UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

SCHEDULE 14A

Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of the Securities

Exchange Act of 1934

Filed by the Registrant ☑

Filed by a Party other than the Registrant ☐

Check the appropriate box:

☐ Preliminary Proxy Statement

☐ Confidential, for Use of the Commission Only (as permitted by Rule 14a-6(e)(2))

☑ Definitive Proxy Statement

☐ Definitive Additional Materials

☐ Soliciting Material under Exchange Act Rule 14a-12

CenterPoint Energy, Inc.

(Name of Registrant as Specified In Its Charter)

(Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement if other than the Registrant)

Payment of Filing Fee (Check the appropriate box):

      Always There.^®

CenterPoint Energy, Inc.

Notice of Annual Meeting of Shareholders

to be held on April 26, 2018

and Proxy Statement

Always There.®
Welcome to the CenterPoint Energy Annual Shareholder Meeting

March 15, 2018

Dear Fellow Shareholders:

We are pleased to invite you to attend our annual shareholder meeting to be held on April 26, 2018, at 9:00 a.m. central time in our auditorium located at 1111 Louisiana Street in Houston, Texas.

As explained in the enclosed proxy statement, at this year’s meeting you will be asked to vote (i) for the election of ten directors, (ii) for the ratification of the appointment of the independent auditors and (iii) for the approval, on an advisory basis, of CenterPoint Energy’s executive compensation, and to consider any other business that may properly come before the meeting.

Your vote is very important to us – participate in the future of CenterPoint Energy and exercise your shareholder right by voting your shares right away.

Only shareholders of record at the close of business on March 1, 2018, or their proxy holders, may vote at the meeting. Attendance at the meeting is limited to shareholders or their proxy holders and CenterPoint Energy guests. Only our shareholders or their valid proxy holders may address the meeting.

Please review the proxy card for the instructions on how you can vote your shares over the internet, by telephone or by mail. It is important that all CenterPoint Energy shareholders, regardless of the number of shares owned, participate in the affairs of the Company. At CenterPoint Energy’s 2017 Annual Shareholder Meeting, approximately 86 percent of the Company’s outstanding shares were represented in person or by proxy.

Thank you for your continued interest in CenterPoint Energy.

Sincerely,

Milton Carroll Executive Chairman of the Board				Scott M. Prochazka President and Chief Executive Officer

Table of Contents

Table of Contents (continued)

Always There.®

Notice of Annual Meeting of Shareholders

Dear Shareholders:

You are cordially invited to attend the 2018 annual meeting of shareholders of CenterPoint Energy, Inc. This is your notice for the meeting.

TIME AND DATE

9:00 a.m. Central Time on April 26, 2018.

PLACE

The CenterPoint Energy auditorium at 1111 Louisiana, Houston, Texas.

ITEMS OF BUSINESS

RECORD DATE

Shareholders of record at the close of business on March 1, 2018 are entitled to vote.

PROXY VOTING

Each share entitles the holder to one vote. You may vote either by attending the meeting or by proxy. For specific voting information, please see “Frequently Asked Questions About Voting” beginning on page 1 of the proxy statement that follows. Even if you plan to attend the meeting, please sign, date and return the enclosed proxy card or submit your proxy using the Internet or telephone procedures described on the proxy card.

Sincerely,

Vincent A. Mercaldi

Corporate Secretary

Dated and first mailed

to shareholders

on or about March 15, 2018

Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials

for the Annual Shareholder Meeting to be Held April 26, 2018

The proxy statement and annual report to shareholders are available at:

http://materials.proxyvote.com/15189T

CENTERPOINT ENERGY, INC.

1111 Louisiana

Houston, Texas 77002

(713) 207-1111

For deliveries by U.S. Postal Service:

P.O. Box 4567

Houston, Texas 77210-4567

Proxy Statement

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT VOTING

On what am I voting?

Who may vote?

Shareholders recorded in our stock register at the close of business on March 1, 2018 may vote at the meeting. As of that date, there were 431,470,883 shares of our common stock outstanding.

How many votes do I have?

You have one vote for each share of our common stock you owned as of the record date for the meeting.

How do I vote?

Your vote is important. You may vote in person at the meeting or by proxy. We recommend you vote by proxy even if you plan to attend the meeting. You may always change your vote at the meeting if you are a holder of record or have a proxy from the record holder. Giving us your proxy means that you authorize us to vote your shares at the meeting in the manner you indicated on your proxy card. You may also provide your proxy using the Internet or telephone procedures described on the proxy card.

You may vote for or against each director nominee under Item 1 (election of directors) and the proposals under Item 2 (ratification of appointment of independent auditors) and Item 3 (advisory vote on executive compensation), or you may abstain from voting on these items. If you give us your proxy but do not specify how to vote, we will vote your shares in accordance with the Board’s recommendations.

Frequently Asked Questions About Voting (continued)

What are the Board’s recommendations?

The Board’s recommendations are set forth together with the description of each item in this proxy statement. In summary, the Board and, with respect to the ratification of the appointment of the independent auditors, the Audit Committee, recommends a vote as follows:

If any other matters properly come before the annual meeting, we will vote the shares in accordance with our best judgment and discretion.

What if I change my mind after I have voted?

You may revoke your proxy before it is voted by:

Will my shares be voted if I do not provide my proxy?

It depends on whether you hold your shares in your own name or in the name of a bank or brokerage firm. If you hold your shares directly in your own name, they will not be voted unless you provide a proxy or vote in person at the meeting.

Brokerage firms generally have the authority to vote their customers’ unvoted shares on certain “routine” matters. If your shares are held in the name of a broker, bank or other nominee, such nominee can vote your shares for the ratification of the appointment of Deloitte & Touche LLP as our independent auditors for 2018 if you do not timely provide your proxy because this matter is considered “routine” under the applicable rules. However, no other items are considered “routine” and may not be voted on by your nominee without your instruction.

For all items other than ratification of the appointment of our independent auditors, brokers holding shares must vote according to specific instructions they receive from the beneficial owners of those shares because the New York Stock Exchange precludes brokers from exercising voting discretion on certain proposals without specific instructions from the beneficial owner as to how to vote. Brokers cannot vote on Item 1 (election of directors) or Item 3 (advisory vote on executive compensation) without instructions from the beneficial owners. If you do not instruct your broker how to vote with respect to Item 1 or Item 3, your broker will not vote for you with respect to those items.

Do I need a ticket to attend the meeting?

To be admitted to the meeting, you must provide proof of ownership of our common stock and proof of identification. If you plan to attend the meeting and your shares are held by banks, brokers, stock plans or other holders of record (in “street name”), you will need to provide proof of ownership. Examples of proof of ownership include a recent brokerage statement or letter from your broker or bank. All shareholders will be required to present valid picture identification, such as a driver’s license, before being admitted to the meeting.

Frequently Asked Questions About Voting (continued)

What constitutes a quorum?

To carry on the business of the meeting, we must have a quorum. This means at least a majority of the shares of common stock outstanding as of the record date must be represented at the meeting, either by proxy or in person. Shares of common stock owned by CenterPoint Energy are not voted and do not count for this purpose.

Abstentions and proxies submitted by brokers that do not indicate a vote because they do not have discretionary authority and have not received instructions as to how to vote on a proposal (so-called “broker non-votes”) will be considered as present for quorum purposes.

What vote is required to approve each of the proposals?

Under our third amended and restated bylaws (bylaws), directors are elected by a majority of the votes cast at the meeting. This means that the number of votes cast “for” a director must exceed the number of votes cast “against” that director. Abstentions and broker non-votes will not affect the outcome of the vote. For additional information on the election of directors, see “Item 1: Election of Directors—Majority Voting in Director Elections.”

Each of the ratification of the appointment of independent auditors in Item 2 and the approval of the resolution included in Item 3 regarding the advisory vote on executive compensation requires the affirmative vote of a majority of the shares of common stock entitled to vote and voted for or against the item. Abstentions and broker non-votes will not affect the outcome of the vote on these items.

Who conducts the proxy solicitation and how much will it cost?

CenterPoint Energy is requesting your proxy for the annual shareholder meeting and will pay all the costs of requesting shareholder proxies, including a fee of $13,000 plus expenses to Morrow Sodali LLC, 470 West Ave, Stamford, CT 06902, who will help us solicit proxies. We can request proxies through the mail, in person, or by telephone, fax or Internet. We can use directors, officers and other employees of CenterPoint Energy to request proxies. Directors, officers and other employees will not receive additional compensation for these services. We will reimburse brokerage firms, nominees, fiduciaries, custodians and other agents for their expenses in distributing proxy material to the beneficial owners of our common stock.

ITEM 1: ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

Nominees for Directors

Each of our directors will be elected at this year’s meeting to a one-year term expiring at the annual meeting in 2019.

If any nominee becomes unavailable for election, the Board of Directors can name a substitute nominee, and proxies will be voted for the substitute nominee pursuant to discretionary authority.

Unless otherwise indicated or the context otherwise requires, when we refer to periods prior to September 1, 2002, CenterPoint Energy should be understood to mean or include the public companies that were its predecessors.

