPossessionsRiskMember 2025-03-01 2026-02-28 0000884152 cik0000884152:PreferredSharesRiskMember 2025-03-01 2026-02-28 0000884152 cik0000884152:WhenIssuedDelayedDeliveryAndForwardCommitmentRisksMember 2025-03-01 2026-02-28 0000884152 cik0000884152:ZeroCouponOrPayInKindSecuritiesRiskMember 2025-03-01 2026-02-28 0000884152 cik0000884152:DerivativesRiskMember 2025-03-01 2026-02-28 0000884152 cik0000884152:AlternativeMinimumTaxRiskMember 2025-03-01 2026-02-28 0000884152 cik0000884152:TaxabilityRiskMember 2025-03-01 2026-02-28 0000884152 cik0000884152:InverseFloatingRateInterestsRiskMember 2025-03-01 2026-02-28 0000884152 cik0000884152:LiquidityRiskMember 2025-03-01 2026-02-28 0000884152 cik0000884152:RestrictedSecuritiesRiskMember 2025-03-01 2026-02-28 0000884152 cik0000884152:Rule144aSecuritiesAndOtherExemptSecuritiesRiskMember 2025-03-01 2026-02-28 0000884152 cik0000884152:DefaultedSecuritiesRiskMember 2025-03-01 2026-02-28 0000884152 cik0000884152:CreditRisksMember 2025-03-01 2026-02-28 0000884152 cik0000884152:IncomeRiskMember 2025-03-01 2026-02-28 0000884152 cik0000884152:CallRiskMember 2025-03-01 2026-02-28 0000884152 cik0000884152:MunicipalIssuerFocusRiskMember 2025-03-01 2026-02-28 0000884152 cik0000884152:InsuranceRiskMember 2025-03-01 2026-02-28 0000884152 cik0000884152:ChangingFixedIncomeMarketConditionsRiskMember 2025-03-01 2026-02-28 0000884152 us-gaap:InterestRateRiskMember 2025-03-01 2026-02-28 0000884152 cik0000884152:MarketDiscountFromNetAssetValueRiskMember 2025-03-01 2026-02-28 0000884152 cik0000884152:HighYieldDebtSecuritiesJunkBondRiskMember 2025-03-01 2026-02-28 0000884152 cik0000884152:MediumAndLowerGradeMunicipalSecuritiesRiskMember 2025-03-01 2026-02-28 0000884152 cik0000884152:UnratedSecuritiesRiskMember 2025-03-01 2026-02-28 0000884152 cik0000884152:OtherRisksMember 2025-03-01 2026-02-28
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM
N-CSR
CERTIFIED SHAREHOLDER REPORT OF REGISTERED
MANAGEMENT INVESTMENT COMPANIES
Investment Company Act file number 811-06567
Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust
(Exact name of registrant as specified in charter)
1555 Peachtree Street, N.E., Suite 1800 Atlanta, Georgia 30309
(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip code)
Glenn Brightman 1555 Peachtree Street, N.E., Suite 1800 Atlanta, Georgia 30309
(Name and address of agent for service)
Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (713) 626-1919
Date of fiscal year end: February 28
Date of reporting period: February 28, 2026

Item 1. Reports to Stockholders.
(a) The Registrant’s annual report transmitted to shareholders pursuant to Rule
30e-1
under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “Act”) is as follows:
(b) Not applicable.

Annual Report to Shareholders |  |  | February 28, 2026 |

Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust
NYSE:
VMO

2 |  | Management’s Discussion
2 |  | Performance Summary
4 |  | Long-Term Trust Performance
6 |  | Supplemental Information
6 |  | Notice of Important Change
8 |  | Dividend Reinvestment Plan
10 |  | Schedule of Investments
26 |  | Financial Statements
30 |  | Financial Highlights
31 |  | Notes to Financial Statements
37 |  | Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
38 |  | Tax Information
39 |  | Additional Information
T-1 |  | Trustees and Officers

Management’s Discussion of Trust Performance

Performance summary |
For the fiscal year ended February 28, 2026, Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust (the Trust), at net asset value (NAV), underperformed its style-specific benchmark, the S&P Municipal Bond 5+ Year Investment Grade Index. The Trust’s return can be calculated based on either the market price or the NAV of its shares. NAV per share is determined by dividing the value of the Trust’s portfolio securities, cash and other assets, less all liabilities and preferred shares, by the total number of common shares outstanding. Market price reflects the supply and demand for Trust shares. As a result, the two returns can differ, as they did during the fiscal year. |
Performance |
Total returns, 2/28/25 to 2/28/26 |
Trust at NAV |  |  | 3.45 | %
Trust at Market Value |  |  | 8.86 |
S&P Municipal Bond Index ▼ (Broad Market Index) |  |  | 4.85 |
S&P Municipal Bond 5+ Year Investment Grade Index ▼ (Style-Specific Index) |  |  | 5.24 |
Market Price Discount to NAV as of 2/28/26 |  |  | -2.35 |
Source(s): ▼ RIMES Technologies Corp. |  |  |  |
The performance data quoted represent past performance and cannot guarantee comparable future results; current performance may be lower or higher. Investment return, NAV and common share market price will fluctuate so that you may have a gain or loss when you sell shares. Please visit invesco.com/us for the most recent month-end performance. Performance figures reflect Trust expenses, the reinvestment of distributions (if any) and changes in NAV for performance based on NAV and changes in market price for performance based on market price. |
Since the Trust is a closed-end management investment company, shares of the Trust may trade at a discount or premium from the NAV. This characteristic is separate and distinct from the risk that NAV could decrease as a result of investment activities and may be a greater risk to investors expecting to sell their shares after a short time. The Trust cannot predict whether shares will trade at, above or below NAV. The Trust should not be viewed as a vehicle for trading purposes. It is designed primarily for risk-tolerant long-term investors. |

Market conditions and your Trust
During the fiscal year ended February 28, 2026, investment grade municipal bonds returned 4.96%, high yield municipal bonds returned 3.11% and taxable municipal bonds returned 7.16%.
1
At the beginning of the fiscal year, the US economy remained relatively resilient, supported by solid consumer spending and a strong labor market.
The US Federal Reserve Board (Fed) maintained a restrictive monetary policy stance for the first half of the period, holding the federal funds rate steady as it prioritized bringing inflation back toward its 2% target. Beginning in September, the Fed initiated a measured easing cycle, implementing a series of three rate cuts through year end, leaving the fed funds target rate at a level of 3.75%.
2
This signaled a gradual shift toward a more neutral policy stance as inflation pressures continued to moderate and Fed policymakers reiterated their commitment to maximum employment and a 2% inflation target.
2
Municipal issuance continued at the heavy pace set in the previous fiscal year. Shifting Fed interest rate policies, political uncertainty and the rising cost of starting new projects and maintaining existing infrastructure may have encouraged many issuers to come to the municipal market in search of capital. New issuance totaled $587 billion for the fiscal
year, which was 12% higher than the previous year’s $522 billion.
1
The fiscal year started on a wobbly note, as the first two months saw municipal fund outflows, which was compounded by the market volatility from tariff-related headlines. The trend reversed over the rest of the year and resulted in 10 months of strong positive flows, helping to absorb the elevated levels of new supply.
3
Net inflows to municipal funds totaled $67 billion, which was a 56% increase over the previous fiscal year’s inflows of $43 billion.
3
The municipal market continued to benefit from strong credit fundamentals throughout the fiscal year, as most state and local governments maintained healthy budget reserves. Furthermore, many states planned to increase the size of their
rainy-day
funds in both absolute terms and as a percentage of expenditures during the 2026 fiscal year.
4
We expect credit quality to remain generally stable in the near term, with fewer upgrades but no major increase in downgrades or defaults.
With continued robust supply of new issuance and markets pricing in two more rate cuts for late 2026, we believe high absolute yields, strong fundamentals and investor migration out of cash will present positive opportunities for municipal bonds. We continue to rely on our experienced portfolio managers and credit analysts to weather economic challenges
while seeking to identify marketplace opportunities to add long-term value for shareholders.
During the fiscal year, an overweight allocation to healthcare sector contributed to returns relative to the Trust’s style-specific index. An overweight exposure to
non-rated
bonds also added to relative performance.
†
On a state level, exposure to Texas-domiciled bonds contributed to relative performance.
An underweight allocation to the
tax-supported
sector detracted from relative performance over the fiscal year. An underweight exposure to
5.00-5.49%
coupon bonds also detracted from relative performance. On a state level, bonds domiciled in Ohio detracted from relative performance.
One important factor affecting the Trust’s performance relative to its style-specific benchmark was the use of leverage. The Trust uses leverage because we believe that, over time, leveraging can provide opportunities for additional income and total return for common shareholders. However, the use of leverage also can expose common shareholders to additional volatility. For example, if the prices of securities held by a trust decline, the negative effect of these valuation changes on common-share NAV and total return is magnified by the use of leverage. Conversely, leverage may enhance common-share returns during periods when the prices of securities held by a trust generally are rising.
Over the fiscal year, leverage contributed to the Trust’s performance relative to its style-specific benchmark. The Trust achieved a leveraged position through the use of inverse floating rate securities and variable rate muni term preferred (VMTP) shares. Inverse floating rate securities or tender option bonds (TOBs) are instruments that have an inverse relationship to a referenced interest rate. VMTPs are a variable rate form of preferred stock with a mandatory redemption date. Inverse floating rate securities and VMTPs can be an efficient way to manage duration, yield curve exposure and credit exposure, potentially enhancing yield. At the close of the fiscal year, leverage accounted for 36% of the Trust’s total assets and it contributed to returns. For more information about the Trust’s use of leverage, see the Notes to Financial Statements and Additional Information - Investment Objective, Policies and Principal Risks of the Trust, later in this report.
We wish to remind you that the Trust is subject to interest rate risk, meaning when interest rates rise, the value of fixed income securities tends to fall. The degree to which the value of fixed income securities may decline due to rising interest rates may vary depending on the speed and magnitude of the increase in interest rates, as well as individual security characteristics, such as price, maturity, duration and coupon and market forces, such as supply and demand for similar securities. We are monitoring interest rates, and the market, economic and geopolitical factors

2 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

that may impact the direction, speed and magnitude of changes to interest rates across the maturity spectrum, including the potential impact of monetary policy changes by the Fed and certain foreign central banks. If interest rates rise or fall faster than expected, markets may experience increased volatility, which may affect the value and/or liquidity of certain of the Trust’s investments and/or the market price of the Trust’s common shares.
Thank you for investing in Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust and for sharing our long-term investment horizon.
1 Source: Bloomberg LP
2 Source: US Federal Reserve
3 Source: Lipper Inc.
4 National Association of State Budget Officers
† A credit rating is an assessment provided by a nationally recognized statistical rating organization (NRSRO) of the creditworthiness of an issuer with respect to debt obligations, including specific securities, money market instruments or other debts. Ratings are measured on a scale that generally ranges from AAA (highest) to D (lowest); ratings are subject to change without notice. NR indicates the debtor was not rated and should not be interpreted as indicating low quality. For more information on rating methodologies, please visit the following NRSRO websites: www.standardandpoors.com and select ‘Understanding Credit Ratings’ under Rating Resources ‘About Ratings’ on the homepage.; https://ratings.moodys.io/ratings and select ‘Understanding Ratings’ on the homepage.; www.fitchratings.com and select ‘Ratings Definitions Criteria’ under ‘Resources’ on the homepage. Then select ‘Rating Definitions’ under ‘Resources’ on the ‘Contents’ menu.
Portfolio manager(s):
Jack Connelly
Josh Cooney
Tim O’Reilly
Mark Paris
Rebecca Setcavage
John Schorle
Julius Williams
The views and opinions expressed in management’s discussion of Trust performance are those of Invesco Advisers, Inc. and its affiliates. These views and opinions are subject to change at any time based on factors such as market and economic conditions. These views and opinions may not be relied upon as investment advice or recommendations, or as an offer for a particular security. The information is not a complete analysis of every aspect of any market, country, industry, security or the Trust. Statements of fact are from sources considered reliable, but Invesco Advisers, Inc. makes no representation or warranty as to their completeness or accuracy. Although historical performance is no guarantee of future results, these insights may help you understand our investment management philosophy.
See important Trust and, if applicable, index disclosures later in this report.

3 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

Your Trust’s Long-Term Performance
Results of a $10,000 Investment
Trust and index data from 2/29/16
1 Source: RIMES Technologies Corp.
*Amount includes the effect of the Adviser
pay-in
for an economic loss that occurred on October 4, 2023. Had the
pay-in
not been made, the total return would have been lower.
Past performance cannot guarantee future results.
Performance shown in the chart does not reflect deduction of taxes a shareholder would pay on Trust distributions or sale of Trust shares.

4 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

Average Annual Total Returns |  |  |  |  |
As of 2/28/26 |  |  |  |  |
|  | NAV |  |  | Market |
10 Years |  |  | 2.42 | % |  |  | 2.56 | %
5 Years |  |  | 0.38 |  |  |  | 0.58 |
1 Year |  |  | 3.45 |  |  |  | 8.86 |

Amount includes the effect of the Adviser
pay-in
for an economic loss that occurred on October 4, 2023. Had the
pay-in
not been made, the total return would have been lower.
The performance data quoted represent past performance and cannot guarantee future results; current performance may be lower or higher. Please visit invesco.com/performance for the most recent
month-end
performance.
Performance figures do not reflect deduction of taxes a shareholder would pay on Trust distributions or sale of Trust shares. Investment return and principal value will fluctuate so that you may have a gain or loss when you sell shares.

5 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

Supplemental Information

∎ | Unless otherwise stated, information presented in this report is as of February 28, 2026, and is based on total net assets applicable to common shares.

∎ | Unless otherwise noted, all data is provided by Invesco.

∎ | To access your Trust’s reports, visit invesco.com/fundreports.

About indexes used in this report

∎ | The S&P Municipal Bond Index is a broad, market value-weighted index that seeks to measure the performance of the US municipal bond market.

∎ | The S&P Municipal Bond 5+ Year Investment Grade Index seeks to measure the performance of investment-grade US municipal bonds with maturities equal to or greater than five years.

∎ | The Trust is not managed to track the performance of any particular index, including the index(es) described here, and consequently, the performance of the Trust may deviate significantly from the performance of the index(es).

∎ | A direct investment cannot be made in an index. Unless otherwise indicated, index results include reinvested dividends, and they do not reflect sales charges. Performance of the peer group, if applicable, reflects fund expenses; performance of a market index does not.

Changes to the Trust’s Governing Documents
At a meeting held on March
9-11,
2026, the Trust’s Board of Trustees (the “Board”) approved changes to the Trust’s Amended and Restated Agreement and Declaration of Trust (the “Declaration of Trust”) and the Trust’s Amended and Restated Bylaws (the “Bylaws”). Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Declaration of Trust or Bylaws, as applicable.
The following is a summary of certain of these changes and is qualified in its entirety by the Declaration of Trust and Bylaws. For clarity, the below provisions restate the relevant sentence(s) in their entirety from the amended Declaration of Trust or Bylaws, as applicable; however, not all of the language within the relevant sentence(s) may be new or amended.
This information may not reflect all of the changes that have occurred since you purchased shares of the Trust.
Declaration of Trust
The Trust’s Declaration of Trust was amended to provide as follows:
∎
In accordance with Section 3804(e) of the Delaware Act, any suit, action or proceeding brought by or in the right of any Shareholder or any person claiming any interest in any Shares seeking to enforce any provision of, or based on any matter arising out of, relating to, or in connection with, the Governing Instrument, the Trust,
any Shares, or any class or series of Shares, including any claim of any nature against the Trust, any Shares, any class or series of Shares, any Trustee, or any officer of the Trust, whether arising under the Governing Instrument, the Delaware Act, or otherwise, shall be brought exclusively in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware to the extent there is subject matter jurisdiction in such court for the claims asserted or, if not, then in the Superior Court of the State of Delaware, provided, however, that unless the Trust consents in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, the United States District Court for the District of Delaware shall, to the fullest extent permitted by law, be the sole and exclusive forum for the resolution of any complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the federal securities laws, including the 1933 Act and the 1940 Act.
∎
The Trustees may construe any of the provisions of the Declaration of Trust and/or Bylaws insofar as the same may appear to be ambiguous or inconsistent with any other provision hereof, and any such construction hereof by the Trustees in good faith shall be conclusive as to the meaning to be given to such provisions.
Bylaws
The Trust’s Bylaws were amended to provide as follows:
∎
Subject to any applicable requirements or interpretations of the 1940 Act, any meeting, regular or special, may be held in person, by telephone or online, or through other means, so long as all persons participating in the meeting can hear one another, and all such persons shall be deemed to be present in person at such meeting for purposes of the Delaware Act and, to the extent permitted, the 1940 Act.
∎
Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in these Bylaws, the Trustees or the officers of the Trust may determine at any time, including, without limitation, after the calling of any meeting of Shareholders, that any meeting of Shareholders be held solely by means of remote communication or both at a physical location and by means of remote communication. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in these Bylaws, if it is determined after notice of the meeting has been delivered to Shareholders that participation by Shareholders in the meeting shall or may be conducted by means of remote communication, announcement of such change may be made at any time by press release
or any other means as may be permitted or required by applicable law.
∎
At all meetings of the Shareholders, every Record Owner entitled to vote on a matter to be voted on by such Shares shall be entitled to vote on such matter at such meeting either in person or by written proxy signed by the Record Owner or by his duly authorized attorney in fact. A Record Owner may duly authorize such attorney in fact through written or electronic communication.
∎
Subject to any guidelines and procedures that the Trustees or the officers of the Trust may adopt, any meeting at which Shareholders or proxyholders are permitted to participate by means of remote communication shall be conducted in accordance with the following, except to the extent otherwise permitted by the federal securities laws and the rules thereunder applicable to the Trust, including any exemptive, interpretive or other relief (including
no-action
relief) or guidance issued by the Commission or the Staff of the Commission:
– The Trust shall implement reasonable measures to verify that each person considered present and authorized to vote at the meeting by means of remote communication is a Shareholder or proxy-holder;
– The Trust shall implement reasonable measures to provide the Shareholders and proxyholders a reasonable opportunity to participate in the meeting and to vote on matters submitted to the Shareholders, including an opportunity to read or hear the proceedings of the meeting substantially concurrently with the proceedings; and
– In the event any Shareholder or proxyholder votes or takes other action at the meeting by means of remote communication, a record of the vote or other action shall be maintained by the Trust.
∎
In advance of any meeting of Shareholders, the Trustees, or at any such meeting, the Trustees or the chair of the meeting, may appoint one or more persons to act as Inspectors of Election at the meeting or any adjournment thereof. Unless otherwise instructed by the Trustees, or by the chair of the meeting, the Inspectors of Election shall (a) determine (i) the number of Shares outstanding on the record date and entitled to vote and the number of such Shares represented at the meeting, (ii) the existence of a quorum, and (iii) the authenticity, validity and effect of proxies; (b) receive votes, ballots or consents; (c) hear and determine all challenges and
NOT FDIC INSURED | MAY LOSE VALUE | NO BANK GUARANTEE

6 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

questions in any way arising in connection with the right to vote; (d) count and tabulate all votes and consents and determine the results; and (e) take such other actions as may be proper to conduct the election or vote, all in accordance with applicable law.
∎
Any Shareholder desiring to nominate any person or persons (as the case may be) for election as a Trustee or Trustees of the Trust shall deliver, as part of such Shareholder Notice each Proposed Nominee’s written representation that he or she meets all applicable legal requirements relevant to service as a Trustee, including, but not limited to, the rules adopted by the principal listing exchange (if any) upon which Shares are listed, Rule
10A-3
under the Exchange Act (or any successor provision thereto), Article
2-01
of Regulation
S-X
under the Exchange Act with respect to the Trust’s independent registered public accounting firm (or any successor provision thereto) and any other criteria established by the 1940 Act related to service as a trustee of a management investment company or the permitted composition of the board of trustees of a management investment company, together with information regarding such Proposed Nominee that will be sufficient, in the discretion of the Trustees, to examine such representation. For the avoidance of doubt, a Proposed Nominee is not required to qualify as an audit committee financial expert of the Trust, as defined in the applicable regulations.
∎
Each Proposed Nominee shall:
– Agree to comply with the policies and guidelines adopted by the Independent Trustees that govern their actions as Trustees of the Trust (the “Independent Trustee Policies”). Refusal by a Proposed Nominee to abide by such Independent Trustee Policies will render the nomination ineffective for failure to satisfy the requirements of these Bylaws.
– If requested by the Trustees, consent to and cooperate with a background screening conducted by a background screening company with experience in conducting background screenings of public company directors selected by the Trustees. Refusal by a Proposed Nominee to cooperate with such a background screening will render the nomination ineffective for failure to satisfy the requirements of these Bylaws.
– If requested by the Trustees, sit for an interview with one or more Trustees or their representatives, which interview may, in the discretion of the Trustees, be conducted by means of remote communication. Refusal by a Proposed Nominee to participate in such interview will render the nomination ineffective for failure to satisfy the requirements of these Bylaws.
∎
Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of this Article and without limiting the generality of any other requirements herein, unless otherwise required by law,
(1) if the Shareholder or a qualified representative of the Shareholder (“Shareholder Representative”) does not appear at the annual meeting of Shareholders of the Trust to present a nomination or proposed business, such nomination shall be disregarded and such proposed business shall not be transacted, notwithstanding that proxies in respect of such vote may have been received by the Trust and (2) a Shareholder shall be disqualified from bringing any business proposed to be brought before a meeting if any of the information in such Shareholder’s notice, or provided in connection therewith, is not correct and complete or if such Shareholder does not comply fully with the representations in such notice. If the annual meeting is held in person (even if a virtual option is also available), then the Shareholder or the Shareholder Representative must attend the meeting in person to present the nominations or the proposal. For purposes of this Article, “Shareholder Representative” must either be (i) a duly authorized officer, manager or partner of such Shareholder, and the Shareholder Representative must deliver an incumbency certificate evidencing such position to the acting secretary at the meeting, or (ii) authorized by a writing executed by such Shareholder to act as proxy for the Shareholder at the meeting, and the Shareholder Representative must deliver a copy of such writing to the acting secretary at the meeting.
∎
The Trustees may construe any of the provisions of the Bylaws insofar as the same may appear to be ambiguous or inconsistent with any other provision hereof, and any such construction hereof by the Trustees in good faith shall be conclusive as to the meaning to be given to such provisions.
The Trust’s Declaration of Trust and Bylaws contain other provisions, including all requirements for the conduct of shareholder meetings, and are available in their entirety upon request to the Trust’s Secretary, c/o Invesco Advisers, Inc., 11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 1000 Houston, TX 77046.

7 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

Dividend Reinvestment Plan
The dividend reinvestment plan (the Plan) offers you a prompt and simple way to reinvest your dividends and capital gains distributions (Distributions) into additional shares of your Invesco
closed-end
Trust (the Trust). Under the Plan, the money you earn from Distributions will be reinvested automatically in more shares of the Trust, allowing you to potentially increase your investment over time. All shareholders in the Trust are automatically enrolled in the Plan when shares are purchased.
Plan benefits

∎ | Add to your account:

You may increase your shares in your Trust easily and automatically with the Plan.

∎ | Low transaction costs:

Shareholders who participate in the Plan may be able to buy shares at below-market prices when the Trust is trading at a premium to its net asset value (NAV). In addition, transaction costs are low because when new shares are issued by the Trust, there is no brokerage fee, and when shares are bought in blocks on the open market, the per share fee is shared among all participants.

∎ | Convenience:

You will receive a detailed account statement from Computershare Trust Company, N.A. (the Agent), which administers the Plan. The statement shows your total Distributions, date of investment, shares acquired, and price per share, as well as the total number of shares in your reinvestment account. You can also access your account at
invesco.com/closed-end.

∎ | Safekeeping:

The Agent will hold the shares it has acquired for you in safekeeping.
Who can participate in the Plan
If you own shares in your own name, your purchase will automatically enroll you in the Plan. If your shares are held in “street name” – in the name of your brokerage firm, bank, or other financial institution – you must instruct that entity to participate on your behalf. If they are unable to participate on your behalf, you may request that they reregister your shares in your own name so that you may enroll in the Plan.
How to enroll
If you haven’t participated in the Plan in the past or chose to opt out, you are still eligible to participate. Enroll by visiting
invesco.com/closed-end,
by calling toll-free 800 341 2929 or by notifying us in writing at Invesco
Closed-End
Funds, Computershare Trust Company, N.A., P.O. Box 43078, Providence, RI 02940-3078. If you are writing to us, please include the Trust name and account number and ensure that all shareholders listed on the account sign these written instructions. Your participation in the Plan will begin with the next Distribution payable after the Agent receives your authorization, as long as they receive it before the “record date,” which is generally 10 business days before the Distribution is paid. If your authorization arrives after such record date, your participation in the Plan will begin with the following Distribution.
How the Plan works
If you choose to participate in the Plan, your Distributions will be promptly reinvested for you, automatically increasing your shares. If the Trust is trading at a share price that is equal to its NAV, you’ll pay that amount for your reinvested shares. However, if the Trust is trading above or below NAV, the price is determined by one of two ways:

| 1. | Premium: If the Trust is trading at a premium – a market price that is higher than its NAV – you’ll pay either the NAV or 95 percent of

|  | the market price, whichever is greater. When the Trust trades at a premium, you may pay less for your reinvested shares than an investor purchasing shares on the stock exchange. Keep in mind, a portion of your price reduction may be taxable because you are receiving shares at less than market price.

| 2. | Discount: If the Trust is trading at a discount – a market price that is lower than its NAV – you’ll pay the market price for your reinvested shares.

Costs of the Plan
There is no direct charge to you for reinvesting Distributions because the Plan’s fees are paid by the Trust. If the Trust is trading at or above its NAV, your new shares are issued directly by the Trust and there are no brokerage charges or fees. However, if the Trust is trading at a discount, the shares are purchased on the open market, and you will pay your portion of any per share fees. These per share fees are typically less than the standard brokerage charges for individual transactions because shares are purchased for all participants in blocks, resulting in lower fees for each individual participant. Any service or per share fees are added to the purchase price. Per share fees include any applicable brokerage commissions the Agent is required to pay.
Tax implications
The automatic reinvestment of Distributions does not relieve you of any income tax that may be due on Distributions. You will receive tax information annually to help you prepare your federal income tax return.
Invesco does not offer tax advice. The tax information contained herein is general and is not exhaustive by nature. It was not intended or written to be used, and it cannot be used, by any taxpayer for avoiding penalties that may be imposed on the taxpayer under US federal tax laws. Federal and state tax laws are complex and constantly changing. Shareholders should always consult a legal or tax adviser for information concerning their individual situation.
How to withdraw from the Plan
You may withdraw from the Plan at any time by calling 800 341 2929, by visiting
invesco.com/closed-end
or by writing to Invesco
Closed-End
Funds, Computershare Trust Company, N.A., P.O. Box 43078, Providence, RI 02940-3078. Simply indicate that you would like to withdraw from the Plan, and be sure to include your Trust name and account number. Also, ensure that all shareholders listed on the account sign these written instructions. If you withdraw, you have three options with regard to the shares held in the Plan:

| 1. | If you opt to continue to hold your non-certificated whole shares (Investment Plan Book Shares), they will be held by the Agent electronically as Direct Registration Book-Shares (Book-Entry Shares) and fractional shares will be sold at the then-current market price. Proceeds will be sent via check to your address of record after deducting applicable fees, including per share fees such as any applicable brokerage commissions the Agent is required to pay.

| 2. | If you opt to sell your shares through the Agent, we will sell all full and fractional shares and send the proceeds via check to your address of record after deducting $2.50 per account and a brokerage charge.

| 3. | You may sell your shares through your financial adviser through the Direct Registration System (DRS). DRS is a service within the securities industry that allows Trust shares to be held in your name in electronic format. You retain full ownership of your shares, without having to hold a share certificate. You should contact your financial adviser to learn more about any restrictions or fees that may apply.

The Trust and Computershare Trust Company, N.A. may amend or terminate the Plan at any time. Participants will receive at least 30 days written notice before the effective date of any amendment. In the case of termination, Participants will receive at least 30 days written notice before the record date for the payment of any such Distributions by the Trust. In the case of amendment or termination necessary or appropriate to comply with applicable law or the rules and policies of the Securities and Exchange Commission or any other regulatory authority, such written notice will not be required.
To obtain a complete copy of the current Dividend Reinvestment Plan, please call our Client Services department at 800 341 2929 or visit
invesco.com/closed-end.

8 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

Fund Information
Portfolio Composition

By credit sector |  | % of total investments
Revenue Bonds |  |  |  | 84.47 | %
General Obligation Bonds |  |  |  | 11.28 |
Other |  |  |  | 3.29 |
Pre-Refunded Bonds |  |  |  | 0.96 |

Top Five Debt Holdings

|  |  |  | % of total net assets
1. |  | Ohio State University (The), Series 2023, VRD Ref. RB |  |  |  | 1.45% |
2. |  | California Enterprise Development Authority, Series 2025, RB |  |  |  | 1.27 |
3. |  | Buckeye Tobacco Settlement Financing Authority, Series 2020 B-2, Ref. RB |  |  |  | 1.21 |
4. |  | New York (State of) Dormitory Authority, Series 2018 E, RB |  |  |  | 1.19 |
5. |  | Louisiana (State of), Series 2023 A-1, Ref. VRD RB |  |  |  | 1.16 |

The Trust’s holdings are subject to change, and there is no assurance that the Trust will continue to hold any particular security.
Data presented here are as of February 28, 2026.

9 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

Schedule of Investments
February 28, 2026

|  | Interest Rate |  |  | Maturity Date |  |  | Principal Amount (000) |  |  | Value
Municipal Obligations–153.47% (a) |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Alabama–2.74% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Birmingham (City of), AL Special Care Facilities Financing Authority (Methodist Home for the Aging); Series 2016, RB |  |  | 5.75% |  |  |  | 06/01/2045 |  |  | $ | 300 |  |  | $     296,707
Black Belt Energy Gas District (The); Series 2023 B, RB (b) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 12/01/2030 |  |  |  | 1,805 |  |  | 1,977,268
Energy Southeast, A Cooperative District; Series 2024 B, RB (b) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 06/01/2032 |  |  |  | 1,290 |  |  | 1,425,285
Huntsville-Redstone Village Special Care Facilities Financing Authority; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2007, Ref. RB |  |  | 6.00% |  |  |  | 01/01/2060 |  |  |  | 1,600 |  |  | 1,334,827
Series 2008, RB (c) |  |  | 2.00% |  |  |  | 01/01/2060 |  |  |  | 337 |  |  | 17,642
Lower Alabama Gas District (The); Series 2016 A, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 09/01/2046 |  |  |  | 4,715 |  |  | 5,146,953
Southeast Energy Authority, A Cooperative District (No. 2); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2021 B, RB (b) |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 12/01/2031 |  |  |  | 1,890 |  |  | 1,977,811
Series 2024 A, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 11/01/2035 |  |  |  | 2,120 |  |  | 2,281,854
Series 2025 A, RB (b) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 06/01/2035 |  |  |  | 1,400 |  |  | 1,474,580
Southeast Energy Authority, A Cooperative District (No. 3); Series 2022 A-1, RB (b) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 12/01/2029 |  |  |  | 1,790 |  |  | 1,948,366
Tuscaloosa (County of), AL Industrial Development Authority (Hunt Refining); Series 2019 A, Ref. IDR (d) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 05/01/2044 |  |  |  | 1,045 |  |  | 1,058,965
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 18,940,258
Alaska–0.06% |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Northern Tobacco Securitization Corp.; Series 2021 A-1, Ref. RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 06/01/2050 |  |  |  | 530 |  |  | 447,407
Arizona–3.08% |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Arizona (State of) Industrial Development Authority (Leman Academy of Excellence); Series 2019 A, RB (d) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2039 |  |  |  | 1,520 |  |  | 1,521,416
Arizona (State of) Industrial Development Authority (Leman Academy-Parker Colorado); Series 2019, RB (d) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2049 |  |  |  | 500 |  |  | 468,888
Arizona (State of) Industrial Development Authority (Mater Academy of Nevada - Bonanza Campus); Series 2020 A, RB (d) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 12/15/2050 |  |  |  | 680 |  |  | 633,075
Arizona (State of) Industrial Development Authority (Social Bonds); Series 2023, RB |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 11/01/2048 |  |  |  | 1,000 |  |  | 1,044,682
City of Mesa AZ Utility System Revenue; Series 2025, RB (INS - BAM) (e) (f) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2046 |  |  |  | 3,805 |  |  | 4,012,664
Glendale (City of), AZ Industrial Development Authority (The Beatitudes Campus); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2017, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 11/15/2029 |  |  |  | 1,390 |  |  | 1,350,820
Series 2017, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 11/15/2045 |  |  |  | 1,125 |  |  | 861,456
Maricopa (County of), AZ Industrial Development Authority (Legacy Traditional Schools); Series 2019, Ref. RB (d) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2049 |  |  |  | 280 |  |  | 270,668
Pima (County of), AZ Industrial Development Authority (The) (American Leadership Academy); Series 2019, Ref. RB (d) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 06/15/2052 |  |  |  | 455 |  |  | 402,090
Pima (County of), AZ Industrial Development Authority (The) (Grande Innovations Academy); Series 2018, RB (d) |  |  | 5.38% |  |  |  | 07/01/2052 |  |  |  | 1,505 |  |  | 1,430,033
Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement & Power District; Series 2025, RB (f) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 01/01/2048 |  |  |  | 4,295 |  |  | 4,571,055
Salt Verde Financial Corp.; Series 2007, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 12/01/2037 |  |  |  | 4,235 |  |  | 4,721,491
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 21,288,338
Arkansas–0.10% |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Arkansas (State of) Development Finance Authority (Baptist Memorial Health); Series 2020, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 09/01/2044 |  |  |  | 685 |  |  | 694,921
California–14.68% |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Beverly Hills Unified School District (Election of 2008); Series 2009, GO Bonds (g) |  |  | 0.00% |  |  |  | 08/01/2028 |  |  |  | 1,050 |  |  | 1,000,574
California (State of); Series 2020, GO Bonds (INS - BAM) (e) |  |  | 3.00% |  |  |  | 11/01/2050 |  |  |  | 2,105 |  |  | 1,656,026
California (State of) Community Choice Financing Authority (Clean Energy) (Green Bonds); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2024 E, RB (b) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 09/01/2032 |  |  |  | 1,345 |  |  | 1,472,153
Series 2024, RB (b) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 04/01/2032 |  |  |  | 1,870 |  |  | 2,039,974
Series 2024, RB (b) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 10/01/2032 |  |  |  | 1,610 |  |  | 1,742,968
California (State of) County Tobacco Securitization Agency (Alameda County Tobacco Asset Securitization Corp.); Series 2006 C, RB (g) |  |  | 0.00% |  |  |  | 06/01/2055 |  |  |  | 13,950 |  |  | 1,410,717
California (State of) County Tobacco Securitization Agency (Los Angeles County Securitization Corp.); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2020 B-1, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 06/01/2049 |  |  |  | 15 |  |  | 15,027
Series 2020 B-2, Ref. RB (g) |  |  | 0.00% |  |  |  | 06/01/2055 |  |  |  | 2,115 |  |  | 411,064

See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements which are an integral part of the financial statements.

10 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

|  | Interest Rate |  | Maturity Date |  | Principal Amount (000) |  |  | Value
California–(continued) |  |  |  |  |  |
California (State of) Health Facilities Financing Authority (PIH Health); Series 2020 A, Ref. RB |  | 4.00% |  | 06/01/2050 |  | $ | 5,315 |  |  | $   4,801,517
California (State of) Housing Finance Agency (Social Certificates); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2021 A, RB |  | 3.25% |  | 08/20/2036 |  |  | 5 |  |  | 4,648
Series 2023-1, RB |  | 4.38% |  | 09/20/2036 |  |  | 418 |  |  | 445,310
California (State of) Municipal Finance Authority (Linxs APM); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2018 A, RB (h) |  | 5.00% |  | 12/31/2036 |  |  | 2,115 |  |  | 2,184,457
Series 2018 A, RB (h) |  | 5.00% |  | 12/31/2047 |  |  | 2,550 |  |  | 2,563,957
California (State of) Municipal Finance Authority (William Jessup University); Series 2019, Ref. RB (Acquired 06/09/2020; Cost $322,030)(d)(i)(j) |  | 5.00% |  | 08/01/2039 |  |  | 320 |  |  | 241,661
California (State of) Pollution Control Financing Authority (Plant Bonds); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2012, RB (d)(h) |  | 5.00% |  | 07/01/2027 |  |  | 685 |  |  | 688,887
Series 2012, RB (d)(h) |  | 5.00% |  | 07/01/2030 |  |  | 275 |  |  | 276,611
Series 2012, RB (d)(h) |  | 5.00% |  | 07/01/2037 |  |  | 2,875 |  |  | 2,885,990
Series 2012, RB (d)(h) |  | 5.00% |  | 11/21/2045 |  |  | 3,365 |  |  | 3,369,359
California (State of) Statewide Communities Development Authority (Loma Linda University Medical Center); Series 2016 A, RB (d) |  | 5.25% |  | 12/01/2056 |  |  | 1,275 |  |  | 1,275,697
California Enterprise Development Authority; Series 2025, RB (f) |  | 5.50% |  | 11/01/2059 |  |  | 8,055 |  |  | 8,783,703
California Health Facilities Financing Authority; Series 2025, RB (f)(k) |  | 5.00% |  | 08/15/2051 |  |  | 5,580 |  |  | 5,855,333
Cambrian School District; Series 2022, GO Bonds |  | 4.00% |  | 08/01/2052 |  |  | 2,950 |  |  | 2,793,423
CSCDA Community Improvement Authority (Jefferson-Anaheim Social Bonds); Series 2021 A, RB (d) |  | 3.13% |  | 08/01/2056 |  |  | 1,055 |  |  | 810,028
Daly (City of), CA Housing Development Finance Agency (Franciscan Mobile Home Park Acquisition); Series 2007 C, Ref. RB |  | 6.50% |  | 12/15/2047 |  |  | 505 |  |  | 505,142
Golden State Tobacco Securitization Corp.; Series 2021 B-2, Ref. RB (g) |  | 0.00% |  | 06/01/2066 |  |  | 1,955 |  |  | 209,251
Los Angeles (City of), CA Department of Airports; Series 2021, Ref. RB (h) |  | 5.00% |  | 05/15/2046 |  |  | 1,995 |  |  | 2,073,868
Los Angeles County Public Works Financing Authority; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2025, RB (f) |  | 5.25% |  | 12/01/2050 |  |  | 2,640 |  |  | 2,880,503
Series 2025, RB (f) |  | 5.25% |  | 12/01/2054 |  |  | 980 |  |  | 1,059,523
Montebello Unified School District; Series 2022 B, GO Bonds (INS - AGI) (e) |  | 5.00% |  | 08/01/2050 |  |  | 1,575 |  |  | 1,642,601
M-S-R Energy Authority; Series 2009 B, RB |  | 6.50% |  | 11/01/2039 |  |  | 745 |  |  | 933,258
Mt. San Antonio Community College District (Election of 2008); Series 2013 A, GO Bonds (c) |  | 6.25% |  | 08/01/2043 |  |  | 2,550 |  |  | 2,669,810
Municipal Improvement Corp. of Los Angeles; Series 2025, RB |  | 5.50% |  | 05/01/2055 |  |  | 2,615 |  |  | 2,885,784
Oxnard School District (Election of 2022); Series 2023 A, GO Bonds (INS - BAM) (e) |  | 4.13% |  | 08/01/2050 |  |  | 5,000 |  |  | 4,915,798
Palo Alto (City of), CA (Election of 2008); Series 2013 A, GO Bonds |  | 4.00% |  | 08/01/2043 |  |  | 50 |  |  | 50,013
Regents of the University of California Medical Center; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2022 P, RB |  | 4.00% |  | 05/15/2053 |  |  | 6,915 |  |  | 6,526,093
Series 2022 P, RB |  | 3.50% |  | 05/15/2054 |  |  | 2,570 |  |  | 2,148,724
San Diego (County of), CA Regional Airport Authority; Series 2021 A, RB |  | 4.00% |  | 07/01/2051 |  |  | 2,620 |  |  | 2,518,795
San Diego County Regional Airport Authority; Series 2025, RB (f)(h) |  | 5.00% |  | 07/01/2048 |  |  | 3,230 |  |  | 3,354,992
San Francisco (City & County of), CA Airport Commission (San Francisco International Airport); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2019 E, RB (h) |  | 5.00% |  | 05/01/2038 |  |  | 860 |  |  | 907,987
Series 2019 E, RB (h) |  | 5.00% |  | 05/01/2050 |  |  | 2,980 |  |  | 3,018,423
Series 2021 A, Ref. RB (h) |  | 5.00% |  | 05/01/2036 |  |  | 775 |  |  | 852,005
San Francisco City & County Airport Comm-San Francisco International Airport; Series 2025, RB (h) |  | 5.50% |  | 05/01/2055 |  |  | 3,140 |  |  | 3,381,237
Silicon Valley Tobacco Securitization Authority (Santa Clara); Series 2007 A, RB (g) |  | 0.00% |  | 06/01/2041 |  |  | 4,410 |  |  | 1,680,192
State of California; Series 2025, GO Bonds (f) |  | 5.00% |  | 03/01/2055 |  |  | 4,290 |  |  | 4,598,687
West Contra Costa Unified School District; Series 2005, GO Bonds (INS - NATL) (e)(g) |  | 0.00% |  | 08/01/2026 |  |  | 1,350 |  |  | 1,336,069
West Sacramento (City of), CA Financing Authority; Series 2006 A, RB (INS - AGI) (e) |  | 5.00% |  | 09/01/2026 |  |  | 465 |  |  | 469,916
William S. Hart Union High School District (Election of 2008); Series 2009 A, GO Bonds (g) |  | 0.00% |  | 08/01/2032 |  |  | 4,650 |  |  | 3,934,159
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 101,281,914
Colorado–6.60% |  |  |  |  |  |
Arista Metropolitan District; Series 2023 A, Ref. GO Bonds (INS - BAM) (e) |  | 4.50% |  | 12/01/2058 |  |  | 3,040 |  |  | 2,973,261
Aurora Highlands Community Authority Board; Series 2021 A, Ref. RB |  | 5.75% |  | 12/01/2051 |  |  | 1,060 |  |  | 1,034,467
Belford North Metropolitan District; Series 2020 A, GO Bonds |  | 5.50% |  | 12/01/2050 |  |  | 1,320 |  |  | 1,211,205
Bromley Park Metropolitan District No. 2; Series 2023, Ref. GO Bonds (INS - BAM) (e) |  | 5.38% |  | 12/01/2053 |  |  | 790 |  |  | 839,830
Centerra Metropolitan District No. 1 (In the City of Loveland); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2017, RB (d) |  | 5.00% |  | 12/01/2047 |  |  | 2,140 |  |  | 2,139,961
Series 2020 A, Ref. GO Bonds |  | 5.00% |  | 12/01/2051 |  |  | 850 |  |  | 842,346
Series 2022, RB |  | 6.50% |  | 12/01/2053 |  |  | 725 |  |  | 761,086

See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements which are an integral part of the financial statements.

