UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
FORM N-CSR
CERTIFIED SHAREHOLDER REPORT OF REGISTERED
MANAGEMENT INVESTMENT COMPANIES
Investment Company Act file number: 811-05398
ALLIANCEBERNSTEIN VARIABLE PRODUCTS SERIES FUND, INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in charter)
|
1345 Avenue of the Americas, New York, New York 10105 |
(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip code)
Joseph J. Mantineo
Alliance Bernstein L.P.
1345 Avenue of the Americas
New York, New York 10105
(Name and address of agent for service)
Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (800) 221-5672
Date of fiscal year end: December 31, 2012
Date of reporting period: June 30, 2012
ITEM 1. REPORTS TO STOCKHOLDERS.
AllianceBernstein
Variable Products Series Fund, Inc.
| | |
![LOGO](https://capedge.com/proxy/N-CSRS/0001193125-12-366259/g374714g16n16.jpg) | | AllianceBernstein Balanced Wealth Strategy Portfolio |
Semi-Annual Report
![LOGO](https://capedge.com/proxy/N-CSRS/0001193125-12-366259/g374714g81g54.jpg)
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT
Investment Products Offered
| Ø | | Are Not Bank Guaranteed |
AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (ABI) is the distributor of the AllianceBernstein family of mutual funds. ABI is a member of FINRA and is an affiliate of AllianceBernstein L.P., the manager of the funds.
You may obtain a description of the Fund’s proxy voting policies and procedures, and information regarding how the Fund voted proxies relating to portfolio securities during the most recent 12-month period ended June 30, without charge. Simply visit AllianceBernstein’s website at www.alliancebernstein.com or go to the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (the “Commission”) website at www.sec.gov, or call AllianceBernstein at (800) 227-4618.
The Fund files its complete schedule of portfolio holdings with the Commission for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year on Form N-Q. The Fund’s Forms N-Q are available on the Commission’s website at www.sec.gov. The Fund’s Forms N-Q may also be reviewed and copied at the Commission’s Public Reference Room in Washington, DC; information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling (800) SEC-0330.
AllianceBernstein® and the AB Logo are registered trademarks and service marks used by permission of the owner, AllianceBernstein L.P.
| | |
| | |
BALANCED WEALTH STRATEGY PORTFOLIO |
FUND EXPENSES (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
As a shareholder of the Fund, you incur two types of costs: (1) transaction costs, including sales charges (loads) on purchase payments, contingent deferred sales charges on redemptions and (2) ongoing costs, including management fees; distribution (12b-1) fees; and other Fund expenses. This example is intended to help you understand your ongoing costs (in dollars) of investing in the Fund and to compare these costs with the ongoing costs of investing in other mutual funds.
The Example is based on an investment of $1,000 invested at the beginning of the period and held for the entire period as indicated below.
Actual Expenses
The table below provides information about actual account values and actual expenses. You may use the information in this line, together with the amount you invested, to estimate the expenses that you paid over the period. Simply divide your account value by $1,000 (for example, an $8,600 account value divided by $1,000 = 8.6), then multiply the result by the number in the first line under the heading entitled “Expenses Paid During Period” to estimate the expenses you paid on your account during this period. The estimate of expenses does not include fees or other expenses of any variable insurance product. If such expenses were included, the estimate of expenses you paid during the period would be higher and your ending account value would be lower.
Hypothetical Example for Comparison Purposes
The table below provides information about hypothetical account values and hypothetical expenses based on the Fund’s actual expense ratio and an assumed annual rate of return of 5% before expenses, which is not the Fund’s actual return. The hypothetical account values and expenses may not be used to estimate the actual ending account balance or expenses you paid for the period. You may use this information to compare the ongoing costs of investing in the Fund and other funds by comparing this 5% hypothetical example with the 5% hypothetical examples that appear in the shareholder reports of other funds. The estimate of expenses does not include fees or other expenses of any variable insurance product. If such expenses were included, the estimate of expenses you paid during the period would be higher and your ending account value would be lower.
Please note that the expenses shown in the table are meant to highlight your ongoing costs only and do not reflect any transactional costs, such as sales charges (loads), or contingent deferred sales charges on redemptions. Therefore, the second line of each class’ table is useful in comparing ongoing costs only, and will not help you determine the relative total costs of owning different funds. In addition, if these transactional costs were included, your costs would have been higher.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Beginning Account Value January 1, 2012 | | | Ending Account Value June 30, 2012 | | | Expenses Paid During Period* | | | Annualized Expense Ratio* | |
Class A | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Actual | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,059.60 | | | $ | 3.33 | | | | 0.65 | % |
Hypothetical (5% return before expenses) | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,021.63 | | | $ | 3.27 | | | | 0.65 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class B | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Actual | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,058.30 | | | $ | 4.61 | | | | 0.90 | % |
Hypothetical (5% return before expenses) | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,020.39 | | | $ | 4.52 | | | | 0.90 | % |
* | | Expenses are equal to each classes’ annualized expense ratios, multiplied by the average account value over the period, multiplied by 182/366 (to reflect the one-half year period). |
1
| | |
BALANCED WEALTH STRATEGY PORTFOLIO |
TEN LARGEST HOLDINGS* | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
COMPANY | | U.S. $ VALUE | | | PERCENT OF NET ASSETS | |
Federal National Mortgage Association | | $ | 44,021,158 | | | | 8.1 | % |
U.S. Treasury Bonds & Notes | | | 31,711,556 | | | | 5.8 | |
Apple, Inc. | | | 8,292,800 | | | | 1.5 | |
Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp. Gold | | | 7,330,327 | | | | 1.4 | |
Exxon Mobil Corp. | | | 6,186,112 | | | | 1.1 | |
Federal Farm Credit Bank | | | 5,704,251 | | | | 1.1 | |
UnitedHealth Group, Inc. | | | 4,781,556 | | | | 0.9 | |
Pfizer, Inc. | | | 4,703,500 | | | | 0.9 | |
Residual Funding Corp. Principal Strip | | | 4,156,373 | | | | 0.8 | |
Citigroup, Inc. | | | 3,978,793 | | | | 0.7 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | $ | 120,866,426 | | | | 22.3 | % |
SECURITY TYPE BREAKDOWN**
June 30, 2012 (unaudited)
| | | | | | | | |
SECURITY TYPE | | U.S. $ VALUE | | | PERCENT OF TOTAL INVESTMENTS | |
Common Stocks | | $ | 343,081,416 | | | | 62.2 | % |
Corporates—Investment Grades | | | 52,772,226 | | | | 9.6 | |
Mortgage Pass-Throughs | | | 46,075,737 | | | | 8.4 | |
Governments—Treasuries | | | 31,711,556 | | | | 5.8 | |
Asset-Backed Securities | | | 20,739,415 | | | | 3.8 | |
Agencies | | | 18,446,790 | | | | 3.3 | |
Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securities | | | 14,402,091 | | | | 2.6 | |
Corporates—Non-Investment Grades | | | 2,346,600 | | | | 0.4 | |
Quasi-Sovereigns | | | 2,239,003 | | | | 0.4 | |
Inflation-Linked Securities | | | 1,197,471 | | | | 0.2 | |
Governments—Sovereign Bonds | | | 1,094,521 | | | | 0.2 | |
Local Governments—Municipal Bonds | | | 588,242 | | | | 0.1 | |
Other*** | | | 446,326 | | | | 0.1 | |
Short-Term Investments | | | 15,963,978 | | | | 2.9 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Investments | | $ | 551,105,372 | | | | 100.0 | % |