Our Board of Directors collectively represents the following backgrounds, key skills and competencies:

Listed below are the biographies of each director nominee. The biographies include information regarding each individual’s service as a director of the Company, business experience, director positions at public companies held currently or at any time during the last five years, and the experiences, qualifications, attributes or skills that caused the Governance Committee and the Board to determine that the person should serve as a director for the Company.

Item 1: Election of Directors (continued)

The ten nominees for election at the annual meeting are listed below.

Item 1: Election of Directors (continued)

Item 1: Election of Directors (continued)

Item 1: Election of Directors (continued)

The Board of Directors recommends a vote FOR the election of each of the nominees as directors.

Director Nomination Process

In assessing the qualifications of candidates for nomination as director in addition to qualifications set forth in our bylaws, the Governance Committee and the Board consider the following:

Item 1: Election of Directors (continued)

At least annually, the Governance Committee reviews the overall composition of the Board, the skills represented by incumbent directors and the need for Board refreshment or expansion. In seeking new director candidates, the Governance Committee and the Board consider the skills, expertise and qualities that will be required to effectively oversee management of the business and affairs of the Company. The Governance Committee and the Board also consider the diversity of the Board in terms of the geographic, gender, age and ethnic makeup of its members. The Board believes that a diverse membership enhances the Board’s deliberations and promotes inclusiveness. The Board evaluates the makeup of its membership in the context of the Board as a whole, with the objective of recommending a group that can effectively work together using its diversity of experience, skills, perspectives and backgrounds to see that the Company is well-managed with a focus of achieving the Company’s long-term business strategy, and represents the interests of the Company and its shareholders.

Suggestions for potential nominees for director can come to the Governance Committee from a number of sources, including incumbent directors, officers, executive search firms and others. Ms. Biddle was identified as a director candidate through the Company’s engagement of an executive search firm, and Mr. Nesbitt was recommended to the Board as a director candidate by our Executive Chairman. If an executive search firm is engaged for this purpose, the Governance Committee has sole authority with respect to the engagement. The Governance Committee will also consider director candidates recommended by shareholders. The extent to which the Governance Committee dedicates time and resources to the consideration and evaluation of any potential nominee brought to its attention depends on the information available to the Committee about the qualifications and suitability of the individual, viewed in light of the needs of the Board, and is at the Committee’s discretion. The Governance Committee and the Board evaluate the desirability for incumbent directors to continue on the Board following the expiration of their respective terms, taking into account their contributions as Board members and the benefit that results from increasing insight and experience developed over a period of time.

Shareholders may submit the names and other information regarding individuals they wish to be considered for nomination as directors by writing to the Corporate Secretary, as provided in our bylaws, at the address indicated on the first page of this proxy statement. To be considered for nomination by the Board of Directors, submissions of potential nominees should be made no later than November 15 in the year prior to the meeting at which the election is to occur.

Proxy Access Requirements

In February 2017, we proactively adopted amendments to our bylaws to implement proxy access for our shareholders. These proxy access amendments permit a nominating group of up to 20 shareholders owning three percent or more of our common stock continuously for at least three years to nominate and include in our proxy materials for an annual meeting of shareholders director candidates constituting up to the greater of (i) 20 percent (or if such amount is not a whole number, the closest whole number below 20 percent) of our Board or (ii) two, provided that the shareholder (or group) and each nominee satisfy the requirements specified in our bylaws. An eligible shareholder wishing to nominate a candidate for election to the Board at the 2019 annual meeting must provide such notice no earlier than November 27, 2018 and no later than December 27, 2018. Any such notice and accompanying nomination materials must meet the requirements set forth in our bylaws, which are publicly available at http://investors.centerpointenergy.com/corporate-governance.cfm.

Annual Board Self-Assessment

The Board of Directors conducts a self-assessment of its performance and effectiveness as well as that of the four standing committees on an annual basis. The purpose of the self-assessment is to track progress from year to year and to identify ways to enhance the Board’s and its Committees’ effectiveness. Further, the Board of Directors, as part of its self-assessment, evaluates management’s preparation for Board and Committee meetings and the content presented at such meetings. As part of the assessment, each director completes a written questionnaire developed by the Governance Committee to provide feedback on the effectiveness of the Board and its Committees. Additionally,

Item 1: Election of Directors (continued)

in conjunction with this process, each director completes an individual evaluation for each of the other directors. The collective ratings and comments of the directors are compiled and presented by Mr. Pound, the chairman of the Governance Committee, or by Mr. Carroll, with respect to Mr. Pound’s evaluation, to the Governance Committee and the full Board for discussion and action.

Director Independence

The Board of Directors determined that Messrs. Johnson*, McLean, Pound, Smith, Somerhalder and Wareing and Mses. Longoria* and Rheney are independent within the meaning of the listing standards for general independence of the New York Stock Exchange. The Board of Directors has determined that should Ms. Biddle and Mr. Nesbitt be elected to serve on the Board of Directors, each of them would be independent within the meaning of the listing standards for general independence of the New York Stock Exchange.

Under the listing standards, a majority of our directors must be independent, and the Audit, Compensation and Governance Committees are each required to be composed solely of independent directors. The standards for audit committee and compensation committee membership include additional requirements under rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission. The Board has determined that all of the members of each of its standing committees meet the applicable independence requirements. The listing standards relating to general independence require an affirmative determination by the Board that the director has no material relationship with the listed company and contain a listing of several specific relationships that preclude independence.

As contemplated by New York Stock Exchange rules then in effect, the Board adopted categorical standards in 2004 to assist in making determinations of independence. Under the rules then in effect, relationships falling within the categorical standards were not required to be disclosed or separately discussed in the proxy statement in connection with the Board’s independence determinations.

The categorical standards cover two types of relationships. The first type involves relationships of the kind addressed in either:

For those relationships, the categorical standards are met if the relationship neither requires disclosure nor precludes a determination of independence under either set of rules.

The second type of relationship is one involving charitable contributions by CenterPoint Energy to an organization in which a director is an executive officer. In that situation, the categorical standards are met if the contributions do not exceed the greater of $1 million or 2% of the organization’s gross revenue in any of the last three years.

In making its subjective determination regarding the independence of Messrs. Johnson,* McLean, Pound, Smith, Somerhalder and Wareing and Mses. Longoria* and Rheney, the Board reviewed and discussed additional information provided by the directors and the Company with regard to each director’s business and personal activities as they related to the Company and Company management. The Board considered the transactions in the context of the New York Stock Exchange’s objective listing standards, the categorical standards noted above and the additional standards established for members of audit, compensation and governance committees.

Item 1: Election of Directors (continued)

Code of Ethics and Ethics and Compliance Code

We have a Code of Ethics for our Chief Executive Officer and Senior Financial Officers, which group consists of our Chief Financial Officer, Chief Accounting Officer, Treasurer and Assistant Controller. We will post information regarding any amendments to, or waivers of, the provisions of this code applicable to these officers at the website location referred to below under “Website Availability of Documents.”

We also have an Ethics and Compliance Code applicable to all directors, officers and employees. This code addresses, among other things, issues required to be addressed by a code of business conduct and ethics under New York Stock Exchange listing standards. Any waivers of this code for executive officers or directors may be made only by the Board of Directors or a committee of the Board and must be promptly disclosed to shareholders.

In 2017, no waivers of our Code of Ethics or our Ethics and Compliance Code were granted.

Conflicts of Interest and Related-Party Transactions

The Governance Committee will address and resolve any issues with respect to related-party transactions and conflicts of interest involving our executive officers, directors or other “related persons” under the applicable disclosure rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Our Ethics and Compliance Code provides that all directors, executive officers and other employees should avoid actual conflicts of interest as well as the appearance of a conflict of interest, and our Code of Ethics for our Chief Executive Officer and Senior Financial Officers similarly obligates the employees covered by that Code of Ethics (our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Accounting Officer, Treasurer and Assistant Controller) to handle actual or apparent conflicts of interest between personal and professional relationships in an ethical manner. Under our Ethics and Compliance Code, prior approval is required for any significant financial interest with suppliers, partners, subcontractors or competitors. Any questionable situation is required to be disclosed to the Legal Department or an employee’s direct manager.

Pursuant to our Corporate Governance Guidelines, the Governance Committee Charter and our Related-Party Transaction Approval Policy, the Board has delegated to the Governance Committee the responsibility for reviewing and resolving any issues with respect to related-party transactions and conflicts of interests involving executive officers or directors of the Company or other related persons under the applicable rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission. The Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines require that (i) each director shall promptly disclose to the Chairman any potential conflicts of interest he or she may have with respect to any matter involving the Company and, if appropriate, recuse himself or herself from any discussions or decisions on any of these matters, and (ii) the Chairman shall promptly advise the Governance Committee of any potential conflicts of interest he or she may have with respect to any matter involving the Company and, if appropriate, recuse himself or herself from any discussions or decisions on any of these matters.