11 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

|  | Interest Rate |  |  | Maturity Date |  |  | Principal Amount (000) |  |  | Value
Colorado–(continued) |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Colorado (State of) Health Facilities Authority (Adventhealth Obligated Group); Series 2021 A, Ref. RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 11/15/2050 |  |  | $ | 940 |  |  | $     856,414
Colorado (State of) Health Facilities Authority (Adventist Health System/Sunbelt Obligated Group); Series 2018 A, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 11/15/2048 |  |  |  | 2,175 |  |  | 2,210,337
Colorado (State of) Health Facilities Authority (CommonSpirit Health); Series 2019 A-2, Ref. RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 08/01/2049 |  |  |  | 2,115 |  |  | 1,883,911
Colorado (State of) Southern Ute Indian Tribe of the Southern Ute Reservation; Series 2025 A, GO Bonds (d) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 04/01/2035 |  |  |  | 1,590 |  |  | 1,782,543
Colorado Crossing Metropolitan District No. 2; Series 2020 A-1, Ref. GO Bonds |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 12/01/2047 |  |  |  | 500 |  |  | 492,182
Colorado State University Research Foundation; Series 2025 A, RB (d) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 03/01/2065 |  |  |  | 1,000 |  |  | 1,003,010
Denver (City & County of), CO; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2018 A, Ref. RB (h) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 12/01/2048 |  |  |  | 2,085 |  |  | 2,121,804
Series 2018 A-2, RB (g) |  |  | 0.00% |  |  |  | 08/01/2034 |  |  |  | 1,675 |  |  | 1,194,353
Great Western Metropolitan District; Series 2020, Ref. GO Bonds |  |  | 4.75% |  |  |  | 12/01/2050 |  |  |  | 504 |  |  | 452,430
Jefferson (County of), CO Center Metropolitan District No. 1; Series 2020 B, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.75% |  |  |  | 12/15/2050 |  |  |  | 2,265 |  |  | 2,268,866
Johnstown Plaza Metropolitan District; Series 2022, Ref. GO Bonds |  |  | 4.25% |  |  |  | 12/01/2046 |  |  |  | 863 |  |  | 850,200
Midtown Clear Creek Metropolitan District; Series 2023 A, Ref. GO Bonds (INS - BAM) (e) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 12/01/2053 |  |  |  | 735 |  |  | 770,443
Mulberry Metropolitan District No. 2; Series 2022, RB |  |  | 7.00% |  |  |  | 12/01/2034 |  |  |  | 926 |  |  | 969,275
North Range Metropolitan District No. 3; Series 2020 A, GO Bonds |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 12/01/2040 |  |  |  | 810 |  |  | 824,195
Penrith Park Metropolitan District; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2025 A, Ref. GO Bonds (INS - BAM) (e) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 12/01/2040 |  |  |  | 735 |  |  | 808,223
Series 2025 A, Ref. GO Bonds (INS - BAM) (e) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 12/01/2045 |  |  |  | 825 |  |  | 881,920
Series 2025 A, Ref. GO Bonds (INS - BAM) (e) |  |  | 4.75% |  |  |  | 12/01/2054 |  |  |  | 2,240 |  |  | 2,266,553
Rampart Range Metropolitan District No. 5; Series 2021, RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 12/01/2051 |  |  |  | 500 |  |  | 408,467
Roaring Fork Transportation Authority; Series 2021, RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 12/01/2051 |  |  |  | 1,700 |  |  | 1,576,120
Severance Shores Metropolitan District No. 4; Series 2025, Ref. GO Bonds (INS - AGI) (e) |  |  | 5.75% |  |  |  | 12/01/2054 |  |  |  | 2,145 |  |  | 2,270,328
Sky Ranch Community Authority Board; Series 2022 A, RB |  |  | 5.75% |  |  |  | 12/01/2052 |  |  |  | 750 |  |  | 762,188
South Aurora Regional Improvement Authority; Series 2025, RB |  |  | 6.75% |  |  |  | 12/01/2055 |  |  |  | 1,065 |  |  | 1,095,094
Spring Valley Metropolitan District No. 3; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2025 A, Ref. GO Bonds (INS - AGI) (e) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 12/01/2045 |  |  |  | 1,000 |  |  | 1,050,619
Series 2025 A, Ref. GO Bonds (INS - AGI) (e) |  |  | 4.63% |  |  |  | 12/01/2054 |  |  |  | 500 |  |  | 492,736
Sterling Ranch Community Authority Board; Series 2025 A, Ref. RB (INS - BAM) (e) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 12/01/2050 |  |  |  | 945 |  |  | 991,367
Village Metropolitan District (The); Series 2025 A, GO Bonds |  |  | 5.75% |  |  |  | 12/01/2055 |  |  |  | 500 |  |  | 507,363
White Buffalo Metropolitan District No. 3; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2020, GO Bonds |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 12/01/2050 |  |  |  | 685 |  |  | 687,346
Series 2025, Ref. GO Bonds |  |  | 9.00% |  |  |  | 12/15/2055 |  |  |  | 1,700 |  |  | 1,707,567
Windler Public Improvement Authority; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2021 A-1, RB |  |  | 4.13% |  |  |  | 12/01/2051 |  |  |  | 625 |  |  | 482,940
Series 2021 A-2, RB (c) |  |  | 4.50% |  |  |  | 12/01/2041 |  |  |  | 2,610 |  |  | 2,096,530
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 45,567,480
District of Columbia–2.46% |  |  |  |  |  |  |
District of Columbia (Provident Group - Howard Properties LLC); Series 2013, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 10/01/2045 |  |  |  | 825 |  |  | 802,571
District of Columbia Water & Sewer Authority; Series 2024 B, Ref. VRD RB (l) |  |  | 1.10% |  |  |  | 10/01/2054 |  |  |  | 3,385 |  |  | 3,385,000
District of Columbia Water & Sewer Authority (Green Bonds); Series 2022 C-1, RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 10/01/2051 |  |  |  | 4,245 |  |  | 3,987,240
Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority; Series 2019 B, Ref. RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 10/01/2049 |  |  |  | 2,120 |  |  | 1,896,165
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority; Series 2025, RB (f)(k) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 07/15/2053 |  |  |  | 2,780 |  |  | 2,921,339
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Dedicated Revenue; Series 2026, RB (f)(k) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 07/15/2055 |  |  |  | 3,770 |  |  | 3,993,419
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 16,985,734
Florida–13.73% |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Alachua (County of), FL Health Facilities Authority (Terraces at Bonita Springs); Series 2022 A, Ref. RB (d) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 11/15/2061 |  |  |  | 1,075 |  |  | 858,286
Brevard (County of), FL Health Facilities Authority (Health First Obligated Group); Series 2022 A, Ref. RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 04/01/2052 |  |  |  | 635 |  |  | 565,967
Broward (County of), FL; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2019 A, RB (h) |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 10/01/2049 |  |  |  | 955 |  |  | 856,671
Series 2019 A, RB (h) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 10/01/2049 |  |  |  | 1,325 |  |  | 1,342,313
Series 2022 A, RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 10/01/2047 |  |  |  | 2,715 |  |  | 2,628,691
Broward (County of), FL (Convention Center Expansion); Series 2021, RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 09/01/2051 |  |  |  | 3,215 |  |  | 2,915,989
Cape Coral (City of), FL; Series 2023, Ref. RB (INS - BAM) (e) |  |  | 5.60% |  |  |  | 03/01/2048 |  |  |  | 1,565 |  |  | 1,690,082

See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements which are an integral part of the financial statements.

12 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

|  | Interest Rate |  |  | Maturity Date |  |  | Principal Amount (000) |  |  | Value
Florida–(continued) |  |  |  |  |  |  |
County of Miami-Dade FL Water & Sewer System Revenue; Series 2025, RB (f) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 10/01/2055 |  |  | $ | 2,940 |  |  | $   3,069,990
Davie (Town of), FL (Nova Southeastern University); Series 2018, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 04/01/2048 |  |  |  | 3,165 |  |  | 3,207,886
Florida (State of) Higher Educational Facilities Financial Authority (Rollins College); Series 2024, RB |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 12/01/2054 |  |  |  | 2,000 |  |  | 2,105,115
Florida (State of) North Broward Hospital District; Series 2017 B, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 01/01/2042 |  |  |  | 1,525 |  |  | 1,561,090
Florida Development Finance Corp. (Brightline Florida Passenger Rail Expansion); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2024, Ref. RB (b)(d)(h)(i) |  |  | 12.00% |  |  |  | 07/15/2028 |  |  |  | 975 |  |  | 341,250
Series 2024, Ref. RB (INS - AGI) (e)(h) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2044 |  |  |  | 2,340 |  |  | 2,323,348
Series 2024, Ref. RB (INS - AGI) (e)(h) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 07/01/2053 |  |  |  | 3,660 |  |  | 3,648,335
Series 2024, Ref. RB (h) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 07/01/2053 |  |  |  | 1,100 |  |  | 819,500
Fort Lauderdale (City of), FL; Series 2024, RB (f) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 09/01/2053 |  |  |  | 3,200 |  |  | 3,490,262
Fort Lauderdale (City of), FL (Prospect Lake Water Treatment Plant); Series 2023, RB |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 09/01/2053 |  |  |  | 1,900 |  |  | 2,072,343
Gainesville (City of), FL; Series 2019 A, RB (b)(m) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 10/01/2029 |  |  |  | 5 |  |  | 5,472
Greater Orlando Aviation Authority; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2017 A, RB (h) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 10/01/2052 |  |  |  | 1,715 |  |  | 1,719,074
Series 2024, RB (h) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 10/01/2048 |  |  |  | 2,125 |  |  | 2,242,555
Hillsborough (County of), FL; Series 2023, GO Bonds |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2053 |  |  |  | 2,010 |  |  | 2,103,188
Hillsborough (County of), FL Aviation Authority (Tampa International Airport); Series 2018 E, RB (h) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 10/01/2048 |  |  |  | 3,220 |  |  | 3,254,298
Hillsborough County Industrial Development Authority; Series 2025, RB (f) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 11/15/2054 |  |  |  | 4,235 |  |  | 4,570,276
JEA Water & Sewer System; Series 2025, RB (f) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 10/01/2055 |  |  |  | 2,120 |  |  | 2,270,305
Lake (County of), FL (Lakeside at Waterman Village); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2020 A, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 08/15/2040 |  |  |  | 890 |  |  | 920,890
Series 2020 A, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.75% |  |  |  | 08/15/2050 |  |  |  | 1,330 |  |  | 1,333,478
Series 2020 A, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.75% |  |  |  | 08/15/2055 |  |  |  | 360 |  |  | 355,758
Lee (County of), FL; Series 2026 A-1, RB (h) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 10/01/2056 |  |  |  | 3,350 |  |  | 3,596,689
Miami Beach (City of), FL; Series 2017, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 09/01/2047 |  |  |  | 1,465 |  |  | 1,466,015
Miami-Dade (County of), FL; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2017 B, Ref. RB (h) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 10/01/2040 |  |  |  | 1,700 |  |  | 1,734,951
Series 2021, RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 10/01/2051 |  |  |  | 3,975 |  |  | 3,688,582
Series 2022 A, Ref. RB (h) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 10/01/2052 |  |  |  | 1,655 |  |  | 1,693,651
Series 2023 A, Ref. RB (h) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 10/01/2047 |  |  |  | 1,065 |  |  | 1,084,210
Series 2025 A, RB (h) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 10/01/2055 |  |  |  | 570 |  |  | 600,711
Series 2025, RB (f) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2052 |  |  |  | 2,970 |  |  | 3,071,732
Series 2025, RB (f) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 10/01/2054 |  |  |  | 5,385 |  |  | 5,699,698
Subseries 2021 A-2, Ref. RB (INS - AGI) (e) |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 10/01/2049 |  |  |  | 3,200 |  |  | 2,979,000
Miami-Dade (County of), FL Expressway Authority; Series 2010 A, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2040 |  |  |  | 5,000 |  |  | 5,007,309
Orange (County of), FL Health Facilities Authority (Orlando Health Obligated Group); Series 2025, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 10/01/2056 |  |  |  | 3,620 |  |  | 3,798,255
Osceola (County of), FL; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2020 A-2, Ref. RB (g) |  |  | 0.00% |  |  |  | 10/01/2052 |  |  |  | 570 |  |  | 141,935
Series 2020 A-2, Ref. RB (g) |  |  | 0.00% |  |  |  | 10/01/2053 |  |  |  | 3,940 |  |  | 928,044
Series 2020 A-2, Ref. RB (g) |  |  | 0.00% |  |  |  | 10/01/2054 |  |  |  | 485 |  |  | 108,006
Reunion East Community Development District; Series 2005, RB (i) |  |  | 5.80% |  |  |  | 05/01/2036 |  |  |  | 197 |  |  | 2
Sarasota (County of), FL Public Hospital District (Sarasota Memorial Hospital); Series 2022, RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2052 |  |  |  | 1,695 |  |  | 1,494,911
South Miami Health Facilities Authority, Inc. (Baptist Health South Florida Obligated Group); Series 2017, Ref. RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 08/15/2047 |  |  |  | 1,070 |  |  | 976,279
Sterling Hill Community Development District; Series 2003 A, RB (n)(o) |  |  | 6.20% |  |  |  | 05/01/2035 |  |  |  | 965 |  |  | 395,507
Tallahassee (City of), FL (Tallahassee Memorial Health Care, Inc.); Series 2016, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 12/01/2055 |  |  |  | 1,715 |  |  | 1,704,820
Tampa (City of), FL; Series 2020 A, RB (g) |  |  | 0.00% |  |  |  | 09/01/2049 |  |  |  | 7,225 |  |  | 2,311,815
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 94,754,534
Georgia–2.53% |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Atlanta (City of), GA (Green Bonds); Series 2023, RB (h) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 07/01/2044 |  |  |  | 1,470 |  |  | 1,590,576
Cartersville (City of), GA; Series 2026, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 06/01/2056 |  |  |  | 2,720 |  |  | 2,860,036
Columbia (City of), GA (Wellstar Health System, Inc.); Series 2023, RAC |  |  | 5.13% |  |  |  | 04/01/2048 |  |  |  | 1,385 |  |  | 1,453,179
Glynn (County of) & Brunswick (City of), GA Memorial Hospital Authority (Southeast Georgia Health System); Series 2017, RAC |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 08/01/2047 |  |  |  | 1,450 |  |  | 1,450,018

See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements which are an integral part of the financial statements.

13 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

|  | Interest Rate |  |  | Maturity Date |  |  | Principal Amount (000) |  |  | Value
Georgia–(continued) |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Main Street Natural Gas, Inc.; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2021 C, RB (b) |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 12/01/2028 |  |  | $ | 1,575 |  |  | $   1,622,085
Series 2022 C, RB (b)(d) |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 11/01/2027 |  |  |  | 1,605 |  |  | 1,618,852
Series 2023 B, RB (b) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 03/01/2030 |  |  |  | 2,360 |  |  | 2,534,209
Series 2024 B, RB (b) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 03/01/2032 |  |  |  | 2,145 |  |  | 2,350,966
Series 2024 E, RB (b) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 12/01/2032 |  |  |  | 1,800 |  |  | 1,969,414
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 17,449,335
Hawaii–1.13% |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Hawaii (State of); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2025, RB (f) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 07/01/2052 |  |  |  | 4,860 |  |  | 5,260,017
Series 2025, RB (f)(h) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 07/01/2054 |  |  |  | 2,385 |  |  | 2,556,509
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 7,816,526
Idaho–0.83% |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Idaho (State of) Health Facilities Authority (Valley Vista Care Corp.); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2017 A, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 11/15/2032 |  |  |  | 450 |  |  | 415,419
Series 2017 A, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 11/15/2037 |  |  |  | 625 |  |  | 545,688
Idaho (State of) Housing & Finance Association (White Pine Charter School Project); Series 2023, RB (CEP - Oregon School Bond Guaranty) |  |  | 5.75% |  |  |  | 05/01/2058 |  |  |  | 500 |  |  | 516,832
Idaho Housing & Finance Association; Series 2025, RB (f) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 08/15/2049 |  |  |  | 3,965 |  |  | 4,232,993
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 5,710,932
Illinois–4.10% |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Chicago (City of), IL; Series 2025 A, GO Bonds |  |  | 6.00% |  |  |  | 01/01/2050 |  |  |  | 460 |  |  | 484,341
Chicago (City of), IL (O’Hare International Airport); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2017 D, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 01/01/2052 |  |  |  | 1,865 |  |  | 1,871,959
Series 2024 A, RB (h) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 01/01/2059 |  |  |  | 2,670 |  |  | 2,790,520
Series 2025 E, RB (h) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 01/01/2055 |  |  |  | 2,095 |  |  | 2,210,475
Series 2026 A, RB |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 01/01/2056 |  |  |  | 3,770 |  |  | 3,971,264
Chicago (City of), IL Board of Education; Series 2018 A, Ref. GO Bonds |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 12/01/2034 |  |  |  | 885 |  |  | 898,999
Chicago (City of), IL Metropolitan Water Reclamation District (Green Bonds); Series 2021 A, GO Bonds |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 12/01/2051 |  |  |  | 1,040 |  |  | 955,830
Chicago (City of), IL Transit Authority; Series 2026, RB |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 12/01/2056 |  |  |  | 855 |  |  | 918,972
Illinois (State of); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2016, GO Bonds |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 11/01/2036 |  |  |  | 1,340 |  |  | 1,356,142
Series 2017 C, GO Bonds |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 11/01/2029 |  |  |  | 335 |  |  | 348,806
Series 2018 A, GO Bonds |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 05/01/2030 |  |  |  | 1,560 |  |  | 1,643,642
Series 2020, GO Bonds |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 05/01/2039 |  |  |  | 2,055 |  |  | 2,223,704
Illinois (State of) Development Finance Authority (CITGO Petroleum Corp.); Series 2002, RB (h) |  |  | 8.00% |  |  |  | 06/01/2032 |  |  |  | 460 |  |  | 460,778
Illinois (State of) Finance Authority (Lutheran Communities Obligated Group); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2019 A, Ref. RB (Acquired 11/27/2019; Cost $77,552) (j) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 11/01/2040 |  |  |  | 75 |  |  | 51,938
Series 2019 A, Ref. RB (Acquired 04/14/2020-10/05/2022; Cost $1,302,255) (j) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 11/01/2049 |  |  |  | 1,550 |  |  | 1,073,375
Illinois (State of) Finance Authority (Mercy Health Corp.); Series 2016, Ref. RB (b)(m) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 06/01/2026 |  |  |  | 3,335 |  |  | 3,358,091
Illinois (State of) Finance Authority (Park Place of Elmhurst); Series 2016, RB |  |  | 5.13% |  |  |  | 05/15/2060 |  |  |  | 1,134 |  |  | 833,425
Illinois (State of) Metropolitan Pier & Exposition Authority (McCormick Place Expansion); Series 2017 B, Ref. RB (INS - BAM) (c)(e) |  |  | 4.70% |  |  |  | 12/15/2037 |  |  |  | 1,500 |  |  | 1,287,225
Illinois (State of) Sports Facilities Authority (The); Series 2014, Ref. RB (INS - AGI) (e) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 06/15/2031 |  |  |  | 1,530 |  |  | 1,553,869
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 28,293,355
Indiana–1.60% |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Fishers Town Hall Building Corp.; Series 2023 A, RB (INS - BAM) (e) |  |  | 5.63% |  |  |  | 07/15/2053 |  |  |  | 3,165 |  |  | 3,481,855
Indiana (State of) Finance Authority (Indiana University Health Obligated Group); Series 2019 A, RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 12/01/2049 |  |  |  | 3,140 |  |  | 2,908,201
Indiana (State of) Finance Authority (KIPP Indianapolis, Inc.); Series 2020 A, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2040 |  |  |  | 170 |  |  | 170,201
Indiana (State of) Finance Authority (U.S. Steel Corp.); Series 2012, RB (h) |  |  | 5.75% |  |  |  | 08/01/2042 |  |  |  | 305 |  |  | 305,234
Indianapolis Local Public Improvement Bond Bank; Series 2025, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 01/01/2055 |  |  |  | 1,015 |  |  | 1,069,284
Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District; Series 2024, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 01/01/2054 |  |  |  | 2,175 |  |  | 2,267,401
Whiting (City of), IN (BP Products North America, Inc.); Series 2015, RB (b)(h) |  |  | 4.40% |  |  |  | 06/10/2031 |  |  |  | 785 |  |  | 834,838
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 11,037,014

See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements which are an integral part of the financial statements.

14 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

|  | Interest Rate |  |  | Maturity Date |  |  | Principal Amount (000) |  |  | Value
Iowa–1.60% |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Iowa (State of) Board of Regents (University of Iowa Hospital & Clinics); Series 2022 B, RB |  |  | 3.00% |  |  |  | 09/01/2056 |  |  | $ | 785 |  |  | $     564,832
Iowa (State of) Finance Authority (Alcoa, Inc.); Series 2012, RB |  |  | 4.75% |  |  |  | 08/01/2042 |  |  |  | 1,670 |  |  | 1,670,579
Iowa (State of) Finance Authority (Iowa Fertilizer Co.); Series 2022, Ref. RB (b)(m) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 12/01/2032 |  |  |  | 3,480 |  |  | 4,063,151
Iowa (State of) Tobacco Settlement Authority; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2021 A-2, Ref. RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 06/01/2035 |  |  |  | 1,000 |  |  | 1,023,253
Series 2021 A-2, Ref. RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 06/01/2049 |  |  |  | 385 |  |  | 329,971
Muscatine Power and Water Electric Revenue; Series 2026 A, RB (INS - AGI) (e) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 12/01/2055 |  |  |  | 1,865 |  |  | 1,970,953
PEFA, Inc.; Series 2019, RB (b) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 09/01/2026 |  |  |  | 1,380 |  |  | 1,396,058
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 11,018,797
Kansas–0.28% |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Wichita (City of), KS (Presbyterian Manors, Inc.); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2018 I, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 05/15/2047 |  |  |  | 1,000 |  |  | 891,698
Series 2024 VIII, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.75% |  |  |  | 05/15/2045 |  |  |  | 1,000 |  |  | 1,007,139
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 1,898,837
Kentucky–1.66% |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Henderson (City of), KY (Pratt Paper LLC); Series 2022 A, RB (d)(h) |  |  | 4.70% |  |  |  | 01/01/2052 |  |  |  | 850 |  |  | 812,610
Kentucky (Commonwealth of) Economic Development Finance Authority (Louisville Arena Authority, Inc.); Series 2017 A, Ref. RB (INS - AGI) (e) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 12/01/2047 |  |  |  | 665 |  |  | 665,245
Kentucky (Commonwealth of) Economic Development Finance Authority (Next Generation Kentucky Information Highway); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2015 A, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2037 |  |  |  | 1,410 |  |  | 1,411,677
Series 2015 A, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2040 |  |  |  | 1,250 |  |  | 1,251,158
Series 2015 A, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 01/01/2045 |  |  |  | 1,695 |  |  | 1,695,815
Kentucky (Commonwealth of) Public Energy Authority; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2023 A-1, Ref. RB (b) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 02/01/2032 |  |  |  | 2,145 |  |  | 2,360,820
Series 2025 B, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 12/01/2033 |  |  |  | 1,045 |  |  | 1,114,298
Louisville (City of) & Jefferson (County of), KY Metropolitan Sewer District; Series 2023 C, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 05/15/2051 |  |  |  | 2,035 |  |  | 2,132,851
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 11,444,474
Louisiana–2.48% |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Louisiana (State of); Series 2023 A-1, Ref. VRD RB (LOC - Toronto-dominion Bank) (l)(p) |  |  | 1.05% |  |  |  | 05/01/2043 |  |  |  | 8,000 |  |  | 8,000,000
Louisiana (State of) Local Government Environmental Facilities & Community Development Authority (St. James Parish Gomesa); Series 2019, RB (d) |  |  | 3.90% |  |  |  | 11/01/2044 |  |  |  | 840 |  |  | 796,494
Louisiana (State of) Public Facilities Authority (I-10 Calcasieu River Bridge); Series 2024, RB (h) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 09/01/2059 |  |  |  | 3,295 |  |  | 3,387,135
Louisiana (State of) Public Facilities Authority (Ochsner Clinic Foundation); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2002 B, RB (b)(m) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 05/15/2026 |  |  |  | 2,000 |  |  | 2,013,338
Series 2025, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 05/15/2050 |  |  |  | 2,120 |  |  | 2,294,235
New Orleans (City of), LA Aviation Board (Parking Facilities Corp. Consolidated Garage System); Series 2018 A, RB (INS - AGI) (e) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 10/01/2048 |  |  |  | 625 |  |  | 635,075
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 17,126,277
Maryland–1.70% |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Howard (County of), MD Housing Commission (Social Bonds); Series 2024, RB |  |  | 4.13% |  |  |  | 12/01/2043 |  |  |  | 1,000 |  |  | 999,816
Maryland (State of) Health & Higher Educational Facilities Authority (MedStar Health); Series 2017 A, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 05/15/2045 |  |  |  | 1,295 |  |  | 1,307,423
Maryland (State of) Health & Higher Educational Facilities Authority (Stevenson University); Series 2021, Ref. RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 06/01/2055 |  |  |  | 1,000 |  |  | 859,708
Maryland (State of) Health & Higher Educational Facilities Authority (University of Maryland Medical System); Series 2025, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 07/01/2052 |  |  |  | 1,280 |  |  | 1,349,055
Maryland Economic Development Corp. (Purple Line) (Green Bonds); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2022 A, RB (h) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 11/12/2028 |  |  |  | 500 |  |  | 502,822
Series 2022 B, RB (h) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 06/30/2055 |  |  |  | 2,280 |  |  | 2,284,907
Prince George’s (County of), MD (Collington Episcopal Life Care Community, Inc.); Series 2017, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 04/01/2029 |  |  |  | 1,145 |  |  | 1,156,346
Tender Option Bond Trust Receipts/Certificates; Series 2026, VRD RB (d)(l) |  |  | 1.25% |  |  |  | 08/15/2033 |  |  |  | 3,255 |  |  | 3,255,000
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 11,715,077
Massachusetts–1.50% |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Massachusetts (Commonwealth of); Series 2024, RB (f) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 06/01/2053 |  |  |  | 5,835 |  |  | 6,093,434

See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements which are an integral part of the financial statements.

15 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

|  | Interest Rate |  |  | Maturity Date |  |  | Principal Amount (000) |  |  | Value
Massachusetts–(continued) |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Massachusetts (Commonwealth of) Development Finance Agency (Boston Medical Center) (Green Bopnds); Series 2023, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 07/01/2048 |  |  | $ | 1,840 |  |  | $    1,876,153
Massachusetts (Commonwealth of) Port Authority; Series 2021 E, RB (h) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2046 |  |  |  | 2,340 |  |  | 2,414,711
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 10,384,298
Michigan–4.11% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Academy of Warren; Series 2020 A, RB (d) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 05/01/2050 |  |  |  | 250 |  |  | 231,983
Detroit (City of), MI; Series 2018, GO Bonds |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 04/01/2035 |  |  |  | 830 |  |  | 862,608
Lansing (City of), MI Board of Water & Light; Series 2024 A, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 07/01/2054 |  |  |  | 4,645 |  |  | 4,921,101
Michigan (State of); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2023, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 11/15/2046 |  |  |  | 3,540 |  |  | 3,777,456
Series 2024, RB (f) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 11/15/2049 |  |  |  | 3,965 |  |  | 4,313,878
Michigan (State of) Finance Authority (Landmark Academy); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2020, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 06/01/2035 |  |  |  | 370 |  |  | 378,822
Series 2020, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 06/01/2045 |  |  |  | 620 |  |  | 598,053
Michigan (State of) Housing Development Authority; Series 2025, RB (f) |  |  | 5.10% |  |  |  | 10/01/2053 |  |  |  | 2,480 |  |  | 2,539,225
Michigan (State of) Strategic Fund (Green Bonds); Series 2021, RB (b)(h) |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 10/01/2026 |  |  |  | 2,885 |  |  | 2,889,188
Michigan State Housing Development Authority; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2025, RB (f) |  |  | 5.10% |  |  |  | 06/01/2056 |  |  |  | 3,665 |  |  | 3,723,190
Series 2025, RB (f) |  |  | 5.40% |  |  |  | 10/01/2060 |  |  |  | 3,940 |  |  | 4,096,060
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 28,331,564
Minnesota–0.97% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Bethel (City of), MN (Spectrum High School); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2017 A, Ref. RB |  |  | 4.25% |  |  |  | 07/01/2047 |  |  |  | 385 |  |  | 336,815
Series 2017 A, Ref. RB |  |  | 4.38% |  |  |  | 07/01/2052 |  |  |  | 500 |  |  | 428,169
Duluth (City of), MN Economic Development Authority (Essentia Health Obligated Group); Series 2018, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 02/15/2048 |  |  |  | 760 |  |  | 766,110
Minnesota Agricultural & Economic Development Board (Healthpartners Obligated Group); Series 2024, RB |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 01/01/2054 |  |  |  | 4,070 |  |  | 4,235,852
St. Paul (City of), MN Housing & Redevelopment Authority (Higher Ground Academy); Series 2023, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 12/01/2057 |  |  |  | 500 |  |  | 504,349
St. Paul (City of), MN Housing & Redevelopment Authority (Hope Community Academy); Series 2020, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 12/01/2045 |  |  |  | 505 |  |  | 406,628
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 6,677,923
Mississippi–0.40% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Mississippi (State of) Development Bank (Greenwood Leflore); Series 2025, RB (INS - BAM) (e) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 03/01/2055 |  |  |  | 1,060 |  |  | 1,100,050
Mississippi Business Finance Corp. (System Energy Resources, Inc.); Series 2021, RB |  |  | 2.38% |  |  |  | 06/01/2044 |  |  |  | 2,405 |  |  | 1,627,946
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 2,727,996
Missouri–2.05% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Kansas City (City of), MO Industrial Development Authority (Downtown Redevelopment District); Series 2011 A, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 09/01/2028 |  |  |  | 2,380 |  |  | 2,390,026
Kansas City (City of), MO Industrial Development Authority (Kansas City International Airport); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2019 B, RB (h) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 03/01/2046 |  |  |  | 5,985 |  |  | 6,071,091
Series 2019 B, RB (INS - AGI) (e)(h) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 03/01/2049 |  |  |  | 1,270 |  |  | 1,281,988
Kirkwood (City of), MO Industrial Development Authority (Aberdeen Heights); Series 2017 A, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 05/15/2050 |  |  |  | 645 |  |  | 600,438
Missouri (State of) Health & Educational Facilities Authority (Lutheran Senior Services); Series 2019, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 02/01/2048 |  |  |  | 420 |  |  | 419,918
St. Louis (County of), MO Industrial Development Authority (Friendship Village West County); Series 2018 A, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 09/01/2038 |  |  |  | 2,335 |  |  | 2,396,181
Taney (County of), MO Industrial Development Authority (Big Cedar Infrastructure); Series 2023, RB (d) |  |  | 6.00% |  |  |  | 10/01/2049 |  |  |  | 975 |  |  | 979,711
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 14,139,353
Nebraska–2.04% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Central Plains Energy Project (No. 3); Series 2017 A, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 09/01/2042 |  |  |  | 5,265 |  |  | 5,736,314
Central Plains Energy Project (No. 5); Series 2022-1, RB (b) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 10/01/2029 |  |  |  | 1,075 |  |  | 1,144,343
Nebraska Investment Finance Authority (Social Bonds); Series 2023 G, RB (CEP - GNMA) |  |  | 5.35% |  |  |  | 09/01/2048 |  |  |  | 1,335 |  |  | 1,390,834
Omaha (City of), NE Public Power District; Series 2021 A, RB (INS - AGI) (e) |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 02/01/2051 |  |  |  | 2,605 |  |  | 2,463,592

See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements which are an integral part of the financial statements.

16 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

|  | Interest Rate |  |  | Maturity Date |  |  | Principal Amount (000) |  |  | Value
Nebraska–(continued) |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Omaha Public Power District; Series 2025, RB (f)(k) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 02/01/2053 |  |  | $ | 3,145 |  |  | $    3,331,442
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 14,066,525
Nevada–1.32% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Clark (County of), NV Water Reclamation District; Series 2024, GO Bonds (f) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2053 |  |  |  | 6,745 |  |  | 7,014,622
Las Vegas Valley Water District; Series 2025, GO Bonds (f) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 06/01/2055 |  |  |  | 1,490 |  |  | 1,593,653
Nevada (State of) Department of Business & Industry (Green Bonds); Series 2025, RB (b)(d)(h) |  |  | 12.00% |  |  |  | 11/02/2026 |  |  |  | 920 |  |  | 496,800
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 9,105,075
New Hampshire–0.87% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
New Hampshire (State of) Business Finance Authority (Social Bonds); Series 2022-1A, RB |  |  | 4.38% |  |  |  | 09/20/2036 |  |  |  | 2,021 |  |  | 2,107,654
New Hampshire (State of) Health and Education Facilities Authority; Series 2020 A, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 08/01/2059 |  |  |  | 1,105 |  |  | 1,141,464
New Hampshire (State of) Housing Finance Authority (Social Bonds); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2023 D, RB (CEP - GNMA) |  |  | 4.80% |  |  |  | 07/01/2043 |  |  |  | 1,360 |  |  | 1,411,404
Series 2023 D, RB (CEP - GNMA) |  |  | 5.13% |  |  |  | 07/01/2053 |  |  |  | 1,305 |  |  | 1,329,776
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 5,990,298
New Jersey–2.67% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
New Jersey (State of) Economic Development Authority (Continental Airlines, Inc.); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 1999, RB (h) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 09/15/2029 |  |  |  | 410 |  |  | 410,805
Series 2012, RB (h) |  |  | 5.75% |  |  |  | 09/15/2027 |  |  |  | 350 |  |  | 350,816
New Jersey (State of) Economic Development Authority (The Goethals Bridge Replacement); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2013, RB (h) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 01/01/2027 |  |  |  | 1,200 |  |  | 1,203,124
Series 2013, RB (h) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 01/01/2028 |  |  |  | 1,000 |  |  | 1,002,187
Series 2013, RB (h) |  |  | 5.38% |  |  |  | 01/01/2043 |  |  |  | 1,320 |  |  | 1,321,713
New Jersey (State of) Health Care Facilities Financing Authority (Inspira Health Obligated Group); Series 2017, RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2047 |  |  |  | 4,865 |  |  | 4,520,944
New Jersey (State of) Turnpike Authority; Series 2025 A, RB |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 01/01/2050 |  |  |  | 1,565 |  |  | 1,698,435
Tobacco Settlement Financing Corp.; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2018 A, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 06/01/2046 |  |  |  | 3,720 |  |  | 3,726,760
Series 2018 A, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 06/01/2046 |  |  |  | 2,120 |  |  | 2,135,441
Series 2018 B, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 06/01/2046 |  |  |  | 2,070 |  |  | 2,051,008
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 18,421,233
New York–21.25% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Build NYC Resource Corp. (Brooklyn Navy Yard); Series 2019, Ref. RB (LOC - Santander Bank N.A.) (d)(h)(p) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 12/31/2033 |  |  |  | 520 |  |  | 531,446
Empire State Development Corp.; Series 2025, RB (f) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 03/15/2050 |  |  |  | 4,655 |  |  | 4,853,038
Erie Tobacco Asset Securitization Corp.; Series 2005 A, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 06/01/2045 |  |  |  | 3,450 |  |  | 2,884,553
Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Green Bonds); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2016 A-1, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 11/15/2041 |  |  |  | 2,510 |  |  | 2,515,757
Series 2020 C-1, RB |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 11/15/2055 |  |  |  | 1,695 |  |  | 1,740,574
Nassau (County of), NY Industrial Development Agency; Series 2021, RB (g)(n) |  |  | 0.00% |  |  |  | 01/01/2058 |  |  |  | 2,730 |  |  | 0
New York & New Jersey (States of) Port Authority; Series 2020 221, RB (h) |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 07/15/2060 |  |  |  | 2,975 |  |  | 2,653,619
New York (City of), NY; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2012, VRD GO Bonds (l) |  |  | 1.05% |  |  |  | 04/01/2042 |  |  |  | 4,185 |  |  | 4,185,000
Series 2023 A, GO Bonds |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 08/01/2046 |  |  |  | 1,250 |  |  | 1,320,295
Subseries 2022 D-1, GO Bonds (f) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 05/01/2039 |  |  |  | 4,680 |  |  | 5,241,624
Subseries 2023 E-1, RB (f) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 04/01/2047 |  |  |  | 1,915 |  |  | 2,037,489
New York (City of), NY Municipal Water Finance Authority; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2016 BB, VRD RB (l) |  |  | 1.10% |  |  |  | 06/15/2049 |  |  |  | 2,110 |  |  | 2,110,000
Series 2020 BB-1, RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 06/15/2050 |  |  |  | 2,125 |  |  | 1,988,481
New York (City of), NY Transitional Finance Authority; Series 2023 F-1, RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 02/01/2051 |  |  |  | 3,230 |  |  | 2,944,974
New York (State of) Dormitory Authority; Series 2018 E, RB (f) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 03/15/2046 |  |  |  | 7,240 |  |  | 8,225,274
New York (State of) Dormitory Authority (City of New York); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2005 A, RB (INS - AMBAC) (e) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 05/15/2028 |  |  |  | 600 |  |  | 643,986
Series 2005 A, RB (INS - AMBAC) (e) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 05/15/2029 |  |  |  | 505 |  |  | 558,294
New York (State of) Dormitory Authority (Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer); Series 2022 1-B, RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2051 |  |  |  | 4,625 |  |  | 4,310,293
New York (State of) Dormitory Authority (Northwell Health Obligated Group); Series 2024, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 05/01/2054 |  |  |  | 2,900 |  |  | 3,019,803

See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements which are an integral part of the financial statements.

17 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

|  | Interest Rate |  |  | Maturity Date |  |  | Principal Amount (000) |  |  | Value
New York–(continued) |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
New York (State of) Dormitory Authority (White Plains Hospital Obligated Group); Series 2024, RB (INS - AGI) (e) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 10/01/2054 |  |  | $ | 420 |  |  | $      449,766
New York (State of) Power Authority (Green Bonds); Series 2020 A, Ref. RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 11/15/2055 |  |  |  | 5,315 |  |  | 4,989,444
New York (State of) Power Authority (Green Transmission) (Green Bonds); Series 2023, RB (INS - AGI) (e) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 11/15/2053 |  |  |  | 2,215 |  |  | 2,333,263
New York (State of) Thruway Authority; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2019 B, RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 01/01/2050 |  |  |  | 6,835 |  |  | 6,236,578
Series 2019 B, RB (INS - AGI) (e) |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 01/01/2050 |  |  |  | 3,300 |  |  | 3,062,312
New York (State of) Thruway Authority (Group 3); Series 2021 A-1, Ref. RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 03/15/2046 |  |  |  | 3,145 |  |  | 3,066,342
New York City Housing Development Corp. (Green Bonds); Series 2023, RB |  |  | 4.80% |  |  |  | 02/01/2053 |  |  |  | 1,610 |  |  | 1,620,557
New York Counties Tobacco Trust IV; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2005 A, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 06/01/2045 |  |  |  | 360 |  |  | 284,789
Series 2010 A, RB (d) |  |  | 6.25% |  |  |  | 06/01/2041 |  |  |  | 1,474 |  |  | 1,466,086
New York Counties Tobacco Trust VI; Series 2016 A-1, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.75% |  |  |  | 06/01/2043 |  |  |  | 4,010 |  |  | 3,949,290
New York Liberty Development Corp. (3 World Trade Center); Series 2014-1, Ref. RB (d) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 11/15/2044 |  |  |  | 7,280 |  |  | 7,292,001
New York State Dormitory Authority; Series 2025, RB (f) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 03/15/2053 |  |  |  | 4,710 |  |  | 5,132,249
New York Transportation Development Corp. (American Airlines, Inc. John F. Kennedy International Airport); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2016, Ref. RB (h) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 08/01/2026 |  |  |  | 470 |  |  | 470,544
Series 2016, Ref. RB (h) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 08/01/2031 |  |  |  | 2,690 |  |  | 2,694,191
Series 2020, Ref. RB (h) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 08/01/2031 |  |  |  | 515 |  |  | 539,156
Series 2020, Ref. RB (h) |  |  | 5.38% |  |  |  | 08/01/2036 |  |  |  | 1,205 |  |  | 1,270,891
New York Transportation Development Corp. (Delta Air Lines, Inc. LaGuardia Airport Terminals C&D Redevelopment); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2018, RB (h) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 01/01/2033 |  |  |  | 2,670 |  |  | 2,759,826
Series 2018, RB (h) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 01/01/2034 |  |  |  | 2,560 |  |  | 2,642,854
Series 2018, RB (h) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 01/01/2036 |  |  |  | 1,580 |  |  | 1,625,397
Series 2020, RB (h) |  |  | 4.38% |  |  |  | 10/01/2045 |  |  |  | 1,485 |  |  | 1,433,015
New York Transportation Development Corp. (John F. Kennedy International Airport New Terminal One) (Green Bonds); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2023, RB (h) |  |  | 5.38% |  |  |  | 06/30/2060 |  |  |  | 2,755 |  |  | 2,766,736
Series 2024, RB (h) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 06/30/2054 |  |  |  | 1,975 |  |  | 2,020,849
Series 2024, RB (h) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 06/30/2060 |  |  |  | 2,035 |  |  | 2,080,288
New York Transportation Development Corp. (John F. Kennedy International Airport) (Green Bonds); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2025, RB (INS - AGI) (e)(h) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 06/30/2059 |  |  |  | 2,130 |  |  | 2,232,624
Series 2025, RB (h) |  |  | 6.00% |  |  |  | 06/30/2059 |  |  |  | 2,130 |  |  | 2,273,390
New York Transportation Development Corp. (LaGuardia Airport Terminal B Redevelopment); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2016 A, RB (h) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2046 |  |  |  | 5,075 |  |  | 5,077,015
Series 2016 A, RB (h) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 01/01/2050 |  |  |  | 3,250 |  |  | 3,251,167
New York Transportation Development Corp. (Terminal 4 JFK International Airport); Series 2022, RB (h) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 12/01/2036 |  |  |  | 1,255 |  |  | 1,371,480
New York Transportation Development Corp. (Terminal 4 JFK International Airport) (Green Bonds); Series 2024, Ref. RB (h) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 12/31/2060 |  |  |  | 85 |  |  | 87,201
New York Transportation Development Corp. (Terminal 4 John F. Kennedy International Airport); Series 2022, RB (h) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 12/01/2038 |  |  |  | 1,040 |  |  | 1,122,779
Rockland Tobacco Asset Securitization Corp.; Series 2001, RB |  |  | 5.75% |  |  |  | 08/15/2043 |  |  |  | 2,105 |  |  | 2,130,682
Triborough Bridge & Tunnel Authority; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2021 A-1, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 05/15/2051 |  |  |  | 2,205 |  |  | 2,288,985
Series 2025, RB (f) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 11/15/2053 |  |  |  | 3,435 |  |  | 3,772,800
Triborough Bridge & Tunnel Authority (MTA Bridges & Tunnels); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2020 A, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 11/15/2054 |  |  |  | 960 |  |  | 994,294
Series 2025, RB (f) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 05/15/2062 |  |  |  | 6,650 |  |  | 6,998,049
Triborough Bridge & Tunnel Authority (TBTA Capital Lockbox Fund); Series 2025, RB |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 12/01/2059 |  |  |  | 635 |  |  | 684,025
TSASC, Inc.; Series 2016 B, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 06/01/2045 |  |  |  | 2,625 |  |  | 2,440,669
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 146,676,084
North Carolina–0.41% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
North Carolina (State of) Housing Finance Agency (Social Bonds); Series 2023, RB (CEP - GNMA) |  |  | 4.90% |  |  |  | 07/01/2043 |  |  |  | 1,215 |  |  | 1,269,700

See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements which are an integral part of the financial statements.