** | The Portfolios security type breakdown is expressed as a percentage of total investments (excluding security collateral lending) and may vary over time. The Portfolio also enters into derivative transactions, which may be used for hedging or investment purposes (see “Portfolio of Investments” section of the report for additional details). |
*** | “Other” represents less than 0.1% weightings in the following security types: Collateralized Mortgage Obligations, Preferred Stocks and Options Purchased—Puts. |
2
| | |
BALANCED WEALTH STRATEGY PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMMON STOCKS–63.2% | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
FINANCIALS–17.1% | | | | | | | | |
CAPITAL MARKETS–1.0% | | | | | | | | |
Affiliated Managers Group, Inc.(a) | | | 8,050 | | | $ | 881,072 | |
Blackstone Group LP | | | 74,917 | | | | 979,165 | |
Deutsche Bank AG | | | 11,900 | | | | 429,510 | |
Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (The) | | | 6,245 | | | | 598,646 | |
Macquarie Group Ltd. | | | 22,587 | | | | 609,936 | |
State Street Corp. | | | 20,500 | | | | 915,120 | |
UBS AG(a) | | | 85,862 | | | | 1,004,772 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 5,418,221 | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMMERCIAL BANKS–2.8% | | | | | | | | |
Australia & New Zealand Banking Group Ltd. | | | 6,900 | | | | 157,183 | |
Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria SA(b) | | | 64,841 | | | | 463,052 | |
Banco do Brasil SA | | | 36,400 | | | | 353,942 | |
Banco Santander SA | | | 69,572 | | | | 460,236 | |
Barclays PLC | | | 120,000 | | | | 306,630 | |
BB&T Corp. | | | 11,200 | | | | 345,520 | |
BNP Paribas SA | | | 12,383 | | | | 477,423 | |
CIT Group, Inc.(a) | | | 50,300 | | | | 1,792,692 | |
HSBC Holdings PLC | | | 197,120 | | | | 1,736,990 | |
Intesa Sanpaolo SpA | | | 233,640 | | | | 332,527 | |
Itau Unibanco Holding SA (ADR) | | | 13,650 | | | | 190,008 | |
KB Financial Group, Inc. | | | 8,875 | | | | 289,919 | |
KeyCorp | | | 15,100 | | | | 116,874 | |
Lloyds Banking Group PLC(a) | | | 739,400 | | | | 361,204 | |
Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Inc. | | | 130,000 | | | | 622,814 | |
National Australia Bank Ltd. | | | 26,400 | | | | 643,040 | |
PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. | | | 7,100 | | | | 433,881 | |
Regions Financial Corp. | | | 20,700 | | | | 139,725 | |
Societe Generale SA(a) | | | 18,089 | | | | 424,179 | |
Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group, Inc. | | | 17,100 | | | | 564,897 | |
Turkiye Vakiflar Bankasi Tao– Class D | | | 96,100 | | | | 200,372 | |
US Bancorp | | | 27,100 | | | | 871,536 | |
Wells Fargo & Co. | | | 104,900 | | | | 3,507,856 | |
Westpac Banking Corp. | | | 10,671 | | | | 233,014 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 15,025,514 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER FINANCE–0.1% | | | | | | | | |
Discover Financial Services | | | 7,800 | | | | 269,724 | |
Shriram Transport Finance Co., Ltd. | | | 23,765 | | | | 226,912 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 496,636 | |
| | | | | | | | |
DIVERSIFIED FINANCIAL SERVICES–1.6% | | | | | | | | |
Bank of America Corp. | | | 134,900 | | | | 1,103,482 | |
Citigroup, Inc. | | | 94,000 | | | | 2,576,540 | |
IG Group Holdings PLC | | | 107,132 | | | | 805,219 | |
ING Groep NV(a) | | | 89,110 | | | | 597,402 | |
JPMorgan Chase & Co. | | | 71,300 | | | | 2,547,549 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Leucadia National Corp. | | | 14,400 | | | $ | 306,288 | |
Moody’s Corp. | | | 9,800 | | | | 358,190 | |
ORIX Corp. | | | 3,580 | | | | 333,641 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 8,628,311 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INSURANCE–1.3% | | | | | | | | |
Admiral Group PLC(b) | | | 61,550 | | | | 1,148,167 | |
Aegon NV | | | 77,499 | | | | 359,408 | |
AIA Group Ltd. | | | 411,400 | | | | 1,420,999 | |
Allianz SE | | | 3,790 | | | | 381,216 | |
Aviva PLC | | | 64,630 | | | | 276,743 | |
Berkshire Hathaway, Inc.(a) | | | 7,600 | | | | 633,308 | |
Chubb Corp. (The) | | | 6,400 | | | | 466,048 | |
Muenchener Rueckversicherungs AG | | | 3,290 | | | | 464,232 | |
Prudential PLC | | | 63,680 | | | | 738,371 | |
Reinsurance Group of America, Inc.–Class A | | | 10,900 | | | | 579,989 | |
Suncorp Group Ltd. | | | 41,970 | | | | 350,704 | |
Travelers Cos., Inc. (The) | | | 6,300 | | | | 402,192 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 7,221,377 | |
| | | | | | | | |
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUSTS (REITs)–7.4% | | | | | | | | |
Allied Properties Real Estate Investment Trust | | | 9,976 | | | | 284,161 | |
American Tower Corp. | | | 3,980 | | | | 278,242 | |
AvalonBay Communities, Inc. | | | 6,180 | | | | 874,346 | |
Befimmo SCA Sicafi | | | 2,510 | | | | 142,611 | |
Boardwalk Real Estate Investment Trust | | | 3,280 | | | | 188,823 | |
Boston Properties, Inc. | | | 9,524 | | | | 1,032,116 | |
Brandywine Realty Trust | | | 17,450 | | | | 215,333 | |
British Land Co. PLC | | | 90,091 | | | | 721,403 | |
Canadian Real Estate Investment Trust | | | 11,560 | | | | 461,673 | |
Chartwell Seniors Housing Real Estate Investment Trust | | | 36,170 | | | | 344,611 | |
Cofinimmo | | | 1,280 | | | | 142,653 | |
Cominar Real Estate Investment Trust | | | 19,643 | | | | 463,051 | |
Commonwealth Property Office Fund | | | 188,430 | | | | 196,419 | |
Corio NV | | | 12,697 | | | | 559,015 | |
Corporate Office Properties Trust | | | 11,651 | | | | 273,915 | |
CubeSmart | | | 12,480 | | | | 145,642 | |
DDR Corp. | | | 18,195 | | | | 266,375 | |
Dexus Property Group | | | 195,410 | | | | 186,988 | |
Digital Realty Trust, Inc. | | | 7,140 | | | | 536,000 | |
Douglas Emmett, Inc. | | | 22,886 | | | | 528,667 | |
Duke Realty Corp. | | | 25,250 | | | | 369,660 | |
Dundee International Real Estate Investment Trust | | | 13,723 | | | | 133,981 | |
Dundee Real Estate Investment Trust | | | 12,646 | | | | 474,365 | |
EastGroup Properties, Inc. | | | 5,490 | | | | 292,617 | |
Entertainment Properties Trust | | | 3,110 | | | | 127,852 | |
Equity Residential | | | 19,010 | | | | 1,185,464 | |
Eurocommercial Properties NV | | | 9,900 | | | | 342,510 | |
3
| | |
BALANCED WEALTH STRATEGY PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
Extra Space Storage, Inc. | | | 22,200 | | | $ | 679,320 | |
Federal Realty Investment Trust | | | 4,060 | | | | 422,605 | |
FelCor Lodging Trust, Inc.(a) (b) | | | 143,520 | | | | 674,544 | |
Fonciere Des Regions | | | 1,810 | | | | 130,136 | |
General Growth Properties, Inc. | | | 23,210 | | | | 419,869 | |
Glimcher Realty Trust | | | 43,166 | | | | 441,156 | |
Goodman Group | | | 191,956 | | | | 726,830 | |
GPT Group | | | 32,670 | | | | 110,508 | |
Hammerson PLC | | | 35,690 | | | | 247,873 | |
HCP, Inc. | | | 19,330 | | | | 853,419 | |
Health Care REIT, Inc. | | | 11,270 | | | | 657,041 | |
Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc. | | | 11,200 | | | | 177,184 | |
InnVest Real Estate Investment Trust | | | 42,557 | | | | 196,462 | |
Japan Real Estate Investment Corp. | | | 38 | | | | 348,413 | |
Japan Retail Fund Investment Corp. | | | 98 | | | | 155,453 | |
Kilroy Realty Corp. | | | 10,156 | | | | 491,652 | |
Klepierre | | | 19,483 | | | | 640,286 | |
Land Securities Group PLC | | | 27,700 | | | | 320,931 | |
Lexington Realty Trust(b) | | | 30,310 | | | | 256,726 | |
Liberty Property Trust(b) | | | 7,220 | | | | 265,985 | |
Link REIT (The) | | | 161,268 | | | | 659,971 | |
LTC Properties, Inc. | | | 9,530 | | | | 345,748 | |
Macerich Co. (The) | | | 2,500 | | | | 147,625 | |
Mack-Cali Realty Corp. | | | 9,820 | | | | 285,467 | |
Mapletree Logistics Trust | | | 471,000 | | | | 366,220 | |
Mercialys SA | | | 16,810 | | | | 312,810 | |
Mirvac Group | | | 324,533 | | | | 426,430 | |
Morguard Real Estate Investment Trust | | | 7,350 | | | | 122,729 | |
National Retail Properties, Inc. | | | 8,070 | | | | 228,300 | |
Nippon Building Fund, Inc.(b) | | | 31 | | | | 299,729 | |
Northern Property Real Estate Investment Trust | | | 13,800 | | | | 446,355 | |
Omega Healthcare Investors, Inc. | | | 19,220 | | | | 432,450 | |
Orix JREIT, Inc. | | | 77 | | | | 346,116 | |
Pebblebrook Hotel Trust | | | 14,210 | | | | 331,235 | |
Post Properties, Inc. | | | 5,570 | | | | 272,651 | |
ProLogis, Inc. | | | 22,043 | | | | 732,489 | |
Public Storage | | | 6,300 | | | | 909,783 | |