The Office of the Corporate Secretary periodically gathers information from directors and executive officers regarding matters involving potential conflicts of interest or related-party transactions and provides that information to the Governance Committee for review. Directors and executive officers are also required to inform the Company immediately of any changes in the information provided concerning related-party transactions in which the director or executive officer or other related person was, or is proposed to be, a participant. In accordance with our Related-Party Transaction Approval Policy, the standard applied in approving the transaction is whether the transaction is in the best interests of the Company and its shareholders.

There were no related-party transactions in 2017 that were required to be reported pursuant to the applicable disclosure rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Item 1: Election of Directors (continued)

Majority Voting in Director Elections

Overview. Our bylaws include a majority voting standard in uncontested director elections. This standard applies to the election of directors at this meeting. To be elected, a nominee must receive more votes cast “for” that nominee’s election than votes cast “against” that nominee’s election. In contested elections, the voting standard will be a plurality of votes cast. Under our bylaws, contested elections occur where, as of a date that is 14 days in advance of the date we file our definitive proxy statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission (regardless of whether or not thereafter revised or supplemented), the number of nominees exceeds the number of directors to be elected.

Our Corporate Governance Guidelines include director resignation procedures. In brief, these procedures provide that:

Our bylaws and our Corporate Governance Guidelines can be found on our website at http://investors.centerpointenergy.com/corporate-governance.cfm.

Board Leadership

The offices of Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer are currently separate and have been separate since the formation of the Company as a new holding company in 2002. The Board believes that the separation of the two roles continues to provide, at present, the best balance of these important responsibilities with the Chairman directing board operations and leading oversight of the Chief Executive Officer and management, and the Chief Executive Officer focusing on developing and implementing the Company’s board-approved strategic vision and managing its day-to-day business. The Board believes that separating the offices of Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer, coupled with regular executive sessions with only independent directors present, helps strengthen the Board’s independent oversight of management and provides an opportunity for the Board members to have more direct input to management in shaping the organization and strategy of the Company.

The Board’s Role in Risk Oversight

The Board of Directors is actively involved in the oversight of risks that could impact the Company, and risk oversight is the responsibility of the full Board. Our Corporate Governance Guidelines specify that the Board has ultimate oversight responsibility for the Company’s system of enterprise risk management.

Management is responsible for developing and implementing the Company’s program of enterprise risk management. A risk oversight committee, which is composed of senior executives from across the Company, monitors and oversees compliance with the Company’s risk control policy. An officer of the Company, who reports to

Item 1: Election of Directors (continued)

the Chief Financial Officer, facilitates risk oversight committee meetings, and provides daily risk assessment and control oversight for commercial activities. Members of executive management also participate in ongoing risk assessments and risk mitigation planning.

Throughout the year, the Board participates in reviews with management of the Company’s risk management process, the major risks facing the Company and steps taken to mitigate those risks. Board reviews include litigation and other legal matters, regulatory developments, business operations, budget and policy, cyber-security, safety and industry and economic developments. The Board also approves overall corporate risk limits. In addition, existing committees help the Board carry out its responsibility for risk oversight by focusing on the following specific key areas of risk:

The Board believes that the administration of its risk oversight function has not affected its leadership structure. In reviewing the Company’s compensation program, the Compensation Committee has made an assessment of whether compensation policies and practices create risks that are reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on the Company and has concluded that they do not create such risks as presently constituted.

Executive Succession Planning and Leadership Development

Our Board of Directors is actively engaged in succession planning for the position of Chief Executive Officer and other key executive positions. To assist the Board, our Executive Committee, consisting of our Chief Executive Officer and certain executive officers reporting directly to our Chief Executive Officer, meets on at least a quarterly basis to conduct talent reviews and discuss succession planning and leadership development, which are key corporate priorities for the Board and management. The results of these quarterly discussions are reviewed by, and discussed with, the Compensation Committee at least annually. Based on feedback from our Compensation Committee, our Chief Executive Officer provides the Board with an assessment of senior executive talent, including potential of such talent to succeed to the position of Chief Executive Officer or other key executive positions, readiness for succession and development opportunities.

D irector Attendance

Last year, the Board met five times, and the standing committees met a total of 17 times. Each director attended more than 75% of the meetings of the Board of Directors and each of the committees on which he or she served.

Directors are expected to attend annual meetings of shareholders. All directors attended the 2017 annual meeting.

Item 1: Election of Directors (continued)

Board Organization and Committees

The Board oversees the management of the Company’s business and affairs. The Board appoints committees to help carry out its duties. Messrs. Carroll and Prochazka do not serve on any standing committees. The following table sets forth the standing committees of the Board and their members as of the date of this proxy statement, as well as the number of meetings each committee held during 2017:

Item 1: Election of Directors (continued)

Executive Sessions of the Board

Our Corporate Governance Guidelines provide that the members of the Board of Directors who are not officers of CenterPoint Energy will hold regular executive sessions without management participation. If at any time the non-management directors include one or more directors who do not meet the listing standards of the New York Stock Exchange for general independence, the Board must hold an executive session at least once each year including

Item 1: Election of Directors (continued)

only the non-management directors who are also independent. An executive session of independent directors is currently scheduled in conjunction with each regular meeting of the Board of Directors. Currently, the Governance Committee Chairman (Mr. Pound) presides at these sessions.

Shareholder Engagement and Communications with Directors

The Company believes that good governance practices include maintaining a consistent and transparent dialogue throughout the year with our shareholders, which helps contribute to the Company’s long-term success. Accordingly, our senior management, investor relations team and corporate governance team contacted shareholders representing approximately 50% of our outstanding shares during 2017. With those shareholders and institutional investors who accepted our offer to engage, we discussed a range of topics, including corporate governance issues, business strategy, industry developments, climate change, executive compensation practices and proxy statement disclosure.

Interested parties who wish to make concerns known to the non-management directors may communicate directly with the non-management directors by making a submission in writing to “Board of Directors (independent members)” in care of our Corporate Secretary at the address indicated on the first page of this proxy statement. Aside from this procedure for communications with the non-management directors, the entire Board of Directors will receive communications in writing from shareholders. Any such communications should be addressed to the Board of Directors in care of the Corporate Secretary at the same address.

Website Availability of Documents

CenterPoint Energy’s Annual Report on Form 10-K, Corporate Governance Guidelines, the charters of the Audit Committee, Compensation Committee, Finance Committee and Governance Committee, the Code of Ethics and the Ethics and Compliance Code can be found on our website at http://investors.centerpointenergy.com/corporate-governance.cfm. Unless specifically stated herein, documents and information on our website are not incorporated by reference in this proxy statement.

Compensation of Directors

The Governance Committee of the Board oversees fee levels and other elements of compensation for CenterPoint Energy’s non-employee directors.

Directors receive a cash retainer and are eligible to receive annual grants of our common stock under the CenterPoint Energy Inc. Stock Plan for Outside Directors, as amended. Directors no longer receive meeting fees, and participation in a plan providing split-dollar life insurance coverage has been discontinued for directors commencing service after 2000.

Stock ownership guidelines for non-employee directors were originally adopted in February 2011. Under the current guidelines, each non-employee director is required to own shares of CenterPoint Energy common stock with a value equal to at least five times the director’s regular annual cash retainer. New directors are required to attain the specified level of ownership within five years of joining the Board.

Retainer Fees

Retainers are paid to our non-employee directors on a quarterly basis in arrears. Our non-employee directors received an annual retainer of $100,000. The Chairmen of the Audit and Compensation Committees each receive a supplemental annual retainer of $20,000 for service as committee chairmen. The Chairmen of the Finance and Governance Committees each receive a supplemental annual retainer of $15,000 for service as committee chairmen. Fees earned or paid in 2017 are set forth in the Fees Earned or Paid in Cash column of the Director Compensation Table.

Item 1: Election of Directors (continued)

Stock Plan for Outside Directors

Each non-employee director serving as of May 1, 2017 was granted an annual stock award under our Stock Plan for Outside Directors in 2017. The cash value of these awards, as of the grant date, is set annually by the Board. The number of shares awarded is then determined by dividing the cash value by the fair market value of the common stock on the grant date. In 2017, for each non-employee director serving as of May 1, 2017, the Board determined a cash value for the stock award, as of the grant date, of $130,000, resulting in a stock award to each non-employee director of 4,592 shares of common stock.

Grants made under this plan vest on the first anniversary of the grant date. Grants also fully vest in the event of the director’s death or upon a change in control (defined in substantially the same manner as in the change in control plan for certain officers described in “Potential Payments upon Change in Control or Termination”). Upon vesting of the awards, each director receives, in addition to the underlying shares, a cash payment equal to the amount of dividend equivalents earned since the date of grant.

If a director’s service on the Board is terminated for any reason other than death or a change in control, the director forfeits all rights to the unvested portion of any outstanding grants as of the termination date. If the director is 70 years of age or older when he or she ceases to serve on the Board of Directors, the director’s termination date is deemed to be December 31st of the year in which he or she leaves the Board.

In addition to the annual grant, our Stock Plan for Outside Directors provides that a non-employee director may receive a one-time, initial grant of shares of common stock upon first commencing service as a director, based on a cash value, as of the date of the grant, set by the Board and subject to the same vesting schedule described above. No awards have been made under the provision allowing one-time initial grants. The aggregate number of outstanding unvested stock awards is set forth in footnote (2) to the Director Compensation Table.