18 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

|  | Interest Rate |  |  | Maturity Date |  |  | Principal Amount (000) |  |  | Value
North Carolina–(continued) |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
North Carolina (State of) Turnpike Authority (Triangle Expressway System); Series 2024, RB (INS - AGI) (e)(g) |  |  | 0.00% |  |  |  | 01/01/2051 |  |  | $ | 5,090 |  |  | $    1,543,844
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 2,813,544
North Dakota–0.34% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Ward (County of), ND (Trinity Obligated Group); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2017 C, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 06/01/2048 |  |  |  | 1,490 |  |  | 1,346,044
Series 2017 C, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 06/01/2053 |  |  |  | 1,150 |  |  | 1,004,613
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 2,350,657
Ohio–6.77% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Buckeye Tobacco Settlement Financing Authority; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2020 A-2, Ref. RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 06/01/2048 |  |  |  | 5,055 |  |  | 4,394,288
Series 2020 B-2, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 06/01/2055 |  |  |  | 10,060 |  |  | 8,319,851
Chillicothe (City of), OH (Adena Health System Obligated Group); Series 2017, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 12/01/2037 |  |  |  | 1,560 |  |  | 1,591,612
Cleveland (City of), OH (Continental Airlines, Inc.); Series 1998, RB (h) |  |  | 5.38% |  |  |  | 09/15/2027 |  |  |  | 1,020 |  |  | 1,022,086
Columbus (City of) & Franklin (County of), OH Finance Authority (Easton); Series 2020, RB (d) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 06/01/2028 |  |  |  | 605 |  |  | 617,183
Columbus Regional Airport Authority (John Glenn Columbus International Airport); Series 2025, Ref. RB (h) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 01/01/2050 |  |  |  | 3,575 |  |  | 3,812,606
County of Franklin OH; Series 2025, RB (f) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 11/01/2055 |  |  |  | 2,520 |  |  | 2,664,976
Cuyahoga (County of), OH (MetroHealth System); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2017, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 02/15/2047 |  |  |  | 1,480 |  |  | 1,475,144
Series 2017, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 02/15/2057 |  |  |  | 1,070 |  |  | 1,055,787
Fayette (County of), OH (Adena Health System Obligated Group); Series 2025, RB (INS - AGI) (e) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 12/01/2054 |  |  |  | 1,225 |  |  | 1,293,916
Hamilton (County of), OH (Cincinnati Children’s Hospital); Series 2019 CC, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 11/15/2049 |  |  |  | 2,095 |  |  | 2,298,690
Hamilton (County of), OH (Life Enriching Communities); Series 2016, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 01/01/2046 |  |  |  | 4,190 |  |  | 4,190,058
Montgomery (County of), OH (Trousdale Foundation Properties); Series 2018 A, RB (Acquired 08/29/2018; Cost $1,408,374) (d)(i)(j) |  |  | 6.00% |  |  |  | 04/01/2038 |  |  |  | 1,437 |  |  | 17,960
Muskingum (County of), OH (Genesis Healthcare System); Series 2013, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 02/15/2044 |  |  |  | 1,170 |  |  | 1,170,155
Ohio (State of) (University Hospitals Health System, Inc.); Series 2020 A, Ref. RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 01/15/2050 |  |  |  | 3,180 |  |  | 2,774,604
Ohio State University (The); Series 2023, VRD Ref. RB (l) |  |  | 1.60% |  |  |  | 06/01/2043 |  |  |  | 10,000 |  |  | 10,000,000
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 46,698,916
Oklahoma–2.06% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
McAlester (City of), OK Public Works Authority; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2002, RB (INS - AGI) (e)(g) |  |  | 0.00% |  |  |  | 02/01/2031 |  |  |  | 1,000 |  |  | 858,461
Series 2002, RB (INS - AGI) (e)(g) |  |  | 0.00% |  |  |  | 02/01/2034 |  |  |  | 3,970 |  |  | 3,043,030
Oklahoma (State of) Development Finance Authority (OU Medicine); Series 2018 B, RB |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 08/15/2052 |  |  |  | 4,800 |  |  | 4,815,172
Oklahoma (State of) Turnpike Authority; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2025 A, RB |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 01/01/2050 |  |  |  | 1,060 |  |  | 1,143,324
Series 2025, RB (f) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 01/01/2050 |  |  |  | 1,900 |  |  | 2,049,355
Oklahoma (State of) Water Resources Board (2019 Master Trust); Series 2023, RB |  |  | 4.13% |  |  |  | 04/01/2053 |  |  |  | 1,135 |  |  | 1,088,994
Tulsa (City of), OK Airports Improvement Trust; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2000 A, Ref. RB (h) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 06/01/2035 |  |  |  | 430 |  |  | 431,094
Series 2001 C, Ref. RB (h) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 12/01/2035 |  |  |  | 815 |  |  | 817,030
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 14,246,460
Ontario–0.14% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Affordable Housing Tax-Exempt Bond Pass-Thru Trust; Series 2023-1, RB (d) |  |  | 6.00% |  |  |  | 10/05/2040 |  |  |  | 951 |  |  | 972,004
Oregon–0.55% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Clackamas (County of), OR Hospital Facility Authority (Rose Villa); Series 2020 A, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.38% |  |  |  | 11/15/2055 |  |  |  | 1,850 |  |  | 1,851,864
Portland (Port of), OR (Green Bonds); Twenty Ninth Series 2023, RB (h) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 07/01/2053 |  |  |  | 1,815 |  |  | 1,915,362
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3,767,226
Pennsylvania–2.78% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Allegheny (County of), PA Airport Authority (Pittsburgh Airport); Series 2023 A, RB (INS - AGI) (e)(h) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 01/01/2048 |  |  |  | 1,740 |  |  | 1,845,827
Allegheny (County of), PA Hospital Development Authority (Allegheny Health Network Obligated Group Issue); Series 2018 A, Ref. RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 04/01/2044 |  |  |  | 1,060 |  |  | 1,012,504
Coatesville School District; Series 2020 A, GO Bonds (INS - BAM) (e)(g) |  |  | 0.00% |  |  |  | 10/01/2036 |  |  |  | 850 |  |  | 558,436
Lancaster (County of), PA Hospital Authority (Penn State Health); Series 2021, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 11/01/2046 |  |  |  | 650 |  |  | 662,905

See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements which are an integral part of the financial statements.

19 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

|  | Interest Rate |  |  | Maturity Date |  |  | Principal Amount (000) |  |  | Value
Pennsylvania–(continued) |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Pennsylvania (Commonwealth of) Economic Development Financing Authority (Penndot Major Bridges); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2022, RB (h) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 06/30/2053 |  |  | $ | 2,565 |  |  | $    2,610,187
Series 2022, RB (INS - AGI) (e)(h) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 12/31/2057 |  |  |  | 1,285 |  |  | 1,303,424
Pennsylvania (Commonwealth of) Economic Development Financing Authority (UPMC); Series 2023 A-2, RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 05/15/2048 |  |  |  | 695 |  |  | 628,943
Pennsylvania (Commonwealth of) Turnpike Commission; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2014 A, RB |  |  | 4.75% |  |  |  | 12/01/2037 |  |  |  | 1,260 |  |  | 1,279,451
Series 2014 A-2, RB |  |  | 5.13% |  |  |  | 12/01/2039 |  |  |  | 2,500 |  |  | 2,657,450
Series 2021 A, RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 12/01/2050 |  |  |  | 1,155 |  |  | 1,065,318
Philadelphia (City of), PA; Series 2017 B, Ref. RB (h) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2047 |  |  |  | 1,310 |  |  | 1,318,189
Philadelphia (City of), PA Authority for Industrial Development; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2017, RB (b)(m) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 05/01/2027 |  |  |  | 745 |  |  | 768,462
Series 2017, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 11/01/2047 |  |  |  | 770 |  |  | 770,462
Philadelphia (City of), PA Authority for Industrial Development (St. Joseph’s University); Series 2022, RB |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 11/01/2060 |  |  |  | 2,130 |  |  | 2,226,315
Philadelphia (City of), PA Authority for Industrial Development (String Theory Charter School); Series 2020, Ref. RB (d) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 06/15/2050 |  |  |  | 500 |  |  | 471,393
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 19,179,266
Puerto Rico–5.45% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Children’s Trust Fund; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2002, RB |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 05/15/2039 |  |  |  | 2,655 |  |  | 2,698,570
Series 2002, RB |  |  | 5.63% |  |  |  | 05/15/2043 |  |  |  | 1,890 |  |  | 1,918,986
Series 2005 A, RB (g) |  |  | 0.00% |  |  |  | 05/15/2050 |  |  |  | 7,500 |  |  | 1,579,914
Series 2005 B, RB (g) |  |  | 0.00% |  |  |  | 05/15/2055 |  |  |  | 3,240 |  |  | 403,249
Series 2008 A, RB (g) |  |  | 0.00% |  |  |  | 05/15/2057 |  |  |  | 26,415 |  |  | 1,300,799
Series 2008 B, RB (g) |  |  | 0.00% |  |  |  | 05/15/2057 |  |  |  | 31,765 |  |  | 993,384
Puerto Rico (Commonwealth of); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2021 A-1, GO Bonds |  |  | 5.63% |  |  |  | 07/01/2027 |  |  |  | 1,490 |  |  | 1,524,922
Series 2021 A-1, GO Bonds |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2035 |  |  |  | 1,605 |  |  | 1,632,549
Series 2021 A-1, GO Bonds |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2037 |  |  |  | 1,250 |  |  | 1,252,583
Series 2021 A-1, GO Bonds |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2041 |  |  |  | 770 |  |  | 747,341
Subseries 2022, RN (g) |  |  | 0.00% |  |  |  | 11/01/2043 |  |  |  | 141 |  |  | 96,752
Puerto Rico (Commonwealth of) Electric Power Authority; Series 2007 VV, Ref. RB (INS - AGI) (e) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 07/01/2031 |  |  |  | 4,545 |  |  | 4,705,365
Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corp.; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2018 A-1, RB (g) |  |  | 0.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2029 |  |  |  | 1,890 |  |  | 1,704,372
Series 2018 A-1, RB (g) |  |  | 0.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2033 |  |  |  | 2,685 |  |  | 2,087,882
Series 2018 A-1, RB (g) |  |  | 0.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2046 |  |  |  | 10,495 |  |  | 3,775,163
Series 2018 A-1, RB (g) |  |  | 0.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2051 |  |  |  | 13,770 |  |  | 3,622,989
Series 2018 A-1, RB |  |  | 4.75% |  |  |  | 07/01/2053 |  |  |  | 2,355 |  |  | 2,296,414
Series 2018 A-1, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2058 |  |  |  | 2,725 |  |  | 2,674,665
Series 2019 A-2, RB |  |  | 4.33% |  |  |  | 07/01/2040 |  |  |  | 1,560 |  |  | 1,563,227
Series 2019 A-2, RB |  |  | 4.78% |  |  |  | 07/01/2058 |  |  |  | 1,075 |  |  | 1,041,581
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 37,620,707
Rhode Island–0.53% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Tobacco Settlement Financing Corp.; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2015 A, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 06/01/2035 |  |  |  | 1,000 |  |  | 1,000,686
Series 2015 B, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 06/01/2050 |  |  |  | 2,635 |  |  | 2,634,805
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3,635,491
South Carolina–1.11% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Patriots Energy Group Financing Agency; Series 2023 A-1, RB (b) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 08/01/2031 |  |  |  | 2,525 |  |  | 2,776,603
South Carolina (State of) Jobs-Economic Development Authority (Lutheran Homes); Series 2013, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 05/01/2028 |  |  |  | 630 |  |  | 630,165
South Carolina (State of) Jobs-Economic Development Authority (Novant Health Obligated Group); Series 2024, RB |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 11/01/2054 |  |  |  | 645 |  |  | 685,579
South Carolina (State of) Public Service Authority; Series 2026 A, RB |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 12/01/2056 |  |  |  | 1,255 |  |  | 1,332,477
South Carolina (State of) Public Service Authority (Santee Cooper); Series 2024 B, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 12/01/2054 |  |  |  | 2,145 |  |  | 2,267,293
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 7,692,117

See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements which are an integral part of the financial statements.

20 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

|  | Interest Rate |  |  | Maturity Date |  |  | Principal Amount (000) |  |  | Value
South Dakota–0.98% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
South Dakota (State of) Health & Educational Facilities Authority (Avera Health); Series 2017, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2046 |  |  | $ | 2,590 |  |  | $    2,614,582
South Dakota (State of) Health & Educational Facilities Authority (Sanford Obligated Group); Series 2014 B, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 11/01/2044 |  |  |  | 1,280 |  |  | 1,280,710
South Dakota (State of) Housing Development Authority; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2023 G, RB (CEP - GNMA) |  |  | 4.90% |  |  |  | 11/01/2043 |  |  |  | 1,370 |  |  | 1,423,946
Series 2023 G, RB (CEP - GNMA) |  |  | 5.13% |  |  |  | 05/01/2049 |  |  |  | 1,420 |  |  | 1,464,358
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 6,783,596
Tennessee–3.45% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Chattanooga (City of), TN Health, Educational & Housing Facility Board (Erlanger Health System); Series 2024, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 12/01/2054 |  |  |  | 1,700 |  |  | 1,771,873
City of Memphis TN Memphis Light Gas & Water Division Electr; Series 2025, RB (f) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 12/01/2055 |  |  |  | 1,755 |  |  | 1,837,873
Greeneville (Town of), TN Health & Educational Facilities Board (Ballad Health Obligated Group); Series 2018 A, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2037 |  |  |  | 2,280 |  |  | 2,380,222
Kingsport (City of), TN; Series 2023, GO Bonds |  |  | 4.13% |  |  |  | 03/01/2053 |  |  |  | 2,650 |  |  | 2,514,798
Knox (County of) & Knoxville (City of), TN City Sports Authority; Series 2024, RB (f) |  |  | 6.00% |  |  |  | 12/01/2054 |  |  |  | 3,730 |  |  | 4,129,565
Knoxville (City of), TN; Series 2022 OO, RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2052 |  |  |  | 4,040 |  |  | 3,765,776
Metropolitan Nashville Airport Authority (The); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2019 B, RB (h) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2054 |  |  |  | 485 |  |  | 488,629
Series 2026 B, RB (h) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 07/01/2056 |  |  |  | 2,095 |  |  | 2,193,056
Tennessee Energy Acquisition Corp.; Series 2021 A, RB (b) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 11/01/2031 |  |  |  | 3,190 |  |  | 3,478,362
Tennessee Housing Development Agency (Social Bonds); Series 2023, RB (CEP - GNMA) |  |  | 5.35% |  |  |  | 07/01/2048 |  |  |  | 1,190 |  |  | 1,246,381
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 23,806,535
Texas–15.98% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Aubrey Independent School District; Series 2022, GO Bonds (CEP - Texas Permanent School Fund) |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 02/15/2052 |  |  |  | 1,815 |  |  | 1,674,556
Austin (City of), TX; Series 2022, RB (h) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 11/15/2047 |  |  |  | 1,500 |  |  | 1,565,621
Austin Community College District; Series 2025, GO Bonds (f) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 08/01/2055 |  |  |  | 3,140 |  |  | 3,337,872
Caddo Mills Independent School District; Series 2023, GO Bonds (CEP - Texas Permanent School Fund) |  |  | 4.25% |  |  |  | 02/15/2053 |  |  |  | 1,440 |  |  | 1,396,873
Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority; Series 2020 A, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 01/01/2049 |  |  |  | 1,240 |  |  | 1,269,893
City of San Antonio TX Electric & Gas Systems Revenue; Series 2025, RB (f)(k) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 02/01/2050 |  |  |  | 2,110 |  |  | 2,297,312
Clifton Higher Education Finance Corp. (Idea Public Schools); Series 2021 T, RB (CEP - Texas Permanent School Fund) |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 08/15/2047 |  |  |  | 1,530 |  |  | 1,446,756
Clifton Higher Education Finance Corp. (International Leadership of Texas); Series 2025, Ref. RB (CEP - Texas Permanent School Fund) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 02/15/2049 |  |  |  | 645 |  |  | 678,007
Crowley Independent School District; Series 2023, GO Bonds (CEP - Texas Permanent School Fund) |  |  | 4.25% |  |  |  | 02/01/2053 |  |  |  | 2,145 |  |  | 2,045,171
Dallas & Fort Worth (Cities of), TX (Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport); Series 2025 A-1, RB (h) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 11/01/2050 |  |  |  | 1,885 |  |  | 2,009,741
Denton (County of), TX; Series 2023, Ref. GO Bonds |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 07/15/2048 |  |  |  | 5,405 |  |  | 5,230,263
El Paso (City of), TX; Series 2022 A, RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 03/01/2048 |  |  |  | 3,890 |  |  | 3,697,397
Grand Parkway Transportation Corp.; Series 2020, Ref. RB (INS - AGI)(e) |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 10/01/2049 |  |  |  | 2,260 |  |  | 2,139,226
Greater Texoma Utility Authority (City of Sherman); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2023 A, RB (INS - BAM) (e) |  |  | 4.38% |  |  |  | 10/01/2053 |  |  |  | 440 |  |  | 428,365
Series 2023, RB (INS - AGI) (e) |  |  | 4.25% |  |  |  | 10/01/2053 |  |  |  | 1,815 |  |  | 1,731,540
Series 2024, RB (INS - BAM) (e) |  |  | 4.38% |  |  |  | 10/01/2054 |  |  |  | 1,260 |  |  | 1,226,777
Harris (County of), TX; Series 2025, RB (f)(k) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 08/15/2054 |  |  |  | 4,705 |  |  | 5,022,933
Houston (City of), TX; Series 2023 A, Ref. RB (INS - AGI) (e)(h) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 07/01/2048 |  |  |  | 2,195 |  |  | 2,298,608
Houston (City of), TX (United Airlines, Inc.); Series 2024 B, RB (h) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 07/15/2038 |  |  |  | 530 |  |  | 583,271
Houston (City of), TX Airport System (United Airlines, Inc. Terminal E); Series 2021 A, RB (h) |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2041 |  |  |  | 740 |  |  | 700,506
Houston (City of), TX Airport System (United Airlines, Inc.); Series 2018, RB (h) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 07/15/2028 |  |  |  | 625 |  |  | 648,539
Jarrell Independent School District; Series 2023, GO Bonds (CEP - Texas Permanent School Fund) |  |  | 4.25% |  |  |  | 02/15/2053 |  |  |  | 1,775 |  |  | 1,732,750
Lamar Consolidated Independent School District; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2023 A, GO Bonds (CEP - Texas Permanent School Fund) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 02/15/2053 |  |  |  | 2,095 |  |  | 2,168,114
Series 2023, GO Bonds |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 02/15/2053 |  |  |  | 2,360 |  |  | 2,179,803
Mansfield Independent School District; Series 2025, GO Bonds (CEP - Texas Permanent School Fund) (f) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 02/15/2055 |  |  |  | 2,345 |  |  | 2,507,568
Mission Economic Development Corp. (Natgasoline); Series 2018, Ref. RB (d)(h) |  |  | 4.63% |  |  |  | 10/01/2031 |  |  |  | 3,665 |  |  | 3,680,128
New Hope Cultural Education Facilities Finance Corp.; Series 2025, RB (f) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 08/15/2049 |  |  |  | 4,230 |  |  | 4,631,499

See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements which are an integral part of the financial statements.

21 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

|  | Interest Rate |  |  | Maturity Date |  |  | Principal Amount (000) |  |  | Value
Texas–(continued) |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
New Hope Cultural Education Facilities Finance Corp. (4-K Housing, Inc.-Stoney Brook); Series 2017 A-1, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2047 |  |  | $ | 1,000 |  |  | $      726,937
New Hope Cultural Education Facilities Finance Corp. (Buckingham Senior Living Community); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2021 A-1, RB (Acquired 11/24/2021; Cost $57,734) (i)(j) |  |  | 7.50% |  |  |  | 11/15/2037 |  |  |  | 65 |  |  | 65,000
Series 2021, RB (Acquired 07/27/2007-11/19/2025; Cost $1,756,533) (i)(j) |  |  | 2.00% |  |  |  | 11/15/2061 |  |  |  | 1,834 |  |  | 788,625
New Hope Cultural Education Facilities Finance Corp. (Carillon Lifecare Community); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2016, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2036 |  |  |  | 795 |  |  | 797,540
Series 2016, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2046 |  |  |  | 1,045 |  |  | 1,020,921
New Hope Cultural Education Facilities Finance Corp. (Children’s Health System of Texas); Series 2017 A, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 08/15/2047 |  |  |  | 1,825 |  |  | 1,847,038
New Hope Cultural Education Facilities Finance Corp. (Jubilee Academic Center); Series 2021, Ref. RB (d) |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 08/15/2051 |  |  |  | 1,280 |  |  | 1,010,662
New Hope Cultural Education Facilities Finance Corp. (Longhorn Village); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2017, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 01/01/2042 |  |  |  | 630 |  |  | 632,267
Series 2017, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 01/01/2047 |  |  |  | 790 |  |  | 790,511
New Hope Cultural Education Facilities Finance Corp. (Presbyterian Village North); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2018, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 10/01/2026 |  |  |  | 265 |  |  | 265,878
Series 2018, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 10/01/2027 |  |  |  | 1,735 |  |  | 1,751,225
Series 2020, RB |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 10/01/2055 |  |  |  | 2,855 |  |  | 2,685,577
North Texas Tollway Authority; Series 2008 D, Ref. RB (INS - AGI) (e)(g) |  |  | 0.00% |  |  |  | 01/01/2028 |  |  |  | 4,100 |  |  | 3,924,237
San Antonio (City of), TX; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2024 C, RB |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 02/01/2049 |  |  |  | 1,080 |  |  | 1,191,461
Series 2025, RB (f) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 02/01/2046 |  |  |  | 1,660 |  |  | 1,805,470
San Jacinto River Authority (Groundwater Reduction Plan Division); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2011, RB (INS - AGI) (e) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 10/01/2032 |  |  |  | 485 |  |  | 485,713
Series 2011, RB (INS - AGI) (e) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 10/01/2037 |  |  |  | 525 |  |  | 525,672
Tarrant (County of), TX Hospital District; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2023, GO Bonds |  |  | 4.25% |  |  |  | 08/15/2048 |  |  |  | 1,025 |  |  | 1,003,250
Series 2023, GO Bonds |  |  | 4.25% |  |  |  | 08/15/2053 |  |  |  | 2,900 |  |  | 2,764,637
Tarrant County Cultural Education Facilities Finance Corp. (Air Force Village Obligated Group); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2016, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 05/15/2037 |  |  |  | 1,895 |  |  | 1,897,184
Series 2016, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 05/15/2045 |  |  |  | 1,000 |  |  | 985,532
Tarrant County Cultural Education Facilities Finance Corp. (C.C. Young Memorial Home); Series 2017 A, RB (i) |  |  | 6.38% |  |  |  | 02/15/2048 |  |  |  | 2,460 |  |  | 1,998,750
Tarrant County Cultural Education Facilities Finance Corp. (MRC Stevenson Oaks); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2020, Ref. RB |  |  | 6.63% |  |  |  | 11/15/2041 |  |  |  | 105 |  |  | 106,246
Series 2020, Ref. RB |  |  | 6.75% |  |  |  | 11/15/2051 |  |  |  | 105 |  |  | 100,062
Series 2020, Ref. RB |  |  | 6.88% |  |  |  | 11/15/2055 |  |  |  | 105 |  |  | 100,985
Texas (State of) Transportation Commission; Series 2019, RB (g) |  |  | 0.00% |  |  |  | 08/01/2044 |  |  |  | 3,500 |  |  | 1,447,427
Texas (State of) Water Development Board; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2022, RB (f) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 10/15/2047 |  |  |  | 4,260 |  |  | 5,230,973
Series 2023 A, RB |  |  | 4.88% |  |  |  | 10/15/2048 |  |  |  | 3,170 |  |  | 3,290,086
Texas Private Activity Bond Surface Transportation Corp.; Series 2023, Ref. RB (h) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 06/30/2040 |  |  |  | 2,000 |  |  | 2,129,491
Texas Transportation Finance Corp.; Series 2025, RB (f) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 10/01/2055 |  |  |  | 3,405 |  |  | 3,722,836
Travis County Cultural Education Facilities Finance Corp. (Wayside Schools); Series 2012 A, RB |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 08/15/2042 |  |  |  | 10 |  |  | 10,002
Waco (City of), TX; Series 2023 A, Ctfs. Of Obligations |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 02/01/2053 |  |  |  | 3,150 |  |  | 2,933,671
Waller Consolidated Independent School District; Series 2023, GO Bonds (INS - BAM) (e) |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 02/15/2053 |  |  |  | 4,270 |  |  | 3,943,965
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 110,308,920
Utah–2.49% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Black Desert Public Infrastructure District; Series 2021 A, GO Bonds (d) |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 03/01/2051 |  |  |  | 500 |  |  | 409,897
Downtown Revitalization Public Infrastructure District; Series 2025, RB (INS - AGI) (e)(f)(k) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 06/01/2050 |  |  |  | 2,400 |  |  | 2,634,055
Military Installation Development Authority; Series 2021 A-2, RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 06/01/2052 |  |  |  | 500 |  |  | 416,289
Salt Lake City (City of), UT; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2018 A, RB (h) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2048 |  |  |  | 1,890 |  |  | 1,909,061
Series 2021 A, RB (h) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2046 |  |  |  | 1,055 |  |  | 1,087,671
Series 2023 A, RB (h) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 07/01/2053 |  |  |  | 3,695 |  |  | 3,887,581
Utah (County of), UT (IHC Health Services, Inc.); Series 2016 B, RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 05/15/2047 |  |  |  | 2,575 |  |  | 2,407,139
Utah (State of) Charter School Finance Authority (Ogden Preparatory Academy); Series 2022 A, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 10/15/2047 |  |  |  | 1,000 |  |  | 1,020,503

See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements which are an integral part of the financial statements.

22 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

|  | Interest Rate |  |  | Maturity Date |  |  | Principal Amount (000) |  |  | Value
Utah–(continued) |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Utah Housing Corp.; Series 2025, RB (CEP - GNMA) (f) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 01/01/2054 |  |  | $ | 1,895 |  |  | $    1,934,606
Utah Telecommunication Open Infrastructure Agency; Series 2022, Ref. RB |  |  | 4.38% |  |  |  | 06/01/2040 |  |  |  | 1,415 |  |  | 1,495,507
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 17,202,309
Virginia–2.85% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Hampton (City of), VA Roads Transportation Accountability Commission; Series 2022 A, RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2052 |  |  |  | 2,700 |  |  | 2,503,193
Isle Wight (County of), VA Economic Development Authority (Riverside Health System); Series 2023, RB (INS - AGI) (e) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 07/01/2053 |  |  |  | 1,385 |  |  | 1,453,027
Peninsula Town Center Community Development Authority; Series 2018, Ref. RB (d) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 09/01/2045 |  |  |  | 645 |  |  | 646,555
Virginia (Commonwealth of) Housing Development Authority; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2023 C, RB |  |  | 4.95% |  |  |  | 01/01/2054 |  |  |  | 2,000 |  |  | 2,021,216
Series 2023 F, RB (CEP - Federal Housing Administration) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 11/01/2053 |  |  |  | 1,485 |  |  | 1,538,574
Virginia (Commonwealth of) Small Business Financing Authority (95 Express Lanes LLC); Series 2022, Ref. RB (h) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 01/01/2038 |  |  |  | 2,000 |  |  | 2,133,136
Virginia (Commonwealth of) Small Business Financing Authority (I-495 Hot Lanes); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2022, Ref. RB (h) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 12/31/2047 |  |  |  | 1,780 |  |  | 1,808,081
Series 2022, Ref. RB (h) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 12/31/2057 |  |  |  | 1,005 |  |  | 1,007,783
Virginia (Commonwealth of) Small Business Financing Authority (Transform 66 P3); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2017, RB (h) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 12/31/2049 |  |  |  | 1,480 |  |  | 1,478,087
Series 2017, RB (h) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 12/31/2056 |  |  |  | 5,170 |  |  | 5,097,232
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 19,686,884
Washington–4.04% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Grant (County of), WA; Series 2025, GO Bonds (INS - BAM) (e) |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 12/01/2060 |  |  |  | 1,150 |  |  | 1,242,633
Kalispel Tribe of Indians; Series 2018 A, RB (d) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 01/01/2038 |  |  |  | 1,680 |  |  | 1,719,095
King (County of), WA; Series 2025 B, Ref. VRD RB (l) |  |  | 1.00% |  |  |  | 01/01/2042 |  |  |  | 4,110 |  |  | 4,110,000
Tacoma (City of), WA; Series 2022, RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 12/01/2047 |  |  |  | 3,515 |  |  | 3,424,129
Washington (State of); Series 2004 F, GO Bonds (INS - AMBAC) (e)(g) |  |  | 0.00% |  |  |  | 12/01/2029 |  |  |  | 2,120 |  |  | 1,942,836
Washington (State of) (Bid Group 2); Series 2024 A, GO Bonds |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 08/01/2046 |  |  |  | 1,080 |  |  | 1,154,955
Washington (State of) Convention Center Public Facilities District; Series 2018, RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2048 |  |  |  | 4,410 |  |  | 4,436,576
Washington (State of) Health Care Facilities Authority; Series 2025 A, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.50% |  |  |  | 09/01/2055 |  |  |  | 2,850 |  |  | 3,042,295
Washington (State of) Health Care Facilities Authority (Seattle Cancer Care Alliance); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2020, Ref. RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 09/01/2045 |  |  |  | 1,575 |  |  | 1,482,144
Series 2020, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 09/01/2055 |  |  |  | 1,830 |  |  | 1,859,840
Washington (State of) Housing Finance Commission; Series 2025, RB (INS - BAM) (d)(e) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 07/01/2064 |  |  |  | 1,060 |  |  | 1,082,623
Washington (State of) Housing Finance Commission (Bayview Manor Homes); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2016 A, Ref. RB (d) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2046 |  |  |  | 550 |  |  | 533,294
Series 2016 A, Ref. RB (d) |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 07/01/2051 |  |  |  | 455 |  |  | 423,465
Washington (State of) Housing Finance Commission (Social Certificates); Series 2021-1A, Revenue Ctfs. |  |  | 3.50% |  |  |  | 12/20/2035 |  |  |  | 1,450 |  |  | 1,440,369
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 27,894,254
West Virginia–0.47% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Monongalia (County of), WV Commission Special District (University Town Centre Economic Opportunity Development District); Series 2020, Ref. RB (d) |  |  | 7.50% |  |  |  | 06/01/2043 |  |  |  | 1,040 |  |  | 1,104,882
West Virginia (State of) Hospital Finance Authority (West Virginia University Health System Obligated Group); Series 2023, RB |  |  | 4.25% |  |  |  | 06/01/2047 |  |  |  | 2,275 |  |  | 2,173,095
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3,277,977
Wisconsin–4.53% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Wisconsin (State of) Center District; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2020 D, RB (INS - AGI) (e)(g) |  |  | 0.00% |  |  |  | 12/15/2050 |  |  |  | 8,300 |  |  | 2,576,596
Series 2020, RB (INS - AGI) (e)(g) |  |  | 0.00% |  |  |  | 12/15/2060 |  |  |  | 25,455 |  |  | 4,459,650
Series 2022, RB (d) |  |  | 5.25% |  |  |  | 12/15/2061 |  |  |  | 2,170 |  |  | 2,152,321
Wisconsin (State of) Health & Educational Facilities Authority (Aspirus, Inc. Obligated Group); Series 2021, RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 08/15/2051 |  |  |  | 3,545 |  |  | 3,181,462
Wisconsin (State of) Health & Educational Facilities Authority (Medical College of Wisconsin); Series 2022, Ref. RB |  |  | 4.00% |  |  |  | 12/01/2051 |  |  |  | 1,960 |  |  | 1,731,405
Wisconsin (State of) Public Finance Authority; |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2025, RB (h) |  |  | 5.75% |  |  |  | 12/31/2065 |  |  |  | 1,070 |  |  | 1,120,181
Series 2025, RB (h) |  |  | 6.50% |  |  |  | 12/31/2065 |  |  |  | 3,190 |  |  | 3,550,389

See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements which are an integral part of the financial statements.

23 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

|  | Interest Rate |  |  | Maturity Date |  |  | Principal Amount (000) |  |  | Value |
Wisconsin–(continued) |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Wisconsin (State of) Public Finance Authority (American Dream at Meadowlands); Series 2017, RB (d)(i) |  |  | 6.75% |  |  |  | 08/01/2031 |  |  | $ | 1,155 |  |  | $ | 808,500 |
Wisconsin (State of) Public Finance Authority (Explore Academy); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2020 A, RB (d) |  |  | 6.13% |  |  |  | 02/01/2050 |  |  |  | 530 |  |  |  | 529,953 |
Series 2022 A, RB (d) |  |  | 6.13% |  |  |  | 02/01/2050 |  |  |  | 575 |  |  |  | 574,944 |
Wisconsin (State of) Public Finance Authority (Mallard Creek STEM Academy); Series 2019 A, RB (d) |  |  | 5.13% |  |  |  | 06/15/2039 |  |  |  | 790 |  |  |  | 790,653 |
Wisconsin (State of) Public Finance Authority (Maryland Proton Treatment Center); Series 2018 A-1, RB (d)(i) |  |  | 6.38% |  |  |  | 01/01/2048 |  |  |  | 835 |  |  |  | 375,750 |
Wisconsin (State of) Public Finance Authority (Prime Healthcare Foundation, Inc.); |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Series 2018 A, RB |  |  | 5.20% |  |  |  | 12/01/2037 |  |  |  | 2,120 |  |  |  | 2,175,396 |
Series 2018 A, RB |  |  | 5.35% |  |  |  | 12/01/2045 |  |  |  | 2,120 |  |  |  | 2,146,347 |
Wisconsin (State of) Public Finance Authority (Rans-Bridgewater); Series 2024, RB (d) |  |  | 5.63% |  |  |  | 12/15/2030 |  |  |  | 899 |  |  |  | 902,572 |
Wisconsin (State of) Public Finance Authority (Roseman University of Health Sciences); Series 2015, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.75% |  |  |  | 04/01/2035 |  |  |  | 1,025 |  |  |  | 1,026,105 |
Wisconsin (State of) Public Finance Authority (Wakemed Hospital); Series 2019 A, Ref. RB |  |  | 5.00% |  |  |  | 10/01/2044 |  |  |  | 3,075 |  |  |  | 3,150,003 |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 31,252,227 |
Total Municipal Obligations (Cost $1,052,474,648) |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 1,059,180,649 |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Shares |  |  |  |
Exchange-Traded Funds–1.08% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Invesco Intermediate Municipal ETF (q) |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 65,800 |  |  |  | 3,457,461 |
Invesco Rochester High Yield Municipal ETF (q) |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 77,786 |  |  |  | 4,003,646 |
Total Exchange-Traded Funds (Cost $7,342,171) |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 7,461,107 |
|  | Interest Rate |  |  | Maturity Date |  |  | Principal Amount (000) |  |  |  |
U.S. Dollar Denominated Bonds & Notes–0.01% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Texas–0.01% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Buckingham Senior Living Community, Inc. Class 2025 (Cost $55,000) (d)(n) |  |  | 12.00% |  |  |  | 03/31/2026 |  |  | $ | 55 |  |  |  | 55,000 |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Shares |  |  |  |
Common Stocks & Other Equity Interests–0.00% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
BL Train Holdings West LLC; Wts. expiring 12/01/2025 (Cost $0) (n) |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 7,620 |  |  |  | 11,430 |
TOTAL INVESTMENTS IN SECURITIES (r) –154.56% (Cost $1,059,871,819) |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 1,066,708,186 |
FLOATING RATE NOTE OBLIGATIONS–(19.36)% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Notes with interest and fee rates ranging from 2.07% to 2.57% at 02/28/2026 and contractual maturities of collateral ranging from 05/01/2039 to 05/15/2062 (See Note 1K) (s) |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | (133,630,000 | )
VARIABLE RATE MUNI TERM PREFERRED SHARES–(36.22)% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | (249,972,374 | )
OTHER ASSETS LESS LIABILITIES–1.02% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 7,054,146 |
NET ASSETS APPLICABLE TO COMMON SHARES–100.00% |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | $ | 690,159,958 |

See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements which are an integral part of the financial statements.

24 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

Investment Abbreviations:
AGI |  | –  Assured Guaranty, Inc.
AMBAC |  | –  American Municipal Bond Assurance Corp.
BAM |  | –  Build America Mutual Assurance Co.
CEP |  | –  Credit Enhancement Provider
Ctfs. |  | –  Certificates
ETF |  | –  Exchange-Traded Fund
GNMA |  | –  Government National Mortgage Association
GO |  | –  General Obligation
IDR |  | –  Industrial Development Revenue Bonds
INS |  | –  Insurer
LOC |  | –  Letter of Credit
NATL |  | –  National Public Finance Guarantee Corp.
RAC |  | –  Revenue Anticipation Certificates
RB |  | –  Revenue Bonds
Ref. |  | –  Refunding
RN |  | –  Revenue Notes
VRD |  | –  Variable Rate Demand
Wts. |  | –  Warrants

Notes to Schedule of Investments:

(a) | Calculated as a percentage of net assets. Amounts in excess of 100% are due to the Trust’s use of leverage.

(b) | Security has an irrevocable call by the issuer or mandatory put by the holder. Maturity date reflects such call or put.

(c) | Convertible capital appreciation bond. The interest rate shown represents the coupon rate at which the bond will accrue at a specified future date.

(d) | Security purchased or received in a transaction exempt from registration under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “1933 Act”). The security may be resold pursuant to an exemption from registration under the 1933 Act, typically to qualified institutional buyers. The aggregate value of these securities at February 28, 2026 was $57,818,235, which represented 8.38% of the Trust’s Net Assets.

(e) | Principal and/or interest payments are secured by the bond insurance company listed.

(f) | Underlying security related to TOB Trusts entered into by the Trust. See Note 1K.

(g) | Zero coupon bond issued at a discount.

(h) | Security subject to the alternative minimum tax.

(i) | Defaulted security. Currently, the issuer is in default with respect to principal and/or interest payments. The aggregate value of these securities at February 28, 2026 was $4,637,498, which represented less than 1% of the Trust’s Net Assets.

(j) | Restricted security. The aggregate value of these securities at February 28, 2026 was $2,238,559, which represented less than 1% of the Trust’s Net Assets.

(k) | Security is subject to a reimbursement agreement which may require the Trust to pay amounts to a counterparty in the event of a significant decline in the market value of the security underlying the TOB Trusts. In case of a shortfall, the maximum potential amount of payments the Trust could ultimately be required to make under the agreement is $18,549,820. However, such shortfall payment would be reduced by the proceeds from the sale of the security underlying the TOB Trusts.

(l) | Demand security payable upon demand by the Trust at specified time intervals no greater than thirteen months. Interest rate is redetermined periodically by the issuer or agent based on current market conditions. Rate shown is the rate in effect on February 28, 2026.

(m) | Advance refunded; secured by an escrow fund of U.S. Government obligations or other highly rated collateral.

(n) | Security valued using significant unobservable inputs (Level 3). See Note 3.

(o) | The issuer is paying less than stated interest, but is not in default on principal because scheduled principal payments have not yet begun.

(p) | Principal and interest payments are fully enhanced by a letter of credit from the bank listed or a predecessor bank, branch or subsidiary.

(q) | Affiliated holding. Affiliated holdings are investments in entities which are under common ownership or control of Invesco Ltd. or are investments in entities in which the Trust owns 5% or more of the outstanding voting securities. The table below shows the Trust’s transactions in, and earnings from, its investments in affiliates for the fiscal year ended February 28, 2026.

|  | Value February 28, 2025 |  | Purchases at Cost |  | Proceeds from Sales |  | Change in Unrealized Appreciation |  | Realized Gain |  | Value February 28, 2026 |  | Dividend Income
Invesco Intermediate Municipal ETF |  |  | $ | - |  |  |  | $ | 3,393,208 |  |  |  | $ | - |  |  |  | $ | 64,253 |  |  |  | $ | - |  |  |  | $ | 3,457,461 |  |  |  | $ | 39,543 |
Invesco Rochester High Yield Municipal ETF* |  |  |  | 832,327 |  |  |  |  | 3,127,818 |  |  |  |  | - |  |  |  |  | 44,142 |  |  |  |  | - |  |  |  |  | 4,003,646 |  |  |  |  | 95,306 |
Total |  |  | $ | 832,327 |  |  |  | $ | 6,521,026 |  |  |  | $ | - |  |  |  | $ | 108,395 |  |  |  | $ | - |  |  |  | $ | 7,461,107 |  |  |  | $ | 134,849 |

| * | Includes return of capital distribution.

(r) | This table provides a listing of those entities that have either issued, guaranteed, backed or otherwise enhanced the credit quality of more than 5% of the securities held in the portfolio. In instances where the entity has guaranteed, backed or otherwise enhanced the credit quality of a security, it is not primarily responsible for the issuer’s obligations but may be called upon to satisfy the issuer’s obligations.

Entity |  | Percent |
Assured Guaranty Inc. |  |  | 6.41 | %

(s) | Floating rate note obligations related to securities held. The interest and fee rates shown reflect the rates in effect at February 28, 2026. At February 28, 2026, the Trust’s investments with a value of $189,025,920 are held by TOB Trusts and serve as collateral for the $133,630,000 in the floating rate note obligations outstanding at that date.

See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements which are an integral part of the financial statements.