Realty Income Corp.(b) | | | 4,770 | | | | 199,243 | |
Regency Centers Corp. | | | 12,770 | | | | 607,469 | |
RioCan Real Estate Investment Trust (Toronto) | | | 7,083 | | | | 192,711 | |
Segro PLC | | | 46,880 | | | | 159,720 | |
Senior Housing Properties Trust | | | 10,780 | | | | 240,610 | |
Simon Property Group, Inc. | | | 22,316 | | | | 3,473,709 | |
SL Green Realty Corp. | | | 5,533 | | | | 443,968 | |
Sovran Self Storage, Inc. | | | 7,222 | | | | 361,750 | |
Stockland | | | 171,880 | | | | 545,530 | |
Strategic Hotels & Resorts, Inc.(a) | | | 70,310 | | | | 454,203 | |
Suntec Real Estate Investment Trust | | | 205,000 | | | | 219,563 | |
Tanger Factory Outlet Centers | | | 22,400 | | | | 717,920 | |
UDR, Inc. | | | 14,470 | | | | 373,905 | |
Unibail-Rodamco SE | | | 8,389 | | | | 1,545,338 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Ventas, Inc. | | | 23,230 | | | $ | 1,466,278 | |
Vornado Realty Trust | | | 11,960 | | | | 1,004,401 | |
Weingarten Realty Investors | | | 8,260 | | | | 217,568 | |
Westfield Group | | | 147,870 | | | | 1,447,851 | |
Westfield Retail Trust | | | 268,650 | | | | 788,000 | |
Weyerhaeuser Co. | | | 13,340 | | | | 298,282 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 40,409,013 | |
| | | | | | | | |
REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT & DEVELOPMENT–2.8% | | | | | | | | |
Aeon Mall Co., Ltd. | | | 25,300 | | | | 539,104 | |
CapitaLand Ltd. | | | 182,000 | | | | 392,420 | |
Castellum AB | | | 22,274 | | | | 269,374 | |
CBRE Group, Inc.(a) | | | 34,273 | | | | 560,706 | |
Cheung Kong Holdings Ltd. | | | 11,000 | | | | 135,953 | |
China Overseas Land & Investment Ltd. | | | 108,000 | | | | 254,342 | |
City Developments Ltd. | | | 18,000 | | | | 160,450 | |
Citycon OYJ | | | 58,590 | | | | 165,800 | |
Daito Trust Construction Co., Ltd. | | | 6,800 | | | | 644,586 | |
Evergrande Real Estate Group Ltd.(b) | | | 1,405,000 | | | | 727,642 | |
Global Logistic Properties Ltd.(a) | | | 76,000 | | | | 126,522 | |
Great Eagle Holdings Ltd. | | | 103,000 | | | | 266,033 | |
GSW Immobilien AG(b) | | | 9,354 | | | | 319,792 | |
Hang Lung Group Ltd. | | | 21,000 | | | | 129,846 | |
Hang Lung Properties Ltd. | | | 509,000 | | | | 1,741,095 | |
Henderson Land Development Co., Ltd. | | | 31,000 | | | | 172,746 | |
Hongkong Land Holdings Ltd. | | | 70,000 | | | | 403,813 | |
Hufvudstaden AB–Class A(b) | | | 32,931 | | | | 352,998 | |
Kerry Properties Ltd. | | | 33,000 | | | | 141,145 | |
Mitsubishi Estate Co., Ltd. | | | 69,000 | | | | 1,237,915 | |
Mitsui Fudosan Co., Ltd. | | | 78,100 | | | | 1,515,361 | |
New World Development Ltd. | | | 657,958 | | | | 774,447 | |
Soho China Ltd. | | | 371,500 | | | | 286,123 | |
Sumitomo Realty & Development Co., Ltd. | | | 34,000 | | | | 836,277 | |
Sun Hung Kai Properties Ltd. | | | 108,708 | | | | 1,291,714 | |
Swire Pacific Ltd. | | | 12,000 | | | | 139,415 | |
Tokyu Land Corp. | | | 63,000 | | | | 312,717 | |
UOL Group Ltd. | | | 77,516 | | | | 303,857 | |
Wharf Holdings Ltd. | | | 149,000 | | | | 829,556 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 15,031,749 | |
| | | | | | | | |
THRIFTS & MORTGAGE FINANCE–0.1% | | | | | | | | |
Housing Development Finance Corp. | | | 44,040 | | | | 517,339 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 92,748,160 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY–9.6% | | | | | | | | |
COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT–1.3% | | | | | | | | |
Cisco Systems, Inc. | | | 115,700 | | | | 1,986,569 | |
F5 Networks, Inc.(a) | | | 15,790 | | | | 1,572,053 | |
4
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
Motorola Solutions, Inc. | | | 5,000 | | | $ | 240,550 | |
QUALCOMM, Inc. | | | 57,925 | | | | 3,225,264 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 7,024,436 | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMPUTERS & PERIPHERALS–2.2% | | | | | | | | |
Apple, Inc.(a) | | | 14,200 | | | | 8,292,800 | |
Dell, Inc.(a) | | | 6,800 | | | | 85,136 | |
EMC Corp./MA(a) | | | 39,049 | | | | 1,000,826 | |
Fujitsu Ltd. | | | 81,000 | | | | 387,642 | |
Hewlett-Packard Co. | | | 106,800 | | | | 2,147,748 | |
Wistron Corp. | | | 121,793 | | | | 150,344 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 12,064,496 | |
| | | | | | | | |
ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT, INSTRUMENTS & COMPONENTS–0.1% | | | | | | | | |
AU Optronics Corp. | | | 537,310 | | | | 218,357 | |
LG Display Co., Ltd.(a) | | | 15,010 | | | | 283,380 | |
TE Connectivity Ltd. | | | 9,100 | | | | 290,381 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 792,118 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INTERNET SOFTWARE & SERVICES–1.2% | | | | | | | | |
Baidu, Inc. (Sponsored ADR)(a) | | | 4,730 | | | | 543,855 | |
Google, Inc.–Class A(a) | | | 6,540 | | | | 3,793,658 | |
LinkedIn Corp.(a)(b) | | | 6,240 | | | | 663,125 | |
Telecity Group PLC(a) | | | 98,697 | | | | 1,243,888 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 6,244,526 | |
| | | | | | | | |
IT SERVICES–0.9% | | | | | | | | |
Cognizant Technology Solutions Corp.–Class A(a) | | | 41,800 | | | | 2,508,000 | |
Tata Consultancy Services Ltd. | | | 10,960 | | | | 253,045 | |
Visa, Inc.–Class A | | | 17,860 | | | | 2,208,032 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 4,969,077 | |
| | | | | | | | |
OFFICE ELECTRONICS–0.1% | | | | | | | | |
Konica Minolta Holdings, Inc. | | | 46,500 | | | | 366,325 | |
| | | | | | | | |
SEMICONDUCTORS & SEMICONDUCTOR EQUIPMENT–1.6% | | | | | | | | |
Advanced Semiconductor Engineering, Inc. | | | 349,685 | | | | 287,052 | |
Advanced Semiconductor Engineering, Inc. (ADR) | | | 56,525 | | | | 230,057 | |
Applied Materials, Inc. | | | 112,700 | | | | 1,291,542 | |
Broadcom Corp.–Class A(a) | | | 21,482 | | | | 726,092 | |
GCL-Poly Energy Holdings Ltd.(b) | | | 639,000 | | | | 142,102 | |
Intel Corp. | | | 76,200 | | | | 2,030,730 | |
Lam Research Corp.(a) | | | 18,900 | | | | 713,286 | |
Micron Technology, Inc.(a) | | | 143,100 | | | | 902,961 | |
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. | | | 290 | | | | 307,106 | |
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (Preference Shares) | | | 990 | | | | 653,550 | |
Sumco Corp.(a) | | | 15,900 | | | | 144,636 | |
Tokyo Electron Ltd. | | | 6,500 | | | | 304,817 | |
Xilinx, Inc. | | | 25,580 | | | | 858,720 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 8,592,651 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
SOFTWARE–2.2% | | | | | | | | |
ANSYS, Inc.(a) | | | 17,975 | | | $ | 1,134,402 | |
Aveva Group PLC | | | 6,940 | | | | 177,189 | |
CA, Inc. | | | 6,100 | | | | 165,249 | |
Citrix Systems, Inc.(a) | | | 30,260 | | | | 2,540,024 | |
Informatica Corp.(a) | | | 16,710 | | | | 707,836 | |
Intuit, Inc. | | | 33,010 | | | | 1,959,144 | |
Microsoft Corp. | | | 14,800 | | | | 452,732 | |
Nintendo Co., Ltd. | | | 1,400 | | | | 163,493 | |
Oracle Corp. | | | 87,930 | | | | 2,611,521 | |
Salesforce.com, Inc.(a) | | | 3,460 | | | | 478,380 | |
Temenos Group AG(a) | | | 12,755 | | | | 210,888 | |
TIBCO Software, Inc.(a) | | | 53,496 | | | | 1,600,600 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 12,201,458 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 52,255,087 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER DISCRETIONARY–9.3% | | | | | | | | |
AUTO COMPONENTS–0.7% | | | | | | | | |
BorgWarner, Inc.(a) (b) | | | 10,608 | | | | 695,779 | |
Cie Generale des Etablissements Michelin–Class B(b) | | | 6,970 | | | | 456,021 | |
GKN PLC | | | 124,100 | | | | 351,845 | |
Lear Corp. | | | 21,200 | | | | 799,876 | |
Magna International, Inc. (Toronto)–Class A(b) | | | 7,540 | | | | 297,793 | |
Magna International, Inc. (New York)–Class A | | | 12,200 | | | | 481,412 | |
NGK Spark Plug Co., Ltd. | | | 13,000 | | | | 171,710 | |
Sumitomo Rubber Industries Ltd. | | | 11,500 | | | | 149,787 | |
TRW Automotive Holdings Corp.(a) | | | 13,900 | | | | 510,964 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 3,915,187 | |
| | | | | | | | |
AUTOMOBILES–1.0% | | | | | | | | |
Bayerische Motoren Werke AG | | | 3,230 | | | | 233,748 | |
Ford Motor Co. | | | 68,100 | | | | 653,079 | |
General Motors Co.(a) | | | 59,600 | | | | 1,175,312 | |
Harley-Davidson, Inc. | | | 15,721 | | | | 718,921 | |
Honda Motor Co., Ltd.(b) | | | 16,100 | | | | 561,818 | |
