Filed pursuant to Rule 497(e)
File Nos. 333-185238 and 811-22743

BLACKSTONE ALTERNATIVE INVESTMENT FUNDS

Supplement dated December 29, 2022 to the

Blackstone Alternative Multi-Strategy Fund (the “Fund”)

Statement of Additional Information, dated July 29, 2022, as supplemented

Change in Portfolio Managers

Effective January 1, 2023, Riad Abrahams is added as a portfolio manager of the Fund and Raymond Chan and Robert Jordan will no longer serve as portfolio managers of the Fund. The other existing portfolio managers will continue to serve as portfolio managers of the Fund. In connection with these changes, effective January 1, 2023, all references to the Fund’s portfolio managers in the Fund’s Statement of Additional Information are amended to include Mr. Abrahams and remove Messrs. Chan and Jordan, as described below.

Effective January 1, 2023, the table in the “Management—Other Accounts Managed by Portfolio Managers” section of the Statement of Additional Information is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:

The table in the “Management—Securities Ownership of Portfolio Managers” section of the Statement of the Additional Information is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:

Addition of Sub-Adviser

Pursuant to action taken by the Board of Trustees of the Fund, Melqart Asset Management (UK) Limited will serve as a discretionary sub-adviser to the Fund.

Effective immediately, the following disclosure is added to the section “Investment Management and Other Services—The Sub-Advisers” in the Statement of Additional Information:

Sub-Adviser Proxy Voting Policy

Effective immediately, the following disclosure is added to Appendix A to the Statement of Additional Information:

Summary of Proxy Voting Policy for Melqart Asset Management (UK) Limited

Policy

Melqart Asset Management (UK) Limited (“Melqart”) is required under AIFMD to adopt strategies for the exercise of voting rights.

Under Rule 206(4)-6 of the Advisers Act, proxies are assets of the Fund that must be voted with diligence, care, and loyalty. The duty of care requires an adviser with proxy voting authority to monitor and vote the proxies.

Rule 206(4)-6 under the Advisers Act requires each registered investment adviser that exercises proxy voting authority with respect to client securities to:

This Policy has been designed to ensure that Melqart votes in the best interests of its clients.

Melqart’s Proxy Voting Policy:

To the extent that a client has delegated to Melqart the authority to vote proxies relating to equity securities, the Firm expects to fulfill its fiduciary obligation to the client by monitoring events concerning the issuer of the security and then voting the proxies in a manner that is consistent with the best interests of that client and that does not subordinate the client’s interests to its own.

Many proxy voting matters that are routinely presented year after year are non-controversial, such as the retention of a company’s outside auditors. On the other hand, over time the major controversies in voting proxies have related to corporate governance matters (e.g., changes in the state of incorporation and provisions on mergers and other corporate restructurings), anti-takeover provisions (e.g., staggered board terms, ‘poison pills’, and supermajority provisions), stock option plans and other management remuneration issues and social and corporate responsibility issues.

Melqart carefully considers all aspects of the issues presented by a proxy matter and depending upon the client requirements, may vote differently for different clients on the same proxy issue. For example, one client may have specific policies on a particular proxy issue that may lead the Firm to cast a ‘no’ vote, while the policies of another client on that same issue may lead the Firm to cast a ‘yes’ vote.

Melqart has established effective strategies for determining when and how any voting rights held in client portfolios are to be exercised, to the exclusive benefit of the portfolio and its underlying investors. The strategy includes measures and procedures for:

General Proxy Voting Policies Followed by Melqart

Absent special client circumstances or specific policies or instructions received from clients, Melqart will vote as follows on the issues listed below:

Except in rare instances, abstention is not an acceptable position and votes will be cast either for or against all issues presented. If unusual or controversial issues are presented that are not covered by the general proxy voting policies described above, or if circumstances exist which suggest that it may be appropriate to vote against a general proxy voting policy, the Proxy Voting Committee shall determine the manner of voting the proxy in question. However, many countries have ‘proxy blocking’ regulations, which prohibit the sale of shares from the date that the vote is filed until the shareholder meeting. A fund would be unable to sell its shares if a negative news event occurred during this time, thus harming its investors. Melqart reserves the right to decline to vote proxies for stocks affected by proxy blocking regulations.