25 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

Statement of Assets and Liabilities
February 28, 2026

Assets: |  |  |  |
Investments in unaffiliated securities, at value (Cost $1,052,529,648) |  | $ | 1,059,247,079 |
Investments in affiliates, at value (Cost $7,342,171) |  |  | 7,461,107 |
Cash |  |  | 5,181,378 |
Receivable for: |  |  |  |
Investments sold |  |  | 79,715 |
Interest |  |  | 11,445,308 |
Investments matured, at value (Cost $253,198) |  |  | 219,375 |
Investment for trustee deferred compensation and retirement plans |  |  | 52,958 |
Other assets |  |  | 906 |
Total assets |  |  | 1,083,687,826 |
Liabilities: |  |  |  |
Floating rate note obligations |  |  | 133,630,000 |
Variable rate muni term preferred shares ($0.01 par value, 2,500 shares issued with liquidation preference of $100,000 per share) |  |  | 249,972,374 |
Payable for: |  |  |  |
Investments purchased |  |  | 8,832,820 |
Dividends |  |  | 118,047 |
Accrued fees to affiliates |  |  | 64,562 |
Accrued interest expense |  |  | 640,474 |
Accrued trustees’ and officers’ fees and benefits |  |  | 2,513 |
Accrued other operating expenses |  |  | 177,299 |
Trustee deferred compensation and retirement plans |  |  | 89,779 |
Total liabilities |  |  | 393,527,868 |
Net assets applicable to common shares |  |  | $  690,159,958 |

Net assets applicable to common shares consist of: |  |  |  |
Shares of beneficial interest – common shares |  | $ | 809,603,382 |
Distributable earnings (loss) |  |  | (119,443,424 | )
|  | $ | 690,159,958 |
Common shares outstanding, no par value, with an unlimited number of common shares authorized: |  |  |  |
Common shares outstanding |  |  | 67,440,685 |
Net asset value per common share |  | $ | 10.23 |
Market value per common share |  | $ | 9.99 |

See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements which are an integral part of the financial statements.

26 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

Statement of Operations
For the year ended February 28, 2026

Investment income: |  |  |  |
Interest |  | $ | 53,383,198 |
Dividends from affiliates |  |  | 134,849 |
Total investment income |  |  | 53,518,047 |
Expenses: |  |  |  |
Advisory fees |  |  | 5,866,843 |
Administrative services fees |  |  | 94,972 |
Custodian fees |  |  | 8,458 |
Interest, facilities and maintenance fees |  |  | 15,661,243 |
Transfer agent fees |  |  | 36,670 |
Trustees’ and officers’ fees and benefits |  |  | 30,157 |
Registration and filing fees |  |  | 65,699 |
Reports to shareholders |  |  | 92,617 |
Professional services fees |  |  | 135,617 |
Other |  |  | 9,750 |
Total expenses |  |  | 22,002,026 |
Less: Fees waived and/or expenses reimbursed |  |  | (5,271 | )
Net expenses |  |  | 21,996,755 |
Net investment income |  |  | 31,521,292 |
Realized and unrealized gain (loss) from: |  |  |  |
Net realized gain (loss) from unaffiliated investment securities (includes net gains (losses) from securities sold to affiliates of $ (3,003,512)) |  |  | (13,254,172 | )
Change in net unrealized appreciation of: |  |  |  |
Unaffiliated investment securities |  |  | 916,179 |
Affiliated investment securities |  |  | 108,395 |
|  |  | 1,024,574 |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) |  |  | (12,229,598 | )
Net increase in net assets resulting from operations applicable to common shares |  | $ | 19,291,694 |

See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements which are an integral part of the financial statements.

27 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

Statement of Changes in Net Assets
For the years ended February 28, 2026 and 2025

|  | 2026 |  |  | 2025 |
Operations: |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Net investment income |  | $ | 31,521,292 |  |  | $ | 27,975,787 |
Net realized gain (loss) |  |  | (13,254,172 | ) |  |  | (2,258,003 | )
Change in net unrealized appreciation (depreciation) |  |  | 1,024,574 |  |  |  | (2,061,358 | )
Net increase in net assets resulting from operations applicable to common shares |  |  | 19,291,694 |  |  |  | 23,656,426 |
Distributions to common shareholders from distributable earnings |  |  | (31,132,928 | ) |  |  | (27,591,101 | )
Return of capital applicable to common shares |  |  | (19,447,586 | ) |  |  | (18,133,683 | )
Total distributions |  |  | (50,580,514 | ) |  |  | (45,724,784 | )
Net increase (decrease) in net assets applicable to common shares |  |  | (31,288,820 | ) |  |  | (22,068,358 | )
Net assets applicable to common shares: |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Beginning of year |  |  | 721,448,778 |  |  |  | 743,517,136 |
End of year |  | $ | 690,159,958 |  |  | $ | 721,448,778 |

See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements which are an integral part of the financial statements.

28 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

Statement of Cash Flows
For the year ended February 28, 2026

Cash provided by operating activities: |  |  |  |
Net increase in net assets resulting from operations applicable to common shares |  | $ | 19,291,694 |
Adjustments to reconcile the change in net assets applicable to common shares from operations to net cash provided by operating activities: |  |  |  |
Purchases of investments |  |  | (270,287,833 | )
Proceeds from sales of investments |  |  | 348,735,408 |
Purchases of short-term investments, net |  |  | (53,835,052 | )
Amortization (accretion) of premiums and discounts, net |  |  | (2,101,130 | )
Net realized loss from investment securities |  |  | 13,254,172 |
Net change in unrealized appreciation on investment securities |  |  | (1,024,574 | )
Change in operating assets and liabilities: |  |  |  |
Decrease in receivables and other assets |  |  | 608,334 |
Decrease in accrued expenses and other payables |  |  | (183,854 | )
Net cash provided by operating activities |  |  | 54,457,165 |
Cash provided by (used in) financing activities: |  |  |  |
Dividends paid to common shareholders from distributable earnings |  |  | (31,204,273 | )
Return of capital |  |  | (19,447,586 | )
Decrease in VMTP Shares, at liquidation value |  |  | (62,400,000 | )
Proceeds from TOB Trusts |  |  | 113,995,000 |
Repayment of TOB Trusts |  |  | (56,475,000 | )
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities |  |  | (55,531,859 | )
Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents |  |  | (1,074,694 | )
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period |  |  | 6,256,072 |
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period |  | $ | 5,181,378 |
Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information: |  |  |  |
Cash paid during the period for interest, facilities and maintenance fees |  | $ | 15,915,519 |

See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements which are an integral part of the financial statements.

29 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

Financial Highlights
The following schedule presents financial highlights for a share of the Trust outstanding throughout the periods indicated.

|  |  |  |  | Years Ended |  |  | Year Ended |  |  | Years Ended |
|  |  |  |  | February 28, |  |  | February 29, |  |  | February 28, |
|  |  |  |  | 2026 |  |  | 2025 |  |  | 2024 |  |  | 2023 |  |  | 2022 |
Net asset value per common share, beginning of period |  |  |  |  |  | $ | 10.70 |  |  | $ | 11.02 |  |  | $ | 10.60 |  |  | $ | 12.80 |  |  | $ | 13.46 |
Net investment income (a) |  |  |  |  |  |  | 0.47 |  |  |  | 0.41 |  |  |  | 0.41 |  |  |  | 0.49 |  |  |  | 0.60 |
Net gains (losses) on securities (both realized and unrealized) |  |  |  |  |  |  | (0.19 | ) |  |  | (0.05 | ) |  |  | 0.44 |  |  |  | (2.15 | ) |  |  | (0.62 | )
Total from investment operations |  |  |  |  |  |  | 0.28 |  |  |  | 0.36 |  |  |  | 0.85 |  |  |  | (1.66 | ) |  |  | (0.02 | )
Less: |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Dividends paid to common shareholders from net investment income |  |  |  |  |  |  | (0.46 | ) |  |  | (0.41 | ) |  |  | (0.42 | ) |  |  | (0.50 | ) |  |  | (0.64 | )
Return of capital |  |  |  |  |  |  | (0.29 | ) |  |  | (0.27 | ) |  |  | (0.01 | ) |  |  | (0.04 | ) |  |  | — |
Total distributions |  |  |  |  |  |  | (0.75 | ) |  |  | (0.68 | ) |  |  | (0.43 | ) |  |  | (0.54 | ) |  |  | (0.64 | )
Net asset value per common share, end of period |  |  |  |  |  | $ | 10.23 |  |  | $ | 10.70 |  |  | $ | 11.02 |  |  | $ | 10.60 |  |  | $ | 12.80 |
Market value per common share, end of period |  |  |  |  |  | $ | 9.99 |  |  | $ | 9.93 |  |  | $ | 9.61 |  |  | $ | 9.45 |  |  | $ | 11.87 |
Total return at net asset value (b) |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3.45 | % |  |  | 3.92 | % |  |  | 8.84 | % (c) |  |  | (12.67 | )% |  |  | (0.28 | )%
Total return at market value (d) |  |  |  |  |  |  | 8.86 | % |  |  | 10.60 | % |  |  | 6.46 | % |  |  | (16.05 | )% |  |  | (4.33 | )%
Net assets applicable to common shares, end of period (000’s omitted) |  |  |  |  |  | $ | 690,160 |  |  | $ | 721,449 |  |  | $ | 743,517 |  |  | $ | 715,008 |  |  | $ | 863,390 |
Portfolio turnover rate (e) |  |  |  |  |  |  | 25 | % |  |  | 10 | % |  |  | 36 | % |  |  | 42 | % |  |  | 13 | %
Ratios/supplemental data based on average net assets applicable to common shares outstanding: |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Ratio of expenses: |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
With fee waivers and/or expense reimbursements |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3.26 | % |  |  | 3.44 | % |  |  | 3.68 | % |  |  | 2.84 | % |  |  | 1.55 | %
With fee waivers and/or expense reimbursements excluding interest, facilities and maintenance fees |  |  |  |  |  |  | 0.94 | % |  |  | 0.97 | % |  |  | 0.95 | % |  |  | 0.99 | % |  |  | 0.93 | %
Without fee waivers and/or expense reimbursements |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3.26 | % |  |  | 3.44 | % |  |  | 3.68 | % |  |  | 2.84 | % |  |  | 1.55 | %
Ratio of net investment income to average net assets |  |  |  |  |  |  | 4.66 | % |  |  | 3.81 | % |  |  | 3.86 | % |  |  | 4.43 | % |  |  | 4.39 | %
Senior securities: |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Total amount of preferred shares outstanding (000’s omitted) |  |  |  |  |  | $ | 250,000 |  |  | $ | 312,400 |  |  | $ | 367,600 |  |  | $ | 367,600 |  |  | $ | 367,600 |
Asset coverage per preferred share(f) |  |  |  |  |  | $ | 376,064 |  |  | $ | 330,938 |  |  | $ | 302,263 |  |  | $ | 294,507 |  |  | $ | 334,872 |
Liquidating preference per preferred share |  |  |  |  |  | $ | 100,000 |  |  | $ | 100,000 |  |  | $ | 100,000 |  |  | $ | 100,000 |  |  | $ | 100,000 |

(a) | Calculated using average shares outstanding.

(b) | Includes adjustments in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America and as such, the net asset value for financial reporting purposes and the returns based upon those net asset values may differ from the net asset value and returns for shareholder transactions. Not annualized for periods less than one year, if applicable.

(c) | Amount includes the effect of the Adviser pay-in for an economic loss that occurred on October 4, 2023. Had the pay-in not been made the total return would have been 8.74%.

(d) | Total return assumes an investment at the common share market price at the beginning of the period indicated, reinvestment of all distributions for the period in accordance with the Trust’s dividend reinvestment plan, and sale of all shares at the closing common share market price at the end of the period indicated. Not annualized for periods less than one year, if applicable.

(e) | Portfolio turnover is not annualized for periods less than one year, if applicable.

(f) | Calculated by subtracting the Trust’s total liabilities (not including preferred shares, at liquidation value) from the Trust’s total assets and dividing this by the total number of preferred shares outstanding.

See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements which are an integral part of the financial statements.

30 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

Notes to Financial Statements
February 28, 2026
NOTE 1–Significant Accounting Policies
Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust (the “Trust”) is a Delaware statutory trust registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”), as a
closed-end
management investment company.
The Trust’s investment objective is to provide common shareholders with a high level of current income exempt from federal income tax, consistent with preservation of capital.
The Trust is an investment company and accordingly follows the investment company accounting and reporting guidance in accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification Topic 946,
Financial Services – Investment Companies
.
The following is a summary of the significant accounting policies followed by the Trust in the preparation of its financial statements.

A. | Security Valuations – Securities, including restricted securities, are valued according to the following policy.

Securities generally are valued on the basis of prices provided by independent pricing services. Prices provided by the pricing service may be determined without exclusive reliance on quoted prices, and may reflect appropriate factors such as
institution-size
trading in similar groups of securities, developments related to specific securities, dividend rate (for unlisted equities), yield (for debt obligations), quality, type of issue, coupon rate (for debt obligations), maturity (for debt obligations), individual trading characteristics and other market data. Pricing services generally value debt obligations assuming orderly transactions of institutional round lot size, but a trust may hold or transact in the same securities in smaller, odd lot sizes. Odd lots often trade at lower prices than institutional round lots, and their value may be adjusted accordingly. Debt obligations are subject to interest rate and credit risks. In addition, all debt obligations involve some risk of default with respect to interest and/or principal payments.
Securities for which market quotations are not readily available are fair valued by Invesco Advisers, Inc. (the “Adviser” or “Invesco”) in accordance with Board-approved policies and related Adviser procedures (“Valuation Procedures”). If a fair value price provided by a pricing service is not representative of market value in the Adviser’s judgment (“unreliable”), the Adviser will fair value the security using the Valuation Procedures. Issuer specific events, market trends, bid/ask quotes of brokers and information providers and other market data may be reviewed in the course of making a good faith determination of a security’s fair value.
The Trust may invest in securities that are subject to interest rate risk, meaning the risk that the prices will generally fall as interest rates rise and, conversely, the prices will generally rise as interest rates fall. Specific securities differ in their sensitivity to changes in interest rates depending on their individual characteristics. Changes in interest rates may result in increased market volatility, which may affect the value and/or liquidity of certain Trust investments.
Valuations change in response to many factors including the historical and prospective earnings of the issuer, the value of the issuer’s assets, general market conditions which are not specifically related to the particular issuer, such as real or perceived adverse economic conditions, changes in the general outlook for revenues or corporate earnings, changes in interest or currency rates, regional or global instability, natural or environmental disasters, widespread disease or other public health issues, war, military conflicts, acts of terrorism, economic crises, economic sanctions and tariffs, significant governmental actions or adverse investor sentiment generally and market liquidity. Because of the inherent uncertainties of valuation, the values reflected in the financial statements may materially differ from the value received upon actual sale of those investments.
The price the Trust could receive upon the sale of any investment may differ from the Adviser’s valuation of the investment, particularly for securities that are valued using a fair valuation technique. When fair valuation techniques are applied, the Adviser uses available information, including both observable and unobservable inputs and assumptions, to determine a methodology that will result in a valuation that the Adviser believes approximates market value. Trust securities that are fair valued may be subject to greater fluctuation in their value from one day to the next than would be the case if market quotations were used. Because of the inherent uncertainties of valuation, and the degree of subjectivity in such decisions, the Trust could realize a greater or lesser than expected gain or loss upon the sale of the investment.

B. | Securities Transactions and Investment Income – Securities transactions are accounted for on a trade date basis. Realized gains or losses on sales are computed on the basis of specific identification of the securities sold. Interest income (net of withholding tax, if any) is recorded on an accrual basis from settlement date and includes coupon interest and amortization of premium and accretion of discount on debt securities as applicable. Pay-in-kind interest income and non-cash dividend income received in the form of securities in lieu of cash are recorded at the fair value of the securities received. Dividend income (net of withholding tax, if any) is recorded on the ex-dividend date.

The Trust may periodically participate in litigation related to Trust investments. As such, the Trust may receive proceeds from litigation settlements. Any proceeds received are included in the Statement of Operations as realized gain (loss) for investments no longer held and as unrealized gain (loss) for investments still held.
Brokerage commissions and mark ups are considered transaction costs and are recorded as an increase to the cost basis of securities purchased and/or a reduction of proceeds on a sale of securities. Such transaction costs are included in the determination of net realized and unrealized gain (loss) from investment securities reported in the Statement of Operations and the Statement of Changes in Net Assets and the net realized and unrealized gains (losses) on securities per share in the Financial Highlights. Transaction costs are included in the calculation of the Trust’s net asset value and, accordingly, they reduce the Trust’s total returns. These transaction costs are not considered operating expenses and are not reflected in net investment income reported in the Statement of Operations and the Statement of Changes in Net Assets, or the net investment income per share and the ratios of expenses and net investment income reported in the Financial Highlights, nor are they limited by any expense limitation arrangements between the Trust and the investment adviser.

C. | Country Determination — For the purposes of making investment selection decisions and presentation in the Schedule of Investments, the investment adviser may determine the country in which an issuer is located and/or credit risk exposure based on various factors. These factors include the laws of the country under which the issuer is organized, where the issuer maintains a principal office, the country in which the issuer derives 50% or more of its total revenues, the country that has the primary market for the issuer’s securities and its “country of risk” as determined by a third party service provider, as well as other criteria. Among the other criteria that may be evaluated for making this determination are the country in which the issuer maintains 50% or more of its assets, the type of security, financial guarantees and enhancements, the nature of the collateral and the sponsor organization. Country of issuer and/or credit risk exposure has been determined to be the United States of America, unless otherwise noted.

D. | Distributions – The Trust declares and pays monthly dividends from net investment income to common shareholders. Distributions from net realized capital gain, if any, are generally declared and paid annually and are distributed on a pro rata basis to common and preferred shareholders.

E. | Federal Income Taxes – The Trust intends to comply with the requirements of Subchapter M of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Internal Revenue Code”), necessary to qualify as a regulated investment company and to distribute substantially all of the Trust’s taxable earnings to shareholders. As such, the Trust will not be subject to federal income taxes on otherwise taxable income (including net realized capital gain) that is distributed to shareholders. Therefore, no provision for federal income taxes is recorded in the financial statements.

The Trust recognizes the tax benefits of uncertain tax positions only when the position is more likely than not to be sustained. Management has analyzed the Trust’s uncertain tax positions and concluded that no liability for unrecognized tax benefits should be recorded related to uncertain tax positions.
In addition, the Trust intends to invest in such municipal securities to allow it to qualify to pay shareholders “exempt-interest dividends”, as defined in the Internal Revenue Code.

31 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

The Trust files tax returns in the U.S. Federal jurisdiction and certain other jurisdictions. Generally, the Trust is subject to examinations by such taxing authorities for up to three years after the filing of the return for the tax period.
In December 2023, the FASB issued ASU
2023-09
Income Taxes (Topic 740): Improvements to Income Tax Disclosures. Effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2024, the amendments require greater disaggregation of disclosures related to income taxes paid by jurisdiction, while removing certain disclosure requirements. The Trust did not pay any material income taxes, net of refunds during the period.

F. | Interest, Facilities and Maintenance Fees – Interest, Facilities and Maintenance Fees include interest and related borrowing costs such as commitment fees, rating and bank agent fees, administrative expenses and other expenses associated with establishing and maintaining the line of credit and Variable Rate Muni Term Preferred Shares (“VMTP Shares”). In addition, interest and administrative expenses related to establishing and maintaining floating rate note obligations, if any, are included.

G. | Accounting Estimates – The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period including estimates and assumptions related to taxation. Actual results could differ from those estimates by a significant amount. In addition, the Trust monitors for material events or transactions that may occur or become known after the period-end date and before the date the financial statements are released to print.

H. | Indemnifications – Under the Trust’s organizational documents, each Trustee, officer, employee or other agent of the Trust is indemnified against certain liabilities that may arise out of the performance of their duties to the Trust. Additionally, in the normal course of business, the Trust enters into contracts, including the Trust’s servicing agreements, that contain a variety of indemnification clauses. The Trust’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown as this would involve future claims that may be made against the Trust that have not yet occurred. The risk of material loss as a result of such indemnification claims is considered remote.

I. | Segment Reporting – The Trust represents a single operating segment, in accordance with ASC 280, Segment Reporting. Subject to the oversight and, when applicable, approval of the Board of Trustees, portfolio managers and senior executives at the Adviser act as the Trust’s chief operating decision maker (“CODM”), assessing performance and making decisions about resource allocation within the Trust. The CODM monitors the operating results as a whole, and the Trust’s long-term strategic asset allocation is determined in accordance with the terms of its prospectus based on a defined investment strategy. The financial information provided to and reviewed by the CODM is consistent with that presented in the Trust’s financial statements.

J. | Cash and Cash Equivalents – For the purposes of the Statement of Cash Flows, the Trust defines Cash and Cash Equivalents as cash (including foreign currency), restricted cash, money market funds that qualify as a cash equivalent and other investments held in lieu of cash.

K. | Floating Rate Note Obligations – The Trust invests in inverse floating rate securities, such as Tender Option Bonds (“TOBs”), for investment purposes and to enhance the yield of the Trust. Such securities may be purchased in the secondary market without first owning an underlying bond but generally are created through the sale of fixed rate bonds by the Trust to special purpose trusts established by a broker dealer or by the Trust (“TOB Trusts”) in exchange for cash and residual interests in the TOB Trusts’ assets and cash flows, which are in the form of inverse floating rate securities. The TOB Trusts finance the purchases of the fixed rate bonds by issuing floating rate notes to third parties and allowing the Trust to retain residual interests in the bonds. The floating rate notes issued by the TOB Trusts have interest rates that reset weekly and the floating rate note holders have the option to tender their notes to the TOB Trusts for redemption at par at each reset date. The residual interests held by the Trust (inverse floating rate securities) include the right of the Trust (1) to cause the holders of the floating rate notes to tender their notes at par at the next interest rate reset date, and (2) to transfer the municipal bond from the TOB Trust to the Trust, thereby collapsing the TOB Trust. Inverse floating rate securities tend to underperform the market for fixed rate bonds in a rising interest rate environment, but tend to outperform the market for fixed rate bonds when interest rates decline or remain relatively stable.

The Trust generally invests in inverse floating rate securities that include embedded leverage, thus exposing the Trust to greater risks and increased costs. The primary risks associated with inverse floating rate securities are varying degrees of liquidity and decreases in the value of such securities in response to changes in interest rates to a greater extent than fixed rate securities having similar credit quality, redemption provisions and maturity, which may cause the Trust’s net asset value to be more volatile than if it had not invested in inverse floating rate securities. In certain instances, the short-term floating rate notes created by the TOB Trust may not be able to be sold to third parties or, in the case of holders tendering (or putting) such notes for repayment of principal, may not be able to be remarketed to third parties. In such cases, the TOB Trust holding the fixed rate bonds may be collapsed with the entity that contributed the fixed rate bonds to the TOB Trust. In the case where a TOB Trust is collapsed with the Trust, the Trust will be required to repay the principal amount of the tendered securities, which may require the Trust to sell other portfolio holdings to raise cash to meet that obligation. The Trust could therefore be required to sell other portfolio holdings at a disadvantageous time or price to raise cash to meet this obligation, which risk will be heightened during times of market volatility, illiquidity or uncertainty. The embedded leverage in the TOB Trust could cause the Trust to lose more money than the value of the asset it has contributed to the TOB Trust and greater levels of leverage create the potential for greater losses. In addition, a Trust may enter into reimbursement agreements with the liquidity provider of certain TOB transactions in connection with certain residuals held by the Trust. These agreements commit a Trust to reimburse the liquidity provider to the extent that the liquidity provider must provide cash to a TOB Trust, including following the termination of a TOB Trust resulting from a mandatory tender event (“liquidity shortfall”). The reimbursement agreement will effectively make the Trust liable for the amount of the negative difference, if any, between the liquidation value of the underlying security and the purchase price of the floating rate notes issued by the TOB Trust.
The Trust accounts for the transfer of fixed rate bonds to the TOB Trusts as secured borrowings, with the securities transferred remaining in the Trust’s investment assets, and the related floating rate notes reflected as Trust liabilities under the caption
Floating rate note obligations
on the Statement of Assets and Liabilities. The carrying amount of the Trust’s floating rate note obligations as reported on the Statement of Assets and Liabilities approximates its fair value. The Trust records the interest income from the fixed rate bonds under the caption Interest and records the expenses related to floating rate obligations and any administrative expenses of the TOB Trusts as a component of
Interest, facilities and maintenance fees
on the Statement of Operations.
Final rules implementing section 619 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Volcker Rule”) prohibit banking entities and their affiliates from sponsoring and/or providing certain services for existing TOB Trusts, which constitute “covered funds” under the Volcker Rule. As a result of the Volcker Rule, the Trust, as holder of inverse floating rate securities, is required to perform certain duties in connection with TOB financing transactions previously performed by banking entities. These duties may alternatively be performed by a
non-bank
third-party service provider. The Trust’s expanded role may increase its operational and regulatory risk.
Further, the SEC and various banking agencies have adopted rules implementing credit risk retention requirements for asset-backed securities (the “Risk Retention Rules”), which apply to TOB financing transactions and TOB Trusts. The Risk Retention Rules require the sponsor of a TOB Trust to retain at least 5% of the credit risk of the underlying security held by the TOB Trust. The Trust has adopted policies intended to comply with the Risk Retention Rules. The Risk Retention Rules may adversely affect the Trust’s ability to engage in TOB financing transactions or increase the costs of such transactions in certain circumstances.
There can be no assurances that TOB financing transactions will continue to be a viable or cost-effective form of leverage. The unavailability of TOB financing transactions or an increase in the cost of financing provided by TOB transactions may adversely affect the Trust’s net asset value, distribution rate and ability to achieve its investment objective.
TOBs are presently classified as private placement securities. Private placement securities are subject to restrictions on resale because they have not been registered under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “1933 Act”), or are otherwise not readily marketable. As a result of the absence of a public trading

32 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

market for these securities, they may be less liquid than publicly traded securities. Although atypical, these securities may be resold in privately negotiated transactions, the prices realized from these sales could be less than those originally paid by the Trust or less than what may be considered the fair value of such securities.

L. | Other Risks – The risk of a municipal obligation generally depends on the financial and credit status of the issuer. Constitutional amendments, legislative enactments, executive orders, administrative regulations, voter initiatives, and the issuer’s regional economic conditions may affect the municipal security’s value, interest payments, repayment of principal and the Trust’s ability to sell the security. Failure of a municipal security issuer to comply with applicable tax requirements may make income paid thereon taxable, resulting in a decline in the security’s value. In addition, there could be changes in applicable tax laws or tax treatments that reduce or eliminate the current federal income tax exemption on municipal securities or otherwise adversely affect the current federal or state tax status of municipal securities.

There is a possibility that the credit rating of a municipal security may be downgraded after purchase, which may occur quickly and without advanced warning following sudden market downturns or unexpected developments involving an issuer, and which may adversely affect the liquidity and value of the security.
Fluctuations in the federal funds and equivalent foreign rates or other changes to monetary policy or regulatory actions may expose fixed income markets to heightened volatility, perhaps suddenly and to a significant degree, and to reduced liquidity for certain fixed income investments, particularly those with longer maturities. Such changes and resulting increased volatility may adversely impact the Trust, including its operations, universe of potential investment options, and return potential. It is difficult to predict the impact of interest rate changes on various markets. In addition, decreases in fixed income dealer market-making capacity may also potentially lead to heightened volatility and reduced liquidity in the fixed income markets. As a result, the value of the Trust’s investments and share price may decline. Changes in central bank policies and other governmental actions and political events within the U.S. and abroad may also, among other things, affect investor and consumer expectations and confidence in the financial markets. This could result in higher than normal redemptions by shareholders, which could potentially increase the Trust’s portfolio turnover rate and transaction costs.
The municipal issuers in which the Trust invests may be located in the same geographic area or may pay their interest obligations from revenue of similar projects, such as hospitals, airports, utility systems and housing finance agencies. This may make the Trust’s investments more susceptible to similar social, economic, political or regulatory occurrences, making the Trust more susceptible to experience a drop in its share price than if the Trust had been more diversified across issuers that did not have similar characteristics.
NOTE 2–Advisory Fees and Other Fees Paid to Affiliates
The Trust has entered into a master investment advisory agreement with the Adviser. Under the terms of the investment advisory agreement, the Trust accrues daily and pays monthly an advisory fee to the Adviser based on the annual rate of 0.55% of the Trust’s average daily managed assets. Managed assets for this purpose means the Trust’s net assets, plus assets attributable to any outstanding preferred shares and the amount of any borrowings incurred for the purpose of leverage (whether or not such borrowed amounts are reflected in the Trust’s financial statements for purposes of GAAP).
Under the terms of a master
sub-advisory
agreement between the Adviser and each of Invesco Asset Management Limited, Invesco Asset Management (Japan) Limited, Invesco Hong Kong Limited, Invesco Management S.A., Invesco Senior Secured Management, Inc. and Invesco Canada Ltd. (collectively, the “Affiliated
Sub-Advisers”)
the Adviser, not the Trust, will pay 40% of the fees paid to the Adviser to any such Affiliated
Sub-Adviser(s)
that provide(s) discretionary investment management services to the Trust based on the percentage of assets allocated to such Affiliated
Sub-Adviser(s).
The Adviser has contractually agreed, through at least August 31, 2027, to waive the advisory fee payable by the Trust in an amount equal to the advisory fees earned by the Adviser and/or its affiliates on underlying affiliated investments, including 100% of the net advisory fees the Adviser receives from any affiliated money market funds on investments by the Trust of uninvested cash in such affiliated money market funds.
For the year ended February 28, 2026, the Adviser waived advisory fees of $5,271.
The Trust has entered into a master administrative services agreement with Invesco pursuant to which the Trust has agreed to pay Invesco for certain administrative costs incurred in providing accounting services to the Trust. For the year ended February 28, 2026, expenses incurred under this agreement are shown in the Statement of Operations as
Administrative services fees
. Invesco has entered into a
sub-administration
agreement whereby State Street Bank and Trust Company (“SSB”) serves as fund accountant and provides certain administrative services to the Trust. Pursuant to a custody agreement with the Trust, SSB also serves as the Trust’s custodian.
Certain officers and trustees of the Trust are officers and directors of Invesco.
NOTE 3–Additional Valuation Information
GAAP defines fair value as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date, under current market conditions. GAAP establishes a hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs to valuation methods, giving the highest priority to readily available unadjusted quoted prices in an active market for identical assets (Level 1) and the lowest priority to significant unobservable inputs (Level 3), generally when market prices are not readily available. Based on the valuation inputs, the securities or other investments are tiered into one of three levels. Changes in valuation methods may result in transfers in or out of an investment’s assigned level:

Level 1 - |  | Prices are determined using quoted prices in an active market for identical assets.
Level 2 - |  | Prices are determined using other significant observable inputs. Observable inputs are inputs that other market participants may use in pricing a security.
|  | These may include quoted prices for similar securities, interest rates, prepayment speeds, credit risk, yield curves, loss severities, default rates, discount rates, volatilities and others. When market movements occur after the close of the relevant foreign securities markets, foreign securities may be fair valued utilizing an independent pricing service.
Level 3 - |  | Prices are determined using significant unobservable inputs. In situations where quoted prices or observable inputs are unavailable (for example, when there is little or no market activity for an investment at the end of the period), unobservable inputs may be used. Unobservable inputs reflect the Adviser’s assumptions about the factors market participants would use in determining fair value of the securities or instruments and would be based on the best available information.

33 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

The following is a summary of the tiered valuation input levels, as of February 28, 2026. The level assigned to the securities valuations may not be an indication of the risk or liquidity associated with investing in those securities. Because of the inherent uncertainties of valuation, the values reflected in the financial statements may materially differ from the value received upon actual sale of those investments.

|  | Level 1 |  |  |  |  |  | Level 2 |  |  |  |  |  | Level 3 |  |  |  |  |  | Total |
Investments in Securities |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Municipal Obligations |  | $ | – |  |  |  |  |  |  | $ | 1,058,785,142 |  |  |  |  |  |  | $ | 395,507 |  |  |  |  |  |  | $ | 1,059,180,649 |
Exchange-Traded Funds |  |  | 7,461,107 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | – |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | – |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 7,461,107 |
U.S. Dollar Denominated Bonds & Notes |  |  | – |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | – |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 55,000 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 55,000 |
Common Stocks & Other Equity Interests |  |  | – |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | – |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 11,430 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 11,430 |
Total Investments in Securities |  |  | 7,461,107 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 1,058,785,142 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 461,937 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 1,066,708,186 |
Other Investments - Assets |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Investments Matured |  |  | – |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 219,375 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | – |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 219,375 |
Total Investments |  | $ | 7,461,107 |  |  |  |  |  |  | $ | 1,059,004,517 |  |  |  |  |  |  | $ | 461,937 |  |  |  |  |  |  | $ | 1,066,927,561 |

NOTE 4–Security Transactions with Affiliated Funds
The Trust is permitted to purchase securities from or sell securities to certain other affiliated funds under specified conditions outlined in procedures adopted by the Board of Trustees of the Trust. The procedures have been designed to ensure that any purchase or sale of securities by the Trust from or to another fund that is or could be considered an “affiliated person” by virtue of having a common investment adviser (or affiliated investment advisers), common Trustees and/or common officers is made in reliance on Rule
17a-7
of the 1940 Act and, to the extent applicable, related SEC staff positions. Each such transaction is effected at the security’s “current market price”, as provided for in these procedures and Rule
17a-7.
Pursuant to these procedures, for the year ended February 28, 2026, the Trust engaged in securities purchases of $134,388,105 and securities sales of $133,482,037, which resulted in net realized gains (losses) of $(3,003,512).
NOTE 5–Trustees’ and Officers’ Fees and Benefits
Trustees’ and Officers’ Fees and Benefits
include amounts accrued by the Trust to pay remuneration to certain Trustees and Officers of the Trust. Trustees have the option to defer compensation payable by the Trust, and
Trustees’ and Officers’ Fees and Benefits
also include amounts accrued by the Trust to fund such deferred compensation amounts. Those Trustees who defer compensation have the option to select various Invesco Funds in which their deferral accounts shall be deemed to be invested. The Trust may have certain former Trustees who participated in a retirement plan and receive benefits under such plan.
Trustees’ and Officers’ Fees and Benefits
include amounts accrued by the Trust to fund such retirement benefits. Obligations under the deferred compensation and retirement plans represent unsecured claims against the general assets of the Trust.
NOTE 6–Cash Balances and Borrowings
The Trust is permitted to temporarily carry a negative or overdrawn balance in its account with SSB, the custodian bank. Such balances, if any at
period-end,
are shown in the Statement of Assets and Liabilities under the payable caption
Amount due custodian
. To compensate the custodian bank for such overdrafts, the overdrawn Trust may either (1) leave funds as a compensating balance in the account so the custodian bank can be compensated by earning the additional interest; or (2) compensate by paying the custodian bank at a rate agreed upon by the custodian bank and Invesco, not to exceed the contractually agreed upon rate.
Inverse floating rate obligations resulting from the transfer of bonds to TOB Trusts are accounted for as secured borrowings. The average floating rate notes outstanding and average annual interest and fee rate related to inverse floating rate note obligations during the year ended February 28, 2026 were $108,789,692 and 4.48%, respectively.
NOTE 7–Distributions to Shareholders and Tax Components of Net Assets
Tax Character of Distributions to Shareholders Paid During the Fiscal Years Ended February 28, 2026 and 2025:

|  | 2026 |  |  | 2025 |
Ordinary income* |  | $ | 372,564 |  |  | $ | 84,843 |
Ordinary income-tax-exempt |  |  | 30,760,364 |  |  |  | 27,506,258 |
Ordinary income-tax-exempt VMTP shares |  |  | 10,767,040 |  |  |  | 14,621,467 |
Return of capital |  |  | 19,447,586 |  |  |  | 18,133,683 |
Total distributions |  | $ | 61,347,554 |  |  | $ | 60,346,251 |

* | Includes short-term capital gain distributions, if any.

Tax Components of Net Assets at
Period-End:

|  | 2026 |
Net unrealized appreciation - investments |  | $ | 6,042,766 |
Temporary book/tax differences |  |  | (67,661 | )
Capital loss carryforward |  |  | (125,418,529 | )
Shares of beneficial interest |  |  | 809,603,382 |
Total net assets |  | $ | 690,159,958 |

The difference between book-basis and
tax-basis
unrealized appreciation (depreciation) is due to differences in the timing of recognition of gains and losses on investments for tax and book purposes. The Trust’s net unrealized appreciation (depreciation) difference is attributable primarily to wash sales, amortization and accretion on debt securities, defaulted bonds and inverse floaters.
The temporary book/tax differences are a result of timing differences between book and tax recognition of income and/or expenses. The Trust’s temporary book/tax differences are the result of the trustee deferral of compensation and retirement plan benefits.

34 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

Capital loss carryforward is calculated and reported as of a specific date. Results of transactions and other activity after that date may affect the amount of capital loss carryforward actually available for the Trust to utilize. The ability to utilize capital loss carryforward in the future may be limited under the Internal Revenue Code and related regulations based on the results of future transactions.
The Trust has a capital loss carryforward as of February 28, 2026, as follows:

Capital Loss Carryforward* |
Expiration |  | Short-Term |  |  |  |  |  | Long-Term |  |  |  |  |  | Total |
Not subject to expiration |  | $ | 59,292,116 |  |  |  |  |  |  | $ | 66,126,413 |  |  |  |  |  |  | $ | 125,418,529 |

* | Capital loss carryforward is reduced for limitations, if any, to the extent required by the Internal Revenue Code and may be further limited depending upon a variety of factors, including the realization of net unrealized gains or losses as of the date of any reorganization.

NOTE 8–Investment Transactions
The aggregate amount of investment securities (other than short-term securities, U.S. Government obligations and money market funds, if any) purchased and sold by the Trust during the year ended February 28, 2026 was $255,735,234 and $348,813,776, respectively. As of February 28, 2026, the aggregate cost of investments, including any derivatives, on a tax basis listed below includes the adjustments for financial reporting purposes as of the most recently completed federal income tax reporting
period-end:

Unrealized Appreciation (Depreciation) of Investments on a Tax Basis |
Aggregate unrealized appreciation of investments |  | $ | 31,976,193 |
Aggregate unrealized (depreciation) of investments |  |  | (25,933,427 | )
Net unrealized appreciation of investments |  | $ | 6,042,766 |

Cost of investments for tax purposes is $1,060,884,795.
NOTE 9–Reclassification of Permanent Differences
Primarily as a result of differing book/tax treatment of return of capital distributions, on February 28, 2026, undistributed net investment income was increased by $19,781,843, undistributed net realized gain (loss) was decreased by $334,257 and shares of beneficial interest was decreased by $19,447,586. This reclassification had no effect on the net assets of the Trust.
NOTE 10–Common Shares of Beneficial Interest
Transactions in common shares of beneficial interest were as follows:

|  | Year Ended February 28, |  |  | Year Ended February 28, |
|  | 2026 |  |  | 2025 |
Beginning shares |  |  | 67,440,685 |  |  |  | 67,440,685 |
Shares issued through dividend reinvestment |  |  | – |  |  |  | – |
Ending shares |  |  | 67,440,685 |  |  |  | 67,440,685 |

In September 2025, the Board of Trustees of the Trust approved the renewal of the Trust’s share repurchase program that allows the Trust to repurchase up to 25% of the
20-day
average trading volume of the Trust’s common shares when the Trust is trading at a 10% or greater discount to its net asset value. The Trust will repurchase shares pursuant to this program if the Adviser reasonably believes that such repurchases may enhance shareholder value. Shares repurchased by the Trust under this program, if any, are shown in the table above under the caption Shares redeemed.
NOTE 11–Variable Rate Muni Term Preferred Shares
The Trust issued Series
2015/6-VMO
VMTP Shares, with a liquidation preference of $100,000 per share, pursuant to an offering exempt from registration under the 1933 Act. As of February 28, 2026, the VMTP Shares outstanding were as follows:

Issue Date |  | Shares Issued |  | Term Redemption Date |  | Extension Date
05/09/2012 |  | 2,500 |  | 12/01/2027 |  | 06/01/2024

VMTP Shares are a variable-rate form of preferred shares with a mandatory redemption date, unless earlier redeemed, repurchased or extended, and are considered debt for financial reporting purposes. On September 4, 2025, the Trust redeemed 624 Series
2015/6-VMO
VMTP Shares, with a liquidation preference of $100,000 per share to pay holders of record as of September 3, 2025, the redemption price, including accumulated but unpaid dividends, to holders of VMTP Shares called for redemption on such date, in connection with the partial redemption. VMTP Shares are subject to optional and mandatory redemption in certain circumstances. The redemption price per share is equal to the sum of the liquidation preference per share plus any accumulated but unpaid dividends and a redemption premium, if any. Starting six months prior to the term redemption date, the Trust will be required to earmark assets having a value equal to 110% of the redemption amount.
The Trust incurs costs in connection with the issuance and/or the extension of the VMTP Shares. These costs are recorded as a deferred charge and are amortized over the term life of the VMTP Shares. Amortization of these costs is included in
Interest, facilities and maintenance fees
on the Statement of Operations, and the unamortized balance is included in the value of
Variable rate muni term
preferred shares
on the Statement of Assets and Liabilities.
Dividends paid on the VMTP Shares (which are treated as interest expense for financial reporting purposes) are declared daily and paid monthly. The initial rate for dividends was equal to the sum of 1.10% per annum plus the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association Municipal Swap Index (the “SIFMA” Index). As of February 28, 2026, the dividend rate is equal to the SIFMA Index plus a spread of 1.23%, which is based on the long term preferred share ratings assigned to the VMTP Shares by a ratings agency. The average aggregate liquidation preference outstanding and the average annualized dividend rate of the VMTP Shares during the year ended February 28, 2026 were $281,969,315 and 3.82%, respectively.
The Trust utilizes the VMTP Shares as leverage in order to enhance the yield of its common shares. The primary risk associated with VMTP Shares is exposing the net asset value of the common shares and total return to increased volatility if the value of the Trust decreases while the value of the VMTP Shares remains unchanged. Fluctuations in the dividend rates on the VMTP Shares can also impact the Trust’s yield or its distributions to common shareholders. The Trust is subject to certain restrictions relating to the VMTP Shares, such as maintaining certain asset coverage and leverage ratio requirements. Failure to comply with these restrictions could

35 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

preclude the Trust from declaring any distributions to common shareholders or purchasing common shares and/or could trigger an increased rate which, if not cured, could cause the mandatory redemption of VMTP Shares at the liquidation preference plus any accumulated but unpaid dividends.
The liquidation preference of VMTP Shares, which approximates fair value, is recorded as a liability under the caption
Variable rate muni term preferred shares
on the Statement of Assets and Liabilities. The fair value of VMTP Shares is expected to be approximately their liquidation preference so long as the credit rating on the VMTP Shares, and therefore the “spread” on the VMTP Shares (determined in accordance with the VMTP Shares’ governing document) remains unchanged. At
period-end,
the Trust’s Adviser has determined that fair value of VMTP Shares is approximately their liquidation preference. Fair value could vary if market conditions change materially. Unpaid dividends on VMTP Shares are recognized as
Accrued interest expense
on the Statement of Assets and Liabilities. Dividends paid on VMTP Shares are recognized as a component of
Interest, facilities and maintenance fees
on the Statement of Operations.
NOTE 12–Dividends
The Trust declared the following dividends to common shareholders from net investment income subsequent to February 28, 2026:

Declaration Date |  | Amount per Share |  | Record Date |  |  | Payable Date |
March 2, 2026 |  | $0.0625 |  |  | March 16, 2026 |  |  |  | March 13, 2026 |
April 1, 2026 |  | $0.0625 |  |  | April 14, 2026 |  |  |  | April 30, 2026 |

36 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
To the Board of Trustees and Shareholders of Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust
Opinion on the Financial Statements
We have audited the accompanying statement of assets and liabilities, including the schedule of investments, of Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust (the “Trust”) as of February 28, 2026, the related statements of operations and cash flows for the year ended February 28, 2026, the statement of changes in net assets for each of the two years in the period ended February 28, 2026, including the related notes, and the financial highlights for each of the five years in the period ended February 28, 2026 (collectively referred to as the “financial statements”). In our opinion, the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Trust as of February 28, 2026, the results of its operations and its cash flows for the year then ended, the changes in its net assets for each of the two years in the period ended February 28, 2026 and the financial highlights for each of the five years in the period ended February 28, 2026 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
Basis for Opinion
These financial statements are the responsibility of the Trust’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Trust’s financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB) and are required to be independent with respect to the Trust in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.
We conducted our audits of these financial statements in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud.
Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. Our procedures included confirmation of securities owned as of February 28, 2026 by correspondence with the custodian and brokers. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
/s/PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Houston, Texas
April 28, 2026
We have served as the auditor of one or more of the investment companies in the Invesco group of investment companies since at least 1995. We have not been able to determine the specific year we began serving as auditor.