Deferred Compensation Plan

We maintain a deferred compensation plan that permits directors to elect each year to defer all or part of their annual retainer and supplemental annual retainer for committee chairmanship. Interest accrues on deferrals at a rate, adjusted annually, equal to the average yield during the year of the Moody’s Long-Term Corporate Bond Index plus two percent. Directors participating in this plan may elect at the time of deferral to receive distributions of their deferred compensation and interest in three ways:

The deferred compensation plan is a nonqualified, unfunded plan, and the directors are general, unsecured creditors of CenterPoint Energy with respect to their plan benefits. No fund or other assets of CenterPoint Energy have been set aside or segregated to pay benefits under the plan. Refer to “Rabbi Trust” under “Executive Compensation Tables—Potential Payments upon Change in Control or Termination” for funding of the deferred compensation plan upon a change in control.

The amounts deferred by directors in 2017 are described in footnote (1) to the Director Compensation Table. The above market earnings are reported in the Change in Pension Value and Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Earnings column of the Director Compensation Table.

Item 1: Election of Directors (continued)

Director Compensation Table

The table below and the narrative in the footnotes provide compensation amounts for our non-employee directors for 2017, as well as additional material information in connection with such amounts. For summary information on the provision of the plans and programs, refer to the “Compensation of Directors” discussion immediately preceding this table.

STOCK OWNERSHIP

The following table shows stock ownership of known beneficial owners of more than 5% of CenterPoint Energy’s common stock, each director or nominee for director, the Chief Executive Officer, the Chief Financial Officer, the other executive officers for whom we are providing detailed compensation information under “Executive Compensation Tables” and our executive officers and directors as a group. Information for the executive officers and directors is given as of March 1, 2018 except as otherwise indicated. The directors and officers, individually and as a group, beneficially own less than 1% of CenterPoint Energy’s outstanding common stock. Beneficial ownership is determined in accordance with Rule 13d-3 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (Exchange Act) and, except as otherwise indicated, the respective holders have sole voting and investment powers over such shares.

Stock Ownership (continued)

COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

The following compensation discussion and analysis as well as the information provided under the “Executive Compensation Tables” section contains information regarding measures applicable to performance-based compensation and targets and other achievement levels associated with these measures. CenterPoint Energy cautions investors not to regard this information, to the extent it may relate to future periods or dates, as forecasts, projections or other guidance. The reasons for this caution include the following: The information regarding performance objectives and associated achievement levels was formulated as of earlier dates and does not take into account subsequent developments. The objectives may include adjustments from, or otherwise may not be comparable to, financial and operating measures that are publicly disclosed and may be considered of significance to investors. Some achievement levels, such as those relating to incentives for exceptional performance, may be based on assumptions that differ from actual results.

Executive Summary

Overview. In this section, we describe and discuss our executive compensation program, including the objectives and elements of compensation, as well as recommendations and determinations made by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors regarding the compensation of our named executive officers.

Our named executive officers for 2017 are:

Scott M. Prochazka		William D. Rogers		Tracy B. Bridge		Milton Carroll		Dana C. O’Brien
President, Chief Executive Officer and Director		Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer		Executive Vice President and President, Electric Division		Executive Chairman		Senior Vice President and General Counsel
Since 2014		Since 2015		Since 2014		Since 2013		Since 2014

Compensation Discussion and Analysis (continued)

In this proxy statement, we refer to Scott M. Prochazka, William D. Rogers, Tracy B. Bridge and Dana C. O’Brien as our “senior executive officers.” We also describe and discuss the compensation of our Executive Chairman, Milton Carroll. We refer to our Executive Chairman and our senior executive officers collectively as our “named executive officers” in this proxy statement.

Our executive compensation program is designed to achieve the objectives as set forth below:

Pay For Performance

The guiding principle of our compensation philosophy is that the interests of executives and shareholders should be aligned and that pay should be based on performance. Our program provides upside and downside potential, depending on actual results, as compared to predetermined measures of success.

A significant portion of our named executive officers’ total direct compensation, which includes base salary in addition to the short-term and long-term incentive components, as applicable, is conditioned upon achieving results that are key to our long-term success and increasing shareholder value.

As illustrated below, the variable and equity-based components of our compensation program are a short-term incentive annual cash bonus plan and a long-term incentive three-year equity-based compensation plan, consisting of performance shares and restricted stock units. Actual payout of the short-term incentive is dependent on corporate, operational and individual performance and the payout of the performance share component of the long-term incentive is dependent on corporate performance. Under our long-term incentive plan, in 2017, performance is measured on financial metrics, including total shareholder return and three-year cumulative operating income.

Compensation Discussion and Analysis (continued)

The following graphics reflect the components of the target total direct compensation opportunities provided to our named executive officers.

TARGET COMPENSATION MIX AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2017

(consisting of base salary, short-term incentives and long-term incentives)

*The graphic represents the average size of each component as a percentage of each named executive officer’s (other than the Chief Executive Officer’s) target total direct compensation opportunities.

Compensation Discussion and Analysis (continued)

Align Interests of Named Executive Officers with Shareholders

The following are key features of our executive compensation program, which we believe align the interests of management with those of our shareholders.

Compensation Discussion and Analysis (continued)

Other features of our executive compensation program include the following:

Compensation Discussion and Analysis (continued)

Our 2017 Executive Compensation Program

The overall objectives and structure of our executive compensation program for our senior executive officers remained largely unchanged in 2017 as compared to 2016. In February 2017, the Compensation Committee, or the independent members of the Board of Directors with respect to Mr. Carroll, reviewed the base salary and short-term and long-term incentive targets for each of our named executive officers and determined their respective base salaries and short-term and long-term incentive targets, as applicable, to provide each officer a more fully competitive total direct compensation opportunity in line with the Company’s philosophy of targeting the market median for these elements of compensation as follows:

Prior to conducting its 2017 analysis, the Compensation Committee asked Pearl Meyer & Partners (“Pearl Meyer”), the Committee’s independent executive compensation consultant at the time, to review the 2016 peer group. Pearl Meyer compared the 2016 peer group to CenterPoint Energy based on key financial and other metrics. In consideration of Pearl Meyer’s recommendations, the Compensation Committee approved (i) the removal of two companies (AGL Resources Inc. and Duke Energy Corporation) from and (ii) the addition of three companies (Alliant Energy Corporation, Eversource Energy and NiSource Inc.) to the 2017 peer group. We believe that the use of this group as a reference for evaluating our compensation policies helps align us with our peers and competitors. We also believe this group of companies provides a sufficiently large data set that is generally not subject to wide changes in compensation data. See “—Role of the Compensation Committee—Decisions Made by the Compensation Committee” for additional information about the peer group.

At its July 2017 meeting, the Compensation Committee engaged in a request for proposal process for compensation consulting services. Following the review, the Committee retained Meridian Compensation Partners, LLC (“Meridian”) as its independent compensation consultant beginning in August 2017. The Compensation Committee selected Meridian based largely on Meridian’s competitive market intelligence for executive pay and governance in the utilities and energy services industries.

Impact of Our Performance on 2017 Short-term Incentive Compensation and Vesting of 2015 Performance Share Grants. We reported net income of $1,792 million, or $4.13 per diluted share, for 2017. Our utility operations delivered solid results in 2017. CenterPoint Energy’s “core operating income,” which is a primary performance objective used under our executive compensation program for determining payouts under short-term incentive compensation awards, was $871 million in 2017, which exceeded the target amount under our 2017 short-term incentive plan by $19 million. CenterPoint Energy’s core operating income is determined by adjusting reported operating income to remove the effect of specified items, either positive or negative, to reflect what we consider to be our core operational business performance in the period being measured. For more information regarding the determination of core operating income, please refer to “Executive Compensation Tables—Non-Equity Incentive Plan Awards.”

Our short-term incentive plan provides an annual cash award based on the achievement of annual performance objectives specified for each of our senior executive officers, including specific objectives relating to core operating

Compensation Discussion and Analysis (continued)

income, consolidated diluted earnings per share, controlling expenditures and other non-financial operational performance objectives.

Based on our level of achievement of the 2017 performance objectives at 133% and an assessment of each individual’s performance by the Compensation Committee, the 2017 short-term incentive awards for our senior executive officers, expressed as a percentage of their individual target awards, were as follows:

Mr. Carroll was not eligible to participate in, and did not receive a payment under, our short-term incentive plan for 2017. Please refer to “Executive Compensation Tables—Non-Equity Incentive Plan Awards” for information regarding the specified performance objectives and our actual achievement levels during 2017.