Kia Motors Corp. | | | 3,100 | | | | 204,320 | |
Mazda Motor Corp.(a) | | | 215,000 | | | | 292,777 | |
Nissan Motor Co., Ltd. | | | 75,200 | | | | 714,079 | |
Renault SA | | | 7,830 | | | | 312,672 | |
Volkswagen AG (Preference Shares) | | | 3,920 | | | | 621,037 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 5,487,763 | |
| | | | | | | | |
DISTRIBUTORS–0.3% | | | | | | | | |
Imperial Holdings Ltd. | | | 6,780 | | | | 143,113 | |
Jardine Cycle & Carriage Ltd. | | | 2,000 | | | | 73,712 | |
Li & Fung Ltd. | | | 802,000 | | | | 1,550,777 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,767,602 | |
| | | | | | | | |
DIVERSIFIED CONSUMER SERVICES–0.3% | | | | | | | | |
Anhanguera Educacional Participacoes SA | | | 15,800 | | | | 201,384 | |
Apollo Group, Inc.–Class A(a) | | | 23,400 | | | | 846,846 | |
Estacio Participacoes SA | | | 23,400 | | | | 283,107 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,331,337 | |
| | | | | | | | |
5
| | |
BALANCED WEALTH STRATEGY PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
HOTELS, RESTAURANTS & LEISURE–1.3% | | | | | | | | |
Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc.–Class A(a) | | | 1,790 | | | $ | 680,110 | |
Intercontinental Hotels Group PLC | | | 24,960 | | | | 600,900 | |
Las Vegas Sands Corp. | | | 34,690 | | | | 1,508,668 | |
MGM Resorts International(a) | | | 101,700 | | | | 1,134,972 | |
Sands China Ltd. | | | 175,600 | | | | 564,909 | |
Shangri-La Asia Ltd. | | | 159,333 | | | | 304,394 | |
Sodexo | | | 8,700 | | | | 677,408 | |
Starbucks Corp. | | | 27,690 | | | | 1,476,431 | |
Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide, Inc. | | | 5,380 | | | | 285,355 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 7,233,147 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HOUSEHOLD DURABLES–0.5% | | | | | | | | |
MRV Engenharia e Participacoes SA | | | 41,500 | | | | 192,158 | |
Newell Rubbermaid, Inc. | | | 48,400 | | | | 877,976 | |
NVR, Inc.(a) | | | 500 | | | | 425,000 | |
Rossi Residencial SA | | | 98,200 | | | | 241,039 | |
Sharp Corp./Japan | | | 90,000 | | | | 458,545 | |
Sony Corp. | | | 14,800 | | | | 211,629 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,406,347 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INTERNET & CATALOG RETAIL–0.4% | | | | | | | | |
Amazon.com, Inc.(a) | | | 4,185 | | | | 955,645 | |
priceline.com, Inc.(a) | | | 1,490 | | | | 990,135 | |
Rakuten, Inc. | | | 19,800 | | | | 204,705 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,150,485 | |
| | | | | | | | |
LEISURE EQUIPMENT & PRODUCTS–0.0% | | | | | | | | |
Namco Bandai Holdings, Inc. | | | 15,900 | | | | 218,047 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MEDIA–2.4% | | | | | | | | |
CBS Corp.–Class B | | | 26,900 | | | | 881,782 | |
Comcast Corp.–Class A | | | 63,580 | | | | 2,032,652 | |
DIRECTV(a) | | | 18,300 | | | | 893,406 | |
Gannett Co., Inc. | | | 54,000 | | | | 795,420 | |
Informa PLC | | | 30,090 | | | | 179,546 | |
McGraw-Hill Cos., Inc. (The) | | | 12,600 | | | | 567,000 | |
News Corp.–Class A | | | 37,400 | | | | 833,646 | |
Time Warner Cable, Inc.– Class A | | | 17,800 | | | | 1,461,380 | |
Viacom, Inc.–Class B | | | 25,500 | | | | 1,199,010 | |
Walt Disney Co. (The) | | | 80,102 | | | | 3,884,947 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 12,728,789 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MULTILINE RETAIL–0.6% | | | | | | | | |
Dollar General Corp.(a) | | | 15,143 | | | | 823,628 | |
Don Quijote Co., Ltd.(b) | | | 16,000 | | | | 551,043 | |
Golden Eagle Retail Group Ltd.(b) | | | 125,000 | | | | 257,324 | |
Macy’s, Inc. | | | 28,900 | | | | 992,715 | |
Target Corp. | | | 6,800 | | | | 395,692 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 3,020,402 | |
| | | | | | | | |
SPECIALTY RETAIL–0.8% | | | | | | | | |
Belle International Holdings Ltd. | | | 216,000 | | | | 370,606 | |
GameStop Corp.–Class A(b) | | | 13,400 | | | | 246,024 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Home Depot, Inc. (The) | | | 10,300 | | | $ | 545,797 | |
L’Occitane International SA | | | 15,000 | | | | 41,630 | |
Lowe’s Cos., Inc. | | | 21,100 | | | | 600,084 | |
Nitori Holdings Co., Ltd. | | | 12,900 | | | | 1,219,810 | |
Shimamura Co., Ltd. | | | 1,000 | | | | 115,555 | |
Staples, Inc. | | | 11,700 | | | | 152,685 | |
Yamada Denki Co., Ltd. | | | 25,050 | | | | 1,282,519 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 4,574,710 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TEXTILES, APPAREL & LUXURY GOODS–1.0% | | | | | | | | |
Cie Financiere Richemont SA | | | 15,570 | | | | 854,945 | |
Coach, Inc. | | | 28,290 | | | | 1,654,399 | |
LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton SA | | | 2,066 | | | | 314,424 | |
PVH Corp. | | | 15,072 | | | | 1,172,451 | |
Ralph Lauren Corp. | | | 4,250 | | | | 595,255 | |
Trinity Ltd. | | | 236,000 | | | | 149,500 | |
VF Corp. | | | 6,530 | | | | 871,428 | |
Yue Yuen Industrial Holdings Ltd. | | | 9,000 | | | | 28,063 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 5,640,465 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 50,474,281 | |
| | | | | | | | |
ENERGY–7.2% | | | | | | | | |
ENERGY EQUIPMENT & SERVICES–2.5% | | | | | | | | |
AMEC PLC | | | 34,208 | | | | 539,270 | |
FMC Technologies, Inc.(a) | | | 17,620 | | | | 691,232 | |
Halliburton Co. | | | 73,580 | | | | 2,088,936 | |
Helmerich & Payne, Inc. | | | 21,200 | | | | 921,776 | |
National Oilwell Varco, Inc. | | | 25,620 | | | | 1,650,953 | |
Oceaneering International, Inc. | | | 31,442 | | | | 1,504,814 | |
Saipem SpA | | | 4,910 | | | | 218,663 | |
Schlumberger Ltd. | | | 53,855 | | | | 3,495,728 | |
Seadrill Ltd. | | | 10,460 | | | | 373,061 | |
Technip SA | | | 8,580 | | | | 894,173 | |
Transocean Ltd./Switzerland | | | 20,300 | | | | 908,019 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 13,286,625 | |
| | | | | | | | |
OIL, GAS & CONSUMABLE FUELS–4.7% | | | | | | | | |
Afren PLC(a) | | | 69,590 | | | | 113,122 | |
Anadarko Petroleum Corp. | | | 16,400 | | | | 1,085,680 | |
BG Group PLC | | | 59,840 | | | | 1,225,013 | |
BP PLC | | | 260,870 | | | | 1,742,142 | |
BP PLC (Sponsored ADR) | | | 40,000 | | | | 1,621,600 | |
Chevron Corp. | | | 22,900 | | | | 2,415,950 | |
China Petroleum & Chemical Corp.–Class H | | | 258,000 | | | | 230,581 | |
Devon Energy Corp. | | | 6,500 | | | | 376,935 | |
ENI SpA | | | 20,300 | | | | 431,276 | |
EOG Resources, Inc. | | | 13,755 | | | | 1,239,463 | |
Exxon Mobil Corp. | | | 72,293 | | | | 6,186,112 | |
Gazprom OAO (Sponsored ADR)(b) | | | 36,290 | | | | 344,755 | |
JX Holdings, Inc. | | | 57,500 | | | | 296,356 | |
LUKOIL OAO (London) (Sponsored ADR)(b) | | | 4,040 | | | | 226,563 | |
Marathon Oil Corp. | | | 31,500 | | | | 805,455 | |
6
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
Marathon Petroleum Corp. | | | 27,400 | | | $ | 1,230,808 | |
Nexen, Inc. (Toronto) | | | 21,652 | | | | 366,644 | |
Noble Energy, Inc. | | | 19,344 | | | | 1,640,758 | |
NovaTek OAO (Sponsored GDR)(c) | | | 820 | | | | 87,558 | |
Petroleo Brasileiro SA (Sponsored ADR)(b) | | | 26,000 | | | | 471,640 | |
PTT PCL | | | 20,800 | | | | 211,537 | |
Royal Dutch Shell PLC (Euronext Amsterdam)–Class A | | | 35,795 | | | | 1,208,105 | |
Suncor Energy, Inc. (New York) | | | 36,670 | | | | 1,061,596 | |
Total SA | | | 19,130 | | | | 861,020 | |
Valero Energy Corp. | | | 9,600 | | | | 231,840 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 25,712,509 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 38,999,134 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HEALTH CARE–6.5% | | | | | | | | |
BIOTECHNOLOGY–0.5% | | | | | | | | |
Biogen Idec, Inc.(a) | | | 5,430 | | | | 783,983 | |
Gilead Sciences, Inc.(a) | | | 36,305 | | | | 1,861,721 | |
Vertex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.(a) | | | 4,400 | | | | 246,048 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,891,752 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HEALTH CARE EQUIPMENT & SUPPLIES–0.5% | | | | | | | | |
Covidien PLC | | | 32,705 | | | | 1,749,717 | |
Stryker Corp. | | | 15,280 | | | | 841,928 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,591,645 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS & SERVICES–1.7% | | | | | | | | |
Aetna, Inc. | | | 6,900 | | | | 267,513 | |
Express Scripts Holding Co.(a) | | | 15,776 | | | | 880,774 | |