37 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

Tax Information
Form
1099-DIV,
Form
1042-S
and other year–end tax information provide shareholders with actual calendar year amounts that should be included in their tax returns. Shareholders should consult their tax advisers.
The following distribution information is being provided as required by the Internal Revenue Code or to meet a specific state’s requirement.
The Trust designates the following amounts or, if subsequently determined to be different, the maximum amount allowable for its fiscal year ended February 28, 2026:

Federal and State Income Tax |  |  |  |  |
Qualified Dividend Income* |  |  | 0.00% |
Corporate Dividends Received Deduction* |  |  | 0.00% |
U.S. Treasury Obligations* |  |  | 0.00% |
Qualified Business Income* |  |  | 0.00% |
Business Interest Income* |  |  | 0.00% |
Tax-Exempt Interest Dividends* |  |  | 99.11% |

| * | The above percentages are based on ordinary income dividends paid to shareholders during the Trust’s fiscal year.

38 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

Additional Information
Investment Objective, Policies and Principal Risks of the Trust
Recent Changes
During the Trust’s most recent fiscal year, there were no material changes in the Trust’s investment objectives or policies that have not been approved by shareholders or in the principal risk factors associated with investment in the Trust. This information may not reflect all of the changes that have occurred since you purchased the Trust.
Investment Objective
The investment objective of Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust (the “Trust”) is to provide common shareholders with a high level of current income exempt from federal income tax, consistent with preservation of capital. The investment objective is fundamental and may not be changed without approval of a majority of the Trust’s outstanding voting securities, as defined in the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”).
Investment Policies of the Trust
Under normal market conditions, at least 80% of the Trust’s net assets will be invested in municipal securities. The policy stated in the foregoing sentence is a fundamental policy of the Trust and may not be changed without approval of a majority of the Trust’s outstanding voting securities, as defined in the 1940 Act. Under normal market conditions, the Trust’s investment adviser, Invesco Advisers, Inc. (the “Adviser”), seeks to achieve the Trust’s investment objective by investing at least 80% of the Trust’s net assets in investment grade municipal securities. Investment grade securities are: (i) securities rated
BBB-
or higher by S&P Global Ratings (“S&P”) or Baa3 or higher by Moody’s Ratings (“Moody’s”) or an equivalent rating by another nationally recognized statistical rating organization (“NRSRO”), (ii) securities with comparable short-term NRSRO ratings, or (iii) unrated municipal securities determined by the Adviser to be of comparable quality, each at the time of purchase. Under normal market conditions, the Trust may invest up to 20% of its net assets in municipal securities rated below investment grade or that are unrated but determined by the Adviser to be of comparable quality at the time of purchase. Lower-grade securities are commonly referred to as junk bonds and involve greater risks than investments in higher-grade securities. The Trust may invest in securities that are in default or rated in categories lower than
B-
by S&P or B3 by Moody’s or unrated securities of comparable quality as part of the foregoing 20% limitation on below investment grade securities. If two or more NRSROs have assigned different ratings to a security, the Adviser uses the highest rating assigned.
†
The Trust may invest all or a substantial portion of its total assets in municipal securities that may subject certain investors to the federal alternative minimum tax and, therefore, a substantial portion of the income produced by the Trust may be taxable for such investors under the federal alternative minimum tax. Accordingly, the Trust may not be a suitable investment for investors who are already subject to the federal alternative minimum tax or could become subject to the federal alternative minimum tax as a result of an investment in the Trust.
The Adviser buys and sells securities for the Trust with a view towards seeking a high level of current income exempt from federal income taxes, subject to reasonable credit risk. As a result, the Trust will not necessarily invest in the highest yielding municipal securities permitted by its investment policies if the Adviser determines that market risks or credit risks associated with such investments would subject the Trust’s portfolio to undue risk. The potential realization of capital gains or losses resulting from possible changes in interest rates will not be a major consideration and frequency of portfolio turnover generally will not be a limiting factor if the Adviser considers it advantageous to purchase or sell securities.
The Trust may invest more than 25% of its total assets in a segment of the municipal securities market with similar characteristics if the Adviser determines that the yields available from obligations in a particular segment justify the additional risks of a larger investment in such segment. The Trust may not, however, invest more than 25% of its total assets in municipal securities issued for
non-governmental
entities that are in the same industry, such as many private activity bonds or industrial development revenue bonds. The Trust has no policy limiting its investments in municipal securities whose issuers are located in the same state. If the Trust were to invest a significant portion of its total assets in issuers located in the same state, it would be more susceptible to adverse economic, business or regulatory conditions in that state.
The Adviser actively manages the Trust’s portfolio and adjusts the average maturity of portfolio investments based upon its expectations regarding the direction of interest rates and other economic factors. The Adviser seeks to identify those securities that it believes entail reasonable credit risk considered in relation to the Trust’s investment policies. In selecting securities for investment, the Adviser uses its extensive research capabilities to assess potential investments and considers a number of factors, including general market and economic conditions and interest rate, credit and prepayment risks. Each security considered for investment is subjected to an
in-depth
credit analysis to evaluate the level of risk it presents. Finally, the Adviser employs leverage in an effort to enhance the Trust’s income and total return.
Decisions to purchase or sell securities are determined by the relative value considerations of the portfolio managers that factor in economic and credit-related fundamentals, market supply and demand, market dislocations and situation-specific opportunities. The purchase or sale of securities may be related to a decision to alter the Trust’s macro risk exposure (such as duration, yield curve positioning and sector exposure), a need to limit or reduce the Trust’s exposure to a particular security or issuer, degradation of an issuer’s credit quality, or general liquidity needs of the Trust. The potential for realization of capital gains or losses resulting from possible changes in interest rates will not be a major consideration and frequency of portfolio turnover generally will not be a limiting factor if the Adviser
considers it ad
vanta
geous to p
urch
ase or sell securities.
Municipal Securities
. Municipal securities are obligations issued by or on behalf of states, territories or possessions of the United States, the District of Columbia and their cities, counties, political subdivisions, agencies and instrumentalities, the interest on which, in the opinion of bond counsel or other counsel to the issuers of such securities, is, at the time of issuance, exempt from federal income tax. The Adviser does not conduct its own analysis of the tax status of the interest paid by municipal securities held by the Trust, but will rely on the opinion of counsel to the issuer of each such instrument.
The yields of municipal securities depend on, among other things, general market conditions, general conditions of the municipal securities market, size of a particular offering, the maturity of the obligation and rating of the issue. There is no limitation as to the maturity of the municipal securities in which the Trust may invest. The ratings of NRSROs represent their opinions of the quality of the municipal securities they undertake to rate. These ratings are general and are not absolute standards of quality. Consequently, municipal securities with the same maturity, coupon and rating may have different yields while municipal securities of the same maturity and coupon with different ratings may have the same yield. The Adviser may adjust the average maturity of the Trust’s portfolio from time to time depending on its assessment of the relative yields available on securities of different maturities and its expectations of future changes in interest rates.
The principal types of municipal debt securities purchased by the Trust are revenue obligations and general obligations. Revenue obligations are usually payable only from the revenues derived from a particular facility or class of facilities or, in some cases, from the proceeds of a special excise tax or other specific revenue source, but not from the general taxing power. Revenue obligations may include industrial development, pollution control, public utility, housing, and health care issues. General obligation securities are secured by the issuer’s pledge of its faith, credit and taxing power for the payment of principal and interest.
Within these principal classifications of municipal securities, there are a variety of types of municipal securities, including but not limited to:
∎
Variable rate securities, which bear rates of interest that are adjusted periodically according to formulae intended to reflect market rates of interest.
∎
Municipal notes, including tax, revenue and bond anticipation notes of short maturity, generally less than three years, which are issued to obtain temporary funds for various public purposes.
∎
Variable rate demand notes, which are obligations that contain a floating or variable interest rate adjustment formula and which are subject to a right of demand for payment of the principal balance plus accrued interest either at any time or at specified intervals. The interest rate on a variable rate demand note may be based on a known lending rate, such as a bank’s prime rate, and may be

39 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

adjusted when such rate changes, or the interest rate may be a market rate that is adjusted at specified intervals. The adjustment formula maintains the value of the variable rate demand note at approximately the par value of such note at the adjustment date.
∎
Municipal leases, which are obligations issued by state and local governments or authorities to finance the acquisition of equipment and facilities. Certain municipal lease obligations may include
non-appropriation
clauses which provide that the municipality has no obligation to make lease or installment purchase payments in future years unless money is appropriated for such purpose on a yearly basis.
∎
Private activity bonds, which are issued by, or on behalf of, public authorities to finance privately operated facilities.
∎
Participation certificates, which are obligations issued by state or local governments or authorities to finance the acquisition of equipment and facilities. They may represent participations in a lease, an installment purchase contract or a conditional sales contract.
∎
Municipal securities that may not be backed by the faith, credit and taxing power of the issuer.
∎
Municipal securities that are privately placed and that may have restrictions on the Trust’s ability to resell, such as timing restrictions or requirements that the securities only be sold to qualified institutional investors.
∎
Municipal securities that are insured by financial insurance companies.
Derivatives
. The Trust may use derivative instruments, including futures, for a variety of purposes, including hedging, risk management, portfolio management or to earn income. Derivatives that the Trust may principally use include futures.
Inverse Floating Rate Interests
. The Trust may invest in inverse floating rate interests for investment purposes and to enhance the yield of the Trust. Inverse floating rate interests are variable rate debt instruments that pay interest at rates that move in the opposite direction of prevailing interest rates. Inverse floating rate interests in which the Trust may invest include derivative instruments such as residual interest bonds, tender option bonds or municipal bond trust certificates. Such instruments are typically created by a special purpose trust (the TOB Trust) that holds long-term fixed rate bonds, which are contributed by the Trust (the underlying security), and sells two classes of beneficial interests: short term floating rate interests, which are sold to or held by third party investors, and inverse floating residual interests, which are purchased by the Trust. Because the interest rate paid to holders of such interests is generally determined by subtracting the available or floating rate from a predetermined amount, the interest rate paid to holders of such interests will decrease as such variable or floating rate increases and increase as such variable or floating rate decrease. For additional information regarding Inverse Floating Rate Interests, see “Notes to Financial Statements.”
When-Issued and Delayed-Delivery Transactions
. The Trust may purchase municipal securities on a “when-issued” basis and may purchase or sell such securities on a “delayed-delivery” basis, which means that a Trust buys or sells a security with payment and delivery taking place in the future. The payment obligation and the interest rate are fixed at the time a Trust enters into the commitment. No
income accrues on such securities until the date a Trust actually takes delivery of the securities.
Restricted Securities
. The Trust may invest in securities subject to contractual restrictions on resale.
Rule 144A Securities and Other Exempt Securities
. The Trust may invest in Rule 144A securities and other types of exempt securities, which are not registered for sale pursuant to an exemption from registration under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.
Preferred Shares
. The Trust may issue preferred shares as leverage. The Trust currently utilizes VMTP Shares as leverage in order to enhance the yield of its common shareholders. For additional information regarding the VMTP Shares, see “Notes to Financial Statements.”
Zero
Coupon/Pay-in-Kind
Securities
. The Trust may invest in securities not producing immediate cash income, including zero coupon securities or
pay-in-kind
securities, when their effective yield over comparable instruments producing cash income makes these investments attractive. Zero coupon securities are debt securities that do not entitle the holder to any periodic payment of interest prior to maturity or a specified date when the securities begin paying current interest.
Pay-in-kind
securities are debt securities that pay interest through the issuance of additional securities.
Temporary Defensive Strategy
. When market conditions dictate a more defensive investment strategy, the Trust may, on a temporary basis, hold cash or invest a portion or all of its assets in high-quality, short-term municipal securities. If such municipal securities are not available or, in the judgment of the Adviser, do not afford sufficient protection against adverse market conditions, the Trust may invest in taxable instruments. Such taxable securities may include securities issued or guaranteed by the U.S. government, its agencies or instrumentalities, other investment grade quality fixed income securities, prime commercial paper, certificates of deposit, bankers’ acceptances and other obligations of domestic banks, repurchase agreements and money market funds (including money market funds affiliated with the Adviser). In taking a defensive position, the Trust would temporarily not be pursuing its principal investment strategies and may not achieve its inve
stm
ent objective.
Principal Risks of Investing in the Trust
As with any fund investment, loss of money is a risk of investing. The risks associated with an investment in the Trust can increase during times of significant market volatility. The principal risks of investing in the Trust are:
Market Risk
. The market values of the Trust’s investments, and therefore the value of the Trust’s shares, will go up and down, sometimes rapidly or unpredictably. Market risk may affect a single issuer, industry or section of the economy, or it may affect the market as a whole. The value of the Trust’s investments may go up or down due to general market conditions that are not specifically related to the particular issuer, such as real or perceived adverse economic conditions, changes in the general outlook for revenues or corporate earnings, changes in interest or currency rates, regional or global instability and uncertainty, or adverse investor sentiment generally. The value of the Trust’s investments may also go up or down due to factors that affect an individual issuer or a particular industry
or sector, such as changes in production costs and competitive conditions within an industry. In addition, economies and financial markets throughout the world have become increasingly interconnected, which increases the likelihood that events or conditions in one region or country will adversely affect markets or issuers in other regions or countries. Natural or environmental disasters, widespread disease or other public health issues, war, military conflict, acts of terrorism, changes in trade regulation, including tariffs or economic sanctions, economic crisis or other events may have a significant impact on the value of the Trust’s investments, as well as the financial markets and global economy generally. Such circumstances may also impact the ability to effectively implement the Trust’s investment strategy. During a general downturn in the financial markets, multiple asset classes may decline in value. When markets perform well, there can be no assurance that specific investments held by the Trust will rise in value.
Increasingly strained relations between the U.S. and foreign countries may adversely affect U.S. issuers, as well as
non-U.S.
issuers. A decrease in U.S. imports or exports, changes in trade regulations, including the imposition of tariffs or other economic sanctions on traditional allies or adversaries and their responses thereto, inflation, and/or an economic recession in the U.S. may have a material adverse effect on the U.S. economy, global financial markets as a whole and the securities to which the Trust has exposure. Proposed and adopted policy and legislative actions in the U.S. may impact many aspects of financial and other regulations and may have a significant effect, including potentially adversely, on U.S. markets generally and the value of certain securities. The continued maintenance of elevated debt levels by the U.S. government as projected by governmental agencies and
non-governmental
organizations, or the imposition of U.S. austerity measures, could potentially constrain future economic growth and the ability to effectively respond to economic downturns. If these trends were to continue, they could adversely impact the U.S. economy, global financial markets as a whole and the securities in which the Trust invests.

∎ | Market Disruption Risks Related to Armed Conflict and Geopolitical Tension . As a result of increasingly interconnected global economies and financial markets, armed conflict and geopolitical tension between countries or in a geographic region, for example continuing conflicts between Russia and Ukraine in Europe and the war in Iran, have the potential to adversely impact the Trust’s investments. Such conflicts and tensions, and other corresponding events, have had, and could continue to have, severe negative effects on regional and global economic and financial markets, including increased volatility, reduced liquidity, and overall uncertainty. The negative impacts may be particularly acute in certain sectors. The timing and duration of such conflicts and tensions, resulting sanctions, related events and other impacts cannot be predicted. The foregoing may result in a negative impact on Trust performance and the value of an investment in the Trust, even beyond any direct investment exposure the Trust may have to issuers located in or with significant exposure to an impacted country or geographic regions.

Debt Securities Risk
. The prices of debt securities held by the Trust will be affected by

40 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

changes in interest rates, the creditworthiness of the issuer and other factors. An increase in prevailing interest rates typically causes the value of existing debt securities to fall and often has a greater impact on longer-duration debt securities and higher quality debt securities. Falling interest rates will cause the Trust to reinvest the proceeds of debt securities that have been repaid by the issuer at lower interest rates. Falling interest rates may also reduce the Trust’s distributable income because interest payments on floating rate debt instruments held by the Trust will decline. The Trust could lose money on investments in debt securities if the issuer or borrower fails to meet its obligations to make interest payments and/or to repay principal in a timely manner. If an issuer seeks to restructure the terms of its borrowings or the Trust is required to seek recovery upon a default in the payment of interest or the repayment of principal, the Trust may incur additional expenses. Changes in an issuer’s financial strength, the market’s perception of such strength or in the credit rating of the issuer or the security may affect the value of debt securities. The credit analysis applied to the Trust’s debt securities may fail to anticipate such changes, which could result in buying a debt security at an inopportune time or failing to sell a debt security in advance of a price decline or other credit event.
Municipal Securities Risk
. The risk of a municipal obligation generally depends on the financial and credit status of the issuer. Constitutional amendments, legislative enactments, executive orders, administrative regulations, voter initiatives, and the issuer’s regional economic conditions may affect the municipal security’s value, interest payments, repayment of principal and the Trust’s ability to sell the security. Municipal obligations may be more susceptible to downgrades or defaults during recessions or similar periods of economic stress. Municipal securities structured as revenue bonds are generally not backed by the taxing power of the issuing municipality but rather the revenue from the particular project or entity for which the bonds were issued. If the Internal Revenue Service determines that an issuer of a municipal security has not complied with applicable tax requirements, interest from the security could be treated as taxable, which could result in a decline in the security’s value. In addition, there could be changes in applicable tax laws or tax treatments that reduce or eliminate the current federal income tax exemption on municipal securities or otherwise adversely affect the current federal or state tax status of municipal securities.
Changing Fixed Income Market
Conditions Risk
. Increases in the federal funds and equivalent foreign rates or other changes to monetary policy or regulatory actions may expose fixed income markets to heightened volatility, perhaps suddenly and to a significant degree, and to reduced liquidity for certain fixed income investments, particularly those with longer maturities. It is difficult to predict the impact of interest rate changes on various markets. In addition, decreases in fixed income dealer market-making capacity may also potentially lead to heightened volatility and reduced liquidity in the fixed income markets. As a result, the value of the Trust’s investments and share price may decline. Changes in central bank policies and other governmental actions and political events within the U.S. and abroad, the U.S. government’s inability at times to agree on a
long-term budget and deficit reduction plan or other legislation aimed at addressing financial or economic conditions, the threat of a federal government shutdown, and threats not to increase or suspend the federal government’s debt limit may also, among other things, affect investor and consumer expectations and confidence in the financial markets, including in the U.S. government’s credit rating and ability to service its debt. Such changes and events may adversely impact the Trust, including its operations, universe of potential investment options, and return potential.
Interest Rate Risk
. Interest rate risk is the risk that rising interest rates will cause the values of the Trust’s investments to decline. The values of debt securities usually change when prevailing interest rates change. When interest rates rise, the values of outstanding debt securities generally fall, and those securities may sell at a discount from their face amount. When interest rates rise, the decrease in values of outstanding debt securities may not be offset by higher income from new investments. When interest rates fall, the values of already-issued debt securities generally rise. However, when interest rates fall, the Trust’s investments in new securities may be at lower yields and may reduce the Trust’s income. The values of longer-term debt securities usually change more than the values of shorter-term debt securities when interest rates change; thus, interest rate risk is usually greater for securities with longer maturities or durations. “Zero-coupon” or “stripped” securities may be particularly sensitive to interest rate changes.
Market Discount from Net Asset Value Risk
. Shares of
closed-end
investment companies like the Trust frequently trade at prices lower than their net asset value. Because the market price of the Trust’s common shares is determined by factors such as relative market supply and demand, general market and economic circumstances, and other factors beyond the control of the Trust, the Trust cannot predict whether its shares of common stock will trade at, below or above net asset value. This characteristic is a risk separate and distinct from the risk that the Trust’s net asset value could decrease as a result of investment activities. Common shareholders bear a risk of loss to the extent that the price at which they sell their shares is lower than at the time of purchase.
High Yield Debt Securities (Junk Bond) Risk
. Compared to higher quality debt securities, high yield debt securities (commonly referred to as “junk bonds”) and other lower-rated securities involve a greater risk of default or price changes due to changes in the credit quality of the issuer because they are generally unsecured and may be subordinated to other creditors’ claims. High yield debt securities are considered speculative with respect to the issuer’s capacity to pay interest and repay principal, are more susceptible to default or decline in market value and are less liquid than investment grade debt securities. Prices of high yield debt securities tend to be very volatile. The values of high yield debt securities often fluctuate more in response to political, regulatory or economic developments than higher quality bonds, and their values can decline significantly over short periods of time or during periods of economic difficulty when the bonds could be difficult to value or sell at a fair price, thus subjecting the Trust to a substantial risk of loss.
Medium- and Lower-Grade Municipal Securities Risk
. Securities which are in the medium- and lower-grade categories generally offer higher yields than are offered by higher-grade securities of similar maturity, but they also generally involve more volatility and greater risks, such as greater credit risk, market risk, liquidity risk and management risk. Furthermore, many issuers of medium- and lower-grade securities choose not to have a rating assigned to their obligations by any nationally recognized statistical rating organization. As such, the Trust’s portfolio may consist of a higher portion of unrated securities as compared with an investment company that invests solely in higher-grade securities. Unrated securities may not be as attractive to as many buyers as are rated securities, a factor which may make unrated securities less able to be sold at a desirable time or price. These factors may limit the ability of the Trust to sell such securities at their fair value either to raise cash or in response to changes in the economy or the financial markets.
Unrated Securities Risk
. The Adviser may internally assign ratings to securities that are not rated by any nationally recognized statistical rating organization, after assessing their credit quality and other factors, in categories similar to those of nationally recognized statistical rating organizations. There can be no assurance, nor is it intended, that the Adviser’s credit analysis process is consistent or comparable with the credit analysis process used by a nationally recognized statistical rating organization. Unrated securities are considered “investment-grade” or “below-investment-grade” if judged by the Adviser to be comparable to rated investment-grade or below-investment-grade securities. The Adviser’s rating does not constitute a guarantee of the credit quality. In addition, some unrated securities may not have an active trading market or may trade less actively than rated securities, which means that the Trust might have difficulty selling them promptly at an acceptable price.
In evaluating the credit quality of a particular security, whether rated or unrated, the Adviser will normally take into consideration a number of factors such as, if applicable, the financial resources of the issuer, the underlying source of funds for debt service on a security, the issuer’s sensitivity to economic conditions and trends, any operating history of the facility financed by the obligation, the degree of community support for the financed facility, the capabilities of the issuer’s management, and regulatory factors affecting the issuer or the particular facility. A reduction in the rating of a security after the Trust buys it will not require the Trust to dispose of the security. However, the Adviser will evaluate such downgraded securities to determine whether to keep them in the Trust’s portfolio.
Defaulted Securities Risk
. Defaulted securities, where the issuer has defaulted on the payment of interest and/or principal, are speculative and involve substantial risks. Although defaulted securities can offer significant potential for higher returns or for an exchange offer for other securities that offer this potential, there can be no assurance that the Trust will achieve these returns or that the issuer will make an exchange offer. The Trust will generally not receive interest payments on defaulted securities and may incur costs to protect its investment. In addition, defaulted securities involve the substantial risk that principal will not be repaid.

41 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

Defaulted securities and any s
ecu
rities received in an exchange for such securities may be subject to restrictions on resale.
Credit Risk
. The issuers of instruments in which the Trust invests may be unable to meet interest and/or principal payments. This risk is increased to the extent the Trust invests in junk bonds, which may cause the Trust to incur higher expenses to protect its interests. The credit risks and market prices of lower-grade securities generally are more sensitive to negative issuer developments, such as reduced revenues or increased expenditures, or adverse economic conditions, such as a recession, than are higher-grade securities. An issuer’s securities may decrease in value if its financial strength weakens, which may reduce its credit rating and possibly its ability to meet its contractual obligations. In the event that an issuer of securities held by the Trust experiences difficulties in the timely payment of principal and interest and such issuer seeks to restructure the terms of its borrowings, the Trust may incur additional expenses and may determine to invest additional assets with respect to such issuer or the project or projects to which the Trust’s securities relate. Further, the Trust may incur additional expenses to the extent that it is required to seek recovery upon a default in the payment of interest or the repayment of principal on its portfolio holdings and the Trust may be unable to obtain full recovery on such amounts.
Income Risk
. The income you receive from the Trust is based primarily on interest rates, which can vary widely over the short- and long-term. If interest rates drop, your income from the Trust may drop as well. The more the Trust invests in adjustable, variable or floating rate securities or in securities susceptible to prepayment risk, the greater the Trust’s income risk.
Call Risk
. If interest rates fall, it is possible that issuers of securities with high interest rates will prepay or call their securities before their maturity dates. In this event, the proceeds from the called securities would likely be reinvested by the Trust in securities bearing the new, lower interest rates, resulting in a possible decline in the Trust’s income and distributions to shareholders.
Municipal Issuer Focus Risk
. The municipal issuers in which the Trust invests may be located in the same geographic area or may pay their interest obligations from revenue of similar projects, such as hospitals, airports, utility systems and housing finance agencies. This may make the Trust’s investments more susceptible to similar social, economic, political or regulatory occurrences, making the Trust more susceptible to experience a drop in its share price than if the Trust had been more diversified across issuers that did not have similar characteristics. From time to time, the Trust’s investments may include securities that alone or together with securities held by other funds or accounts managed by the Adviser, represents a major portion or all of an issue of municipal securities. Because there may be relatively few potential purchasers for such investments and, in some cases, there may be contractual restrictions on resales, the Trust may find it more difficult to sell such securities at a desirable time or price.
Insurance Risk
. Financial insurance guarantees that interest payments on a bond will be made on time and that principal will be repaid when the bond matures. Insured municipal obligations would generally be assigned a lower rating if the rating was
based primarily on the credit quality of the issuer without regard to the insurance feature. If the claims-paying ability of the insurer were downgraded, the ratings on the municipal obligations it insures may also be downgraded. Insurance does not protect the Trust against losses caused by declines in a bond’s value due to a change in market conditions.
Alternative Minimum Tax Risk
. Although the interest received from municipal securities generally is exempt from federal income tax, the Trust may invest all or a portion of its total assets in municipal securities subject to the federal alternative minimum tax. Accordingly, investment in the Trust could cause shareholders to be subject to, or result in an increased liability under, the federal alternative minimum tax.
Taxability Risk
. The Trust’s investments in municipal securities rely on the opinion of the issuer’s bond counsel that the interest paid on those securities will not be subject to federal income tax. Tax opinions are generally provided at the time the municipal security is initially issued. However, tax opinions are not binding on the Internal Revenue Service or any court and after the Trust buys a security, the Internal Revenue Service or a court may determine that a bond issued as
tax-exempt
should in fact be taxable and the Trust’s dividends with respect to that bond might be subject to federal income tax. As a result, the treatment of dividends previously paid or to be paid by the Trust as “exempt-interest dividends” could be adversely affected, subjecting the Trust’s shareholders to increased federal income tax liabilities. In addition, income from
tax-exempt
municipal securities could be declared taxable because of unfavorable changes in tax laws, adverse interpretations by the Internal Revenue Service or a court, or the
non-compliant
conduct of a bond issuer. The value of the Trust’s investments and its net asset value may be adversely affected by changes in tax rates and policies. Because interest income from municipal securities is normally not subject to regular federal income taxation, the attractiveness of municipal securities in relation to other investment alternatives is affected by changes in federal income tax rates or changes in the
tax-exempt
status of interest income from municipal securities. Any proposed or actual changes in such rates or exempt status, therefore, can significantly affect the demand for and supply, liquidity and marketability of municipal securities. This could in turn affect the Trust’s net asset value and ability to acquire and dispose of municipal securities at desirable yield and price levels.
Inverse Floating Rate Interests Risk
. Inverse floating rate interests (Inverse Floaters) are issued in connection with municipal tender option bond (TOB) financing transactions to generate leverage for the Trust. Such instruments are created by a special purpose trust (a TOB Trust) that holds long-term fixed rate bonds, sold to it by the Trust (the underlying security), and issues two classes of beneficial interests: short-term floating rate interests (Floaters), which are sold to other investors, and Inverse Floaters, which are purchased by the Trust. The Floaters have first priority on the cash flow from the underlying security held by the TOB Trust, have a tender option feature that allows holders to tender the Floaters back to the TOB Trust for their par amount and accrued interest at specified intervals and bear interest at prevailing short-term interest rates. Tendered Floaters are remarketed for sale to other investors for their par amount and accrued
interest by a remarketing agent to the TOB Trust and are ultimately supported by a liquidity facility provided by a bank, upon which the TOB Trust can draw funds to pay such amount to holders of Tendered Floaters that cannot be remarketed. The Trust, as holder of the Inverse Floaters, is paid the residual cash flow from the underlying security. Accordingly, the Inverse Floaters provide the Trust with leveraged exposure to the underlying security. When short-term interest rates rise or fall, the interest payable on the Floaters issued by a TOB Trust will, respectively, rise or fall, leaving less or more, respectively, residual interest cash flow from the underlying security available for payment on the Inverse Floaters. Thus, as short-term interest rates rise, Inverse Floaters produce less income for the Trust, and as short-term interest rates decline, Inverse Floaters produce more income for the Trust. The price of Inverse Floaters is expected to decline when interest rates rise and increase when interest rates decline, in either case generally more so than the price of a bond with a similar maturity, because of the effect of leverage. As a result, the price of Inverse Floaters is typically more volatile than the price of bonds with similar maturities, especially if the relevant TOB Trust is structured to provide the holder of the Inverse Floaters relatively greater leveraged exposure to the underlying security (e.g., if the par amount of the Floaters, as a percentage of the par amount of the underlying security, is relatively greater). Upon the occurrence of certain adverse events (including a credit ratings downgrade of the underlying security or a substantial decrease in the market value of the underlying security), a TOB Trust may be collapsed by the remarketing agent or liquidity provider and the underlying security liquidated, and the Trust could lose the entire amount of its investment in the Inverse Floater and may, in some cases, be contractually required to pay the shortfall, if any, between the liquidation value of the underlying security and the principal amount of the Floaters. Consequently, in a rising interest rate environment, the Trust’s investments in Inverse Floaters could negatively impact the Trust’s performance and yield, especially when those Inverse Floaters provide the Trust with relatively greater leveraged exposure to the underlying securities held by the relevant TOB Trusts.
Liquidity Risk
. The Trust may be unable to sell illiquid investments at the time or price it desires and, as a result, could lose its entire investment in such investments. An investment may be illiquid due to a lack of trading volume in the investment or if the investment is privately placed and not traded in any public market or is otherwise restricted from trading. Liquid securities can become illiquid during periods of market stress.
Restricted Securities Risk
. Limitations on the resale of restricted securities may have an adverse effect on their marketability, and may prevent the Trust from disposing of them promptly at reasonable prices. There can be no assurance that a trading market will exist at any time for any particular restricted security. Transaction costs may be higher for restricted securities. Also, restricted securities may be difficult to value because market quotations may not be readily available, and the securities may have significant volatility. In addition, the Trust may get only limited information about the issuer of a restricted security and therefore may be less able to predict a loss.

42 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

Rule 144A Securities and Other Exempt Securities Risk
. The Trust may invest in Rule 144A securities and other types of exempt securities, which are not registered for sale pursuant to an exemption from registration under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “1933 Act” or “Securities Act”). These securities are also known as privately issued securities, and typically may be resold only to qualified institutional buyers, or in a privately negotiated transaction, or to a limited number of purchasers, or in limited quantities after they have been held for a specified period of time and other conditions are met for an exemption from registration. Although such securities may be determined to be liquid, if there are an insufficient number of qualified institutional buyers interested in purchasing such securities at a particular time, the Trust may have difficulty selling such securities at a desirable time or price. As a result, the Trust’s investment in such securities may be subject to increased liquidity risk. In addition, the issuers of Rule 144A securities may require their qualified institutional buyers (such as the Trust) to keep certain offering information confidential, which could adversely affect the ability of the Trust to sell such securities.
Tobacco Related Bonds Risk
. The Trust may invest in tobacco settlement revenue bonds and tobacco bonds subject to a state’s appropriation pledge (STA Tobacco Bonds).

∎ | Tobacco Settlement Revenue Bonds Risk . Tobacco settlement revenue bonds are secured by payments made under the Master Settlement Agreement (MSA), which provides for annual payments by participating tobacco manufacturers to certain U.S. states and jurisdictions in perpetuity. A number of states and local governments have securitized the future flow of those payments by selling bonds backed by the future revenue flows from the tobacco manufacturers. Annual payments on the bonds, and thus the risk to the Trust, are dependent on the receipt of future settlement payments by the state or its instrumentality. The actual amount of future settlement payments is dependent on many factors including, but not limited to, annual domestic cigarette shipments, cigarette consumption, inflation and the financial capability of participating tobacco companies. Accordingly, payments made by tobacco manufacturers could be reduced if there is a significant decrease in tobacco consumption, which could be a result of, among other things, increased regulation or restrictions on cigarette sales or smoking, anti-smoking campaigns, tax increases, price increases or increased competition from other nicotine delivery devices. A market share loss by the MSA companies to non-MSA participating tobacco manufacturers or issues affecting a tobacco manufacturer, such as bankruptcy, could also cause a reduction or delay in bond payments, which could affect the Trust’s net asset value. Because tobacco settlement revenue bonds are backed by payments from the tobacco manufacturers, and generally not by the credit of the state or local government issuing the bonds, their creditworthiness depends on the ability of tobacco manufacturers to meet their obligations. The MSA and tobacco manufacturers have been and continue to be subject to various legal claims and an adverse outcome could affect the payment

| streams associated with the MSA or cause delays or reductions in bond payments.

∎ | “Subject to Appropriation” (STA) Tobacco Bonds Risk . STA Tobacco Bonds rely on both the revenue from the MSA and a state appropriation pledge. “Government appropriation” or “subject to appropriation” bonds (or “appropriation debt”) are typically payable from two distinct sources: (i) a dedicated revenue source (in the case of tobacco bonds, the MSA funds), and (ii) the issuer’s general funds. Appropriation debt differs from a state’s general obligation debt in that general obligation debt is backed by the state’s full faith, credit and taxing power, while appropriation debt requires the state to pass a specific periodic appropriation to pay interest and/or principal on the bonds, which is usually made annually. While STA Tobacco Bonds offer an enhanced credit support feature, that feature is generally not an unconditional guarantee of payment by a state and states generally do not pledge the full faith, credit or taxing power of the state.

Investing in U.S. Territories,
Commonwealths and Possessions Risk
. The Trust also invests in obligations of the governments of U.S. territories, commonwealths and possessions such as Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands to the extent such obligations are exempt from regular federal individual and state income taxes. Accordingly, the Trust may be adversely affected by local political, economic, social and environmental conditions and developments, including natural disasters, within these U.S. territories, commonwealths and possessions affecting the issuers of such obligations.
Certain of the municipalities in which the Trust invests, including Puerto Rico, currently experience significant financial difficulties, which may include default, insolvency or bankruptcy. As a result, securities issued by certain of these municipalities are currently considered below-investment-grade securities. A credit rating downgrade relating to, default by, or insolvency or bankruptcy of, one or several municipal security issuers of a state, territory, commonwealth or possession in which the Trust invests could affect the payment of principal and interest, the market values and marketability of many or all municipal obligations of such state, territory, commonwealth or possession. For the past several years, Puerto Rico has faced and continues to face significant fiscal challenges, including persistent government deficits, underfunded public pension benefit obligations, underfunded government retirement systems, sizable debt service obligations and a high unemployment rate. The amount of its outstanding public debt will make it very difficult for Puerto Rico to make full repayment. Certain issuers of Puerto Rico municipal securities have filed for bankruptcy and/or failed to make payments on obligations that have come due. As a result of Puerto Rico’s challenging economic and fiscal environment, certain securities issued by Puerto Rico and its agencies are currently considered below-investment-grade securities. If the economic situation in Puerto Rico persists or worsens, the volatility, liquidity, credit quality and performance of the Trust could be adversely affected. The outcome of the debt restructuring of certain Puerto Rican issuers in which the Trust invests, both within and outside bankruptcy proceedings is uncertain, and could adversely affect the Trust.
Preferred Shares Risk
. The primary risk associated with the Trust’s issuance of preferred shares, such as the VMTP Shares, is exposing the net asset value of the common shares and total return to increased volatility if the value of the Trust decreases while the value of the preferred shares remains unchanged. Fluctuations in the dividend rates on the VMTP Shares can also impact the Trust’s yield or its distributions to common shareholders. The Trust is subject to certain restrictions relating to the VMTP Shares, such as maintaining certain asset coverage and leverage ratio requirements. Failure to comply with these restrictions could preclude the Trust from declaring any distributions to common shareholders or purchasing common shares and/or could trigger an increased rate which, if not cured, could cause the mandatory redemption of VMTP Shares at the liquidation preference plus any accumulated but unpaid dividends. For additional information regarding the risks of VMTP Shares, see “Notes to Financial Statements”.
When-Issued, Delayed Delivery and Forward Commitment Risks
. When-issued and delayed delivery transactions are subject to market risk as the value or yield of a security at delivery may be more or less than the purchase price or the yield generally available on securities when delivery occurs. In addition, the Trust is subject to counterparty risk because it relies on the buyer or seller, as the case may be, to consummate the transaction, and failure by the counterparty to complete the transaction may result in the Trust missing the opportunity of obtaining a price or yield considered to be advantageous. These transactions have a leveraging effect on the Trust because the Trust commits to purchase securities that it does not have to pay for until a later date. These investments therefore increase the Trust’s overall investment exposure and, as a result, its volatility. Typically, no income accrues on securities the Trust has committed to purchase prior to the time delivery of the securities is made.
Zero Coupon or
Pay-In-Kind
Securities Risk
. Zero coupon and
pay-in-kind
securities may be subject to greater fluctuation in value and less liquidity in the event of adverse market conditions than comparably rated securities paying cash interest at regular interest payment periods. Prices on
non-cash-paying
instruments may be more sensitive to changes in the issuer’s financial condition, fluctuation in interest rates and market demand/supply imbalances than cash-paying securities with similar credit ratings, and thus may be more speculative. Investors may purchase zero coupon and
pay-in-kind
securities at a price below the amount payable at maturity. Because such securities do not entitle the holder to any periodic payments of interest prior to maturity, this prevents any reinvestment of interest payments at prevailing interest rates if prevailing interest rates rise. The higher yields and interest rates on
pay-in-kind
securities reflect the payment deferral and increased credit risk associated with such instruments and that such investments may represent a higher credit risk than coupon loans.
Pay-in-kind
securities may have a potential variability in valuations because their continuing accruals require continuing judgments about the collectability of the deferred payments and the value of any associated collateral. Special tax considerations are associated with investing in certain lower-grade securities, such as zero coupon or
pay-in-kind
securities.