In April 2015, we granted performance share awards to Messrs. Prochazka, Rogers, Bridge and Carroll and to Ms. O’Brien under our long-term incentive plan. The awards were made in two separate grants, with the payout opportunity for each grant based on a different performance objective to be measured over the three-year performance cycle of January 2015 through December 2017. The first performance objective was based on total shareholder return as compared to that of other publicly traded companies in our total-shareholder-return peer group (see “—Elements of Compensation—Long-Term Incentives”) and the second was based on achieving a cumulative core operating income goal. Based on our performance over the three-year cycle, the 2015 performance share awards vested based on an achievement level of 66% and 94%, respectively. Please refer to “Executive Compensation Tables—Option Exercises and Stock Vested for Fiscal Year 2017” for information regarding the number of gross shares distributed and the total value realized on vesting.

Compensation Discussion and Analysis (continued)

Actions Taken Regarding 2018 Executive Compensation Program

Consistent with our compensation philosophy of targeting the market median (50th percentile) of our peers for each major element of compensation, in February 2018, the Compensation Committee (or the independent members of the Board of Directors, with respect to Mr. Carroll) considered competitive market data provided by Meridian and made the following adjustments for each of the named executive officers to provide each officer with a more fully competitive total direct compensation opportunity:

Neither the Compensation Committee nor the independent members of the Board of Directors made any other changes to the compensation arrangements for the senior executive officers or Mr. Carroll, respectively.

In February 2018, the Compensation Committee also reviewed and approved the long-term incentive compensation awards to be made to our executives in 2018, including allocations between performance shares and stock awards, as well as the performance goals that would determine the payout opportunities under the planned awards.

For more information regarding the actions taken by our Compensation Committee with respect to our 2018 Executive Compensation Program, please see below under “2018 Executive Compensation Program.”

Shareholder Advisory “Say-on-Pay” Vote

At our 2018 annual meeting, we are providing our shareholders with the opportunity to cast an advisory vote on the compensation of our named executive officers, commonly known as a “say-on-pay” vote. This vote provides our shareholders the opportunity to express their views regarding the compensation program for our named executive officers as disclosed in this proxy statement. As an advisory vote, the say-on-pay vote at our 2018 annual meeting will not be binding upon CenterPoint Energy or the Board of Directors. However, the Board of Directors values the opinions expressed by our shareholders, and the Compensation Committee (and, with respect to Mr. Carroll, the independent members of the Board of Directors) will consider the outcome of the vote when making future compensation decisions for our named executive officers. For additional information, please refer to “Advisory Vote on Executive Compensation (Item 3).”

The advisory vote on executive compensation at our 2018 annual meeting will be our eighth “say-on-pay” vote. We conducted our seventh say-on-pay vote at our 2017 annual meeting at which an advisory resolution approving the compensation of our named executive officers, as disclosed in the proxy statement for our 2017 annual meeting, was approved by approximately 94% of the shares that were voted either for or against the resolution (excluding abstentions and broker non-votes). We have considered the favorable results of this vote, and the Compensation Committee has not made any changes to our overall executive compensation program as a result of the vote.

The advisory vote on the frequency of future shareholder advisory votes on executive compensation at our 2017 annual meeting was our second advisory vote on say-on-pay frequency, with the prior say-on-frequency vote held at

Compensation Discussion and Analysis (continued)

our 2011 annual meeting. At our 2017 annual meeting, we conducted an advisory vote on the frequency of future shareholder advisory votes on executive compensation, at which the Board of Directors recommended that our shareholders vote in favor of holding annual say-on-pay votes instead of the other options presented. At our 2017 annual meeting, approximately 86.8% of the shares that were voted in favor of one of the three available frequency recommendations (excluding abstentions and broker non-votes) voted in favor of an annual frequency, approximately 0.5% voted in favor of holding future votes once every two years, and approximately 12.7% voted in favor of holding future votes once every three years. Since our 2011 annual meeting, consistent with the results of both the 2011 and 2017 advisory votes, we held future say-on-pay votes annually.

Objective and Design of Executive Compensation Program

Recruit and Retain Talent. We strive to provide compensation that is competitive, both in total level and in individual components, with the companies we believe are our peers and other likely competitors for executive talent. By competitive, we mean that total compensation and each element of compensation corresponds to a market-determined range. We target the market median (50th percentile) for each major element of compensation because we believe the market median is a generally accepted benchmark of external competitiveness. We believe competitive compensation is normally sufficient to attract executive talent to the Company and also makes it less likely that executive talent will be lured away by higher compensation to perform a similar role with a similarly sized competitor.

To help ensure market-based levels of compensation, we measure the major elements of compensation annually for a position against available data for similar positions in other companies. We believe annual measurement is generally appropriate because the market is subject to variations over time as a result of changes within peer companies and the supply and demand for experienced executives. Once the market value for a position is determined, we compare the compensation levels of individual incumbents to these market values. The salary level and short-term and long-term incentive target percentages for our senior executive officers are based on market data for the officer’s position. Compensation levels can vary compared to the market due to a variety of factors such as experience, scope of responsibilities, tenure, internal equity and individual performance.

We maintain benefit programs for our employees, including our senior executive officers, with the objective of retaining their services. Our benefits reflect competitive practices at the time the benefit programs were implemented and, in some cases, reflect our desire to maintain similar benefits treatment for all employees in similar positions. To the extent possible, we structure these programs to deliver benefits in a manner that is tax efficient to both the recipient and CenterPoint Energy.

Pay for Performance; Align Interests of our Executives with our Shareholders. We also motivate our executives to achieve individual and business performance objectives by varying their compensation in accordance with CenterPoint Energy’s overall success. Actual compensation in a given year will vary based on CenterPoint Energy’s performance, and to a lesser extent, on qualitative appraisals of individual performance. We expect our senior executive officers to have a higher percentage of their total compensation at risk and therefore, we try to align each of our senior executive officers with the short-term and long-term performance objectives of CenterPoint Energy and with the interests of our shareholders. The size of at-risk compensation is expressed as a percentage of base salary.

Role of the Compensation Committee

The Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors oversees compensation for our senior executive officers, our Executive Chairman and other senior executives, including base salary and short-term and long-term incentive awards. The Compensation Committee also administers incentive compensation plans, evaluates our Chief Executive Officer’s performance and reviews management succession planning and development. The Board has determined that the members of the Compensation Committee meet the applicable requirements for independence under the standards of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the New York Stock Exchange discussed under “Director Independence.”

Compensation Discussion and Analysis (continued)

Decisions Made by the Compensation Committee. The Compensation Committee reviews each element of compensation annually to improve alignment with stated compensation objectives. As a result of its review, the Compensation Committee approves adjustments to base salary for our senior executive officers and reports these adjustments to the Board. In addition, the Compensation Committee may adjust short-term and long-term incentive target compensation levels for the senior executive officers to better align compensation with our market-based pay philosophy. In its review, the Compensation Committee also takes into consideration whether any incentive compensation target or performance objective could lead to a decision by an executive to take an inappropriate level of risk for the Company. In establishing individual incentive targets and awards, the Compensation Committee considers the data provided by its consultant, the level and nature of the executive’s responsibility, the executive’s experience and the Compensation Committee’s own qualitative assessment of the executive’s performance. In making these determinations, the Compensation Committee also takes into account our Chief Executive Officer’s performance evaluations of and recommendations regarding such executive officers.

The Compensation Committee, together with Meridian, has conducted a compensation risk assessment, including review of performance metrics, pay mix, pay leverage, checks and balances, external market references and goal setting, and no areas of concern were identified in the assessment. The Compensation Committee considers the results of this assessment in developing and evaluating compensation program design.

Annually, the Compensation Committee directs its consultant to review the base salary and short-term and long-term incentive levels of our senior or named executive officers, as applicable. To ensure that our compensation programs are market-based, the Committee’s consultant analyzes and matches the position and responsibilities of each senior executive officer to proxy statement data from a peer group of utility companies and to published compensation surveys covering both the utility industry and general industry. We do not consider geographical differences to be a relevant factor since we recruit on a national basis.

Our 2017 Peer Group. For 2017, the peer group for proxy statement data consisted of the following 17 publicly traded utility companies:

This peer group had median revenues and market capitalization comparable to CenterPoint Energy. This group of companies was identical to the group of companies used for measuring our relative total shareholder return under our 2017 long-term incentive compensation awards.

Prior to conducting its 2018 analysis, the Compensation Committee asked Meridian to review the 2017 peer group. Meridian compared the 2017 peer group to CenterPoint Energy based on key financial and other metrics and recommended the addition of two companies (Avangrid, Inc. and Edison International) to the existing peer group for the Company, which the Committee evaluated and approved. Factors considered by Meridian include our current peer group membership, companies within comparable Global Industry Classification Standard sectors, companies who list CenterPoint Energy as a peer in their proxies, the peers that the current peer group list as comparables, companies listed in shareholder advisor reports regarding CenterPoint Energy and companies within a reasonable range of CenterPoint Energy relative to 12-month trailing revenue and current market capitalization. We believe that the use of this group as a reference for evaluating our compensation policies helps align us with our peers and

Compensation Discussion and Analysis (continued)

competitors. We also believe this group of companies provides a sufficiently large data set that is generally not subject to wide changes in compensation data.