Conflicts of Interest

In the management of its Managed Accounts, the Firm may purchase for one client’s portfolio securities that have been issued by another client. Melqart does not have a policy against such investments because such a prohibition would unnecessarily limit investment opportunities. In that case, however, a conflict of interest may exist between the interests of the client for whose account the security was purchased and the interests of the Firm. For example, Melqart may manage corporate cash for Company X whose management is soliciting proxies. The Firm has purchased Company X’s securities for the account of Company Y, another of the Firm’s clients. Moreover, Company Y’s policies would suggest Melqart should vote against the position put forward by Company X’s management.

However, voting against Company X management may harm the Firm’s relationship with Company X’s management. Thus, Melqart may have an incentive to vote with the management of Company X, and hence has a conflict of interest.

To ensure that proxy votes are voted in a client’s best interest and unaffected by any conflict of interest that may exist, Melqart will vote on a proxy question that presents a material conflict of interest between the interests of a client and the interests of the Firm.

If one of the Firm’s general proxy voting policies described above applies to the proxy issue in question, Melqart will vote the proxy in accordance with that policy. This assumes, of course, that the policy in question furthers the interests of the client and not of the Firm.

However, if the general proxy voting policy does not further the interests of the client, Melqart will seek specific instructions from the client.

Procedure

Melqart shall ensure that it is the designated party to receive proxy voting materials.

The Operations Team shall receive all proxy voting materials and shall be responsible for coordinating with the analyst responsible for the security and ensuring that proxies are voted and submitted in a timely manner.

In addition to discussions with analysts, a member of the Operations Team shall review Melqart’s lists of directorships and investor relationships to help in determining whether any conflicts of interests exist.

If a potential material conflict is identified, Melqart will determine whether voting in accordance with the voting guidelines and factors is in the best interests of the AIF and its investors. Melqart will also determine whether it is appropriate to disclose the conflict to the affected client and give the AIFs (and/or its underlying investors) the opportunity to exercise these voting rights themselves.

Provided that no material conflicts of interests are identified, Melqart shall vote proxies, or abstain from voting, according to this policy.

If a material conflict of interest is identified, a member of the Operations Team shall notify the above-mentioned individuals to determine how such proxy will be voted.

A member of the Compliance Team shall keep a record of all proxy votes and other relevant details and will ensure that actual proxy voting practices are consistent with this Policy.

The following information must be kept in relation to each vote:

Compliance Review

Melqart uses a third party service provider to cast the majority of votes on proxy voting elections. On a monthly basis, the Proxy Voting Record is acquired from the platform and saved on Melqart’s servers for bookkeeping & compliance purposes. This Record holds all the information mentioned above expect the rational and the analysts who made the decision on the election. Those can be found on the exchange of emails between the Research Team and the Operations Team which are also kept on file for record keeping and compliance purposes.

For any other proxy voting elections, email correspondence between the Operations Team, the Investment Team, and the alternate proxy voting platform (e.g., broker) will be kept as emails on Melqart servers for record keeping and compliance purposes.

Once per year, the Compliance Team will:

Paragraph (c)(ii) of Rule 204-2 under the Advisers Act requires Melqart to maintain certain records associated with its proxy voting policies and procedures. The Compliance Team ensures that Melqart complies with all applicable recordkeeping requirements associated with proxy voting.

Corporate Actions

The Rule is silent on these and not explicitly referred to in the policy. However, Melqart in recognition of its fiduciary responsibilities to its clients will exercise its discretion to review certain Corporate Actions that may impact its clients or the Firm.

Shareholders should retain this Supplement for future reference.