43 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

Derivatives Risk
. The value of a derivative instrument depends largely on (and is derived from) the value of an underlying security, currency, commodity, interest rate, index or other asset (each referred to as an underlying asset). In addition to risks relating to the underlying assets, the use of derivatives may include other, possibly greater, risks, including counterparty, leverage and liquidity risks. Counterparty risk is the risk that the counterparty to the derivative contract will default on its obligation to pay the Trust the amount owed or otherwise perform under the derivative contract. Derivatives create leverage risk because they do not require payment up front equal to the economic exposure created by holding a position in the derivative. As a result, an adverse change in the value of the underlying asset could result in the Trust sustaining a loss that is substantially greater than the amount invested in the derivative or the anticipated value of the underlying asset, which may make the Trust’s returns more volatile and increase the risk of loss. Derivative instruments may also be less liquid than more traditional investments and the Trust may be unable to sell or close out its derivative positions at a desirable time or price. This risk may be more acute under adverse market conditions, during which the Trust may be most in need of liquidating its derivative positions. Derivatives may also be harder to value, less tax efficient and subject to changing government regulation that could impact the Trust’s ability to use certain derivatives or their cost. Derivatives strategies may not always be successful. For example, derivatives used for hedging or to gain or limit exposure to a particular market segment may not provide the expected benefits, particularly during adverse market conditions.
Variable-Rate Demand Notes Risk
. There may not be an active secondary market with respect to particular variable and floating rate instruments in which the Trust invests, which could make it difficult to dispose of these instruments during periods that the Trust is not entitled to exercise its demand rights or if the issuer and/or remarketing agent defaulted on its payment obligation. This could cause the Trust to suffer a loss with respect to such instruments.
Repurchase Agreements Risk
. If the seller of a repurchase agreement defaults or otherwise does not fulfill its obligations, the Trust may incur delays and losses arising from selling the underlying securities, enforcing its rights, or declining collateral value. These risks are magnified to the extent that a repurchase agreement is secured by securities other than cash or U.S. government securities.
Valuation Risk
. The price the Trust could receive upon the sale of a portfolio investment may differ from the Trust’s valuation of the investment, particularly for investments that trade in thin or volatile markets or that are valued using a fair valuation methodology. Financial information related to securities of
non-U.S.
issuers may be less reliable than information related to securities of U.S. issuers, which may make it difficult to obtain a current price for a
non-U.S.
security held by the Trust. When market quotations are not readily available for Trust investments, those investments are fair valued by the Adviser. There are multiple methods that can be used to fair value a portfolio investment and such methods may involve more subjectivity than the use of market quotations. The value established for an investment through fair valuation may be different from what would be produced if the investment had been valued using market quotations. In addition, there is no
assurance that the Trust could sell a portfolio investment at any time for the value ascribed to it for purposes of calculating the Trust’s net asset value, and it is possible that the Trust could incur a loss because an investment is sold at a discount to its ascribed value. The ability to value investments may also be impacted by technological issues and/or errors by pricing services or other third-party service providers.
Management Risk
. The Trust is actively managed and depends heavily on the Adviser’s judgment about markets, interest rates or the attractiveness, relative values, liquidity, or potential appreciation of particular investments made for the Trust’s portfolio. The Trust could experience losses if these judgments prove to be incorrect. There can be no guarantee that the Adviser’s investment techniques or investment decisions will produce the desired results. Additionally, legislative, regulatory, or tax developments may affect the investments or investment strategies available to the Adviser in connection with managing the Trust, which may also adversely affect the ability of the Trust to achieve its investment objective.
Fundamental Investment Restrictions
The Trust is subject to the following investment restrictions, which may be changed only by a vote of the Trust’s outstanding shares:
1. The Trust is a “diversified company” as defined in the 1940 Act. The Trust will not purchase the securities of any issuer if, as a result, the Trust would fail to be a diversified company within the meaning of the 1940 Act, and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder, as such statute, rules and regulations are amended from time to time or are interpreted from time to time by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) staff (collectively, the “1940 Act Laws and Interpretations”) or except to the extent that the Trust may be permitted to do so by exemptive order or similar relief (collectively, with the 1940 Act Laws and Interpretations, the “1940 Act Laws, Interpretations and Exemptions”). In complying with this restriction, however, the Trust may purchase securities of other investment companies to the extent permitted by the 1940 Act Laws, Interpretations and Exemptions.
2. The Trust may not borrow money or issue senior securities, except as permitted by the 1940 Act Laws, Interpretations and Exemptions.
3. The Trust may not underwrite the securities of other issuers. This restriction does not prevent the Trust from engaging in transactions involving the acquisition, disposition or resale of its portfolio securities, regardless of whether the Trust may be considered to be an underwriter under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.
4. The Trust may not make personal loans or loans of its assets to persons who control or are under common control with the Trust, except to the extent permitted by the 1940 Act Laws, Interpretations and Exemptions. This restriction does not prevent the Trust from, among other things, purchasing debt obligations, entering into repurchase agreements, loaning its assets to broker-dealers or institutional investors, or investing in loans, including assignments and participation interests.
5. The Trust may not purchase real estate or sell real estate unless acquired as a result of ownership of securities or other instruments. This restriction does not prevent the Trust from investing in issuers that invest, deal, or otherwise engage in transactions in real estate or interests therein, or investing in
securities that are secured by real estate or interests therein.
6. The Trust may not purchase or sell physical commodities except to the extent permitted by the 1940 Act and any other governing statute, and by the rules thereunder, and by the SEC or other regulatory agency with authority over the Trust.
7. The Trust will not make investments that will result in the concentration (as that term may be defined or interpreted by the 1940 Act Laws, Interpretations and Exemptions) of its investments in the securities of issuers primarily engaged in the same industry. This restriction does not limit the Trust’s investments in (i) obligations issued or guaranteed by the U.S. government, its agencies or instrumentalities, or
(ii) tax-exempt
obligations issued by governments or political subdivisions of governments. In complying with this restriction, the Trust will not consider a bank-issued guaranty or financial guaranty insurance as a separate se
cu
rity.
†Standard & Poor’s, Fitch Ratings, Moody’s. A credit rating is an assessment provided by a nationally recognized statistical rating organization (NRSRO) of the creditworthiness of an issuer with respect to debt obligations, including specific securities, money market instruments or other debts. Ratings are measured on a scale that generally ranges from AAA (highest) to D (lowest); ratings are subject to change without notice.
“Non-Rated”
indicates the debtor was not rated and should not be interpreted as indicating low quality. For more information on rating methodology, please visit spglobal.com, fitchratings.com and ratings.moodys.com.

44 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

Trustees and Officers
The address of each trustee and officer is 11 Greenway Plaza, Houston, Texas 77046-1173. Column two below includes length of time served with predecessor entities, if any.

Name, Year of Birth and Position(s) Held with the Trust |  | Trustee and/or Officer Since |  | Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years |  | Number of Funds in Fund Complex Overseen by Trustee |  | Other Directorship(s) Held by Trustee During At Least The Past 5 Years
Interested Trustees |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Jeffrey H. Kupor 1 – 1968 Trustee |  | 2024 |  | Senior Managing Director, Company Secretary and General Counsel, Invesco Ltd.; Trustee, Invesco Foundation, Inc.; Director, Invesco Advisers, Inc.; Executive Vice President, Invesco Asset Management (Bermuda), Ltd. and Invesco Investments (Bermuda) Ltd; and Vice President, Invesco Group Services, Inc. Formerly: Head of Legal of the Americas, Invesco Ltd.; Senior Vice President and Secretary, Invesco Advisers, Inc. (formerly known as Invesco Institutional (N.A.), Inc.) (registered investment adviser); Secretary, Invesco Distributors, Inc. (formerly known as Invesco AIM Distributors, Inc.); Vice President and Secretary, Invesco Investment Services, Inc. (formerly known as Invesco AIM Investment Services, Inc.); Senior Vice President, Chief Legal Officer and Secretary, The Invesco Funds; Secretary and General Counsel, Invesco Investment Advisers LLC (formerly known as Van Kampen Asset Management); Secretary and General Counsel, Invesco Capital Markets, Inc. (formerly known as Van Kampen Funds Inc.) and Chief Legal Officer, Invesco Exchange-Traded Fund Trust, Invesco Exchange-Traded Fund Trust II, Invesco India Exchange-Traded Fund Trust, Invesco Actively Managed Exchange-Traded Fund Trust, Invesco Actively Managed Exchange-Traded Commodity Fund Trust and Invesco Exchange-Traded Self-Indexed Fund Trust; Secretary and Vice President, Harbourview Asset Management Corporation; Secretary and Vice President, Oppenheimer Funds, Inc. and Invesco Managed Accounts, LLC; Secretary and Senior Vice President, OFI Global Institutional, Inc.; Secretary and Vice President, OFI SteelPath, Inc.; Secretary and Vice President, Oppenheimer Acquisition Corp.; Secretary and Vice President, Shareholder Services, Inc.; Secretary and Vice President, Trinity Investment Management Corporation, Senior Vice President, Invesco Distributors, Inc.; Secretary and Vice President, Jemstep, Inc.; Head of Legal, Worldwide Institutional, Invesco Ltd.; Secretary and General Counsel, INVESCO Private Capital Investments, Inc.; Senior Vice President, Secretary and General Counsel, Invesco Management Group, Inc. (formerly known as Invesco AIM Management Group, Inc.); Assistant Secretary, INVESCO Asset Management (Bermuda) Ltd.; Secretary and General Counsel, Invesco Private Capital, Inc.; Assistant Secretary and General Counsel, INVESCO Realty, Inc.; Secretary and General Counsel, Invesco Senior Secured Management, Inc.; Secretary, Sovereign G./P. Holdings Inc.; Secretary, Invesco Indexing LLC; and Secretary, W.L. Ross & Co., LLC |  | 149 |  | None
Douglas Sharp 1 – 1974 Trustee |  | 2024 |  | Senior Managing Director and Head of Americas & EMEA, Invesco Ltd. Formerly: Director and Chairman, Invesco UK Limited; and Director, Chairman and Chief Executive, Invesco Fund Managers Limited |  | 149 |  | None

1 | Mr. Kupor and Mr. Sharp are considered interested persons (within the meaning of Section 2(a)(19) of the 1940 Act) of the Trust because they are officers of the Adviser to the Trust, and officers of Invesco Ltd., ultimate parent of the Adviser.

T-1 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

Trustees and Officers
–(continued)

Name, Year of Birth and Position(s) Held with the Trust |  | Trustee and/or Officer Since |  | Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years |  | Number of Funds in Fund Complex Overseen by Trustee |  | Other Directorship(s) Held by Trustee During Past 5 Years
Independent Trustees |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Beth Ann Brown – 1968 Trustee (2019) and Chair (2022) |  | 2019 |  | Independent Consultant Formerly: Head of Intermediary Distribution, Managing Director, Strategic Relations, Managing Director, Head of National Accounts, Senior Vice President, National Account Manager and Senior Vice President, Key Account Manager, Columbia Management Investment Advisers LLC; and Vice President and Key Account Manager, Liberty Funds Distributor, Inc. |  | 149 |  | Director, Board of Directors of Caron Engineering Inc. Formerly: Advisor, Board of Advisors of Caron Engineering Inc.; President and Director, Acton Shapleigh Youth Conservation Corps (non-profit); President and Director of Grahamtastic Connection (non-profit); and Trustee of certain Oppenheimer Funds
Carol Deckbar – 1962 Trustee |  | 2024 |  | Formerly: Executive Vice President and Chief Product Officer, TIAA Financial Services; Executive Vice President and Principal, College Retirement Equities Fund at TIAA; Executive Vice President and Head of Institutional Investments and Endowment Services, TIAA |  | 149 |  | Formerly: Board Member, TIAA Asset Management, Inc.; and Board Member, TH Real Estate Group Holdings Company
Cynthia Hostetler – 1962 Trustee |  | 2017 |  | Non-Executive Director and Trustee of a number of public and private business corporations Formerly: Director, Aberdeen Investment Funds (4 portfolios); Director, Artio Global Investment LLC (mutual fund complex); Director, Edgen Group, Inc. (specialized energy and infrastructure products distributor); Director, Genesee & Wyoming, Inc. (railroads);;Head of Investment Funds and Private Equity, Overseas Private Investment Corporation; President, First Manhattan Bancorporation, Inc.; and Attorney, Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP |  | 149 |  | Resideo Technologies (smart home technology); Vulcan Materials Company (construction materials company); Trilinc Global Impact Fund; Investment Company Institute (professional organization); and Independent Directors Council (professional organization) Formerly: Textainer Global Holdings (holding company)
Eli Jones – 1961 Trustee |  | 2016 |  | Professor and Dean Emeritus, Mays Business School - Texas A&M University Formerly: Board Member of the regional board, First Financial Bank Texas; Dean of Mays Business School at Texas A&M University; Professor and Dean, Walton College of Business, University of Arkansas and E.J. Ourso College of Business, Louisiana State University; and Director, Arvest Bank |  | 149 |  | Insperity, Inc. (formerly known as Administaff) (human resources provider); and Board Member, First Financial Bankshares, Inc. Texas
Elizabeth Krentzman – 1959 Trustee |  | 2019 |  | Formerly: Principal and Chief Regulatory Advisor for Asset Management Services and U.S. Mutual Fund Leader of Deloitte & Touche LLP; General Counsel of the Investment Company Institute (trade association); National Director of the Investment Management Regulatory Consulting Practice, Principal, Director and Senior Manager of Deloitte & Touche LLP; Assistant Director of the Division of Investment Management – Office of Disclosure and Investment Adviser Regulation of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and various positions with the Division of Investment Management – Office of Regulatory Policy of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission; and Associate at Ropes & Gray LLP |  | 149 |  | Formerly: Member of the Cartica Funds Board of Directors (private investment funds); Trustee of the University of Florida National Board Foundation; Member of the University of Florida Law Center Association, Inc. Board of Trustees, Audit Committee, and Membership Committee; and Trustee of certain Oppenheimer Funds
Anthony J. LaCava, Jr. – 1956 Trustee |  | 2019 |  | Formerly: Director and Member of the Audit Committee, Blue Hills Bank (publicly traded financial institution) and Managing Partner, KPMG LLP |  | 149 |  | Member and Chairman of the Bentley University Business School Advisory Council Formerly: Board Member and Chair of the Audit and Finance Committee and Nominating Committee, KPMG LLP
James “Jim” Liddy – 1959 Trustee |  | 2024 |  | Formerly: Chairman, Global Financial Services, Americas and Retired Partner, KPMG LLP |  | 149 |  | Director and Treasurer, Gulfside Place Condominium Association, Inc. and Non-Executive Director, Kellenberg Memorial High School
Edward Perkin – 1972 Trustee |  | 2025 |  | Former: Chief Investment Officer, Equity, Eaton Vance |  | 149 |  | None
Teresa M. Ressel – 1962 Trustee |  | 2017 |  | Non-executive director and trustee of a number of public and private business corporations; Managing Partner, Radiate Capital (private equity sponsor) Formerly: Chief Executive Officer, UBS Securities LLC (investment banking); Group Chief Operating Officer, UBS AG Americas (investment banking); Sr. Management Team Olayan America, The Olayan Group (international investor/commercial/industrial); and Assistant Secretary for Management & Budget and Designated Chief Financial Officer, U.S. Department of Treasury |  | 149 |  | None

T-2 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

Trustees and Officers
–(continued)

Name, Year of Birth and Position(s) Held with the Trust |  | Trustee and/or Officer Since |  | Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years |  | Number of Funds in Fund Complex Overseen by Trustee |  | Other Directorship(s) Held by Trustee During Past 5 Years
Independent Trustees–(continued) |  |  |  |
Daniel S. Vandivort –1954 Trustee |  | 2019 |  | President, Flyway Advisory Services LLC (consulting and property management) and Member, Investment Committee of Historic Charleston Foundation Formerly: President and Chief Investment Officer, previously Head of Fixed Income, Weiss Peck and Greer/Robeco Investment Management; Trustee and Chair, Weiss Peck and Greer Funds Board; and various capacities at CS First Boston including Head of Fixed Income at First Boston Asset Management. |  | 149 |  | Formerly: Trustee and Governance Chair, Oppenheimer Funds; Treasurer, Chairman of the Audit and Finance Committee, Huntington Disease Foundation of America.

T-3 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

Trustees and Officers
–(continued)

Name, Year of Birth and Position(s) Held with the Trust |  | Trustee and/or Officer Since |  | Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years |  | Number of Funds in Fund Complex Overseen by Trustee |  | Other Directorship(s) Held by Trustee During Past 5 Years
Officers |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Glenn Brightman – 1972 President and Principal Executive Officer |  | 2023 |  | Chief Operating Officer, Investments & Americas, Invesco Ltd.; Senior Vice President, Invesco Advisers, Inc.; President and Principal Executive Officer, The Invesco Funds; Manager, Invesco Investment Advisers LLC; Director, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer, Invesco Canada Ltd.; Director, Chief Executive Officer and President, Invesco Corporate Class Inc.; Director, Invesco Investment Services, Inc.; and President, Invesco Global Direct Real Estate GP Ltd., Invesco, Inc., Invesco IP Holdings (Canada) Ltd., Invesco Global Direct Real Estate Feeder GP Ltd. and Invesco Financial Services Ltd. Formerly: Global Head of Finance, Invesco Ltd; Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Nuveen |  | N/A |  | N/A
Melanie Ringold – 1975 Senior Vice President, Chief Legal Officer and Secretary |  | 2023 |  | Head of Legal of the Americas, Invesco Ltd.; Senior Vice President and Secretary, Invesco Advisers, Inc. (formerly known as Invesco Institutional (N.A.), Inc.) (registered investment adviser); Secretary, Invesco Distributors, Inc. (formerly known as Invesco AIM Distributors, Inc.); Secretary, Invesco Investment Services, Inc. (formerly known as Invesco AIM Investment Services, Inc.); Senior Vice President, Chief Legal Officer and Secretary, The Invesco Funds; Secretary, Invesco Investment Advisers LLC and Invesco Capital Markets, Inc.; Chief Legal Officer, Invesco Exchange-Traded Fund Trust, Invesco Exchange-Traded Fund Trust II, Invesco India Exchange-Traded Fund Trust, Invesco Actively Managed Exchange-Traded Fund Trust, Invesco Actively Managed Exchange-Traded Commodity Fund Trust, Invesco Exchange-Traded Self-Indexed Fund Trust and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1; Secretary and Senior Vice President, Harbourview Asset Management Corporation; Secretary and Senior Vice President, OppenheimerFunds, Inc. and Invesco Managed Accounts, LLC; Secretary and Senior Vice President, Oppenheimer Acquisition Corp.; Secretary, SteelPath Funds Remediation LLC; Secretary and Senior Vice President, Trinity Investment Management Corporation; Manager, Invesco Specialized Products, LLC and Invesco Capital Management LLC; Manager, Tremont Group Holdings, LLC; Director, Tremont (Bermuda) Limited; Assistant Secretary, W.L. Ross & Co., LLC; Assistant Secretary, Invesco Private Capital, Inc.; and Assistant General Counsel and Assistant Secretary, Invesco Senior Secured Management, Inc. Formerly: Secretary and Senior Vice President, OFI SteelPath, Inc.; Assistant Secretary, Invesco Distributors, Inc.; Invesco Advisers, Inc. Invesco Investment Services, Inc., Invesco Capital Markets, Inc., Invesco Capital Management LLC and Invesco Investment Advisers LLC; and Assistant Secretary and Assistant Vice President, Invesco Funds |  | N/A |  | N/A
Adrien Deberghes – 1967 Principal Financial Officer, Treasurer and Senior Vice President |  | 2020 |  | Head of the Fund Office of the CFO and Fund Administration; Vice President, Invesco Advisers, Inc.; Principal Financial Officer, Treasurer and Senior Vice President, The Invesco Funds; and Vice President, Invesco Exchange-Traded Fund Trust, Invesco Exchange-Traded Fund Trust II, Invesco India Exchange-Traded Fund Trust, Invesco Actively Managed Exchange-Traded Fund Trust, Invesco Actively Managed Exchange-Traded Commodity Fund Trust, Invesco Exchange-Traded Self-Indexed Fund Trust and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1. Formerly: Director, Invesco Trust Company; Vice President, The Invesco Funds; Senior Vice President and Treasurer, Fidelity Investments |  | N/A |  | N/A
Crissie M. Wisdom – 1969 Anti-Money Laundering Compliance Officer |  | 2013 |  | Anti-Money Laundering and OFAC Compliance Officer for Invesco U.S. entities including: Invesco Advisers, Inc. and its affiliates, Invesco Capital Markets, Inc., Invesco Distributors, Inc., Invesco Investment Services, Inc., The Invesco Funds, Invesco Capital Management, LLC, Invesco Trust Company; and Fraud Prevention Manager for Invesco Investment Services, Inc. |  | N/A |  | N/A
Todd F. Kuehl – 1969 Chief Compliance Officer and Senior Vice President |  | 2020 |  | Chief Compliance Officer, Invesco Advisers, Inc. (registered investment adviser); and Chief Compliance Officer and Senior Vice President, The Invesco Funds Formerly: Managing Director and Chief Compliance Officer, Legg Mason (Mutual Funds); Chief Compliance Officer, Legg Mason Private Portfolio Group (registered investment adviser) |  | N/A |  | N/A
James Bordewick, Jr. – 1959 Senior Vice President and Senior Officer |  | 2022 |  | Senior Vice President and Senior Officer, The Invesco Funds Formerly, Chief Legal Officer, KingsCrowd, Inc. (research and analytical platform for investment in private capital markets); Chief Operating Officer and Head of Legal and Regulatory, Netcapital (private capital investment platform); Managing Director, General Counsel of asset management and Chief Compliance Officer for asset management and private banking, Bank of America Corporation; Chief Legal Officer, Columbia Funds and BofA Funds; Senior Vice President and Associate General Counsel, MFS Investment Management; Chief Legal Officer, MFS Funds; Associate, Ropes & Gray; Associate, Gaston Snow & Ely Bartlett. |  | N/A |  | N/A

T-4 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

Trustees and Officers
–(continued)

Office of the Fund |  | Investment Adviser |  | Auditors |  | Custodian
1331 Spring Street NW, Suite 2500 |  | Invesco Advisers, Inc. |  | PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP |  | State Street Bank and Trust Company
Atlanta, GA 30309 |  | 1331 Spring Street NW, Suite 2500 |  | 1000 Louisiana Street, Suite 5800 |  | 225 Franklin Street
|  | Atlanta, GA 30309 |  | Houston, TX 77002-5021 |  | Boston, MA 02110-2801
Counsel to the Fund |  | Counsel to the Independent Trustees |  | Transfer Agent |  |
Stradley Ronon Stevens & Young, LLP |  | Sidley Austin LLP |  | Computershare Trust Company, N.A |  |
2005 Market Street, Suite 2600 |  | 787 Seventh Avenue |  | 250 Royall Street |  |
Philadelphia, PA 19103-7018 |  | New York, NY 10019 |  | Canton, MA 02021 |  |

T-5 |  | Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

(This page intentionally left blank)

(This page intentionally left blank)

Correspondence information
Send general correspondence to Computershare Trust Company, N.A., P.O. Box 43078, Providence, RI 02940-3078
Trust holdings and proxy voting information
The Trust provides a complete list of its portfolio holdings four times each fiscal year, at the end of each fiscal quarter. For the second and fourth quarters, the list appears, respectively, in the Trust’s semiannual and annual reports to shareholders. For the first and third quarters, the Trust files the list with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) as an exhibit to its reports on Form
N-PORT.
The most recent list of portfolio holdings is available at invesco.com/us. Shareholders can also look up the Trust’s Form
N-PORT
filings on the SEC website at sec.gov. The SEC file number for the Trust is shown below.
A description of the policies and procedures that the Trust uses to determine how to vote proxies relating to portfolio securities is available without charge, upon request, from our Client Services department at 800 341 2929 or at
invesco.com/corporate/about-us/esg.
The information is also available on the SEC website, sec.gov.
Information regarding how the Trust voted proxies related to its portfolio securities during the most recent
12-month
period ended June 30 is available at invesco.com/proxysearch. The information is also available on the SEC website, sec.gov.

SEC file number(s): 811-06567 |  |  |  | VK-CE-MOPP-AR-1

Item 2. Code of Ethics.

The Registrant has adopted a Code of Ethics (the “Code”) that applies to the Registrant’s Principal Executive Officer (“PEO”) and Principal Financial Officer (“PFO”). This Code is filed as an exhibit to this report on Form N-CSR under Item 19(a)(1). No substantive amendments to this Code were made during the reporting period. There were no waivers for the fiscal year ended February 28, 2026.

Item 3. Audit Committee Financial Expert.

The Board of Trustees has determined that the Registrant has two audit committee financial experts serving on its Audit Committee: Anthony J. LaCava, Jr. and James Liddy. Each of these audit committee financial experts is “independent” within the meaning of that term as used in Form N-CSR.

Item 4. Principal Accountant Fees and Services.

(a) to (d)

Fees Billed by PwC Related to the Registrant

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (“PwC”), the Registrant’s independent registered public accounting firm, billed the Registrant aggregate fees for services rendered to the Registrant for the last two fiscal years as shown in the following table. The Audit Committee pre-approved all audit and non-audit services provided to the Registrant.

|  | Fees Billed by PwC for Services Rendered to the Registrant for Fiscal Year Ended 2026 |  |  | Fees Billed by PwC for Services Rendered to the Registrant for Fiscal Year Ended 2025 |
Audit Fees |  | $ | 54,600 |  |  | $ | 53,529 |
Audit-Related Fees(1) |  | $ | 490 |  |  | $ | 0 |
Tax Fees(2) |  | $ | 13,219 |  |  | $ | 13,433 |
All Other Fees |  | $ | 0 |  |  | $ | 0 |
Total Fees |  | $ | 68,309 |  |  | $ | 66,962 |

(1) | Audit-Related Fees for the fiscal year ended 2026 includes fees billed for reviewing regulatory filings.

(2) | Tax Fees for the fiscal years ended 2026 and 2025 includes fees billed for preparation of U.S. Tax Returns and Taxable Income calculations, including excise tax and year-to-date estimates for various book-to-tax differences.

Fees Billed by PwC Related to Invesco and Affiliates

PwC billed Invesco Advisers, Inc. (“Invesco”), the Registrant’s investment adviser, and any entity controlling, controlled by or under common control with Invesco that provides ongoing services to the Registrant (“Affiliates”) aggregate fees for pre-approved non-audit services rendered to Invesco and Affiliates for the last two fiscal years as shown in the following table. The Audit Committee pre-approved all non-audit services provided to Invesco and Affiliates that were required to be pre-approved.

|  | Fees Billed for Non- Audit Services Rendered to Invesco and Affiliates for Fiscal Year Ended 2026 That Were Required to be Pre-Approved by the Registrant’s Audit Committee |  |  | Fees Billed for Non- Audit Services Rendered to Invesco and Affiliates for Fiscal Year Ended 2025 That Were Required to be Pre-Approved by the Registrant’s Audit Committee |
Audit-Related Fees(1) |  | $ | 1,195,000 |  |  | $ | 1,141,000 |
Tax Fees |  | $ | 0 |  |  | $ | 0 |
All Other Fees |  | $ | 0 |  |  | $ | 0 |
Total Fees |  | $ | 1,195,000 |  |  | $ | 1,141,000 |

(1) | Audit-Related Fees for the fiscal years ended 2026 and 2025 include fees billed related to reviewing controls at a service organization.

(e)(1)

PRE-APPROVAL OF AUDIT AND NON-AUDIT SERVICES

POLICIES AND PROCEDURES

As adopted by the Audit Committees

of the Invesco Funds (the “Funds”)

Last Amended March 29, 2017

| I. | Statement of Principles

The Audit Committees (the “Audit Committee”) of the Boards of Trustees of the Funds (the “Board”) have adopted these policies and procedures (the “Procedures”) with respect to the pre-approval of audit and non-audit services to be provided by the Funds’ independent auditor (the “Auditor”) to the Funds, and to the Funds’ investment adviser(s) and any entity controlling, controlled by, or under common control with the investment adviser(s) that provides ongoing services to the Funds (collectively, “Service Affiliates”).

Under Section 202 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, all audit and non-audit services provided to the Funds by the Auditor must be preapproved by the Audit Committee. Rule 2-01 of Regulation S-X requires that the Audit Committee also pre-approve a Service Affiliate’s engagement of the Auditor for non-audit services if the engagement relates directly to the operations and financial reporting of the Funds (a “Service Affiliate’s Covered Engagement”).

These Procedures set forth the procedures and the conditions pursuant to which the Audit Committee may pre-approve audit and non-audit services for the Funds and a Service Affiliate’s Covered Engagement pursuant to rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and other organizations and regulatory bodies applicable to the Funds (“Applicable Rules”).1 They address both general pre-approvals without consideration of specific case-by-case services (“general pre-approvals”) and pre-approvals on a case-by-case basis (“specific pre-approvals”). Any services requiring pre-approval that are not within the scope of general pre-approvals hereunder are subject to specific pre-approval. These Procedures also address the delegation by the Audit Committee of pre-approval authority to the Audit Committee Chair or Vice Chair.

| II. | Pre-Approval of Fund Audit Services

The annual Fund audit services engagement, including terms and fees, is subject to specific pre-approval by the Audit Committee. Audit services include the annual financial statement audit and other procedures required to be performed by an independent auditor to be able to form an opinion on the Funds’ financial statements. The Audit Committee will receive, review and consider sufficient information concerning a proposed Fund audit engagement to make a reasonable evaluation of the Auditor’s qualifications and independence. The Audit Committee will oversee the Fund audit services engagement as necessary, including approving any changes in terms, audit scope, conditions and fees.

In addition to approving the Fund audit services engagement at least annually and specifically approving any changes, the Audit Committee may generally or specifically pre-approve engagements for other audit services, which are those services that only an independent auditor reasonably can provide. Other audit services may include services associated with SEC registration statements, periodic reports and other documents filed with the SEC.

| III. | General and Specific Pre-Approval of Non-Audit Fund Services

The Audit Committee will consider, at least annually, the list of General Pre-Approved Non-Audit Services which list may be terminated or modified at any time by the Audit Committee. To inform the Audit Committee’s review and approval of General Pre-Approved Non-Audit Services, the Funds’ Treasurer (or his or her designee) and Auditor shall provide such information regarding independence or other matters as the Audit Committee may request.

Any services or fee ranges that are not within the scope of General Pre-Approved Non-Audit Services have not received general pre-approval and require specific pre-approval. Each request for specific pre-approval by the Audit Committee for services to be provided by the Auditor to the Funds must be submitted to the Audit Committee by the Funds’ Treasurer (or his or her designee) and must include detailed information about the services to be provided, the fees or fee ranges to be charged, and other relevant information sufficient to allow the Audit Committee to consider whether to pre-approve such engagement, including evaluating whether the provision of such services will impair the independence of the Auditor and is otherwise consistent with Applicable Rules.

1 | Applicable Rules include, for example, New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) rules applicable to closed-end funds managed by Invesco and listed on NYSE.

| IV. | Non-Audit Service Types

The Audit Committee may provide either general or specific pre-approval of audit-related, tax or other services, each as described in more detail below.

| a. | Audit-Related Services

“Audit-related services” are assurance and related services that are reasonably related to the performance of the audit or review of the Fund’s financial statements or that are traditionally performed by an independent auditor. Audit-related services include, among others, accounting consultations related to accounting, financial reporting or disclosure matters not classified as “Audit services”; assistance with understanding and implementing new accounting and financial reporting guidance from rulemaking authorities; services related to mergers, acquisitions or dispositions; compliance with ratings agency requirements and interfund lending activities; and assistance with internal control reporting requirements.

| b. | Tax Services

“Tax services” include, but are not limited to, the review and signing of the Funds’ federal tax returns, the review of required distributions by the Funds and consultations regarding tax matters such as the tax treatment of new investments or the impact of new regulations. The Audit Committee will not approve proposed services of the Auditor which the Audit Committee believes are to be provided in connection with a service or transaction initially recommended by the Auditor, the sole business purpose of which may be tax avoidance and the tax treatment of which may not be supported in the Internal Revenue Code and related regulations. The Audit Committee will consult with the Funds’ Treasurer (or his or her designee) and may consult with outside counsel or advisers as necessary to ensure the consistency of tax services rendered by the Auditor with the foregoing policy. The Auditor shall not represent any Fund or any Service Affiliate before a tax court, district court or federal court of claims.

Each request to provide tax services under either the general or specific pre-approval of the Audit Committee will include a description from the Auditor in writing of (i) the scope of the service, the fee structure for the engagement, and any side letter or other amendment to the engagement letter, or any other agreement (whether oral, written, or otherwise) between the Auditor and the Funds, relating to the service; and (ii) any compensation arrangement or other agreement, such as a referral agreement, a referral fee or fee-sharing arrangement, between the Auditor (or an affiliate of the Auditor) and any person (other than the Funds or Service Affiliates receiving the services) with respect to the promoting, marketing, or recommending of a transaction covered by the service. The Auditor will also discuss with the Audit Committee the potential effects of the services on the independence of the Auditor, and document the substance of its discussion with the Audit Committee.

| c. | Other Services

The Audit Committee may pre-approve other non-audit services so long as the Audit Committee believes that the service will not impair the independence of the Auditor. Appendix I includes a list of services that the Auditor is prohibited from performing by the SEC rules. Appendix I also includes a list of services that would impair the Auditor’s independence unless the Audit Committee reasonably concludes that the results of the services will not be subject to audit procedures during an audit of the Funds’ financial statements.

| V. | Pre-Approval of Service Affiliate’s Covered Engagements

Rule 2-01 of Regulation S-X requires that the Audit Committee pre-approve a Service Affiliate’s engagement of the Auditor for non-audit services if the engagement relates directly to the operations and financial reporting of the Funds, defined above as a “Service Affiliate’s Covered Engagement”.

The Audit Committee may provide either general or specific pre-approval of any Service Affiliate’s Covered Engagement, including for audit-related, tax or other services, as described above, if the Audit Committee believes that the provision of the services to a Service Affiliate will not impair the independence of the Auditor with respect to the Funds. Any Service Affiliate’s Covered Engagements that are not within the scope of General Pre-Approved Non-Audit Services have not received general pre-approval and require specific pre-approval.

Each request for specific pre-approval by the Audit Committee of a Service Affiliate’s Covered Engagement must be submitted to the Audit Committee by the Funds’ Treasurer (or his or her designee) and must include detailed information about the services to be provided, the fees or fee ranges to be charged, a description of the current status of the pre-approval process involving other audit committees in the Invesco investment company complex (as defined in Rule 2-201 of Regulation S-X) with respect to the proposed engagement, and other relevant information sufficient to allow the Audit Committee to consider whether the provision of such services will impair the independence of the Auditor from the Funds. Additionally, the Funds’ Treasurer (or his or her designee) and the Auditor will provide the Audit Committee with a statement that the proposed engagement requires pre-approval by the Audit Committee, the proposed engagement, in their view, will not impair the independence of the Auditor and is consistent with Applicable Rules, and the description of the proposed engagement provided to the Audit Committee is consistent with that presented to or approved by the Invesco audit committee.

Information about all Service Affiliate engagements of the Auditor for non-audit services, whether or not subject to pre-approval by the Audit Committee, shall be provided to the Audit Committee at least quarterly, to allow the Audit Committee to consider whether the provision of such services is compatible with maintaining the Auditor’s independence from the Funds. The Funds’ Treasurer and Auditor shall provide the Audit Committee with sufficiently detailed information about the scope of services provided and the fees for such services, to ensure that the Audit Committee can adequately consider whether the provision of such services is compatible with maintaining the Auditor’s independence from the Fund.

| VI. | Pre-Approved Fee Levels or Established Amounts

Pre-approved fee levels or ranges for audit and non-audit services to be provided by the Auditor to the Funds, and for a Service Affiliate’s Covered Engagement, under general pre-approval or specific pre-approval will be set periodically by the Audit Committee. Any proposed fees exceeding 110% of the maximum pre-approved fee levels or ranges for such services or engagements will be promptly presented to the Audit Committee and will require specific pre-approval by the Audit Committee before payment of any additional fees is made.

| VII. | Delegation

The Audit Committee hereby delegates, subject to the dollar limitations set forth below, specific authority to its Chair, or in his or her absence, Vice Chair, to pre-approve audit and non-audit services proposed to be provided by the Auditor to the Funds and/or a Service Affiliate’s Covered Engagement, between Audit Committee meetings. Such delegation does not preclude the Chair or Vice Chair from declining, on a case-by-case basis, to exercise his or her delegated authority and instead convening the Audit Committee to consider and pre-approve any proposed services or engagements.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Audit Committee must pre-approve: (a) any non-audit services to be provided to the Funds for which the fees are estimated to exceed $500,000; (b) any Service Affiliate’s Covered Engagement for which the fees are estimated to exceed $500,000; or (c) any cost increase to any previously approved service or engagement that exceeds the greater of $250,000 or 50% of the previously approved fees up to a maximum increase of $500,000.

| VIII. | Compliance with Procedures

Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, failure to pre-approve any services or engagements that are not required to be pre-approved pursuant to the de minimis exception provided for in Rule 2-01(c)(7)(i)(C) of Regulation S-X shall not constitute a violation of these Procedures. The Audit Committee has designated the Funds’ Treasurer to ensure services and engagements are pre-approved in compliance with these Procedures. The Funds’ Treasurer will immediately report to the Chair of the Audit Committee, or the Vice Chair in his or her absence, any breach of these Procedures that comes to the attention of the Funds’ Treasurer or any services or engagements that are not required to be pre-approved pursuant to the de minimis exception provided for in Rule 2-01(c)(7)(i)(C) of Regulation S-X.

On at least an annual basis, the Auditor will provide the Audit Committee with a summary of all non-audit services provided to any entity in the investment company complex (as defined in section 2-01(f)(14) of Regulation S-X, including the Funds and Service Affiliates) that were not pre-approved, including the nature of services provided and the associated fees.

| IX. | Amendments to Procedures

All material amendments to these Procedures must be approved in advance by the Audit Committee. Non-material amendments to these Procedures may be made by the Legal and Compliance Departments and will be reported to the Audit Committee at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Audit Committee.

Appendix I

Non-Audit Services That May Impair the Auditor’s Independence

The Auditor is not independent if, at any point during the audit and professional engagement, the Auditor provides the following non-audit services:

| • |  | Management functions;

| • |  | Human resources;

| • |  | Broker-dealer, investment adviser, or investment banking services;

| • |  | Legal services;

| • |  | Expert services unrelated to the audit;

| • |  | Any service or product provided for a contingent fee or a commission;

| • |  | Services related to marketing, planning, or opining in favor of the tax treatment of confidential transactions or aggressive tax position transactions, a significant purpose of which is tax avoidance;

| • |  | Tax services for persons in financial reporting oversight roles at the Fund; and

| • |  | Any other service that the Public Company Oversight Board determines by regulation is impermissible.

An Auditor is not independent if, at any point during the audit and professional engagement, the Auditor provides the following non-audit services unless it is reasonable to conclude that the results of the services will not be subject to audit procedures during an audit of the Funds’ financial statements:

| • |  | Bookkeeping or other services related to the accounting records or financial statements of the audit client;

| • |  | Financial information systems design and implementation;

| • |  | Appraisal or valuation services, fairness opinions, or contribution-in-kind reports;

| • |  | Actuarial services; and

| • |  | Internal audit outsourcing services.

(e)(2) There were no amounts that were pre-approved by the Audit Committee pursuant to the de minimis exception under Rule 2-01 of Regulation S-X.

(f) Not applicable.

(g) In addition to the amounts shown in the tables above, PwC billed Invesco and Invesco Affiliates aggregate fees of $6,726,000 for the fiscal year ended February 28, 2026 and $6,489,000 for the fiscal year ended February 28, 2025. In total, PwC billed the Registrant, Invesco and Invesco Affiliates aggregate non-audit fees of $7,934,219 for the fiscal year ended February 28, 2026 and $7,643,433 for the fiscal year ended February 28, 2025.

PwC provided audit services to the Investment Company complex of approximately $35 million.

(h) The Audit Committee also has considered whether the provision of non-audit services that were rendered to Invesco and Invesco Affiliates that were not required to be pre-approved pursuant to SEC regulations, if any, is compatible with maintaining PwC’s independence.

(i) Not applicable.

(j) Not applicable.

Item 5. Audit Committee of Listed Registrants.

(a) The Registrant has a separately designated Audit Committee established in accordance with Section 3(a)(58)(A) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, which consists solely of independent trustees. The Audit Committee members are Anthony LaCava, Jr., Cynthia Hostetler, Eli Jones, James Liddy, Teresa Ressel and Daniel Vandivort.

(b) Not applicable.

Item 6. Investments.

(a) Investments in securities of unaffiliated issuers is filed under Item 1 of this Form N-CSR.

(b) Not applicable.

Item 7. Financial Statements and Financial Highlights for Open-End Management Investment Companies.

Not applicable.

Item 8. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants for Open-End Management Investment Companies.

Not applicable.

Item 9. Proxy Disclosures for Open-End Management Investment Companies.

Not applicable.

Item 10. Remuneration Paid to Directors, Officers, and Others for Open-End Management Investment Companies.

Not applicable.

Item 11. Statement Regarding Basis for Approval of Investment Advisory Contract.

Not applicable.

Item 12. Disclosure of Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures for Closed-End Management Investment Companies.