Role of Consultant. To assist in carrying out its responsibilities, the Compensation Committee retains a consultant to provide independent advice on executive compensation and to perform specific tasks as requested by the Committee. The consultant reports directly to the Compensation Committee, which preapproves the scope of work and the fees charged. The Compensation Committee or the Governance Committee may direct our compensation consultant to perform additional analyses or research related to compensation issues.

From August 2014 to August 2017, Pearl Meyer served as consultant to the Compensation Committee. From time to time, the Governance Committee also retained Pearl Meyer to provide independent advice on director compensation. At its July 2017 meeting, the Compensation Committee decided to engage in a request for proposal process for compensation consulting services. Following the review, the Compensation Committee retained Meridian, effective August 2017, as its independent compensation consultant. The Compensation Committee selected Meridian due in large part to its competitive market intelligence for executive pay and governance in the utilities and energy services industries. The Governance Committee has also retained Meridian to periodically provide independent advice on director compensation as requested.

The Compensation Committee reviews and assesses the independence and performance of its consultant in accordance with applicable Securities and Exchange Commission and New York Stock Exchange rules on an annual basis to confirm that the consultant is independent and meets all applicable regulatory requirements. In making this determination, the Compensation Committee reviewed information provided by its compensation consultant including the following factors:

In particular, the Compensation Committee noted that Meridian provided no other services to CenterPoint Energy.

Role of Executive Officers

Of our senior executive officers, only our Chief Executive Officer has a role in determining executive compensation policies and programs. Our Chief Executive Officer works with business unit and functional leaders along with our internal compensation staff to provide information to the Compensation Committee to help ensure that all elements of compensation support our business strategy and goals. Our Chief Executive Officer reviews internally developed materials before they are furnished to the Compensation Committee.

Compensation Discussion and Analysis (continued)

Our Chief Executive Officer also periodically reviews and recommends specific Company performance metrics to be used in short-term and long-term incentive plans. Our Chief Executive Officer works with the various business units and functional departments to develop these metrics, which are then presented to the Compensation Committee for its consideration and approval.

Our Chief Executive Officer reviews and recommends changes to the peer companies used for compensation purposes using internal analyses of revenue, market capitalization and comparable business mix (e.g., natural gas versus electric; regulated versus unregulated; generation versus transmission and distribution). These recommendations are reviewed by the Compensation Committee’s independent consultant and then presented to the Committee for its consideration and approval.

Within the parameters of the compensation policies established by the Compensation Committee, our Chief Executive Officer also makes preliminary recommendations for base salary adjustments and short-term and long-term incentive levels for the other senior executive officers. Our Chief Executive Officer also recommends payment amounts for the other executive officers’ short-term incentive plan awards. Our Chief Executive Officer bases his recommendations on a variety of factors such as his appraisal of the executive’s job performance and contribution to CenterPoint Energy, improvement in organizational and employee development and accomplishment of strategic priorities. Our Chief Executive Officer does not make any recommendations regarding his own compensation.

Elements of Compensation

Base Salary. Base salary is the foundation of total compensation. Base salary recognizes the job being performed and the value of that job in the competitive market. Base salary must be sufficient to attract and retain the executive talent necessary for our continued success and provides an element of compensation that is not at risk to avoid fluctuations in compensation that could distract our executives from the performance of their responsibilities. The Compensation Committee generally seeks to position the base salary for our most senior executives near the 50th percentile of base salaries in the peer group and published compensation surveys.

Adjustments to base salary primarily reflect either changes or responses to changes in market data or increased experience and individual contribution of the employee. The typical date for making these adjustments is April 1; however, adjustments may occur at other times during the year to recognize new responsibilities or new data regarding the market value of the job being performed. Changes in base salary impact short-term and long-term incentive payouts, as well as some benefits. A newly named executive or an executive whose responsibilities have significantly increased may be moved to the market median (50th percentile) over several years.

Short-Term Incentives. Our short-term incentive plan provides an annual cash award that is designed to link each employee’s annual compensation to the achievement of annual performance objectives for CenterPoint Energy as well as to recognize the employee’s performance during the year. The target award for each employee is expressed as a percentage of base salary earned during the year.

The Compensation Committee generally determines each senior executive officer’s short-term incentive target based on the competitive market data developed by its compensation consultant and recommendations from the Chief Executive Officer for officers other than himself.

The achievement of the corporate and business performance objectives generates a funding pool under the short-term incentive plan for the year. The Compensation Committee establishes and approves the specific performance objectives, based on business criteria selected from among the performance objectives set forth in the short-term incentive plan. The business criteria and other material terms of the performance objectives in the short-term incentive plan were last approved by our shareholders at our 2015 annual meeting so that future awards under the short-term incentive plan may qualify as performance-based compensation for purposes of Section 162(m) of the

Compensation Discussion and Analysis (continued)

Internal Revenue Code. However, effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017, the performance-based compensation exclusion under Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code was eliminated under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (“Tax Reform”) that was signed into law December 22, 2017.

Performance objectives under the short-term incentive plan are based on financial and operational factors determined to be critical to achieving our desired business plans and are designed to reflect goals and objectives to be accomplished over a 12-month measurement period. As such, incentive opportunities under the plan are not impacted by compensation amounts earned in prior years. After the end of the year, the Compensation Committee compares the actual results to the pre-established performance objectives and certifies the extent to which the objectives are achieved for determining the funding pool under the plan. The Compensation Committee has discretion to decrease the amount payable pursuant to any performance award, but, under the current terms of the short-term incentive plan, may not increase the amount payable in a manner inconsistent with the requirements for qualified performance-based compensation under Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code. In determining whether to exercise its discretion, the Compensation Committee may assess an individual executive’s contribution to the achievement of the performance objectives and any special circumstances and may also consider the input of our Chief Executive Officer on the amount to be awarded to each of the other senior officers.

Beginning in 2017, the entirety of each individual award is subject to the Compensation Committee’s discretion, consistent with the Company’s philosophy to pay for performance. For years prior to 2017, the Compensation Committee was guided by our policy providing that absent performance issues, individual performance awards under the plan will not be less than 50% of the individual award when determined formulaically based on the level of achievement of the specified corporate and business performance objectives.

In addition, the Compensation Committee has discretion to pay awards that are not tied to performance objectives. This authority provides the Compensation Committee with the flexibility to provide awards for executive performance in connection with extraordinary circumstances or events. Any such amount is reported as a bonus instead of non-equity incentive plan compensation.

In 2018, the Compensation Committee will review the application and impact of Tax Reform, if any, on the Company’s compensation programs, and the Board will modify the terms of the short-term incentive plan for 2018 and thereafter as it determines to be in the best interest of the Company and its shareholders, including addressing the elimination of the performance-based compensation exception under Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code and the ability of the Compensation Committee to decrease or increase the amount payable pursuant to a performance award.

Because an important component of our business plan is successful financial performance, core operating income and consolidated diluted earnings per share were the primary performance objectives for 2017. The short-term incentive plan measures of core operating income and consolidated diluted earnings per share represent amounts reported under generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) that are adjusted to reflect how we evaluate the Company’s fundamental business performance for the period being measured. The adjustments made to our reported operating income to arrive at our core operating income and to diluted earnings per share under GAAP to arrive at our consolidated diluted earnings per share are detailed under “Executive Compensation Tables—Non-Equity Incentive Plan Awards.”

For 2017, the performance objectives of our senior executive officers were based on our core operating income, consolidated diluted earnings per share and operational objectives, which include (i) controlling expenditures and (ii) non-financial operational performance objectives such as safety-related incident and participation rates and customer satisfaction measures relating to the services provided by CenterPoint Energy. These performance measures and operational objectives were determined to be appropriate given our senior executive officers’ responsibility with respect to the collective operating performance of all of CenterPoint Energy’s businesses as a whole.

Compensation Discussion and Analysis (continued)

Additional detail regarding specific performance objectives for our senior executive officers for 2017 and the specified threshold, target, maximum and exceptional achievement levels, and an example of the payout calculation are provided under “Executive Compensation Tables—Non-Equity Incentive Plan Awards.”

The scaling of the levels necessary to achieve threshold, target, maximum and exceptional performance is based on an assessment of expected business performance during the measurement period. Over a period of years, if we achieve expected business performance, the short-term incentive program should pay out at target levels. For a program to be motivational, there should be a high likelihood of achieving at least threshold performance in a given year.

Also in a given year, we believe there should be a reasonable likelihood of achieving target performance. To create additional incentive for exceptional performance, funding for short-term incentive goals related to core operating income, consolidated diluted earnings per share and controlling expenditures can reach 200% of target, but it is not expected that this level of funding would be triggered in most years.

Currently, retirement-eligible participants (age 55 with five years of service) who terminate employment after at least 90 days of service during the year will receive a short-term incentive payment, if any, under the short-term incentive plan based on the actual achievement of the applicable performance objectives and eligible earnings during the calendar year prior to the participant’s retirement date.

Long-Term Incentives. We provide a long-term incentive plan in which each of our named executive officers and certain other management-level employees participate. Our long-term incentive plan is designed to reward participants for sustained improvements in CenterPoint Energy’s financial performance and increases in the value of our common stock and dividends over an extended period.