Health Net, Inc.(a) | | | 15,100 | | | | 366,477 | |
McKesson Corp. | | | 10,230 | | | | 959,063 | |
UnitedHealth Group, Inc. | | | 81,736 | | | | 4,781,556 | |
WellPoint, Inc. | | | 31,200 | | | | 1,990,248 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 9,245,631 | |
| | | | | | | | |
LIFE SCIENCES TOOLS & SERVICES–0.2% | | | | | | | | |
Eurofins Scientific | | | 3,074 | | | | 381,736 | |
Illumina, Inc.(a) (b) | | | 17,612 | | | | 711,349 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,093,085 | |
| | | | | | | | |
PHARMACEUTICALS–3.6% | | | | | | | | |
Abbott Laboratories | | | 1,700 | | | | 109,599 | |
Allergan, Inc./United States | | | 18,475 | | | | 1,710,231 | |
AstraZeneca PLC | | | 29,659 | | | | 1,325,391 | |
AstraZeneca PLC (Sponsored ADR) | | | 35,500 | | | | 1,588,625 | |
GlaxoSmithKline PLC | | | 25,430 | | | | 577,618 | |
Johnson & Johnson | | | 50,700 | | | | 3,425,292 | |
Merck & Co., Inc. | | | 64,800 | | | | 2,705,400 | |
Novartis AG | | | 13,994 | | | | 782,423 | |
Otsuka Holdings Co., Ltd. | | | 9,100 | | | | 279,326 | |
Perrigo Co. | | | 6,260 | | | | 738,242 | |
Pfizer, Inc. | | | 204,500 | | | | 4,703,500 | |
Roche Holding AG | | | 4,230 | | | | 730,660 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Roche Holding AG (Sponsored ADR) | | | 12,800 | | | $ | 553,216 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 19,229,523 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 35,051,636 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INDUSTRIALS–5.6% | | | | | | | | |
AEROSPACE & DEFENSE–0.9% | | | | | | | | |
Boeing Co. (The) | | | 22,720 | | | | 1,688,096 | |
General Dynamics Corp. | | | 5,800 | | | | 382,568 | |
Northrop Grumman Corp. | | | 4,100 | | | | 261,539 | |
Precision Castparts Corp. | | | 13,275 | | | | 2,183,605 | |
Safran SA | | | 12,500 | | | | 464,205 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 4,980,013 | |
| | | | | | | | |
AIR FREIGHT & LOGISTICS–0.2% | | | | | | | | |
Kuehne & Nagel International AG | | | 10,270 | | | | 1,088,036 | |
| | | | | | | | |
AIRLINES–0.2% | | | | | | | | |
Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd. | | | 52,000 | | | | 84,440 | |
Delta Air Lines, Inc.(a) | | | 75,900 | | | | 831,105 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 915,545 | |
| | | | | | | | |
BUILDING PRODUCTS–0.2% | | | | | | | | |
Asahi Glass Co., Ltd.(b) | | | 58,000 | | | | 391,279 | |
Fortune Brands Home & Security, Inc.(a) | | | 17,300 | | | | 385,271 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 776,550 | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMMERCIAL SERVICES & SUPPLIES–0.2% | | | | | | | | |
Edenred | | | 7,299 | | | | 206,922 | |
Serco Group PLC | | | 125,675 | | | | 1,055,423 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,262,345 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSTRUCTION & ENGINEERING–0.1% | | | | | | | | |
Bouygues SA | | | 19,525 | | | | 523,926 | |
| | | | | | | | |
ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT–0.8% | | | | | | | | |
AMETEK, Inc. | | | 14,108 | | | | 704,130 | |
Emerson Electric Co. | | | 40,390 | | | | 1,881,366 | |
Rockwell Automation, Inc. | | | 10,589 | | | | 699,509 | |
Roper Industries, Inc. | | | 7,280 | | | | 717,663 | |
Sumitomo Electric Industries Ltd. | | | 36,600 | | | | 456,068 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 4,458,736 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INDUSTRIAL CONGLOMERATES–1.5% | | | | | | | | |
Cookson Group PLC | | | 12,810 | | | | 118,536 | |
Danaher Corp. | | | 64,359 | | | | 3,351,817 | |
General Electric Co. | | | 165,600 | | | | 3,451,104 | |
Hopewell Holdings Ltd. | | | 15,900 | | | | 45,312 | |
Jardine Matheson Holdings Ltd. | | | 2,400 | | | | 116,905 | |
Jardine Strategic Holdings Ltd. | | | 4,000 | | | | 122,961 | |
Keppel Corp., Ltd. | | | 137,500 | | | | 1,126,470 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 8,333,105 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MACHINERY–0.6% | | | | | | | | |
Cummins, Inc. | | | 8,600 | | | | 833,426 | |
Dover Corp. | | | 21,920 | | | | 1,175,131 | |
Flowserve Corp. | | | 6,949 | | | | 797,398 | |
7
| | |
BALANCED WEALTH STRATEGY PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
IHI Corp. | | | 32,000 | | | $ | 68,448 | |
Parker Hannifin Corp. | | | 1,900 | | | | 146,072 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 3,020,475 | |
| | | | | | | | |
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES–0.7% | | | | | | | | |
Bureau Veritas SA | | | 9,893 | | | | 880,086 | |
Capita PLC | | | 158,430 | | | | 1,627,967 | |
Hays PLC | | | 57,154 | | | | 66,008 | |
Intertek Group PLC | | | 33,532 | | | | 1,404,852 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 3,978,913 | |
| | | | | | | | |
ROAD & RAIL–0.1% | | | | | | | | |
DSV A/S | | | 9,495 | | | | 188,267 | |
East Japan Railway Co. | | | 1,700 | | | | 106,745 | |
Localiza Rent a Car SA | | | 14,500 | | | | 219,106 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 514,118 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TRADING COMPANIES & DISTRIBUTORS–0.1% | | | | | | | | |
Mitsubishi Corp. | | | 18,000 | | | | 363,857 | |
Mitsui & Co., Ltd. | | | 13,400 | | | | 199,122 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 562,979 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 30,414,741 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER STAPLES–3.6% | | | | | | | | |
BEVERAGES–0.1% | | | | | | | | |
Asahi Group Holdings Ltd. | | | 14,500 | | | | 311,523 | |
| | | | | | | | |
FOOD & STAPLES RETAILING–1.0% | | | | | | | | |
CVS Caremark Corp. | | | 21,800 | | | | 1,018,714 | |
Delhaize Group SA | | | 4,637 | | | | 169,862 | |
Empire Co., Ltd. | | | 1,900 | | | | 100,141 | |
Jeronimo Martins SGPS SA | | | 40,421 | | | | 683,389 | |
Koninklijke Ahold NV | | | 36,190 | | | | 448,296 | |
Kroger Co. (The) | | | 72,800 | | | | 1,688,232 | |
Olam International Ltd.(b) | | | 790,412 | | | | 1,144,790 | |
Sugi Holdings Co., Ltd. | | | 12,300 | | | | 403,524 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 5,656,948 | |
| | | | | | | | |
FOOD PRODUCTS–0.5% | | | | | | | | |
Archer-Daniels-Midland Co. | | | 11,100 | | | | 327,672 | |
Hershey Co. (The) | | | 13,890 | | | | 1,000,497 | |
Nestle SA | | | 7,690 | | | | 458,923 | |
Tyson Foods, Inc.–Class A | | | 19,200 | | | | 361,536 | |
Unilever PLC | | | 20,400 | | | | 684,904 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,833,532 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HOUSEHOLD PRODUCTS–0.5% | | | | | | | | |
Procter & Gamble Co. (The) | | | 30,800 | | | | 1,886,500 | |
Reckitt Benckiser Group PLC | | | 12,830 | | | | 678,155 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,564,655 | |
| | | | | | | | |
PERSONAL PRODUCTS–0.2% | | | | | | | | |
Estee Lauder Cos., Inc. (The)– Class A | | | 14,480 | | | | 783,658 | |
Natura Cosmeticos SA | | | 6,400 | | | | 149,763 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 933,421 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TOBACCO–1.3% | | | | | | | | |
Altria Group, Inc. | | | 45,300 | | | | 1,565,115 | |
British American Tobacco PLC | | | 34,952 | | | | 1,776,959 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Imperial Tobacco Group PLC | | | 12,570 | | | $ | 484,300 | |
Japan Tobacco, Inc. | | | 21,400 | | | | 633,989 | |
Lorillard, Inc. | | | 12,100 | | | | 1,596,595 | |
Philip Morris International, Inc. | | | 14,665 | | | | 1,279,668 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 7,336,626 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 19,636,705 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MATERIALS–1.5% | | | | | | | | |
CHEMICALS–0.9% | | | | | | | | |
Agrium, Inc. (Toronto)(b) | | | 2,930 | | | | 259,674 | |
Air Water, Inc. | | | 14,000 | | | | 169,748 | |
Denki Kagaku Kogyo KK | | | 30,000 | | | | 104,871 | |
Filtrona PLC | | | 56,720 | | | | 425,452 | |
Incitec Pivot Ltd. | | | 6,901 | | | | 20,388 | |
Koninklijke DSM NV | | | 13,018 | | | | 641,780 | |
LyondellBasell Industries NV | | | 23,800 | | | | 958,426 | |
Monsanto Co. | | | 17,738 | | | | 1,468,352 | |
OCI Co., Ltd. | | | 750 | | | | 150,096 | |
Orica Ltd. | | | 10,056 | | | | 256,144 | |
PPG Industries, Inc. | | | 5,000 | | | | 530,600 | |
Teijin Ltd. | | | 35,000 | | | | 106,545 | |
