Filed pursuant to Rule 497(e)

File Nos. 333-185238 and 811-22743

BLACKSTONE ALTERNATIVE INVESTMENT FUNDS

Supplement dated October 4, 2024 to the

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

Statement of Additional Information, dated July 29, 2024, as supplemented

Addition of Sub-Adviser

Pursuant to action taken by the Board of Trustees of the Fund, Catalio Capital Management, LP 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 disclosure in the attached Appendix A is added to Appendix A to the Statement of Additional Information:

APPENDIX A

SUMMARY OF CATALIO CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, LP (“CATALIO”) PROXY VOTING POLICY

Introduction

The Advisers Act’s “Proxy Voting Rule” requires Catalio, as an Adviser that exercises voting authority with respect to the Client’s securities to: (i) adopt written policies reasonably designed to ensure that the Firm votes in the best interest of the Clients and addresses how Catalio will deal with material conflicts of interest that may arise between the Adviser and the Clients; (ii) disclose to Investors information about such policies and procedures; and (iii) upon request, provide information to Investors on how proxies were voted.

Proxy Voting Policy

Pursuant to Catalio’s “Proxy Voting Policy,” the Firm will comply with the Proxy Voting Rule and will act solely in the best interests of the Clients when exercising its proxy voting authority. The Firm determines whether and how to vote proxy proposals, amendments, consents, or resolutions (collectively, “Proxies”) on a case-by-case basis, and will:

Generally, vote in accordance with the recommendation of the issuing company’s management on routine and administrative matters, unless the Firm has a particular reason to vote to the contrary.

Catalio utilizes the services of a third party service provider as its electronic proxy voting vendor. Catalio further utilizes another service provider for proxy vote recommendations.

Conflicts of Interest

Catalio will not put its own interests ahead of those of any Client. Section 206 of the Investment Advisers Act aims to address conflicts of interest between investment advisers and their clients, and Catalio from putting its own interest ahead of those of any Client. In the event that a potential conflict of interest arises in connection with voting a proxy, a conflict of interest will be considered material to the extent that the conflict has the potential to influence the Firm’s decision making in voting the proxy. Catalio may take into account all relevant factors, as determined by the Firm in its sole discretion including, without limitation: (i) the impact on the value of the securities or instruments owned by the relevant Client and the returns on those securities; (ii) the anticipated associated costs and benefits; (iii) the continued or increased availability of portfolio information; and (iv) industry and business practices.

Catalio will abstain from voting or affirmatively decide not to vote if the Firm determines that abstention or not voting is in the best interests of the Clients in light of the scope of services to which it and the Clients have agreed. In making this determination, Catalio will consider various factors, including, but not limited to, (i) the costs associated with exercising the proxy (e.g., translation or travel costs) relative to the expected benefits to the Client; and (ii) any legal restrictions on trading resulting from the exercise of a proxy. Catalio may determine not to vote proxies relating to securities in which clients have no position as of the receipt of the proxy (for example, when Catalio has sold, or has otherwise closed, a client position after the proxy record date but before the proxy receipt date).

Conflicts of interest may arise between Catalio’s and the Clients’ interests. If the Firm determines that it may have, or is perceived to have, a conflict of interest when voting proxies, the Firm will vote in accordance with its Proxy Voting Policy.

Use of Proxy Advisory Firms

The SEC has indicated that an investment adviser that retains a “Proxy Advisory Firm”¹ to provide voting recommendations or voting execution services also should consider steps to evaluate whether the Adviser’s voting determinations are consistent with its voting policies and procedures and in the Client’s best interest before the votes are cast.

Catalio may use a Proxy Advisory Firm. To the extent it does so, Catalio adopts reasonably designed procedures to sufficiently evaluate the third party in order to ensure that the Firm casts votes in the best interest of its Clients.

Shareholders should retain this Supplement for future reference.

¹ Proxy Advisory Firms perform a variety of functions and services, including administrative services such as providing an Adviser with an electronic platform that enables the Adviser to manage voting mechanics more efficiently. Other services provided by Proxy Advisory Firms relate to the substance of voting, such as: providing research and analysis regarding the matters subject to a vote; promulgating general voting guidelines that investment advisers can adopt; and making voting recommendations to investment advisers on specific matters subject to a vote.