Invesco’s Policy Statement on Global
Corporate Governance
and Proxy Voting
Effective March 2026
1

Table of Contents

I. | Introduction | 3
| A. Our Approach to Proxy Voting | 3
| B. Scope of Policy | 3
II. | Global Proxy Voting Operational Procedures | 3
| A. Oversight and Governance | 3
| B. The Proxy Voting Process | 4
| C. Proxy Voting Administration | 4
| D. Retention and Oversight of Proxy Service Providers | 5
| E. Disclosures and Recordkeeping | 6
| F. Market and Operational Limitations | 7
| G. Securities Lending | 7
| H. Conflicts of Interest | 8
| I. Voting of Affiliated Holdings and Funds of Funds | 9
| J. Review of Policy | 9
III. | Our Good Governance Principles | 9
| A. Transparency | 10
| B. Accountability | 11
| C. Board Composition and Effectiveness | 13
| D. Capitalization | 15
| E. Environmental and Social Issues | 16
| F. Executive Compensation and Performance Alignment | 17

2

I.
Introduction
Invesco Ltd. and its wholly owned investment adviser subsidiaries (collectively, “Invesco,” the “Company,” “our” or “we”) have adopted and implemented this Policy Statement on Global Corporate Governance and Proxy Voting (this “Global Proxy Voting Policy” or “Policy”), which we believe describes policies and procedures reasonably designed to assure proxy voting matters are conducted in the best interests of our clients. The policy generally applies where Invesco invests and manages investments on behalf of its clients and has been delegated proxy voting authority.
A.
Our Approach to Proxy Voting
Proxy voting is an integral aspect of the investment management services Invesco provides to clients. As an investment adviser, Invesco has a fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of our clients. Where Invesco has been delegated the authority to vote proxies with respect to securities held in client portfolios, we exercise such authority in the manner we believe best serves the interests of such clients and their investment objectives. We recognize that proxy voting is an important tool that enables us to drive long-term shareholder value.
A summary of our global operational procedures and governance structure is included in Part II of this Policy. Invesco’s good governance principles, which are included in Part III of this Policy, and our internal proxy voting guidelines are both principles and rules, and cover topics that typically appear on voting ballots. Invesco’s investment teams retain ultimate authority to vote proxies. Given the complexity of proxy issues across our clients’ holdings globally, our investment teams consider many factors when determining how to cast votes. We seek to evaluate and make voting decisions that favor proxy proposals and governance practices that, in our view, promote long-term shareholder value.
B.
Scope of Policy
Invesco’s investment teams vote proxies on behalf of Invesco funds and both fund and non-fund advisory clients that have explicitly granted Invesco authority in writing to vote proxies on their behalf. In the case of institutional or sub-advised clients, Invesco will vote the proxies in accordance with this Policy unless the client agreement specifies that the client retains the right to vote or has designated a named fiduciary to direct voting. This Policy is implemented by all entities listed in Exhibit A, except as noted below. Due to regional or asset class-specific considerations, certain entities may have local proxy voting guidelines or policies and procedures that differ from this Policy. In the event local policies and this Policy differ, the local policy will apply. These entities subject to local policies are listed in Exhibit A. Additionally, eligible exchange-traded funds may participate in Invesco’s Proxy Voting Choice Program Pilot. Eligible funds are listed in Exhibit B.
II.
Global Proxy Voting Operational Procedures
Invesco’s global proxy voting operational procedures (the “Procedures”) are in place to implement the provisions of this Policy. Invesco aims to vote all proxies for which it has voting authority in accordance with this Policy, as implemented by the Procedures outlined in this Section II. It is the responsibility of Invesco’s Global Corporate Governance & Advisory team to maintain and facilitate the review of the Procedures annually.
A.
Oversight and Governance
The Global Corporate Governance & Advisory team and the Global Invesco Proxy Advisory Committee (“Global IPAC”) provides oversight of the proxy voting process. For some clients, third parties (e.g., U.S. fund boards) and internal sub-committees also provide oversight of the proxy voting process.
Guided by its philosophy that investment teams should manage proxy voting, Invesco has created the Global IPAC. The Global IPAC is an investments-driven committee comprising representatives from various investment management teams. Representatives from Invesco’s Legal, Compliance, Risk, Investment Stewardship and Government Affairs departments may also participate in Global IPAC
3

meetings. The Global Head of Corporate Governance & Advisory chairs the committee. The Global IPAC provides a forum for investment teams to:
●
monitor, understand and discuss key proxy issues and voting trends within the Invesco complex;
●
assist Invesco in meeting regulatory obligations;
●
review votes not aligned with our good governance principles; and
●
consider conflicts of interest in the proxy voting process.
In fulfilling its responsibilities, the Global IPAC meets as necessary (but no less than semi-annually) and has the following responsibilities and functions: (i) acts as a key liaison between the Global Corporate Governance & Advisory team and investment teams to assure compliance with this Policy; (ii) provides insight on market trends as it relates to stewardship practices; (iii) monitors proxy votes that present potential conflicts of interest; and (iv) reviews and provides input, at least annually, on this Policy and related internal procedures and recommends any changes to this Policy based on, but not limited to, Invesco’s experience, evolving industry practices, or developments in applicable laws or regulations. In addition, when necessary, the Global IPAC Conflict of Interest Sub-committee makes voting decisions on proxies that require an override of this Policy due to an actual or perceived conflict of interest. The Global IPAC reviews Global IPAC Conflict of Interest Sub-committee voting decisions.
B.
The Proxy Voting Process
When making voting decisions, Invesco’s investment teams may take a wide array of factors into consideration and may utilize information from various sources, including, but not limited to, company filings, company site visits, management engagements, industry trade groups, third-party research, internal proprietary research and Invesco’s internal Good Governance Principles set out in Section III of this policy.
Our Global Voting Policy and Good Governance Principles apply to all relevant asset classes, however, there may be different approaches to voting for certain asset classes. For example, voting decisions with respect to investments in fixed income securities and privately held securities will generally be made by the relevant investment teams based on their evaluation of the specific transactions or matters under consideration. In the event this Policy or Invesco’s Good Governance Principles do not provide a vote recommendation, and an investment team does not make a voting decision, Invesco will vote the proxy item consistent with the recommendation of the issuer.
Invesco’s investment teams are supported by a centralized investment stewardship function, including the Global Corporate Governance & Advisory team which evaluates proxy proposals. For certain investment teams of actively-managed products, the Global Corporate Governance & Advisory team evaluates proxy ballot items, analyzes proxy proposals to facilitate decision-making by the investment teams, and casts votes in accordance with the investment team’s instructions. For certain passively-managed investment strategies that seek to track an index, the Global Corporate Governance & Advisory team may evaluate and execute votes on proposals that meet pre-defined criteria, including materiality thresholds. This team may utilize information from various sources, including but not limited to company filings, management engagements, industry trade groups, third-party research, internal proprietary research and the Good Governance Principles in Section III of this Policy. Investment teams retain discretion to vote proxies independently of, or consistent with, this Policy, the Good Governance Principles and any recommendations from the Global Corporate Governance & Advisory team. There may also be instances where different investment teams reach different positions on voting issues for the same proxy.
C.
Proxy Voting Administration
At Invesco, investment teams execute voting decisions through our proprietary voting platform and are supported by the Global Corporate Governance & Advisory team and a dedicated technology team. Invesco’s proprietary voting platform streamlines the proxy voting process by providing our investment
4

teams with direct access to proxy meeting materials, including ballots, Invesco’s internal proxy voting guidelines and recommendations, as well as proxy research and vote recommendations issued by Proxy Service Providers (as such term is defined in Part C below). Votes executed on Invesco’s proprietary voting platform are transmitted to our proxy voting agent electronically and are then delivered to the respective designee for tabulation.
Invesco’s Global Corporate Governance & Advisory team monitors whether we have received proxy ballots for shareholder meetings in which we are entitled to vote. This involves coordination among various parties in the proxy voting ecosystem, including, but not limited to, our proxy voting agent, custodians and ballot distributors. If necessary, we may choose to escalate a matter in accordance with our internal procedures to facilitate our ability to exercise our right to vote.
Our proprietary systems are designed to facilitate internal control and oversight of the voting process. To facilitate the casting of votes in an efficient manner, Invesco may choose to pre-populate and leverage the capabilities of these proprietary systems to automatically submit votes based on internal proxy voting guidelines. To efficiently execute proxy voting for clients’ holdings, votes may be cast by Invesco or via the Proxy Service Providers Web platform at our direction.
D.
Retention and Oversight of Proxy Service Providers
Invesco has retained two independent third-party proxy voting service providers to provide proxy support globally: Institutional Shareholder Services Inc. (“ISS”) and Glass Lewis (“GL”). In addition to ISS and GL, Invesco may retain certain local proxy service providers to access regionally specific research (such local proxy service providers, collectively with ISS and GL, “Proxy Service Providers”). The services may include one or more of the following: providing a comprehensive analysis of each voting item and interpretations of each voting item based on Invesco’s internal proxy voting guidelines; and providing assistance with the administration of the proxy process and certain proxy voting-related functions, including, but not limited to, operational, reporting and recordkeeping services. To the extent Proxy Service Providers consider non-financial factors in their proxy research and recommendations, Invesco may take that into account when evaluating their proxy research and recommendations.
While Invesco may take into consideration the information and recommendations provided by the Proxy Service Providers, including recommendations based upon Invesco’s internal proxy voting guidelines and recommendations provided to such Proxy Service Providers, Invesco’s investment teams retain full and independent discretion with respect to proxy voting decisions.
Updates to previously issued proxy research reports and recommendations may be provided to investment teams to incorporate newly available information or additional disclosure provided by an issuer regarding a matter to be voted on, or to correct factual errors that may result in the issuance of revised proxy vote recommendations. Invesco’s Global Corporate Governance & Advisory team periodically monitors for these research alerts issued by Proxy Service Providers with our investment teams.
Invesco performs extensive initial and ongoing due diligence on the Proxy Service Providers it engages globally. Invesco conducts annual due diligence meetings as part of its ongoing due diligence. The topics included in these annual due diligence meetings include material changes in service levels, leadership and control, conflicts of interest, methodologies for formulating vote recommendations, operations, and research personnel, among other topics. In addition, Invesco monitors and communicates with the Proxy Service Providers throughout the year and monitors their compliance with Invesco’s performance and policy standards.
As part of our annual policy development process, Invesco may engage with other external proxy and governance experts to understand market trends and developments. These meetings provide Invesco with an opportunity to assess the Proxy Service Providers’ capabilities, conflicts of interest and service levels, as well as provide investment professionals with direct insight into the Proxy Service Providers’ stances on key corporate governance and proxy topics and their policy framework/methodologies.
5

Invesco reviews the System and Organizational Controls (“SOC”) Reports for Proxy Service Providers to confirm that their related controls were in place and to provide reasonable assurance that the related controls operated effectively.
E.
Disclosures and Recordkeeping
This Policy is maintained by the Global Corporate Governance and Advisory team and accessible on the Invesco website. Records of votes cast by Invesco on behalf of clients are retained electronically for at least seven (7) years unless otherwise required by local or regional requirements by Invesco’s Technology Department and by our Proxy Service Provider. Invesco makes its proxy voting records publicly available in compliance with regulatory requirements and industry best practices in the regions below:
●
In accordance with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) regulations, Invesco will file a record of all proxy voting activity for the prior 12 months ending June 30 for each U.S. registered fund. In addition, Invesco, as an institutional investment manager that is required to file Form 13F, will file a record of its votes on certain executive compensation (“say on pay”) matters. The proxy voting filings will generally be made on or before August 31 of each year and are available on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. In addition, each year, the Form N-PX proxy voting records for Invesco mutual funds’ and closed-end funds’, and Invesco ETF’s are made available on Invesco’s website here.
●
To the extent applicable, the U.S. Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (“ERISA”), including Department of Labor regulations and guidance thereunder, provide that the named fiduciary generally should be able to review not only the investment adviser’s voting procedure with respect to plan-owned stock, but also the actions taken in individual proxy voting situations. In the case of institutional and sub-advised clients, clients may contact their client service representative to request information about how Invesco voted proxies on their behalf. Absent specific contractual guidelines, such requests may be made on a semi-annual basis.
●
In the UK and Europe, Invesco publicly discloses our proxy votes monthly in compliance with the UK Stewardship Code here. Additionally, in accordance with the European Shareholder Rights Directive and the UK Financial Conduct Authority’s Conduct of Business Sourcebook (“UK COBS”), Invesco publishes an annual report on implementation of our engagement policies, including a general description of voting behavior, an explanation of the most significant votes and the use of proxy voting advisors.
●
In Canada, Invesco publicly discloses a record of all proxy voting activity for the prior 12 months ending June 30th for each Invesco Canada registered mutual fund and ETF. In compliance with the National Instrument 81-106 Investment Fund Continuous Disclosure, the proxy voting records will generally be made available on or before August 31st of each year here.
●
In Japan, Invesco publicly discloses our proxy votes annually in compliance with the Japan Stewardship Code here.
●
In India, Invesco publicly discloses our proxy votes quarterly here in compliance with The Securities and Exchange Board of India (“SEBI”) Circular on stewardship code for all Mutual Funds and all categories of Alternative Investment Funds in relation to their investment in listed equities. SEBI has implemented principles on voting for Mutual Funds through circulars dated March 15, 2010, March 24, 2014, and March 5, 2021, which prescribed detailed mandatory requirements for Mutual Funds in India to disclose their voting policies and actual voting by Mutual Funds on different resolutions of investee companies.
●
In Hong Kong, Invesco Hong Kong Limited will provide proxy voting records upon request in compliance with the Securities and Futures Commission Principles of Responsible Ownership.
6

●
In Taiwan, Invesco publicly discloses our proxy voting policy and proxy votes annually in compliance with Taiwan’s Stewardship Principles for Institutional Investors here.
●
In Australia, Invesco publicly discloses a summary of its proxy voting record annually here.
●
In Singapore, Invesco Asset Management Singapore Ltd. will provide proxy voting records upon request in compliance with the Singapore Stewardship Principles for Responsible Investors.
Invesco may engage Proxy Service Providers to make available or maintain certain required proxy voting records in accordance with the above stated applicable regulations. Separately managed account clients that have authorized Invesco to vote proxies on their behalf will receive proxy voting information with respect to those accounts upon request. Certain other clients may obtain information about how we voted proxies on their behalf by contacting their client service representative or advisor. Invesco does not publicly disclose voting intentions in advance of shareholder meetings.
F.
Market and Operational Limitations
In the great majority of instances, Invesco will vote proxies. However, in certain circumstances, Invesco may refrain from voting where the economic or other opportunity costs of voting exceed any benefit to clients. Moreover, ERISA fiduciaries must not subordinate the economic interests of plan participants and beneficiaries to unrelated objectives when voting proxies or exercising other shareholder rights. These matters are left to the discretion of the relevant investment team. Such circumstances could include, for example:
●
Certain countries impose temporary trading restrictions, a practice known as “share blocking.” This means that once the shares have been voted, the shareholder does not have the ability to sell the shares for a certain period of time, usually until the day after the conclusion of the shareholder meeting. Unless a client directs otherwise, Invesco generally refrains from voting proxies at companies or in markets where share blocking applies. In some instances, Invesco may determine that the benefit to the client(s) of voting a specific proxy outweighs the client’s temporary inability to sell the shares.
●
Some companies require a representative to attend shareholder meetings in person to vote a proxy or issuer-specific additional documentation, certification or the disclosure of beneficial owner details to vote. Invesco may determine that the costs of sending a representative or submitting additional documentation, including power of attorney documentation, or disclosures outweigh the benefit of voting a particular proxy.
●
Invesco may not receive proxy materials from the relevant fund or custodian used by our clients with sufficient time and information to make an informed independent voting decision.
●
Invesco held shares on the record date but sold them prior to the meeting date.
●
Although Invesco uses reasonable efforts to vote a proxy, proxies may not be accepted or may be rejected for various reasons, including due to changes in the agenda for a shareholder meeting for which Invesco does not have sufficient notice, when certain custodians used by our clients do not offer a proxy voting in a jurisdiction, or due to operational issues experienced by third parties involved in the process or by an issuer or sub-custodian.
●
Additionally, despite the best efforts of Invesco and its proxy voting agent, there may be instances where our votes may not be received or properly tabulated by an issuer or an issuer’s agent. Invesco will generally endeavor to vote and maintain any paper ballots received provided they are delivered in a timely manner ahead of the vote deadline.
G.
Securities Lending
Invesco’s funds may participate in a securities lending program. In circumstances where Invesco fund shares are on loan, the voting rights of those shares are transferred to the borrower. If the security in question is on loan as part of a securities lending program, Invesco may determine that the vote is
7

material to the investment, and therefore, the benefit to the client of voting a particular proxy outweighs the economic benefits of securities lending. In those instances, Invesco may determine to recall securities that are on loan prior to the meeting record date, so we will be entitled to vote those shares. For example, for certain actively managed funds, the lending agent has standing instructions to recall all securities on loan systematically in a timely manner on a best efforts basis for Invesco to vote the proxies on those previously loaned shares. There may be instances where Invesco may be unable to recall shares or may choose not to recall shares. Such circumstances may include instances when Invesco does not receive timely notice of the meeting, or when Invesco deems the opportunity for a fund to generate securities lending revenue outweighs the benefits of voting at a specific meeting. The relevant investment team will make these determinations.
H.
Conflicts of Interest
There may be occasions where voting proxies may present a perceived or actual conflict of interest between Invesco, as investment adviser, and one or more of Invesco’s clients or vendors.
Firm-Level Conflicts of Interest
A conflict of interest may exist if Invesco has a material business relationship with either the company soliciting a proxy or a third party that has a material interest in the outcome of a proxy vote or that is actively lobbying for a particular outcome of a proxy vote. Such relationships may include, among others, a client relationship, serving as a vendor whose products/services are material or significant to Invesco, serving as a distributor of Invesco’s products, or serving as a significant research provider or broker to Invesco.
Invesco identifies potential conflicts of interest based on a variety of factors, including, but not limited to, the materiality of the relationship between the issuer or its affiliates to Invesco.
Material firm-level conflicts of interests are identified by individuals and groups within Invesco globally using criteria established by the Global Corporate Governance & Advisory team. These criteria are monitored and updated periodically by the Global Corporate Governance & Advisory team so up-to-date information is available when conducting conflicts checks. Operating procedures and associated governance are designed to assure conflicts of interest are appropriately considered ahead of voting proxies. The Global IPAC Conflict of Interest Sub-committee maintains oversight of the process. Companies identified as conflicted will be voted in line with the principles below as implemented by Invesco’s internal proxy voting guidelines. To the extent an investment team disagrees with the Policy, our processes and procedures seek to assure that justifications and rationales are fully documented and presented to the Global IPAC Conflict of Interest Sub-committee for approval by a majority vote of the Sub-committee.
As an additional safeguard, persons from Invesco’s marketing, distribution and other customer-facing functions may not serve on the Global IPAC. For the avoidance of doubt, Invesco may not consider Invesco Ltd.’s pecuniary interest when voting proxies on behalf of clients. To avoid any appearance of a conflict of interest, Invesco will instruct “abstain” on proxies issued by Invesco Ltd. that are held in client accounts. If an “abstain” vote is not operationally possible, Invesco will not vote the shares.
Personal Conflicts of Interest
A conflict also may exist where an Invesco employee has a known personal or business relationship with other proponents of proxy proposals, participants in proxy contests, corporate directors, or candidates for directorships. Under Invesco’s Global Code of Conduct, Invesco entities and individuals must act in the best interests of clients and must avoid any situation that gives rise to an actual or perceived conflict of interest.
All Invesco personnel with proxy voting responsibilities are required to report any known personal or business conflicts of interest regarding proxy issues with which they are involved. In such instances, the individual(s) with the conflict will be excluded from the decision-making process relating to such issue.
8

I.
Voting of Affiliated Holdings and Funds of Funds
Funds of funds holdings can create various special situations for proxy voting, including operational challenges in certain markets. The scenarios below set out examples of how Invesco votes funds of funds:
●
When required by law or regulation, securities issued by an Invesco fund held by other Invesco funds will be voted in the same proportion as the votes of external holders of the underlying fund. If such proportional voting is not operationally possible, Invesco will not vote the securities.
●
When required by law or regulation, securities issued by an unaffiliated registered fund held by one or more Invesco funds will be voted in the same proportion as the votes of external holders of the underlying fund. If such proportional voting is not operationally possible, Invesco will not vote the securities.
●
For U.S. funds of funds where proportional voting is not required by law or regulation, securities issued by Invesco funds held by other Invesco funds generally will be voted in the same proportion as the votes of external holders of the underlying fund. If such proportional voting is not operationally possible, Invesco will vote in line with internal proxy voting guidelines. Investment teams retain full discretion over proxy voting decisions for funds of funds where proportional voting is not required by law or regulation and may choose to vote differently.
●
For U.S. funds of funds where proportional voting is not required by law or regulation, securities issued by unaffiliated registered funds held by one or more Invesco funds generally will be voted in the same proportion as the votes of external holders of the underlying fund. If such proportional voting is not operationally possible, Invesco will vote in line with internal proxy voting guidelines. Investment teams retain full discretion over proxy voting decisions for funds of funds where proportional voting is not required by law or regulation and may choose to vote differently.
●
Securities issued by non-U.S. funds of funds will not be voted proportionally due to operational limitations. The applicable Invesco entity will vote in line with its local policies, as indicated in Exhibit A. If no local policies exist, Invesco will vote in line with the firm level conflicts of interest process described above.
●
Where client accounts are invested directly in securities issued by Invesco affiliates and Invesco has proxy voting authority, securities will be voted in the same proportion as the votes of external shareholders of the underlying securities. If proportional voting is not possible, the securities will be voted in line with a Proxy Service Provider’s recommendation.
●
Where Invesco invests in its own products (either as seed capital or otherwise), securities will be voted in line with recommendations of the issuer’s management or board.
●
Unless it decides to solicit investor instructions, Invesco shall not vote the securities of an Invesco fund held by a fund, client or proprietary account managed by Invesco Canada Ltd.
J.
Review of Policy
It is the responsibility of the Global IPAC to review this Policy and the internal proxy voting guidelines annually to consider whether any changes are warranted. This annual review seeks to assure that this Policy and the internal proxy voting guidelines remain consistent with clients’ best interests, regulatory requirements, local market standards and best practices. Further, this Policy and our internal proxy voting guidelines are reviewed at least annually by various departments within Invesco to seek to ensure that they remain consistent with Invesco’s views on best practice in corporate governance and long-term investment stewardship.
III.
Our Good Governance Principles
Invesco’s good governance principles outline our views on best practice in corporate governance and long-term investment stewardship. These principles have been developed by our global investment teams in
9

collaboration with the Global Corporate Governance & Advisory team and various departments internally. The broad philosophy and guiding principles in this section inform our approach to long-term investment stewardship and proxy voting. The principles and positions reflected in this Policy are designed to guide Invesco’s investment professionals in voting proxies; they are not intended to be exhaustive or prescriptive.
Our investment teams retain full discretion on vote execution in the context of our good governance principles and internal proxy voting guidelines, except where otherwise specified in this Policy. The final voting decisions may consider the unique facts and circumstances applicable to each company, issue, and individual ballot item. These include relevant market laws and regulations, country-specific best practices or corporate governance codes, the issuer’s public disclosures, internal research, input from external research providers, and any dialogue we have had with company management. As a result, investment teams may reach different conclusions on portfolio companies and may cast different votes at the same shareholder meeting. When investment teams choose to vote a proxy that is contrary to the principles below or internal proxy voting guidelines, they are required to document their rationales.
The following guiding principles apply to proxy voting with respect to operating companies. We apply a separate approach to open-end and closed-end investment companies and unit investment trusts. Where appropriate, these guidelines may be supplemented by additional internal guidance that considers regional variations in best practices, company disclosure and region-specific voting items. Invesco may vote on proposals not specifically addressed by these principles or guidelines based on an evaluation of a proposal’s likelihood to enhance long-term shareholder value.
Our good governance principles are organized around six broad pillars:
A.
Transparency
We expect companies to provide accurate, timely and complete information that enables investors to make informed investment decisions and effectively carry out their stewardship activities. Invesco supports the highest standards in corporate transparency and believes that these disclosures should be made available ahead of the voting deadlines for an annual general meeting or special meeting to allow for timely review and decision-making.
Financial reporting: Company accounts and reporting must accurately reflect the underlying economic position of a company. Arrangements that may constitute an actual or perceived conflict with this objective should be avoided.
●
We will generally support proposals to accept the annual financial statements, statutory accounts and similar proposals. However, if these reports are not presented in a timely manner or significant issues are identified regarding their integrity (e.g., the external auditor’s opinion is absent or qualified), we will generally review the matter on a case-by-case basis.
External auditor ratification and audit fees:
●
We will generally not support the ratification of the independent auditor and/or ratification of their fees payable if non-audit fees exceed audit and audit related fees or if there are significant auditing controversies or questions regarding the independence of the external auditor. We will consider an auditor’s length of service as a company’s independent auditor in applying this policy.
●
We will generally vote against the incumbent audit committee chair, or nearest equivalent, where the non-audit fees paid to the independent auditor exceed audit fees for two consecutive years or other problematic accounting practices are identified such as fraud, misapplication of audit standards or persistent material weaknesses/deficiencies in internal controls over financial reporting.
Other business: Generally, we vote against proposals to transact other business matters where disclosure is insufficient and we are not given the opportunity to review and understand what issues may be raised.
10

Related-party transactions: Invesco will generally consider the following factors when evaluating related party transactions, among others:
●
disclosure of the transaction details must be full and transparent (such as details of the related parties and of the transaction subject, timeframe, pricing, potential conflicts of interest, and other terms and conditions);
●
the transaction must be fair and appropriate, with a sound strategic rationale;
●
the company should provide an independent opinion either from the supervisory board or an external financial adviser;
●
minority shareholders’ interests should be protected; and
●
the transactions should be on an arm’s length basis.
Routine business items and formalities: Invesco generally votes non-contentious routine business items and formalities as recommended by the issuer’s management and board of directors. Routine business items and formalities generally include proposals to:
●
accept or approve a variety of routine reports; and
●
approve provisionary financial budgets and strategy for the current year.
B.
Accountability
Robust shareholder rights and strong board oversight help ensure that management adhere to the highest standards of ethical conduct, are held to account for poor performance and responsibly deliver value creation for stakeholders over the long term. We encourage companies to adopt governance features that ensure board and management accountability. In particular, we consider the following as key mechanisms for enhancing accountability to investors:
One share one vote: Voting rights are an important tool for investors to hold boards and management teams accountable.
●
We generally do not support proposals that establish or perpetuate dual classes of voting shares, double voting rights or other means of differentiated voting or disproportionate board nomination rights.
●
We generally support proposals to decommission differentiated voting rights.
●
Where unequal voting rights are established, we expect these to be accompanied by reasonable safeguards to protect minority shareholders’ interests.
Anti-takeover devices: Mechanisms designed to prevent or delay takeover attempts may unduly limit the accountability of boards and management teams to shareholders.
●
We generally will not support proposals to adopt anti-takeover devices such as poison pills. Exceptions may be warranted at entities without significant operations and to preserve the value of net operating losses carried forward or where the applicability of the pill is limited in scope and duration.
●
In addition, we will generally not support capital authorizations or amendments to corporate articles or bylaws at operating companies that may be utilized for anti-takeover purposes, for example, the authorization of classes of shares of preferred stock with unspecified voting, dividend, conversion or other rights (“blank check” authorizations).
●
We generally support proposals for the removal of anti-takeover provisions.
Shareholder rights: We support the rights of shareholders to hold boards and management teams accountable for company performance. We generally support best-practice-aligned proposals to enhance shareholder rights:
11

●
Proxy access: Within the US market, we generally vote for management and shareholder proposals for proxy access that employ guidelines reflecting the SEC framework for proxy access with the following provisions:
●
Ownership threshold: at least three percent (3%) of the voting power;
●
Ownership duration: at least three (3) years of continuous ownership for each member of the nominating group;
●
Aggregation: minimal or no limits on the number of shareholders permitted to form a nominating group; and
●
Cap: cap on nominees of one (1) director or twenty-five percent (25%) of the board, whichever is higher.
●
Shareholder ability to call special meetings: Generally, we vote for management and shareholder proposals that provide shareholders with the ability to call special meetings with a minimum threshold of 10% but not greater than 25%. We generally will not support proposals to prohibit shareholders’ right to call special meetings.
●
Shareholder ability to act by written consent: Generally, we assess shareholder proposals that provide shareholders with the ability to act by written consent case-by-case taking into account the following factors, among other things:
●
Shareholders’ current right to call special meetings; and
●
Investor ownership structure.
●
Supermajority vote requirements: Generally, we vote against proposals to require a supermajority shareholder vote. We will vote for management and shareholder proposals to reduce supermajority vote requirements, in favor of a simple majority threshold. Lowering this requirement can democratize corporate governance and facilitate a more fair and dynamic decision-making that empowers and represents a wider shareholder base, especially for key corporate actions such as mergers, changes in control, or proposals to amend or repeal a portion of a company’s articles of incorporation.
●
Bundling of proposals: It is our view that the bundling of multiple proposals or articles amendments in one single voting item restricts shareholders’ ability to express their views, with an all-or-nothing vote. We generally oppose such proposals unless all bundled resolutions are deemed acceptable and conducive of long-term shareholder value.
Virtual shareholder meetings: Companies should hold their annual or special shareholder meetings in a manner that best serves the needs of its shareholders and the company. Shareholders should have an opportunity to participate in such meetings. Shareholder meetings provide an important mechanism by which shareholders provide feedback or raise concerns and hear from the board and management.
●
We will generally support management proposals seeking to allow for the convening of hybrid shareholder meetings (allowing shareholders the option to attend and participate either in person or through a virtual platform).
●
We may support management or shareholder proposals that seek to authorize the company to hold virtual-only meetings (held entirely through virtual platform with no corresponding in-person physical meeting), if companies fulfill their responsibility to provide strong justification and establish safeguards to preserve comparable rights and opportunities for shareholders to participate virtually as they would have during an in-person meeting. In particular, Invesco will consider, among other things, a company’s practices, jurisdiction and disclosure, including the items set forth below:
i.
meeting procedures and requirements are disclosed in advance of a meeting detailing the rationale for eliminating the in-person meeting;
12

ii.
clear and comprehensive description of which shareholders are qualified to participate, how shareholders can join the virtual-only meeting, how and when shareholders submit and ask questions either in advance of or during the meeting;
iii.
disclosure regarding procedures for questions received during the meeting, but not answered due to time or other restrictions; and
iv.
description of how shareholder rights will be protected in a virtual-only meeting format including the ability to vote shares during the time the polls are open.
C.
Board Composition and Effectiveness
Voting on director nominees in uncontested elections
Definition of independence: Invesco considers local market definitions of director independence but applies a proprietary standard for assessing director independence considering a director’s status as a current or former employee of the business, any commercial or consulting relationships with the company, the level of shares beneficially owned or represented and familial relationships, among others.
Board and committee independence: The board of directors, board committees and regional equivalents should be sufficiently independent from management, substantial shareholders and should be free from conflicts of interest. We consider local market practices in this regard and in general we look for a balance across the board of directors. Above all, we like to see signs of robust challenge and discussion in the boardroom.
●
We will generally vote against one or more non-independent directors when a board is less than majority independent, but we will take into account local market practice with regards to board independence in limited circumstances where this standard is not appropriate.
●
We will generally vote against non-independent directors serving on the audit committee.
●
We will generally vote against non-independent directors serving on the compensation committee.
●
We will generally vote against non-independent directors serving on the nominating committee.
●
In relation to the board, compensation committee and nominating committee we will consider the appropriateness of significant shareholder representation in applying this policy. This exception will generally not apply to the audit committee.
Independent Board Chair: It is our view that independent board leadership generally enhances management accountability to investors. Companies deviating from this best practice should provide a strong justification and establish safeguards to ensure that there is independent oversight of a board’s activities (e.g., by appointing a lead or senior independent director with clearly defined powers and responsibilities).
●
We will generally vote against the incumbent nominating committee chair, or nearest equivalent, where the board chair is not independent unless a lead independent or senior director is appointed.
●
We will review shareholder proposals requesting that the board chair be an independent director on a case-by-case basis, taking into account several factors, including, but not limited to, the presence of a lead independent director and a sufficiently independent board, a sound governance structure with no record of recent material governance failures or controversies, and sound financial performance. Invesco will also positively consider less disruptive proposals that will enter into force at the subsequent leadership transition.
●
We will generally not vote against a CEO or executive serving as board chair solely on the basis of this issue, however, we may do so in instances where we have significant concerns regarding a company’s corporate governance, capital allocation decisions and/or compensation practices.
13

Attendance and over boarding: Director attendance at board and committee meetings is a fundamental part of their responsibilities and provides efficient oversight for the company and its investors. In addition, directors should not have excessive external board or managerial commitments that may interfere with their ability to execute the duties of a director.
●
We will generally vote against or withhold votes from directors who attend less than 75% of board and committee meetings for two consecutive years. We expect companies to disclose any extenuating circumstances, such as health matters or family emergencies, that would justify a director’s low attendance, in line with good practices.
●
We will generally vote against directors who have more than four total mandates at public operating companies, if their attendance is not disclosed or below 75% of all board and committee meetings in the year under review, or if material governance failures have been identified. We apply a lower threshold for directors with significant commitments such as executive positions and chairmanships.
Other Board Qualifications: In our view, an effective board should be comprised of qualified and engaged directors with a mix of skills, experience, perspectives and characteristics. We recognize that the presence of a variety of these factors in the boardroom may contribute to robust challenge, debate, and innovation, and allows the board to make informed judgements. We expect companies to comply with their local market legal requirements or listing standards for board diversity and to the extent that a company fails to comply with such requirements, Invesco will generally vote against the nominating committee chair, or nearest equivalent. Invesco will also consider the professional experience of the individuals on the board and how they underpin the company’s performance and long-term shareholder value, among other factors.
Director term limits and retirement age: It is important for a board of directors to examine its membership regularly with a view to ensuring that the board is effective, and the company continues to benefit from a variety of director viewpoints and experience. It is our view that an individual board’s nominating committee is best positioned to determine whether director term limits or establishing a mandatory retirement age would be an appropriate measure to help achieve these goals and, if so, the nature of such limits. Therefore, Invesco generally opposes shareholder proposals to limit the tenure of board directors or to impose a mandatory retirement age.
Governance failures: A board of directors is ultimately responsible for overseeing management and ensuring that proper governance, oversight and control mechanisms are in place at the company it oversees. Invesco considers the adequacy of a company's response to material oversight failures when determining whether any voting action is warranted. Invesco may take voting action against director nominees in response to material failures of governance, risk oversight or fiduciary responsibilities at the company that adversely affect shareholder value. This may include, bribery, fines or sanctions from regulatory bodies, demonstrably poor risk oversight, or adverse legal judgments, among other things. In addition, Invesco will consider the responsibilities delegated to board sub-committees when determining if it is appropriate to hold the incumbent chair of the relevant committee, or nearest equivalent, accountable for these material failures.
Director Indemnification: Invesco recognizes that individuals may be reluctant to serve as corporate directors if they are personally liable for all related lawsuits and legal costs. As a result, reasonable limitations on directors’ liability can benefit a company and its shareholders by helping to attract and retain qualified directors while preserving recourse for shareholders in the event of misconduct by directors. Invesco will evaluate shareholder proposals to amend directors’ indemnification and exculpation provisions on a case-by-case basis.
Discharge of directors: We will generally support proposals to ratify the actions of the board of directors, supervisory board and/or executive decision-making bodies, provided there are no material oversight failures and legal controversies, or other wrongdoings in the relevant fiscal year – committed or yet to be confirmed. When such oversight concerns are identified, we will consider a company’s
14

response to any issues raised and may vote against ratification proposals instead of, or in addition to, director nominees.
Director election process: Board members should generally stand for election annually and individually.
●
We will generally support proposals requesting that directors stand for election annually.
●
We will generally vote against the incumbent governance committee chair or nearest equivalent, if a company has a classified board structure that is not being phased out. We may make exceptions to this guideline in regions where market practice is for directors to stand for election on a staggered basis.
●
We will generally support shareholder proposals to repeal a classified board and elect all directors annually.
●
When a board is presented for election as a slate (e.g., shareholders are unable to vote against individual nominees and must vote for or against the entire nominated slate of directors) and this approach is not aligned with local market practice, we will generally vote against the slate in cases where we otherwise would vote against an individual nominee.
●
Where market practice is to elect directors as a slate, we will generally support the nominated slate unless there are governance concerns with several of the individuals included on the slate or we have broad concerns with the composition of the board such as a lack of independence.
Majority vote standard: Invesco generally votes in favor of proposals to elect directors by a majority vote, except in cases where a company has adopted formal governance principles that present a meaningful alternative to the majority voting standard.
Board size: We will generally defer to the board with respect to determining the optimal number of board members given the size of the company and complexity of the business, provided that the proposed board size is sufficiently large to represent shareholder interests and sufficiently limited to remain effective.
Board assessment and succession planning: Invesco will consider and vote case-by-case on shareholder proposals to adopt a policy on succession planning. When evaluating board effectiveness, Invesco considers whether periodic performance reviews and skills assessments are conducted to ensure the board represents the interests of shareholders. In addition, boards should have a robust succession plan in place for key management and board personnel.
Voting on director nominees in contested elections
Proxy contests: We will review case-by-case dissident shareholder proposals based on their individual merits. We consider the following factors, among others, when evaluating the merits of each list of nominees: the long-term performance of the company relative to its industry, management’s track record, any relevant background information related to the contest, the qualifications of the respective lists of director nominees, the strategic merits of the approaches proposed by both sides, including the likelihood that the proposed goals can be met, and positions of stock ownership in the company.
D.
Capitalization
Capital allocation: Invesco expects companies to responsibly raise and deploy capital toward the long-term, sustainable success of the business. In addition, we expect capital allocation authorizations and decisions to be made with due regard to shareholder dilution, rights of shareholders to ratify significant corporate actions and pre-emptive rights, where applicable.
Share issuance: We generally support authorizations to issue shares without preemptive rights up to 20% of a company’s issued share capital for general corporate purposes. However, for issuance requests with preemptive rights, we support authorizations up to a threshold of 50%. Shares should not
15

be issued at a substantial discount to the market price. The same requirements are expected for convertible and non-convertible debt instruments.
Share repurchase programs: We generally support share repurchase plans in which all shareholders may participate on equal terms. However, it is our view that such plans should be executed transparently and in alignment with long-term shareholder interests. Therefore, we will not support such plans when there is clear evidence of abuse or no safeguards against selective buybacks, or the terms do not align with market best practices.
Stock splits: We will generally evaluate proposals for forward and reverse stock splits on a case-by-case basis. Each proposal will be evaluated based on its potential impact on shareholder value, local market best practices, and alignment with the company's long-term strategic goals.
Increases in authorized share capital: We will generally support proposals to increase a company’s number of authorized common and/or preferred shares, provided we have not identified concerns regarding a company’s historical share issuance activity or the potential to use these authorizations for anti-takeover purposes. We will consider the amount of the request in relation to the company’s current authorized share capital, any proposed corporate transactions contingent on approval of these requests and the cumulative impact on a company’s authorized share capital, for example, if a reverse stock split is concurrently submitted for shareholder consideration.
Mergers, acquisitions, disposals and other corporate transactions: Invesco’s investment teams will review proposed corporate transactions including mergers, acquisitions, reorganizations, proxy contests, dissolutions and divestitures based on a proposal’s individual investment merits. In addition, we broadly approach voting on other corporate transactions as follows:
●
We will generally support proposals to approve different types of restructurings that provide the necessary financing to save the company from involuntary bankruptcy.
●
We will generally support proposals to enact corporate name changes and other proposals related to corporate transactions that we believe are in shareholders’ best interests.
●
We will generally support reincorporation proposals, provided that management has provided a compelling rationale for the change in legal jurisdiction and provided further that the proposal will not significantly adversely impact shareholders’ rights.
E.
Environmental and Social Issues
Shareholder proposals addressing environmental and social issues: We recognize environmental and social shareholder proposals are nuanced and require company specific analysis, and therefore, Invesco will analyze such proposals on a case-by-case basis. When analyzing such proposals, we will consider the following factors, among others:
●
whether we consider the adoption of such proposal would promote long-term shareholder value;
●
the materiality of the issue(s) being raised;
●
whether there are fines or litigation, significant controversies including reputational risks associated with the company’s practices or policies related to the issue(s) raised in the proposal;
●
the board’s written response to the proposal in the proxy and whether the company has already responded or taken action to appropriately address the issue(s) raised in the proposal.
Additionally, Invesco may consider the company's existing level of disclosure and track record on environmental and social issues or if the company already complies with relevant local laws and regulations as it relates to the issue(s) raised in the proposal; the intentions of the proponent(s) and how they impact the company’s long-term economic success; if the proposal requests greater transparency or disclosure to make an informed assessment; and whether the proposal’s requested action is unduly burdensome (scope or timeframe) or overly prescriptive.
16

F.
Executive Compensation and Performance Alignment
Invesco supports compensation policies and equity incentive plans that promote alignment between management incentives and shareholders’ long-term interests. We pay close attention to local market practice and may apply stricter or modified criteria where appropriate.
Advisory votes on executive compensation, remuneration policy and remuneration reports: We will generally not support compensation-related proposals where more than one of the following is present:
i.
there is an unmitigated misalignment between executive pay and company performance for at least two consecutive years;
ii.
there are problematic compensation practices which may include, among others, incentivizing excessive risk taking or circumventing alignment between management and shareholders’ interests via repricing of underwater options;
iii.
vesting periods for long-term incentive awards are less than three years;
iv.
the company “front loads” equity awards;
v.
there are inadequate risk mitigating features in the program such as clawback provisions;
vi.
excessive, discretionary one-time equity grants are awarded to executives; and/or
vii.
less than half of variable pay is linked to performance targets, except where prohibited by law.
Invesco will consider company reporting on pay ratios as part of our evaluation of compensation proposals, where relevant.
Equity plans: Invesco generally supports equity compensation plans that promote the proper alignment of incentives with shareholders’ long-term interests, and generally votes against plans that are overly dilutive to existing shareholders, plans that contain objectionable structural features which may include provisions to reprice options without shareholder approval, plans that include evergreen provisions or plans that provide for automatic accelerated vesting upon a change in control.
Employee stock purchase plans: We generally support employee stock purchase plans that are reasonably designed to provide proper incentives to a broad base of employees, provided that the price at which employees may acquire stock represents a reasonable discount from the market price and that the total shareholder dilution resulting from the plan is not excessive (e.g., more than 10% of outstanding shares).
Severance Arrangements: Invesco considers proposed severance arrangements (sometimes known as “golden parachute” arrangements) on a case-by-case basis due to the wide variety among their terms. Invesco acknowledges that in some cases such arrangements, if reasonable, and aligned with local market best practices, may be in shareholders’ best interests as a method of attracting and retaining high-quality executive talent. We generally support proposals requiring submission of severance agreements for certain senior executives for shareholder ratification.
Frequency of Advisory Vote on Executive Compensation (Say-on-Pay, MSOP) Management Proposals: It is our view that shareholders should be given the opportunity to vote on executive compensation and adequately express their potential concerns. Invesco will generally vote in favor of a one-year frequency, in order to foster greater accountability, as well as to grant shareholders a timely intervention on pay practices.
17

Exhibit A
Harbourview Asset Management Corporation
Invesco Advisers, Inc.
Invesco Asset Management (India) Pvt. Ltd*1
Invesco Asset Management (Japan) Limited*1
Invesco Asset Management (Schweiz) AG
Invesco Asset Management Limited 1
Invesco Asset Management Singapore Ltd
Invesco Australia Ltd
Invesco Canada Ltd.1
Invesco Capital Management LLC
Invesco Capital Markets, Inc.*1
Invesco European RR L.P
Invesco Fund Managers Limited
Invesco Hong Kong Limited
Invesco Investment Advisers LLC
Invesco Investment Management (Shanghai) Limited
Invesco Investment Management Limited
Invesco Loan Manager, LLC
Invesco Managed Accounts, LLC
Invesco Management S.A.
Invesco Overseas Investment Fund Management (Shanghai) Limited
Invesco Pensions Limited
Invesco Private Capital, Inc.
Invesco Real Estate Management S.à r.l.1
Invesco RR Fund L.P.
Invesco Senior Secured Management, Inc.
Invesco Taiwan Limited*1
Invesco Trust Company
OppenheimerFunds, Inc.
WL Ross & Co. LLC
* Invesco entities with specific proxy voting guidelines
1 Invesco entities with specific conflicts of interest policies
18

Exhibit B
The Invesco Proxy Voting Choice Program (the “Proxy Voting Choice”) is available to certain eligible clients and shareholders and provides the ability to choose from a menu of distinct voting policy options that support different voting objectives. As implemented through Invesco’s internal Proxy Voting Choice procedures, clients or shareholders that participate in Proxy Voting Choice have the option of selecting a voting policy option which directs how their proportionate shares of the eligible product are voted at corporate shareholder meetings. Invesco Proxy Voting Choice aims to facilitate greater alignment of proxy voting with eligible client/shareholder interests with respect to the products specified below.
The Proxy Voting Choice pilot program is available to shareholders of the following products:
●
Invesco S&P 100 Equal Weight ETF
19

Proxy Voting Guidelines
for
Invesco Asset Management (Japan) Limited
20

Invesco Japan Proxy Voting Guideline
Invesco Japan (hereinafter “we” or “our) votes proxies to maximize the interests of our clients (investors) and beneficiaries in the long term, acknowledging the importance of corporate governance based on fiduciary duties to our clients (investors) and beneficiaries. We do not vote proxies for the interests of ourselves and any third party other than clients (investors) and beneficiaries. The interests of clients (investors) and beneficiaries are to expand the corporate value or the shareholders’ economic interests or prevent damage thereto. Proxy voting is an integral part of our stewardship activities, and we make voting decisions considering whether the proposal would contribute to corporate value expansion and sustainable growth.
To vote proxies adequately, we have established the Responsible Investment Committee and developed the Proxy Voting Guideline to govern the decision-making process of proxy voting. While we may seek advice from an external service provider based on our own guidelines, our investment professionals make voting decisions in principle, based on the proxy voting guideline, taking into account whether they contribute to increasing the subject company’s shareholder value.
Responsible proxy voting and constructive dialogue with investee companies are important components of stewardship activities. While the Proxy Voting Guideline are principles for our voting decisions, depending on the proposals, we may make an exception if we conclude that such a decision is in the best interests of clients (investors) and beneficiaries after having constructive dialogue with the investee companies. In such a case, approval of the Responsible Investment Committee shall be obtained.
The Responsible Investment Committee consists of members including Chief Investment Officer, as the chair, Head of Compliance, Head of ESG, investment professionals nominated by the chair and the other members, including persons in charge at the Client Reporting department.
We have established the Conflict of Interest Management Policy. In the situation that may give rise to a conflict of interest, we aim to control it in the best interests of clients (investors) and beneficiaries. The Compliance department is responsible for governing company-wide control of a conflict of interest. The Compliance department is independent of Investment and Sales departments and shall not receive any command or order for the matters compliant with the laws and regulations, including a conflict of interest, from them.
Proxy Voting Guidelines
1. Appropriations of Retained Earnings and Dividends
We decide how to vote on proposals seeking approval for appropriations of retained earnings and dividends, taking into account the subject company’s financial conditions and business performance, shareholders’ economic interests and so on.
●
Taking into account the company’s capital adequacy, business strategies, and so on if the total payout ratio, including dividends and share repurchases, is significantly low, we consider voting against the proposals unless reasonable explanations are given by the company.
●
With respect to the company where the Board of Directors determines appropriations of retained earnings, taking into account the subject company’s capital adequacy, business strategies, and so on if the total payout ratio, including dividends and share repurchases, is significantly low, we consider voting against the reappointment of board directors unless reasonable explanations are given by the company.
●
Taking into account the subject company’s capital adequacy, business strategies, and so on if the total payout ratio, including dividends and share repurchases, is significantly low, we consider voting for shareholder proposals increasing shareholder returns.
21