Ube Industries Ltd./Japan | | | 41,000 | | | | 95,366 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 5,187,442 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS–0.0% | | | | | | | | |
Taiheiyo Cement Corp. | | | 87,000 | | | | 199,772 | |
| | | | | | | | |
METALS & MINING–0.6% | | | | | | | | |
Anglo American PLC | | | 15,460 | | | | 508,098 | |
Dowa Holdings Co., Ltd. | | | 19,000 | | | | 117,823 | |
Exxaro Resources Ltd. | | | 6,700 | | | | 156,455 | |
Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold, Inc. | | | 17,550 | | | | 597,929 | |
Goldcorp, Inc. | | | 4,010 | | | | 150,971 | |
KGHM Polska Miedz SA | | | 4,600 | | | | 201,317 | |
OneSteel Ltd. | | | 96,600 | | | | 87,115 | |
Rio Tinto PLC | | | 12,910 | | | | 613,531 | |
ThyssenKrupp AG | | | 2,500 | | | | 40,724 | |
Vale SA (Sponsored ADR) (Local Preference Shares)(b) | | | 22,700 | | | | 442,877 | |
Xstrata PLC | | | 9,210 | | | | 115,801 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 3,032,641 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 8,419,855 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES–1.4% | | | | | | | | |
DIVERSIFIED TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES–1.1% | | | | | | | | |
AT&T, Inc. | | | 64,700 | | | | 2,307,202 | |
CenturyLink, Inc. | | | 51,100 | | | | 2,017,939 | |
Nippon Telegraph & Telephone Corp. | | | 20,500 | | | | 955,925 | |
Telecom Italia SpA (ordinary shares) | | | 463,414 | | | | 457,918 | |
Telecom Italia SpA (savings shares) | | | 148,800 | | | | 120,583 | |
Vivendi SA | | | 20,934 | | | | 388,972 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 6,248,539 | |
| | | | | | | | |
8
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES–0.3% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
NTT DoCoMo, Inc. | | | | | | | 290 | | | $ | 482,561 | |
Vodafone Group PLC | | | | | | | 343,503 | | | | 965,503 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 1,448,064 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 7,696,603 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
UTILITIES–1.3% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
ELECTRIC UTILITIES–0.7% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
American Electric Power Co., Inc. | | | | | | | 21,200 | | | | 845,880 | |
E.ON AG | | | | | | | 23,166 | | | | 500,597 | |
Edison International | | | | | | | 17,200 | | | | 794,640 | |
EDP–Energias de Portugal SA | | | | | | | 91,200 | | | | 215,743 | |
Great Plains Energy, Inc. | | | | | | | 28,900 | | | | 618,749 | |
NV Energy, Inc. | | | | | | | 56,200 | | | | 987,996 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 3,963,605 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
GAS UTILITIES–0.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Atmos Energy Corp. | | | | | | | 17,100 | | | | 599,697 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
INDEPENDENT POWER PRODUCERS & ENERGY TRADERS–0.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
APR Energy PLC | | | | | | | 31,534 | | | | 335,832 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
MULTI-UTILITIES–0.4% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CenterPoint Energy, Inc. | | | | | | | 33,000 | | | | 682,110 | |
DTE Energy Co. | | | | | | | 7,800 | | | | 462,774 | |
National Grid PLC | | | | | | | 35,730 | | | | 378,667 | |
Public Service Enterprise Group, Inc. | | | | | | | 6,900 | | | | 224,250 | |
Veolia Environnement SA | | | | | | | 13,520 | | | | 171,206 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 1,919,007 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 6,818,141 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
OTHER INSTRUMENTS–0.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
OTHER INSTRUMENTS–0.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Retail Opportunity Investments Corp.(b) | | | | | | | 47,021 | | | | 567,073 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Common Stocks (cost $318,706,388) | | | | | | | | | | | 343,081,416 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Principal Amount (000) | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
CORPORATES–INVESTMENT GRADES–9.7% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
INDUSTRIAL–4.7% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
BASIC–0.5% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Alcoa, Inc. 5.40%, 4/15/21 | | | US$ | | | | 285 | | | | 283,794 | |
AngloGold Ashanti Holdings PLC 5.375%, 4/15/20 | | | | | | | 290 | | | | 298,042 | |
ArcelorMittal 6.125%, 6/01/18 | | | | | | | 279 | | | | 282,891 | |
ArcelorMittal USA LLC 6.50%, 4/15/14 | | | | | | | 105 | | | | 111,355 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
BHP Billiton Finance USA Ltd. 7.25%, 3/01/16 | | US$ | | | | | 203 | | | $ | 244,598 | |
Dow Chemical Co. (The) 4.125%, 11/15/21 | | | | | | | 165 | | | | 176,979 | |
5.25%, 11/15/41 | | | | | | | 160 | | | | 176,870 | |
8.55%, 5/15/19 | | | | | | | 253 | | | | 336,509 | |
Eastman Chemical Co. 2.40%, 6/01/17 | | | | | | | 128 | | | | 129,356 | |
3.60%, 8/15/22 | | | | | | | 137 | | | | 139,730 | |
International Paper Co. 4.75%, 2/15/22 | | | | | | | 135 | | | | 147,358 | |
7.95%, 6/15/18 | | | | | | | 190 | | | | 239,425 | |
Packaging Corp. of America 5.75%, 8/01/13 | | | | | | | 30 | | | | 31,643 | |
PPG Industries, Inc. 5.75%, 3/15/13 | | | | | | | 129 | | | | 133,504 | |
Teck Resources Ltd. 4.75%, 1/15/22 | | | | | | | 204 | | | | 219,199 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 2,951,253 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
CAPITAL GOODS–0.2% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
ADT Corp. (The) 3.50%, 7/15/22(c) | | | | | | | 110 | | | | 110,369 | |
Embraer SA 5.15%, 6/15/22 | | | | | | | 130 | | | | 133,445 | |
Holcim US Finance Sarl & Cie SCS 6.00%, 12/30/19(c) | | | | | | | 40 | | | | 41,938 | |
Owens Corning 6.50%, 12/01/16 | | | | | | | 178 | | | | 197,922 | |
Republic Services, Inc. 3.80%, 5/15/18 | | | | | | | 17 | | | | 18,187 | |
5.25%, 11/15/21 | | | | | | | 165 | | | | 189,434 | |
5.50%, 9/15/19 | | | | | | | 233 | | | | 269,615 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 960,910 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
COMMUNICATIONS–MEDIA–1.0% | | | | | | | | | |
CBS Corp. 3.375%, 3/01/22 | | | | | | | 305 | | | | 303,870 | |
5.75%, 4/15/20 | | | | | | | 250 | | | | 290,769 | |
8.875%, 5/15/19 | | | | | | | 190 | | | | 251,253 | |
Comcast Corp. 5.15%, 3/01/20 | | | | | | | 740 | | | | 859,055 | |
DirecTV Holdings LLC/DirecTV Financing Co., Inc. 3.80%, 3/15/22 | | | | | | | 215 | | | | 217,428 | |
4.60%, 2/15/21 | | | | | | | 255 | | | | 271,202 | |
4.75%, 10/01/14 | | | | | | | 155 | | | | 166,381 | |
Globo Comunicacao e Participacoes SA 5.307%, 5/11/22(c) (d) | | | | | | | 221 | | | | 234,260 | |
Interpublic Group of Cos., Inc. (The) 4.00%, 3/15/22 | | | | | | | 47 | | | | 47,716 | |
News America, Inc. 6.15%, 3/01/37-2/15/41 | | | | | | | 352 | | | | 403,552 | |
9.25%, 2/01/13 | | | | | | | 144 | | | | 150,463 | |
Omnicom Group, Inc. 3.625%, 5/01/22 | | | | | | | 165 | | | | 167,657 | |
Reed Elsevier Capital, Inc. 8.625%, 1/15/19 | | | | | | | 435 | | | | 551,867 | |
9
| | |
BALANCED WEALTH STRATEGY PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Company | | Principal Amount (000) | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Time Warner Cable, Inc. 5.00%, 2/01/20 | | US$ | | | | | 157 | | | $ | 176,316 | |
7.50%, 4/01/14 | | | | | | | 145 | | | | 160,760 | |
Time Warner Entertainment Co. LP 8.375%, 3/15/23 | | | | | | | 311 | | | | 421,267 | |
Virgin Media Secured Finance PLC 5.25%, 1/15/21 | | | | | | | 200 | | | | 221,567 | |
WPP Finance 2010 4.75%, 11/21/21 | | | | | | | 77 | | | | 80,800 | |
WPP Finance UK 8.00%, 9/15/14 | | | | | | | 350 | | | | 394,722 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 5,370,905 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
COMMUNICATIONS– TELECOMMUNICATIONS–0.6% | | | | | | | | | |
American Tower Corp. 5.05%, 9/01/20 | | | | | | | 380 | | | | 399,142 | |
AT&T Corp. 8.00%, 11/15/31 | | | | | | | 15 | | | | 22,224 | |
AT&T, Inc. 4.45%, 5/15/21 | | | | | | | 251 | | | | 284,135 | |
5.35%, 9/01/40 | | | | | | | 328 | | | | 376,433 | |
BellSouth Corp. 5.20%, 9/15/14 | | | | | | | 94 | | | | 102,298 | |
British Telecommunications PLC 2.00%, 6/22/15 | | | | | | | 200 | | | | 202,748 | |