The Committee authorizes grants annually at a regularly scheduled meeting during the first quarter of the year. Grants can be made from a variety of award types authorized under our long-term incentive plan. In recent years, we have emphasized performance-based shares.

We have also granted restricted stock unit awards, which we sometimes refer to as “stock awards” in this proxy statement, which vest based on continued service over a three-year period. Over a period of years, if we achieve expected business performance, we expect that the long-term incentive plan should pay out at target levels.

As a result of the three-year performance period, in any given year, our named executive officers generally have outstanding grants covering three concurrent periods.

On February 21, 2017, the Committee authorized awards as shown in the columns captioned “Estimated Future Payouts Under Equity Incentive Plan Awards” in the Grants of Plan-Based Awards for Fiscal Year 2017 table. The

Compensation Discussion and Analysis (continued)

Committee set a target percentage of each named executive officer’s base salary that was consistent with our objective of targeting the market median compensation level as described above. Vesting and payout of the performance shares will be determined based on the level of achievement of each performance objective over the three-year cycle of January 2017 through December 2019. For additional detail regarding the grants, see “Executive Compensation Tables—Equity Incentive Plan Awards—Long-term Incentive Plan Awards Granted in 2017.”

Long-term incentive compensation has been allocated between performance shares and stock awards on a 70% and 30% basis, respectively. This allocation provides what the Committee considers to be an appropriate blend of grants. The Compensation Committee reviews the allocation between performance shares and stock awards annually with its compensation consultant. In 2017, both Pearl Meyer and the successor compensation consultant, Meridian, confirmed that the allocation between performance shares and stock awards on a 70% and 30% basis, respectively, was market-based among both utility peers and the general industry. Pearl Meyer and Meridian also informed the Compensation Committee that they believed that the blend is sufficient to provide both an incentive and retention effect for our named executive officers. Our 2017 performance share awards were made in two separate grants, with the payout opportunity for each grant based on a different performance objective.

The first is based on total shareholder return over the three-year performance cycle as compared to that of the 18 companies, consisting of CenterPoint Energy and the other 17 companies listed under the heading “Total Shareholder Return” in the “Executive Compensation Tables” section (we refer to this group as the total-shareholder-return peer group or the TSR peer group). Forty percent of long-term compensation is based on the total shareholder return metric. The remaining 30% is based on achieving specified cumulative operating income goals over the three-year performance cycle.

Total shareholder return is a widely utilized metric that captures stock price appreciation and dividend yield. By comparing CenterPoint Energy’s total shareholder return to the other companies included in the TSR peer group, achievement for this metric is as follows:

We intend for the total shareholder return measure to provide a reasonable chance of threshold performance, thus enhancing the motivational effects of the plan, while requiring a rank in the top two companies for maximum payout. We believe the TSR peer group is a reasonable proxy for the universe of companies engaged in businesses similar to ours.

The Compensation Committee established a cumulative operating income target as the other performance objective for long-term incentive awards made in 2017. We calculate operating income based on generally accepted accounting principles, adjusted for certain factors to reflect what we consider to be our core operating income. We intend that this objective will provide a reasonable chance of achieving threshold performance, thus enhancing the motivational

Compensation Discussion and Analysis (continued)

effects of the plan, while requiring significant earnings growth for maximum payout. For a detailed description of the calculation of cumulative operating income, see “Executive Compensation Tables—Three-Year Cumulative Operating Income.”

If actual achievement for the performance objective under an award does not meet at least the threshold level, the Compensation Committee will not approve a distribution under the plan related to that award. If a performance objective meets or exceeds the threshold level, the threshold payout for these awards is 33% of target for the total shareholder return performance objective and 50% of target for the cumulative operating income objective, and the maximum payout opportunity is 200% of target.

The February 21, 2017 awards shown in the Grants of Plan-Based Awards for Fiscal Year 2017 table also include restricted stock unit awards. Vesting of these awards requires continuous service through the February 21, 2020 vesting date. The restricted stock units are intended to retain executive officers and reward them for absolute long-term stock appreciation while providing some value to the recipient even if the stock price declines. In this way, the restricted stock units help balance against the riskier nature of the performance share awards and promote retention.

Payments of both the performance share awards and the stock awards will be made in the form of shares equal in number to the shares covered by the award multiplied by the achievement percentage, if applicable, subject to withholding to satisfy tax obligations. Please refer to “Potential Payments Upon Change in Control or Termination” for the impact of a change in control or termination of employment on outstanding grants.

Both the performance shares and the stock awards accrue dividend equivalents over the performance cycle or vesting period, respectively, until they are delivered, at the same level as dividends earned by shareholders on shares of common stock outstanding. Dividend equivalents on the shares which are vested are paid in cash when the shares are delivered. Dividend equivalents are not paid with respect to unearned and unvested shares.

In addition, outstanding performance share awards and stock awards provide that “retirement eligible” participants (age 55 with five years of service) who terminate employment will receive a payment under the award, if any, based on the actual achievement of the applicable performance objective at the end of the performance period or vesting period, if applicable, with any such amount pro-rated for the period of their employment during the performance or vesting period, as applicable. Upon termination for cause, no benefits are payable under the award agreements.

Further, for awards made beginning in February 2018, subject to Compensation Committee approval for certain of our officers, including our named executive officers, a “retirement eligible” participant will vest in amounts that would otherwise be forfeited upon retirement due to the proration described above if: (1) the award was granted prior to the year of termination of employment; (2) the sum of the retirement eligible participant’s service and age is 65 or greater; (3) the retirement eligible participant provides at least six months’ written notice of his or her retirement; and (4) the retirement eligible participant submits a transition plan. Any such vesting for our named executive officers will be at the sole discretion of the Compensation Committee. This change reinforces the overall compensation philosophy and provides an opportunity for executives to become eligible for compensation that was previously awarded and was designated as total compensation, but was partially forfeited upon retirement.

The Compensation Committee approved this change to further align our executive compensation with both the short-term and long-term Company objectives and shareholder interests by supporting our strategic workforce planning and increasing employee engagement. Management believes that this change facilitates the development of robust succession and transition plans so that we may successfully effect a smooth transition and retirement from the organization.

Awards made beginning in February 2018 also include restrictive covenants that are beneficial to the Company by requiring forfeiture of unpaid awards and return of paid awards upon breach of confidentiality, non-solicitation and non-competition obligations.

Compensation Discussion and Analysis (continued)

The awards also provide for full vesting upon the participant’s death or termination of employment due to disability (as defined under our long-term disability plan). For performance shares, such vesting is at the target level of achievement. Awards prior to February 2018 provided for pro rata vesting upon the participant’s death or termination of employment due to disability, with such pro rata vesting based on the number of days employed in the performance cycle and the target level of achievement for performance shares and on the number of days employed in the vesting period for stock awards.

2017 Executive Compensation Program

For 2017 base salaries and short-term and long-term incentive targets for our named executive officers, please see “—Executive Summary—Our 2017 Executive Compensation Program.”

In 2017, the Compensation Committee structured the short-term incentive plan for 2017 for our senior executive officers to include an “umbrella” feature. Under this “umbrella” feature, maximum bonus amounts were initially determined based on achievement of one or more threshold performance goals which were established by the Committee on or before March 31, 2017. The threshold goal for 2017 was $425 million in core operating income. The Committee could exercise its negative discretion to determine the actual bonuses payable to our senior executive officers, in each case considering our actual performance with respect to the separate annual performance goals approved by the Committee in February 2017. This design was implemented to better enable us to make bonus awards intended to qualify as “performance-based” compensation within the meaning of Section 162(m) such that, if so qualified, payouts under the short-term incentive plan would be deductible for federal income tax purposes. However, under Tax Reform, the performance-based compensation exclusion under Section 162(m) was eliminated. As a result, effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017, payouts under the short-term incentive plan to our senior executive officers will not be deductible for federal income tax purposes to the extent the 162(m) deduction limit is exceeded regardless of any umbrella feature. As such, an umbrella feature was not adopted for the 2018 plan year.

2018 Executive Compensation Program

Consistent with our compensation philosophy of targeting the market median (50th percentile) of our peers for each major element of compensation, in February 2018, the Compensation Committee considered competitive market data provided by Meridian and made adjustments to the compensation for each of the named executive officers as described in “—Executive Summary—Actions Taken Regarding 2018 Executive Compensation Program.”

In February 2018, the Compensation Committee also determined that 2018 long-term incentive compensation awards would again be allocated between performance shares and restricted stock units on a 70% and 30% basis, respectively. The Compensation Committee determined that 2018 performance share awards would be made in two separate grants, with 40% of total long-term incentive compensation based on total shareholder return over the three-year performance cycle as compared to our 2018 peer group, which includes the companies listed under “Role of the Compensation Committee” in addition to Avangrid, Inc. and Edison International, and 30% of total long-term incentive compensation based on achieving a cumulative utility net income goal over the three-year performance cycle.

Compensation Discussion and Analysis (continued)

Thirty percent of long-term compensation is based on the achievement of a three-year cumulative utility net income goal. For the three-year performance cycle ending December 31, 2020, the cumulative utility net income performance goal reflects annual growth targets for each of 2019 and 2020 relative to the 2018 utility net income target from our approved five-year plan.