2. Appointment of Board Directors
We decide how to vote on proposals concerning the appointment of board directors, taking into account their independence, competence, anti-social activity records (if any), and so on. Furthermore, we decide how to vote on the reappointment of board directors, taking into account their corporate governance practices, accountability during their tenures, the company’s business performance and anti-social records (if any), and so on in addition to the above factors.
Board directors should make best efforts to continuously gain knowledge and skills to fulfill the critical role and responsibilities in the company’s governance. A company should also provide sufficient training opportunities.
Independent outside directors are expected to play a significant role, such as safeguarding minority shareholders’ interests through action based on their insights to increase the company’s corporate value. It is desirable to enhance the board’s governance function with independent outside directors accounting for the board majority. However, given the challenge to secure competent candidates, we also recognize that it is difficult for all the companies, irrespective of their size, to deploy the independent outside directors’ majority on the Board.
Sufficient disclosure is a prerequisite for reflecting the assessment of independence and suitability of director candidates and board composition in voting decisions. Currently, there are cases where sufficient information cannot be obtained due to insufficient disclosure on a board chair, each committee’s function and committee chairs in Notice of Annual General Meeting (AGM) and a corporate governance report, as well as untimeliness of these issuances. We generally make decisions based on Notice of AGM, a corporate governance report and an annual securities report disclosed by the time of voting. However, this shall not apply if we obtain such information from direct engagement with the company or find relevant disclosure elsewhere.
(1)
Independence
We generally vote for the appointment of outside directors. However, we generally vote against if a candidate is not regarded as independent of the subject company. It is desirable that the company discloses information, such as numerical data, which supports our decision on board independence.
●
We view the following outside director candidates are not independent enough.
●
Candidates who have been working for the following companies for the last ten years or are those people’s relatives.
●
The subject company
●
Its subsidiary
●
Its parent company
●
Candidates who have been working for the following companies for the last five years or are those people’s relatives.
●
Shareholders who own more than 10% of the subject company
●
Principal loan lenders
●
Principal securities brokers
●
Major business partners
●
Auditors
●
Audit companies, consulting companies or any related service providers which have any consulting contracts with the subject company
●
Any other counterparts which have any interests in the subject company
22

In cases other than above, we separately scrutinize the independence of candidates who are regarded as not independent enough.
●
We take extra care when we assess the independence of candidates from a company which is regarded as a policy shareholder under cross shareholding, mutually sends outside directors to each other, and so on, as such cases potentially raise doubts about their independence. The company should give reasonable explanations. It is also desirable that the company contrives the timing and method of disclosure to allow investors to understand those relationships enough.
●
We judge board independence according to the stock exchange’s independence criteria with emphasizing independence ensured practically. We consider each company’s business environment and make the best effort to engage with the subject company to determine the independence of the candidates.
●
We regard an outside director with a significantly long tenure as non-independent and consider voting against the reappointment of such an outside director. We generally consider voting against the reappointment of outside directors whose tenures are longer than ten years.
●
If the subject company is a company with Audit Committee, we judge the independence of outside director candidates who become audit committee board members using the same independence criteria for the appointment of statutory auditors in principle.
●
We generally consider voting against the appointment of top executives and a nominating committee chair at a company with three Committees if independent outside directors of the subject company account for less than 1/3 of the Board after the AGM. However, this shall not apply if we confirm sufficient planning or special circumstances on increasing the number of independent outside directors in engagements.
●
In case the subject company has a parent company or controlling shareholders, we generally consider voting against the appointment of top executives and a nominating committee chair at a company with three Committees if independent outside directors account for less than half of the Board after the AGM. However, this shall not apply if we confirm sufficient planning or special circumstances on increasing the number of independent outside directors in engagements.
(2)
Attendance rate and concurrent duties
●
All members are expected to attend board and respective committee meetings in principle. A Company is generally obligated to facilitate all members to attend these meetings. We generally vote against the reappointment of board directors who attended less than 75% of board or respective committee meetings.
●
We take into account not only the number of attendance but nomination reasons and candidates’ real contributions if disclosed.
●
We take extra care when we assess the capability of board directors who have many concurrent duties as a director or statutory auditor of listed companies, as such cases potentially raise doubts about their capacity given the importance of directors’ role and responsibilities. Accordingly, we consider voting against the appointment of board directors who perform five or more duties as a director or statutory auditor of a listed company or equivalent company. However, in case nominees serve as executive director or statutory auditor of a listed company or equivalent company, we consider voting against the appointment of directors who perform three or more duties.
●
If a company nominates a board director with many concurrent duties, it should provide reasonable explanations. It is also desirable that the company contrives disclosure timing and methods to allow investors to understand the situation enough.
23

(3)
Company’s business performance
●
We consider voting against the reappointment of board directors if the subject company made a loss for the three consecutive years during their tenures.
●
We consider voting against the reappointment of board directors if we judge that the subject company’s business performance significantly lags the peers in the same industry during their tenures.
●
We consider voting against top executives if, concerning capital efficiency including return on capital, effective business strategies achieving corporate value expansion and sustainable growth are not demonstrated, and appropriate disclosures and sufficient constructive dialogues are not conducted.
(4)
Company’s anti-social activities
●
If we judge that a corporate scandal damages or is likely to damage shareholder value with having a significant effect on society during a board tenure, we conduct adequate dialogues with the subject company on the background and subsequent resolutions of the scandal. Based on the dialogues, we decide how to vote on the reappointment of top executives, board directors in charge of those cases and audit committee board members at a company with Audit Committee or three Committees, considering the impact on shareholder value.
●
With respect to domestic corporate scandals, at the time a company receives administrative dispositions to cartel, bid-rigging, and so on from authorities, such as the Fair Trade Commission, we consider voting against the reappointment of top executives, directors in charge and audit committee board members at a company with Audit Committee or three Committees. However, in case final dispositions are subsequently determined based on appeal or complaints resolutions, we do not vote against the reappointment again at that time. We vote on a case-by-case basis concerning compensation orders in a civil case, dispositions from the Consumer Affairs Agency or administrative dispositions from overseas authorities.
●
With respect to administrative dispositions to an unlisted subsidiary or affiliate, we consider voting against the reappointment of top executives, directors in charge and audit committee board members at a company with Audit Committee or three Committees of the holding or parent company. If a subsidiary or affiliate is listed, we consider voting against the reappointment of top executives, directors in charge and audit committee board members at a company with Audit Committee or three Committees of both the subsidiary or affiliate and the holding or parent company. However, we may vote on a case-by-case basis, depending on the importance of the disposition to the subsidiary or affiliate, its impact on the holding or parent company’s financial performance, and so on.
●
With respect to employees’ scandals, if the scandal damages or is likely to damage shareholder value, and we judge that the subject company owes management responsibility, we consider voting against the reappointment of top executives, directors in charge and audit committee board members at a company with Audit Committee or three Committees.
●
We consider voting against the reappointment of board directors if the subject company engages in window dressing or inadequate accounting practices during their tenures.
(5)
Activities against shareholder interest
●
If a company raises capital through an excessively dilutive third-party allotment without a shareholders’ meeting’s approval, we consider voting against the reappointment of board directors, particularly top executives.
●
If a company raises capital through a large-scale public offering without reasonable explanations, we consider voting against the reappointment of board directors, particularly top executives.
●
If a company does not execute a shareholder proposal regarded as favorable for minority shareholders receiving the majority support from shareholders or does not make a similar company proposal at an AGM in the following year, we consider voting against the appointment of top executives.
24

(6)
Others
●
If a company insufficiently discloses board director candidates’ information, we generally vote against such candidates.
3. Composition of Board of Directors
While each company’s board structure would differ depending on its size and so on, we believe that a company with three Committees (Nomination, Audit and Remuneration) is desirable to achieve better governance as a listed company. For a company with Board of Statutory Auditors (Kansayaku) or Audit Committee, it is also desirable to voluntarily deploy a Nomination Committee, a Remuneration Committee and other necessary committees. Besides, it is desirable that Board Chair is an independent outside director. We believe that a highly transparent board composition ensures management accountability and contributes to sustained enterprise value expansion. Finally, the disclosure of the third-party assessment on the Board of Directors is desirable.
To strengthen the Board of Directors’ monitoring function and increase its transparency and effectiveness, we believe it is important to ensure gender, nationality, career, and age diversity in principle. It is desirable that each company adopts a skills matrix that defines the diversity and expertise required to fulfill the Board’s responsibilities reflecting its situation and selects director candidates accordingly.
We are concerned about retired directors assuming consulting, advisory or other similar positions which could negatively impact transparency and decision making of the Board. If such positions exist, and retired directors assume them, it is desirable that the company discloses their existence, their expected roles and contributions and compensations for such posts.
(1)
Number of board members and change in board composition
●
We decide how to vote on proposals concerning the number of board members and change in board composition, taking into account the impacts on the subject company and shareholders’ economic interests compared to the current situations.
●
The number of board members should be optimized to make the right management decision at the right time. We may consider each company’s business situation and scale. However, we generally consider voting against the appointment of top executives and a nominating committee chair at a company three Committees if the number of board members is expected to exceed 20 without decreasing from the previous AGM, and reasonable explanations are not given.
●
We generally vote against the appointment of top executives and a nomination committee chair at a company three Committees if a decrease in outside directors or an increase in internal directors significantly reduces the percentage of outside directors, which potentially causes governance problems.
●
If there are two or more females on the Board, we consider voting against the appointment of top executives and a nomination committee chair at a company three Committees. However, this shall not apply if 20% or more of board members are females, or we confirm sufficient planning or special circumstances on increasing the number of female directors in engagements.
●
We believe that board diversity is important and may set a higher target for a female board member ratio in the future. Similarly, we may set a racial and nationality diversity target, especially for companies with global business operations.
(2)
Procedures of board director appointment, scope of their responsibilities and so on
●
We decide how to vote on proposals concerning change in board director appointment procedures, taking into account the rationales, and so on, compared to the current procedures.
●
We generally vote against proposals reducing board directors’ responsibilities for financial damages on fiduciary duty breach.
25

●
Board directors’ responsibilities include effective monitoring of top executives succession planning. The Nomination Committee at a company with three Committees or the arbitrary Nomination Committee created at a company with the other governance structures should provide effective monitoring of successor development and appointment with transparency. It is desirable that an independent outside director serves as Nomination Committee Chair. If we judge that the succession procedure significantly lacks transparency and rationality, we consider voting against the appointment of top executives.
4. Appointment of Statutory Auditors (Kansayaku)
We decide how to vote on proposals concerning the appointment of statutory auditors, taking into account their independence, competence and anti-social activities records (if any), and so on. We decide how to vote on the reappointment of statutory auditors, taking into account their corporate governance practices and accountability during their tenures, the company’s anti-social activity records, and so on in addition to the above factors.
Statutory auditors and audit committee board directors at a company with Audit committee or three Committees should have deep knowledge specialized in accounting, laws and regulations and should make best efforts to continuously gain knowledge and skills to fulfill the critical role and responsibilities in the company’s governance. A company should also provide sufficient training opportunities.
(1)
Independence
●
We generally vote against the appointment of outside statutory auditors without independency.
●
In general, a person who has no relationship with the subject company other than a statutory auditor appointment is regarded as independent.
●
We regard that an outside statutory auditor with a significantly long tenure is not independent and generally vote against the reappointment of such an outside statutory auditor. We generally consider voting against the candidate whose tenure is longer than ten years.
(2)
Attendance rate and concurrent duties
●
All statutory auditors are expected to attend board or board of statutory auditors meetings in principle. A companies is generally obligated to facilitate all statutory auditors to attend these meetings. We generally vote against the reappointment of statutory auditors who attended less than 75% of board or board of statutory auditors meetings.
●
We take into account not only the number of attendance but nomination reasons and candidates’ real contributions if disclosed.
●
We take extra care when we assess the capability of statutory auditors who have many concurrent duties as an director or statutory auditor of listed companies, as such cases potentially rise doubts about their capacity, given the importance of statutory auditors’ role and responsibilities. Accordingly, we consider voting against the appointment of statutory auditors who perform five or more duties as a board director or statutory auditor of a listed company or equivalent company. However, in case nominees serve as executive director or statutory auditor of a listed company or equivalent company, we consider voting against the appointment of statutory auditors who perform three or more duties.
●
If a company nominates a statutory auditor with many concurrent duties, it should give reasonable explanations. It is also desirable that the company contrives disclosure timing and methods to allow investors to understand the situation enough.
(3)
Accountability
●
If there are material concerns about a published audit report or audit procedures, or insufficiencies of required disclosures, we vote against the reappointment of statutory auditors.
26

(4)
Company’s anti-social activities
●
If we judge that a corporate scandal damages or is likely to damage shareholder value with having a significant impact on society during a statutory auditor’s tenure, we conduct adequate dialogues with the subject company on the background and subsequent resolutions of the scandal. Based on the dialogues, we decide how to vote on the reappointment of statutory auditors, considering the impact on shareholder value.
●
With respect to domestic corporate scandals, at the time a company receives administrative dispositions to cartel, bid-rigging, and so on from authorities, such as the Fair Trade Commission, we consider voting against the reappointment of statutory auditors. However, in case the final dispositions are subsequently determined based on appeal or complaints resolutions, we do not vote against the reappointment again at that time. We vote on a case-by-case basis concerning compensation orders in a civil case, dispositions from the Consumer Affairs Agency or administrative dispositions from overseas authorities.
●
With respect to administrative dispositions to an unlisted subsidiary or affiliate, we consider voting against the reappointment of statutory auditors of the holding or parent company. If a subsidiary or affiliate is listed, we consider voting against the reappointment of statutory auditors of both the subsidiary or affiliate and the holding or parent company. However, we may decide on a case-by-case basis, depending on the importance of the dispositions to the subsidiary or affiliate, its impact on the holding or parent company’s financial performance, and so on.
●
With respect to employees’ scandals, if the scandal damages or is likely to damage shareholder value, and we judge that the subject company owes management responsibility, we consider voting against the reappointment of statutory auditors.
●
We consider voting against the reappointment of statutory auditors if the subject company engages in window-dressing or inadequate accounting practices during their tenures.
5. Composition of Board of Statutory Auditors (Kansayaku)
We decide how to vote on proposals concerning the number of members or change in composition of the board of statutory auditors, taking into account the impact on the subject company and shareholders’ economic interests compared to the current situations.
●
We consider an increase in statutory auditors favorably. However, in case of a decrease, we consider voting against the reappointment of top executives unless clear and reasonable explanations are given.
●
We consider the same for audit committee board members for a company with Audit Committee.
6. Appointment of Accounting Auditors
We decide how to vote on proposals concerning the appointment and replacement of accounting auditors, taking into account their competence, audit fee levels, and so on.
●
We generally vote against the reappointment of statutory auditors (Kansayaku) or audit committee board members at a company with Audit Committee or three Committees if we judge that a company reappoints an accounting auditor without replacing it despite the following accounting audit problems.
●
It is determined that an accounting auditor provides an unfair opinion on the company’s financial conditions.
●
In case there are concerns on financial statements, required disclosures are insufficient.
●
In case an accounting auditor has a service contract other than accounting audit services with the subject company, it is regarded that such a contract creates a conflict of interest between them.
●
Excessive audit fees are paid.
●
It is regarded that an accounting auditor makes fraud or negligence.
27

●
If it is regarded that an accounting auditor has issues in other company’s audits, in case a company appoints or reappoints the accounting auditor without replacing it, we take the impact on the company’s corporate value full consideration into voting decisions.
●
We generally vote against proposals concerning accounting auditor replacement if it is regarded that a company changes an incumbent accounting auditor due to a dispute about accounting principles.
7. Compensation for Board Directors, Statutory Auditors (Kansayaku) and Employees
(1)
Board directors’ salaries and bonuses
●
It is desirable to increase the proportion of stock incentive plans in board directors’ salaries and bonuses, on condition that a performance-based compensation structure is established, transparency, such as disclosures of a benchmark or formula laying the foundations for calculation, ensures accountability, and the impact on shareholders, such as dilution, are taken into considerations. The Remuneration Committee at a company with three Committees (Nomination, Audit and Remuneration) or the arbitrary Remuneration Committee preferably deployed at a company with the other governance structures should ensure the accountability of compensation schemes. It is desirable that an independent outside director serves as Remuneration Committee Chair.
●
We consider voting against proposals seeking approval for salaries and bonuses in the following cases.
●
Negative correlation between company’s financial performance and directors’ salaries and bonuses are observed.
●
Inappropriate systems and practices are in place.
●
The total amount of salaries and bonuses is not disclosed.
●
Management failures, such as a significant share price decline or serious earnings deterioration, are apparent.
●
The remuneration proposal includes people determined to be responsible for activities against shareholder interest.
●
We generally vote for shareholder proposals requesting disclosure of individual directors’ salaries and bonuses.
●
If a company implements any measures ensuring transparency other than disclosure, we take it into consideration.
●
If there is no proposal seeking approval for directors’ salaries and bonuses, and the compensation structure lacks transparency, we consider voting against the appointment of top executives.
●
We generally vote against bonuses for statutory auditors at a company with Board of Statutory Auditors and audit committee board members at a company with Audit Committee.
●
We separately consider voting to audit committee board members at a company with three Committees.
(2)
Stock incentive plans
●
We decide how to vote on proposals concerning stock incentive plans, including stock options and restricted stock units, taking into account the impact on shareholder value and rights, compensation levels, the scope, the rationales, and so on.
●
We generally vote against proposals seeking to lower the strike price of stock options.
●
We generally vote for proposals seeking to change the strike price on condition that shareholders’ approval is required every time.
28

●
We generally vote against stock incentive plans if the terms and conditions for exercising options, including equity dilution, lack transparency. We generally consider voting against proposals potentially causing 10% or more equity dilution.
●
It is desirable that stock incentive plans is a long-term incentive aligned with sustainable growth and corporate value expansion. As such, we generally vote against stock incentive plans allowing recipients to exercise all the rights within two years after vested for the subject fiscal year. However, this shall not apply to recipients who retire during the subject fiscal year. We assess the validity if a vesting period is regarded as too long.
●
We generally vote against stock incentive plans granted to statutory auditors and audit committee board members at a company with Audit Committee.
●
We separately consider stock incentive plans granted to audit committee board members, including both inside and outside directors, at a company with three Committees.
●
We generally vote against stock incentive plans granted to any third parties other than employees.
●
We generally vote against stock incentive plans in case a company is likely to adopt the plans as takeover defense.
(3)
Employee stock purchase plan
●
We decide how to vote on proposals concerning employee stock purchase plans, taking into account the impact on shareholder value and rights, the scope and the rationales, and so on.
(4)
Retirement benefits for board directors
●
We decide how to vote on proposals concerning grant of retirement benefits, taking into account the scope and scandals (if any) of recipients and business performance and scandals (if any) of the subject company, and so on.
●
We generally vote for proposals granting retirement benefits if all the following criteria are satisfied.
●
The granted amount is disclosed.
●
Outside directors, statutory auditors and audit committee board members at a company with Audit Committees are excluded.
●
Recipients do not cause any significant scandals during their tenures.
●
The subject company does not make a loss for the three consecutive years, or its business performance is not determined to significantly lag behind the peers in the same industry.
●
The company does not cause scandals that significantly impact society and damage, or are unlikely to damage, shareholder value during their tenures.
●
The company does not engage in window-dressing or inadequate accounting practices during their tenures.
8. Cross-shareholdings
If a company holds shares for the sake of business relations (cross shareholdings), the company should explain the medium- to long-term business and financial strategies, including capital costs, and disclose proxy voting guidelines, voting results, and so on. If the company does not give reasonable explanations and engage in constructive dialogues, we consider voting against the appointment of top executives. It is important that the company does not hinder the sales/reduction of cross shareholdings when a policy shareholder intends. In addition, a company should formulate a policy for institutional investor engagements, considering its shareholder composition, and conduct business with an awareness of capital costs and stock prices.
●
If a company's cross shareholdings account for 20% or more of its net assets, we generally consider
29

voting against the appointment of top executives. However, this shall not apply if we confirm that the company makes a reduction, does sufficient planning or has industry-specific circumstances that should be taken into consideration in engagement.
9. Capital Policy
As a listed companies’ capital policy is likely to significantly impact shareholder value and interests, a company should implement a rational capital policy and explain capital policy guidelines to shareholders. We consider voting against proposals concerning capital policies that we judge damage shareholder value. If a company has a capital policy that is not part of proposals at an AGM but regarded to damage shareholder value, we consider voting against the reappointment of board directors.
●
It is undesirable that a company intends to maintain or increase so-called “friendly” stable shareholders and infringes minority shareholders’ rights by the third-party allotment, treasury stocks transfer or company management holdings’ transfer to foundations affiliated with the company.
(1)
Change in authorized shares
●
We decide how to vote on proposals seeking to increase authorized shares, taking into account the impact on shareholder value and rights, the rationales, the impact on the sustainability of stock market listing and a going concern, and so on.
●
We generally vote for proposals seeking to increase authorized shares if we judge that not increasing authorized shares is likely to lead to delisting or have a significant impact on a going concern.
●
We generally vote against proposals seeking to increase authorized shares after an acquirer emerges.
(2)
New share issue
●
We decide how to vote on new share issues, taking into account the rationales, the terms and conditions of issues, the impact of dilution on shareholder value and rights and the impact on the sustainability of stock market listing or a going concern, and so on.
(3)
Share repurchase and reissue
●
We decide how to vote on proposals concerning share repurchase or reissue, taking into account the rationales, and so on.
(4)
Stock split
●
We generally vote for proposals seeking a stock split.
(5)
Consolidation of shares (reverse stock split)
●
We decide how to vote on proposals seeking consolidation of shares, taking into account the rationale, and so on.
(6)
Preferred shares
●
We generally vote against proposals seeking to issue blank-cheque preferred shares or increase authorized shares without specifying voting rights, dividends, conversion and other rights.
●
We generally vote for proposals seeking to issue preferred shares or increase authorized shares if voting rights, dividends, conversion and other rights are specified, and those rights are regarded as reasonable.
●
We generally vote for proposals requiring approvals for preferred shares issues from shareholders.
(7)
Convertible bonds
●
We decide how to vote on proposals seeking to issue convertible bonds, taking into account the number of new shares, the time to maturity, and so on.
30

(8) Corporate bonds and credit facilities
●
We decide how to vote on proposals concerning a corporate bond issue or a credit facility expansion, taking into account the subject company’s financial conditions, and so on.
(9) Debt capitalization
●
We decide how to vote on proposals seeking to change the number of authorized shares or issue shares for debt restructuring, taking into account the terms and conditions of the change or the issue, the impact on shareholder value and rights, the rationales, the impact on the sustainability of stock market listing and a going concern, and so on.
(10) Capital reduction
●
We decide how to vote on proposals concerning capital reduction, taking into account the impact on shareholder value and rights, the rationales and the impact on the sustainability of stock market listing and a going concern, and so on.
●
We generally vote for proposals seeking capital reduction following standard accounting procedures.
(11) Financing plan
●
We decide how to vote on proposals concerning a financing plan, taking into account the impact on shareholder value and rights, the rationales and the impact on the sustainability of stock market listing and a going concern, and so on.
(12) Capitalization of reserves
●
We decide how to vote on proposals seeking capitalization of reserves, taking into account the rationales, and so on.
10. Amendment to Articles of Incorporation and Other Legal Documents
(1) Change in an accounting period
●
We generally vote for proposals seeking to change an accounting period unless it is regarded as an aim to delay an AGM.
(2) Amendment to articles of incorporation
●
We decide how to vote on proposals to amend an article of incorporation, taking into account the impact on shareholder value and rights, the necessity, the rationales, and so on.
●
We generally vote for proposals seeking to amend an article of incorporation if it is required by law.
●
We generally vote against proposals seeking to amend an article of incorporation if we judge that it is likely to infringe shareholder rights or damage shareholder value.
●
We generally vote for transition to a company with three Committees.
●
We decide how to vote on proposals seeking to relax or eliminate special resolution requirements, taking into account the rationale.
●
We are concerned about retired directors assuming advisory, consulting, or other similar positions which could negatively impact on transparency and decision making of the Board of Directors. We generally vote against proposals seeking to create such a position.
●
We generally vote for proposals seeking to authorize a company to hold virtual-only meetings, taking into account the impact on shareholder value and rights.
●
We will consider, among other things, a company’s practices, jurisdiction and disclosure, including the items set forth below:
31

●
meeting procedures and requirements are disclosed in advance of a meeting detailing the rationale for eliminating the in-person meeting,
●
safeguard and clear and comprehensive description as to how and when shareholders submit and ask questions either in advance of or during the meeting,
●
disclosure regarding procedures for questions received during the meeting, but not answered due to time or other restrictions, and
●
description of how shareholder rights will be protected in a virtual-only meeting format including the ability to vote on proposals during the time the polls are open.
(3) Change in a quorum for an annual general meeting (AGM)
●
We decide how to vote on proposals concerning change in quorum for an AGM, taking into account the impact on shareholder value and rights, and so on.
11. Company Organization Change
(1) Change in a registered company name and address
●
We decide how to vote on proposals seeking to change a registered company name, taking into account the impact on shareholder value, and so on.
●
We generally vote for proposals seeking to change a registered address.
(2) Company reorganization
●
We decide how to vote on proposals concerning the following company reorganization, taking into account their respective impacts on shareholder value and rights, the subject company’s financial conditions and business performance, and the sustainability of stock market listing or a going concern, and so on.
Mergers and acquisitions
Business transfers
Company split (spin-off)
Asset sale
Company sale
Liquidation
12. Proxy Fight
(1)
Proxy fight
●
We decide how to vote on proposals concerning the appointment of directors with opposition candidates, taking into account their independence, competence, anti-social activity records (if any), corporate governance practices and accountability of the candidates and business performance and anti-social activity records (if any) of the subject company, the proxy fight background, and so on.
(2)
Proxy context defense
●
Classified board
●
We generally vote against proposals seeking to introduce a classified board.
●
We generally vote for proposals seeking to set a director's term of one year.
●
Shareholder rights to remove a director
32

●
We generally vote against proposals seeking to tighten requirements for shareholders to remove a director.
●
Cumulative voting
●
We decide how to vote on proposals seeking to introduce cumulative voting for director appointments, taking into account the background, and so on.
●
We decide how to vote on proposals seeking to terminate cumulative voting for director appointment, taking into account the background, and so on.
13. Takeover Defense
We believe that management and shareholder interest is not always aligned. As such, we generally vote against the creation, amendment and renewal of takeover defense measures that we judge decrease shareholder value or infringes shareholder rights. We generally vote against the reappointment of directors if takeover defense measures are not part of proposals at an AGM but are regarded to decrease shareholder value or infringes shareholder rights.
●
Relaxing requirements to amend articles of incorporation and company policies
●
We decide how to vote on proposals seeking to relax requirements to amend articles of incorporation or company policies, taking into account the impact on shareholder value and rights, and so on.
●
Relaxing of requirements for merger approval
●
We decide how to vote on proposals seeking to relaxing requirements for merger approval, taking into account the impact on shareholder value and rights, and so on.
14. Environment, Social and Governance (ESG)
We support the United Nations Principles for Responsible Investment (UN PRI) and acknowledge that company’s ESG practices are an important factor in investment decision making. Thus, we consider voting against the reappointment of top executives and directors in charge if we judge that there is an issue that could significantly damage corporate value. We consider voting for proposals related to ESG materiality, including climate change or diversity, if we judge that such proposals contribute to preventing from damaging or expanding corporate value. If not, we consider voting against such proposals.
15. Disclosure
Disclosure and constructive dialogues based thereon are important in proxy voting and investment decision making. Furthermore, proactive disclosure and effective engagement are desirable as demand for ESG disclosure, including climate change, has been increasing, and the disclosure frameworks have been rapidly progressing.
●
We generally vote against proposals that lack sufficient disclosure to make proxy voting decisions.
●
We generally vote for proposals seeking to enhance disclosures if such information is beneficial to shareholders.
●
If a company’s financial and non-financial disclosures is significantly poor, and if the level of investor relations activities by management or people in charge is significantly low, we consider voting against the reappointment of top executives and directors in charge.
16. Conflict of Interest
We abstain from voting proxies of the following companies that are likely to have a conflict of interest. We also abstain from voting proxies with respect to the following investment trusts that are managed by us or Invesco group companies, as a conflict of interest may rise.
●
Companies and investment trusts that we abstain from voting proxies:
33

●
Invesco Ltd.
We have established the Conflict of Interest Management Policy. In the situation that may give rise to a conflict of interest, we aim to control it in the best interests of clients (investors) and beneficiaries. The Compliance department is responsible for governing company-wide control of a conflict of interest. The Compliance department is independent of the Investment and Sales departments and shall not receive any command or order for the matters compliant with the laws and regulations, including a conflict of interest, from the Investment and Sales departments.
Proxy voting and stewardship activities are reported to the Responsible Investment Committee. The Responsible Investment Committee approves them. Besides, the Compliance department reviews whether conflicts of interest are properly managed in proxy voting and then reports the results to the Conflict of Interest Oversight Committee. Furthermore, the results are reported to the Executive Committee in Tokyo and the Invesco Proxy Advisory Committee.
17. Shareholder Proposals
We vote on a case-by-case basis on shareholder proposals while we follow the Proxy Voting Guidelines in principle.
DISCLAIMER: The English version is a translation of the original in Japanese for information purposes only. In case of a discrepancy, the Japanese original will prevail. You can download the Japanese version from our website: http://www.invesco.co.jp/footer/proxy.html.
2092318-JP
34

Item 13. Portfolio Managers of Closed-End Management Investment Companies.

As of February 28, 2026, the following individuals are jointly and primarily responsible for the day-to-day management of the Trust:
●
Mark Paris, Portfolio Manager, who has been responsible for the Trust since 2015 and has been associated with Invesco and/or its affiliates since 2010.
●
John “Jack” Connelly, Portfolio Manager, who has been responsible for the Trust since 2016 and has been associated with Invesco and/or its affiliates since 2016.
●
Joshua Cooney, Portfolio Manager, who has been responsible for the Trust since 2021 and has been associated with Invesco and/or its affiliates since 1999.
●
Tim O’Reilly, Portfolio Manager, who has been responsible for the Trust since 2016 and has been associated with Invesco and/or its affiliates since 2010.
●
John Schorle, Portfolio Manager, who has been responsible for the Trust since 2018 and has been associated with Invesco and/or its affiliates since 2010.
●
Rebecca Setcavage, Portfolio Manager, who has been responsible for the Trust since 2021 and has been associated with Invesco and/or its affiliates since 2019. Ms. Setcavage was associated with OppenheimerFunds, a global asset management firm, since 2017.
●
Julius Williams, Portfolio Manager, who has been responsible for the Trust since 2015 and has been associated with Invesco and/or its affiliates since 2010.
Portfolio Manager Fund Holdings and Information on Other Managed Accounts
Invesco’s portfolio managers develop investment models which are used in connection with the management of certain Invesco Funds as well as other mutual funds for which Invesco or an affiliate acts as sub-adviser, other pooled investment vehicles that are not registered mutual funds, and other accounts managed for organizations and individuals. The ‘Investments’ chart reflects the portfolio managers' investments in the Fund(s) that they manage and includes investments in the Fund’s shares beneficially owned by a portfolio manager, as determined in accordance with Rule 16a-1(a)(2) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act), (beneficial ownership includes ownership by a portfolio manager’s immediate family members sharing the same household). The ‘Assets Managed’ chart reflects information regarding accounts other than the Fund for which each portfolio manager has day-to-day management responsibilities. Accounts are grouped into three categories: (i) other registered investment companies; (ii) other pooled investment vehicles; and (iii) other accounts. To the extent that any of these accounts pay advisory fees that are based on account performance (performance-based fees), information on those accounts is specifically noted. In addition, any assets denominated in foreign currencies have been converted into U.S. dollars using the exchange rates as of the applicable date.
Investments
The following information is as of February 28, 2026 (unless otherwise noted):

Fund | Portfolio Managers | Dollar Range of Investments in the Fund
Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust
| Mark Paris | None
| John “Jack” Connelly | None
| Joshua Cooney | None
| Tim O’Reilly | None
| John Schorle | None
| Rebecca Setcavage | None
| Julius Williams | None

Assets Managed
The following information is as of February 28, 2026 (unless otherwise noted):

Portfolio Manager(s) | Other Registered Investment Companies Managed | Other Pooled Investment Vehicles Managed | Other Accounts Managed
| Number of Accounts | Assets (in millions) | Number of Accounts | Assets (in millions) | Number of Accounts | Assets (in millions)
Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust
Mark Paris | 27 | $43,623.2 | 1 | $34.9 | 19 1 | $18,380.4 1
John “Jack” Connelly | 16 | $21,213.2 | None | None | None | None
Joshua Cooney | 21 | $24,563.2 | None | None | 19 1 | $18,380.4 1
Tim O’Reilly | 26 | $43,515.7 | None | None | None | None
John Schorle | 16 | $21,213.2 | None | None | None | None
Rebecca Setcavage | 8 | $10,042.1 | None | None | 19 1 | $18,380.4 1
Julius Williams | 26 | $43,515.7 | None | None | None | None

1 These are accounts of individual investors for which Invesco provides investment advice. Invesco offers separately managed accounts that are managed according to the investment models developed by its portfolio managers and used in connection with the management of certain Invesco Funds. These accounts may be invested in accordance with one or more of those investment models and investments held in those accounts are traded in accordance with the applicable models.
Potential Conflicts of Interest
Actual or apparent conflicts of interest may arise when a portfolio manager has day-to-day management responsibilities with respect to more than one Fund or other account. More specifically, portfolio managers who manage multiple Funds and/or other accounts may be presented with one or more of the following potential conflicts:
●
The management of multiple Funds and/or other accounts may result in a portfolio manager devoting unequal time and attention to the management of each Fund and/or other account. The Adviser and each Sub-Adviser seek to manage such competing interests for the time and attention of portfolio managers by having portfolio managers focus on a particular investment discipline. Most other accounts managed by a portfolio manager are managed using the same investment models that are used in connection with the management of the Funds.
●
If a portfolio manager identifies a limited investment opportunity which may be suitable for more than one Fund or other account, a Fund may not be able to take full advantage of that opportunity due to an allocation of filled purchase or sale orders across all eligible Funds and other accounts. To deal with these situations, the Adviser, each Sub-Adviser and the Funds have adopted procedures for allocating portfolio transactions across multiple accounts.
●
The Adviser and each Sub-Adviser determine which broker to use to execute each order for securities transactions for the Funds, consistent with its duty to seek best execution of the transaction. However, for certain other accounts (such as mutual funds for which Invesco or an affiliate acts as sub-adviser, other pooled investment vehicles that are not registered mutual funds, and other accounts managed for organizations and individuals), the Adviser and each Sub-Adviser may be limited by the client with respect to the selection of brokers or may be instructed to direct trades through a particular broker. In these cases, trades for a Fund in a particular security may be placed separately from, rather than aggregated with, such other accounts. Having separate transactions with respect to a security may temporarily affect the market price of the security or the execution of the transaction, or both, to the possible detriment of the Fund or other account(s) involved.
●
The appearance of a conflict of interest may arise where the Adviser or Sub-Adviser has an incentive, such as a performance-based management fee, which relates to the management of one Fund or account but not all Funds and accounts for which a portfolio manager has day-to-day management responsibilities. None of the Invesco Fund accounts managed have a performance-based fee.
●
In the case of a fund-of-funds arrangement, including where a portfolio manager manages both the investing Fund and an affiliated underlying fund in which the investing Fund invests or may invest, a conflict of interest may arise if the portfolio manager of the investing Fund receives material nonpublic information about the underlying fund. For example, such a conflict may restrict the ability of the portfolio manager to buy or sell securities of the underlying Fund, potentially for a prolonged period of time, which may adversely affect the Fund.
The Adviser, each Sub-Adviser, and the Funds have adopted certain compliance procedures which are designed to address these types of conflicts. However, there is no guarantee that such procedures will detect each and every situation in which a conflict arises.

Description of Compensation Structure
For the Adviser and each Sub-Adviser
The Adviser and each Sub-Adviser seek to maintain a compensation program that is competitively positioned to attract and retain high-caliber investment professionals. Portfolio managers receive a base salary, an incentive cash bonus opportunity and a deferred compensation opportunity. Portfolio manager compensation is reviewed and may be modified each year as appropriate to reflect changes in the market, as well as to adjust the factors used to determine bonuses to promote competitive Fund performance. The Adviser and each Sub-Adviser evaluate competitive market compensation by reviewing compensation survey results conducted by an independent third party of investment industry compensation. Each portfolio manager's compensation consists of the following three elements:
Base Salary. Each portfolio manager is paid a base salary. In setting the base salary, the Adviser and each Sub-Adviser’s intention is to be competitive in light of the particular portfolio manager's experience and responsibilities.
Annual Bonus. The portfolio managers are eligible, along with other employees of the Adviser and each Sub-Adviser, to participate in a discretionary year-end bonus pool. The Compensation Committee of Invesco Ltd. reviews and approves the firm-wide bonus pool based upon progress against strategic objectives and annual operating plan, including investment performance, revenues, enterprise expectations and financial results. In addition, while having no direct impact on individual bonuses, assets under management are considered when determining the starting bonus funding levels. Each portfolio manager is eligible to receive an annual cash bonus which is based on quantitative (i.e. investment performance and revenues) and non-quantitative factors (which may include, but are not limited to, enterprise expectations, individual performance, risk management and teamwork).
Each portfolio manager's compensation is linked to the pre-tax investment performance of the Funds/accounts managed by the portfolio manager as described in Table 1 below.

Sub-Adviser | Performance time period 2
Invesco 3 | One-, Three- and Five-year performance against Fund peer group or Market Index
Invesco Canada 3
Invesco Management S.A.3
Invesco Hong Kong 3
Invesco Asset Management 3
Invesco Listed Real Assets Division 3
Invesco Senior Secured 3, 4 |
Invesco Capital 3, 5 | Not applicable
Invesco Japan | One-, Three- and Five-year performance
2 Rolling time periods are measured from October 1 st to September 30 th .
3 Portfolio Managers may be granted an annual deferral award that vests on a pro-rata basis over a four-year period.
4 Invesco Senior Secured’s bonus is based on annual measures of equity return and standard tests of collateralization performance.
5 Portfolio Managers for Invesco Capital base their bonus on Invesco results as well as overall performance of Invesco Capital.

High investment performance (against applicable peer group and/or benchmarks) would deliver compensation generally associated with top pay in the industry (determined by reference to the third-party provided compensation survey information) and poor investment performance (versus applicable peer group) would result in low bonus compared to the applicable peer group or no bonus at all. These decisions are reviewed and approved collectively by senior leadership which has responsibility for executing the compensation approach across the organization.
With respect to Invesco Capital, there is no policy regarding, or agreement with, the Portfolio Managers or any other senior executive of the Adviser to receive bonuses or any other compensation in connection with the performance of any of the accounts managed by the Portfolio Managers.
Deferred / Long Term Compensation. Portfolio managers may be granted a deferred compensation award based on a firm-wide bonus pool approved by the Compensation Committee of Invesco Ltd. Deferred compensation awards largely take the form of long-term awards (LTA) which consist of Fund Deferral (LTF) and Equity (LTE). Fund deferrals are notionally invested in certain Invesco funds selected by the Portfolio Manager and are settled in cash. Equity awards are settled in Invesco Ltd. common shares. Deferred compensation awards have a four-year ratable vesting schedule. The vesting period aligns the interests of the Portfolio Managers with the long-term interests of clients and shareholders and encourages retention.

Retirement and health and welfare arrangements. Portfolio managers are eligible to participate in retirement and health and welfare plans and programs that are available generally to all employees.

Item 14. Purchases of Equity Securities by Closed-End Management Investment Company and Affiliated Purchasers.

Not applicable.

Item 15. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders.

None.

Item 16. Controls and Procedures.

| (a) | As of a date within 90 days of the filing date of this report, an evaluation was performed under the supervision and with the participation of the officers of the Registrant, including the PEO and PFO, to assess the effectiveness of the Registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures, as that term is defined in Rule 30a-3(c) under the Act. Based on that evaluation, the Registrant’s officers, including the PEO and PFO, concluded that the Registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures were reasonably designed to ensure: (1) that information required to be disclosed by the Registrant on Form N-CSR is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified by the rules and forms of the Securities and Exchange Commission; and (2) that material information relating to the Registrant is made known to the PEO and PFO as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

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

Item 17. Disclosure of Securities Lending Activity for Closed-End Management Investment Companies.

Not applicable.

Item 18. Recovery of Erroneously Awarded Compensation.

Not applicable.

Item 19. Exhibits.

19(a)(1) Code of Ethics is attached as Exhibit 99.CODEETH.
19(a)(2) Not applicable.
19(a)(3) Certifications of the Registrant’s PEO and PFO pursuant to Rule 30a-2(a) under the Act and Section 302 of the Sarbanes- Oxley Act of 2002 are attached as Exhibit 99.CERT.
19(a)(4) Not applicable.
19(a)(5) Not applicable.
19(b) Certifications of Registrant’s PEO and PFO pursuant to Rule 30a-2(b) under the Act and Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 are attached as Exhibit 99.906CERT.

SIGNATURES

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

(Registrant) Invesco Municipal Opportunity Trust

By: |  | /s/ Glenn Brightman
Name: |  | Glenn Brightman
Title: |  | Principal Executive Officer
Date: May 7, 2026

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

By: |  | /s/ Glenn Brightman
Name: |  | Glenn Brightman
Title: |  | Principal Executive Officer
Date: May 7, 2026
By: |  | /s/ Adrien Deberghes
Name: |  | Adrien Deberghes
Title: |  | Principal Financial Officer
Date: May 7, 2026