5.95%, 1/15/18 | | | | | | | 121 | | | | 141,738 | |
Deutsche Telekom International Finance BV 4.875%, 3/06/42(c) | | | | | | | 490 | | | | 465,521 | |
Telecom Italia Capital SA 6.00%, 9/30/34 | | | | | | | 65 | | | | 49,888 | |
6.175%, 6/18/14 | | | | | | | 305 | | | | 307,288 | |
6.375%, 11/15/33 | | | | | | | 60 | | | | 47,100 | |
7.175%, 6/18/19 | | | | | | | 170 | | | | 169,150 | |
Telefonica Emisiones SAU 5.462%, 2/16/21 | | | | | | | 185 | | | | 161,097 | |
United States Cellular Corp. 6.70%, 12/15/33 | | | | | | | 135 | | | | 139,570 | |
Vodafone Group PLC 6.15%, 2/27/37 | | | | | | | 375 | | | | 479,297 | |
7.875%, 2/15/30 | | | | | | | 100 | | | | 141,396 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 3,489,025 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER CYCLICAL–AUTOMOTIVE–0.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Ford Motor Credit Co. LLC 3.00%, 6/12/17 | | | | | | | 385 | | | | 382,879 | |
Harley-Davidson Funding Corp. 5.75%, 12/15/14(c) | | | | | | | 341 | | | | 369,261 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 752,140 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER CYCLICAL–ENTERTAINMENT–0.2% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Time Warner, Inc. 4.70%, 1/15/21 | | | | | | | 123 | | | | 137,062 | |
7.625%, 4/15/31 | | | | | | | 275 | | | | 355,201 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. 8.375%, 7/01/13 | | US$ | | | | | 225 | | | $ | 240,321 | |
Viacom, Inc. 5.625%, 9/15/19 | | | | | | | 473 | | | | 557,815 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 1,290,399 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER CYCLICAL–OTHER–0.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Marriott International, Inc./DE 3.00%, 3/01/19 | | | | | | | 242 | | | | 244,678 | |
Series J 5.625%, 2/15/13 | | | | | | | 216 | | | | 221,912 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 466,590 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER CYCLICAL–RETAILERS–0.2% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CVS Caremark Corp. | | | | | | | | | | | | |
6.125%, 8/15/16 | | | | | | | 100 | | | | 116,972 | |
6.60%, 3/15/19 | | | | | | | 195 | | | | 243,175 | |
Macy’s Retail Holdings, Inc. 3.875%, 1/15/22 | | | | | | | 475 | | | | 499,402 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 859,549 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER NON-CYCLICAL–0.3% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Ahold Finance USA LLC 6.875%, 5/01/29 | | | | | | | 420 | | | | 522,166 | |
Bunge Ltd. Finance Corp. 5.10%, 7/15/15 | | | | | | | 69 | | | | 73,733 | |
5.875%, 5/15/13 | | | | | | | 180 | | | | 186,805 | |
8.50%, 6/15/19 | | | | | | | 153 | | | | 191,012 | |
Cadbury Schweppes US Finance LLC 5.125%, 10/01/13(c) | | | | | | | 260 | | | | 272,355 | |
Delhaize Group SA 5.875%, 2/01/14 | | | | | | | 105 | | | | 110,568 | |
Whirlpool Corp. 8.60%, 5/01/14 | | | | | | | 45 | | | | 50,101 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 1,406,740 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
ENERGY–0.7% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Anadarko Petroleum Corp. 5.95%, 9/15/16 | | | | | | | 432 | | | | 490,224 | |
6.45%, 9/15/36 | | | | | | | 109 | | | | 126,018 | |
Canadian Natural Resources Ltd. 5.15%, 2/01/13 | | | | | | | 100 | | | | 102,529 | |
ConocoPhillips Holding Co. 6.95%, 4/15/29 | | | | | | | 66 | | | | 90,542 | |
Encana Corp. 3.90%, 11/15/21 | | | | | | | 580 | | | | 573,700 | |
Marathon Petroleum Corp. 3.50%, 3/01/16 | | | | | | | 67 | | | | 70,232 | |
5.125%, 3/01/21 | | | | | | | 318 | | | | 356,035 | |
Nabors Industries, Inc. 9.25%, 1/15/19 | | | | | | | 269 | | | | 349,247 | |
Noble Energy, Inc. 8.25%, 3/01/19 | | | | | | | 303 | | | | 387,357 | |
Noble Holding International Ltd. 4.90%, 8/01/20 | | | | | | | 36 | | | | 39,095 | |
10
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Company | | Principal Amount (000) | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Phillips 66 4.30%, 4/01/22(c) | | US$ | | | | | 490 | | | $ | 515,873 | |
Southwestern Energy Co. 4.10%, 3/15/22(c) | | | | | | | 135 | | | | 136,828 | |
Valero Energy Corp. 6.125%, 2/01/20 | | | | | | | 275 | | | | 317,503 | |
Weatherford International Ltd./Bermuda 5.125%, 9/15/20 | | | | | | | 175 | | | | 187,871 | |
9.625%, 3/01/19 | | | | | | | 285 | | | | 371,424 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 4,114,478 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
OTHER INDUSTRIAL–0.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Noble Group Ltd. 6.75%, 1/29/20(c) | | | | | | | 445 | | | | 429,425 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
SERVICES–0.0% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Western Union Co. (The) 5.93%, 10/01/16 | | | | | | | 90 | | | | 104,419 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
TECHNOLOGY–0.3% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Agilent Technologies, Inc. 5.00%, 7/15/20 | | | | | | | 71 | | | | 80,414 | |
Hewlett-Packard Co. 4.65%, 12/09/21 | | | | | | | 214 | | | | 224,315 | |
Intel Corp. 4.80%, 10/01/41 | | | | | | | 265 | | | | 303,487 | |
Motorola Solutions, Inc. 7.50%, 5/15/25 | | | | | | | 35 | | | | 43,262 | |
Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson 4.125%, 5/15/22 | | | | | | | 495 | | | | 496,369 | |
Xerox Corp. 2.95%, 3/15/17 | | | | | | | 91 | | | | 92,031 | |
8.25%, 5/15/14 | | | | | | | 280 | | | | 312,208 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 1,552,086 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
TRANSPORTATION–AIRLINES–0.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Southwest Airlines Co. 5.25%, 10/01/14 | | | | | | | 307 | | | | 332,275 | |
5.75%, 12/15/16 | | | | | | | 155 | | | | 179,092 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 511,367 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
TRANSPORTATION–RAILROADS–0.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CSX Corp. 4.75%, 5/30/42 | | | | | | | 465 | | | | 479,439 | |
5.50%, 8/01/13 | | | | | | | 35 | | | | 36,747 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 516,186 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
TRANSPORTATION– SERVICES–0.2% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Asciano Finance Ltd. 3.125%, 9/23/15(c) | | | | | | | 470 | | | | 467,761 | |
Con-way, Inc. 6.70%, 5/01/34 | | | | | | | 291 | | | | 289,084 | |
Ryder System, Inc. 5.85%, 11/01/16 | | | | | | | 127 | | | | 144,206 | |
7.20%, 9/01/15 | | | | | | | 127 | | | | 145,397 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 1,046,448 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 25,821,920 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS–3.7% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
BANKING–2.3% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Bank of America Corp. 3.875%, 3/22/17(b) | | US$ | | | | | 360 | | | $ | 366,731 | |
5.70%, 1/24/22 | | | | | | | 90 | | | | 99,117 | |
5.875%, 1/05/21-2/07/42 | | | | | | | 459 | | | | 502,064 | |
7.375%, 5/15/14 | | | | | | | 340 | | | | 365,648 | |
Series L 5.65%, 5/01/18 | | | | | | | 90 | | | | 96,236 | |
Barclays Bank PLC 5.125%, 1/08/20 | | | | | | | 345 | | | | 374,382 | |
Bear Stearns Cos. LLC (The) 5.55%, 1/22/17 | | | | | | | 290 | | | | 313,002 | |
5.70%, 11/15/14 | | | | | | | 190 | | | | 205,597 | |
Citigroup, Inc. 4.50%, 1/14/22(b) | | | | | | | 395 | | | | 407,977 | |
5.375%, 8/09/20 | | | | | | | 232 | | | | 250,698 | |
5.50%, 4/11/13 | | | | | | | 230 | | | | 236,504 | |
6.50%, 8/19/13 | | | | | | | 260 | | | | 272,418 | |
8.50%, 5/22/19 | | | | | | | 190 | | | | 234,656 | |
Compass Bank 5.50%, 4/01/20 | | | | | | | 314 | | | | 296,745 | |
Countrywide Financial Corp. 6.25%, 5/15/16 | | | | | | | 92 | | | | 95,753 | |
DNB Bank ASA 3.20%, 4/03/17(c) | | | | | | | 485 | | | | 490,538 | |
Fifth Third Bancorp 3.50%, 3/15/22 | | | | | | | 188 | | | | 189,988 | |
Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (The) 5.25%, 7/27/21 | | | | | | | 213 | | | | 216,369 | |
5.75%, 1/24/22 | | | | | | | 450 | | | | 475,022 | |
6.00%, 6/15/20 | | | | | | | 440 | | | | 469,730 | |
7.50%, 2/15/19 | | | | | | | 335 | | | | 382,035 | |
HSBC Holdings PLC 4.00%, 3/30/22 | | | | | | | 515 | | | | 534,775 | |