If performance for the goal meets or exceeds the threshold level, the Compensation Committee may approve a payout of 50% to 200% of the number of the target performance shares awarded. Similar to our cumulative operating income goal for the 2017–2019 performance cycle, consolidated net income will be further adjusted to account for the following: the net income from our midstream investments segment and any impact to income from the change in value of the ZENS-related securities and the effects of mergers, acquisitions and divestitures on such securities, among others. The three-year cumulative utility net income target will be updated if our financial plan changes as a result of any acquisitions, mergers and divestitures.

In February 2018, the Compensation Committee approved the performance objectives for our short-term incentive plan for fiscal year 2018. The performance goals approved for 2018 consist of the following:

The Compensation Committee may exercise its discretion to determine the actual bonuses payable to our senior executive officers, in each case considering our actual performance with respect to the performance goals. The Compensation Committee intends to not make any payments for the 2018 plan year if core operating income does not equal or exceed $725 million.

Compensation Discussion and Analysis (continued)

Equity Award Practices

In accordance with the terms of our long-term incentive plan, our practice is to price annual grants of equity awards at the closing market price for our common stock on the New York Stock Exchange on the grant date, which is the date the Compensation Committee approves the grants. Long-term incentive grants made other than at the time of the annual grants have also been provided for promotion and retention purposes or to new employees as an inducement for employment. These types of grants are approved by the Compensation Committee or, with respect to our non-executive officers, a Special Stock Award Committee, which includes our Chief Executive Officer. In February 2017, the Compensation Committee authorized 135,000 shares to be in a special stock award pool to be used for certain discretionary annual grants to non-officers and for any grants made at other times by the Special Stock Award Committee. We do not have a practice of timing grants in coordination with the release of material information or timing grants to enhance the value of stock options to optionees. We have not granted stock options since 2004.

Recoupment of Awards

The Board has implemented a policy for the recoupment of short-term and long-term incentive payments in the event an officer is found to have engaged in any fraud, intentional misconduct or gross negligence that leads to a restatement of all, or a portion of, our financial results. This policy permits us to pursue recovery of incentive payments if the payment would have been lower based on the restated financial results.

Executive Stock Ownership Guidelines

We believe that our Executive Stock Ownership Guidelines align the interests of our officers, including our named executive officers, with the interests of shareholders. The guidelines provide that our executives maintain common stock ownership as follows:

For purposes of the guidelines, the ownership requirement will be determined annually based on the executive’s current base salary. The base salary multiple is converted to a fixed number of shares (rounded to the nearest 100 shares) using the prior 365-calendar day average closing price of our common stock as reported by the New York Stock Exchange.

In addition to shares of CenterPoint Energy common stock owned outright, equivalent shares held in our savings plan, unvested stock awards, and shares held in trust are counted towards the guidelines. Unvested performance share awards do not count towards the guidelines for our officers. Until the designated ownership level is reached, the officer is expected to retain at least 50% of the after-tax shares delivered through the long-term incentive plan. Certain exclusions apply to the retention expectation, such as estate planning, gifts to charity, education and the purchase of a primary residence. Newly hired or recently promoted officers are given a reasonable period of time to comply with these guidelines. The Committee reviews our officers’ stock holdings annually to monitor compliance with these guidelines. We have also adopted a policy prohibiting directors and corporate and senior division officers from pledging shares to secure loans, subject to grandfathering of existing arrangements, or otherwise holding shares of our common stock in margin accounts.

Although we do not conduct formal benchmarking studies of ownership guidelines, the ownership guidelines and the administration of the program are reviewed annually by the Compensation Committee with advice from the Committee’s consultant.

Compensation Discussion and Analysis (continued)

Review of Tally Sheets

At least annually (with the most recent pro forma December 31 version presented in December 2017), the Compensation Committee reviews tally sheets for each of our then-current named executive officers that reflect all components of compensation, including base salary, short-term and long-term incentive compensation, other perquisites, imputed income, death benefits and benefits or payments that would be payable in connection with a change in control or termination of employment. Tally sheets are provided to the Committee to show how various compensation and benefits amounts are interrelated and how changes in one component of compensation impact other components and to enable Committee members to quantify amounts payable upon various termination scenarios.

Change in Control Plan

CenterPoint Energy has a change in control plan that is intended to help ensure that our officers, including our senior executive officers and our Executive Chairman, continue to give their full attention to our business needs in the event we were to become the subject of the types of change in control transactions described in the plan. The plan includes a “double trigger,” whereby to be eligible for benefits, the executive’s employment must be terminated within a set period before or after a change in control. The plan does not provide for any excise tax gross-up payments. For a more detailed discussion, refer to “Potential Payments upon Change in Control or Termination.”

Benefits

We have maintained a defined benefit plan for eligible employees since 1953 to help employees provide for retirement and to attract and retain employees. In addition, we maintain a benefit restoration plan as a nonqualified supplemental retirement plan to generally provide for benefits in excess of those available under the retirement plan due to annual limits imposed by the Internal Revenue Code. Changes in base salary and/or short-term incentive compensation affect benefits payable under the retirement plan and the benefit restoration plan. See “Executive Compensation Tables—Pension Benefits” for a description of the retirement plan and benefit restoration plan. The present value of the accumulated benefits under the plans for each senior executive officer is set forth in the Pension Benefits table.

We maintain a savings plan, which includes matching contributions, designed to encourage all employees to help provide for their own retirement and to attract and retain employees. We also have a nonqualified savings restoration plan that provides for matching contributions not available under the savings plan due to Internal Revenue Code limits. Base salary and short-term incentive compensation are included as eligible plan compensation under the provisions of the savings plan and the savings restoration plan. See “Executive Compensation Tables—Savings Plan and Savings Restoration Plans” for further information. Matching contributions to the plans for the senior executive officers are included in the footnote to the All Other Compensation column of the Summary Compensation Table.

Our senior executive officers may defer salary and short-term incentive compensation under our deferred compensation plan. For further information and a description of the plan, see “Executive Compensation Tables—Deferred Compensation Plans.” The above-market portion of the 2017 aggregate earnings is reported in the Change in Pension Value and Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Earnings column of the Summary Compensation Table.

We also have an executive life insurance plan providing endorsement split-dollar life insurance in the form of a death benefit for non-employee directors who were elected to the Board prior to January 1, 2001 (Mr. Carroll). The purpose of this plan is to assist the executive’s beneficiaries with the impact of estate taxes on deferred compensation plan distributions. Due to changes in tax laws, we froze entry into this plan effective January 1, 2002. See footnote 6(e) to the Summary Compensation Table for a description of the plan.

Compensation Discussion and Analysis (continued)

We also provide executives with the same health and welfare benefits provided to all other similarly situated employees, and at the same cost charged to all other eligible employees. Executives are also entitled to the same post-retirement health and welfare benefits as those provided to similarly situated retirees.

Tax Considerations

Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code generally limits the tax deductibility of compensation in excess of $1 million for our named executive officers. Prior to Tax Reform, this limit applied to our Chief Executive Officer and any of our three next-highest-paid executive officers (other than our Chief Financial Officer) unless the compensation met certain rules qualifying it as performance-based compensation. However, Tax Reform eliminated the exclusion for performance-based compensation under Section 162(m), and such compensation paid to our named executive officers is now subject to the $1 million deductibility limit effective as of 2018.

The Compensation Committee believes that, in establishing the compensation program for our executives, the potential deductibility of the compensation should be only one of a number of relevant factors taken into consideration. For that reason, the Compensation Committee may deem it appropriate to provide one or more of our executives with the opportunity to earn compensation, whether through incentive awards or otherwise, which may not be deductible by reason of Section 162(m) or other provisions of the Internal Revenue Code. The Compensation Committee believes it is important to maintain flexibility in structuring compensation at the requisite level to attract and retain the individuals essential to our financial success, even if all or part of that compensation may not be deductible by reason of Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code. In 2018, the Compensation Committee will review the application and impact of the Tax Reform, if any, on our compensation programs, and the Board will evaluate this impact in the context of the other competing aims of the Company’s compensation programs.

Unlike certain of our change in control agreements, which expired on December 31, 2014, our change in control plan described above for our named executive officers does not provide a gross-up payment to cover any excise tax an executive is determined to owe on an “excess parachute payment.” For additional discussion about our change in control plan, refer to “Potential Payments upon Change in Control or Termination.”

Our executive plans and agreements that are subject to Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code are intended to comply with Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code.

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION TABLES

The following tables show compensation information for: our President and Chief Executive Officer, our Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, our Executive Vice President for our Electric Division and our Executive Chairman for the one-year periods ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015 and our Senior Vice President and General Counsel for the one-year period ended December 31, 2017.

Summary Compensation Table for Fiscal Year 2017

Executive Compensation Tables (continued)

The maximum value at the grant date of stock awards for each of our named executive officers assuming the highest level of performance conditions is achieved is as follows:

Executive Compensation Tables (continued)