5.10%, 4/05/21 | | | | | | | 320 | | | | 357,264 | |
JPMorgan Chase & Co. 4.40%, 7/22/20 | | | | | | | 390 | | | | 411,345 | |
4.50%, 1/24/22 | | | | | | | 515 | | | | 554,767 | |
4.625%, 5/10/21 | | | | | | | 233 | | | | 249,307 | |
Macquarie Bank Ltd. 5.00%, 2/22/17(c) | | | | | | | 90 | | | | 91,665 | |
Macquarie Group Ltd. 4.875%, 8/10/17(b)(c) | | | | | | | 379 | | | | 379,898 | |
Morgan Stanley | | | | | | | | | | | | |
5.50%, 7/24/20-7/28/21 | | | | | | | 676 | | | | 663,622 | |
6.625%, 4/01/18 | | | | | | | 345 | | | | 360,721 | |
National Capital Trust II 5.486%, 3/23/15(c) | | | | | | | 91 | | | | 84,558 | |
Nationwide Building Society 6.25%, 2/25/20(c) | | | | | | | 465 | | | | 501,610 | |
North Fork Bancorporation, Inc. 5.875%, 8/15/12 | | | | | | | 100 | | | | 100,469 | |
Royal Bank of Scotland PLC (The) 6.125%, 1/11/21 | | | | | | | 345 | | | | 383,266 | |
Santander US Debt SAU 2.991%, 10/07/13(c) | | | | | | | 500 | | | | 480,781 | |
11
| | |
BALANCED WEALTH STRATEGY PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Company | | Principal Amount (000) | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Societe Generale SA 2.50%, 1/15/14(c) | | US$ | | | | | 245 | | | $ | 240,650 | |
SouthTrust Corp. 5.80%, 6/15/14 | | | | | | | 225 | | | | 241,152 | |
Unicredit Luxembourg Finance SA 6.00%, 10/31/17(c) | | | | | | | 230 | | | | 188,315 | |
Wachovia Corp. 5.50%, 5/01/13 | | | | | | | 320 | | | | 332,505 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 12,497,880 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
FINANCE–0.3% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
General Electric Capital Corp. 4.65%, 10/17/21 | | | | | | | 193 | | | | 214,332 | |
5.625%, 5/01/18 | | | | | | | 480 | | | | 551,779 | |
SLM Corp. 7.25%, 1/25/22 | | | | | | | 340 | | | | 359,550 | |
Series A 5.375%, 5/15/14 | | | | | | | 270 | | | | 279,440 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 1,405,101 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
INSURANCE–0.8% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Allied World Assurance Co., Ltd. 7.50%, 8/01/16 | | | | | | | 160 | | | | 184,475 | |
Allstate Corp. (The) 6.125%, 5/15/37 | | | | | | | 209 | | | | 205,865 | |
American International Group, Inc. 6.40%, 12/15/20 | | | | | | | 300 | | | | 339,443 | |
Coventry Health Care, Inc. 5.95%, 3/15/17 | | | | | | | 90 | | | | 102,085 | |
6.125%, 1/15/15 | | | | | | | 40 | | | | 43,629 | |
6.30%, 8/15/14 | | | | | | | 275 | | | | 298,924 | |
Genworth Financial, Inc. 6.515%, 5/22/18 | | | | | | | 215 | | | | 206,031 | |
Guardian Life Insurance Co. of America 7.375%, 9/30/39(c) | | | | | | | 163 | | | | 212,672 | |
Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. 4.00%, 3/30/15 | | | | | | | 95 | | | | 99,633 | |
5.125%, 4/15/22 | | | | | | | 180 | | | | 185,356 | |
5.50%, 3/30/20 | | | | | | | 242 | | | | 252,661 | |
Humana, Inc. 6.45%, 6/01/16 | | | | | | | 40 | | | | 45,490 | |
7.20%, 6/15/18 | | | | | | | 285 | | | | 342,482 | |
Lincoln National Corp. 8.75%, 7/01/19 | | | | | | | 98 | | | | 123,409 | |
Markel Corp. 7.125%, 9/30/19 | | | | | | | 230 | | | | 267,532 | |
Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Co. 8.875%, 6/01/39(c) | | | | | | | 90 | | | | 128,959 | |
MetLife, Inc. 7.717%, 2/15/19 | | | | | | | 112 | | | | 141,848 | |
10.75%, 8/01/39 | | | | | | | 140 | | | | 195,650 | |
Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. 9.375%, 8/15/39(c) | | | | | | | 335 | | | | 440,751 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
XL Group PLC 5.25%, 9/15/14 | | US$ | | | | | 135 | | | $ | 142,205 | |
6.375%, 11/15/24 | | | | | | | 157 | | | | 175,023 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 4,134,123 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
OTHER FINANCE–0.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Aviation Capital Group Corp. 7.125%, 10/15/20(c) | | | | | | | 173 | | | | 175,942 | |
ORIX Corp. 4.71%, 4/27/15 | | | | | | | 369 | | | | 384,773 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 560,715 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
REITS – 0.2% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
ERP Operating LP 5.25%, 9/15/14 | | | | | | | 105 | | | | 113,121 | |
HCP, Inc. 5.375%, 2/01/21 | | | | | | | 505 | | | | 558,430 | |
Health Care REIT, Inc. 5.25%, 1/15/22 | | | | | | | 505 | | | | 535,686 | |
Healthcare Realty Trust, Inc. 5.125%, 4/01/14 | | | | | | | 131 | | | | 135,640 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 1,342,877 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 19,940,696 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
UTILITY–1.2% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
ELECTRIC–0.5% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Allegheny Energy Supply Co. LLC 5.75%, 10/15/19(c) | | | | | | | 205 | | | | 220,606 | |
Constellation Energy Group, Inc. 5.15%, 12/01/20 | | | | | | | 210 | | | | 232,458 | |
FirstEnergy Corp. Series C 7.375%, 11/15/31 | | | | | | | 275 | | | | 345,199 | |
MidAmerican Energy Holdings Co. 6.125%, 4/01/36 | | | | | | | 395 | | | | 494,242 | |
Nisource Finance Corp. 6.80%, 1/15/19 | | | | | | | 502 | | | | 601,810 | |
Pacific Gas & Electric Co. 4.50%, 12/15/41 | | | | | | | 190 | | | | 201,005 | |
6.05%, 3/01/34 | | | | | | | 38 | | | | 47,887 | |
SPI Electricity & Gas Australia Holdings Pty Ltd. 6.15%, 11/15/13(c) | | | | | | | 348 | | | | 362,578 | |
TECO Finance, Inc. 4.00%, 3/15/16 | | | | | | | 100 | | | | 107,009 | |
5.15%, 3/15/20 | | | | | | | 125 | | | | 142,876 | |
Union Electric Co. 6.70%, 2/01/19 | | | | | | | 45 | | | | 56,668 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 2,812,338 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
NATURAL GAS–0.7% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
DCP Midstream LLC 5.35%, 3/15/20(c) | | | | | | | 137 | | | | 149,516 | |
Energy Transfer Partners LP 6.70%, 7/01/18 | | | | | | | 127 | | | | 145,676 | |
7.50%, 7/01/38 | | | | | | | 410 | | | | 462,397 | |
Enterprise Products Operating LLC 5.20%, 9/01/20 | | | | | | | 305 | | | | 348,941 | |
12
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Company | | Principal Amount (000) | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
EQT Corp. 8.125%, 6/01/19 | | US$ | | | | | 234 | | | $ | 280,628 | |
Kinder Morgan Energy Partners LP 3.95%, 9/01/22 | | | | | | | 424 | | | | 429,559 | |
4.15%, 3/01/22 | | | | | | | 220 | | | | 226,166 | |
ONEOK, Inc. 4.25%, 2/01/22 | | | | | | | 480 | | | | 502,684 | |
Talent Yield Investments Ltd. 4.50%, 4/25/22(c) | | | | | | | 490 | | | | 501,292 | |
TransCanada PipeLines Ltd. 6.35%, 5/15/67 | | | | | | | 120 | | | | 123,570 | |
Williams Partners LP 5.25%, 3/15/20 | | | | | | | 298 | | | | 334,820 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 3,505,249 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 6,317,587 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
NON CORPORATE SECTORS–0.1% | | | | | | | | | |
AGENCIES–NOT GOVERNMENT GUARANTEED–0.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Gazprom OAO Via Gaz Capital SA 6.212%, 11/22/16(c) | | | | | | | 290 | | | | 314,635 | |
Petrobras International Finance Co. - Pifco 5.75%, 1/20/20 | | | | | | | 345 | | | | 377,388 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 692,023 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Corporates–Investment Grades (cost $49,522,064) | | | | | | | | | | | 52,772,226 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGHS–8.5% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
AGENCY FIXED RATE 30-YEAR–7.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp. Gold 4.50%, 10/01/39 | | | | | | | 3,305 | | | | 3,530,992 | |
5.50%, 4/01/38 | | | | | | | 2,548 | | | | 2,766,701 | |
Series 2005 5.50%, 1/01/35 | | | | | | | 855 | | | | 933,791 | |
Series 2007 5.50%, 7/01/35 | | | | | | | 90 | | | | 98,843 | |
Federal National Mortgage Association 3.50%, TBA | | | | | | | 2,705 | | | | 2,843,209 | |
3.50%, 12/01/41 | | | | | | | 2,622 | | | | 2,756,979 | |
4.00%, 1/01/41-12/01/41 | | | | | | | 6,803 | | | | 7,250,078 | |
4.50%, TBA | | | | | | | 2,750 | | | | 2,949,804 | |
4.50%, 8/01/40 | | | | | | | 1,001 | | | | 1,074,243 | |
5.00%, 12/01/39 | | | | | | | 477 | | | | 516,076 | |
5.50%, 5/01/38-6/01/38 | | | | | | | 1,799 | | | | 1,957,900 | |
6.00%, 8/01/37-7/01/39 | | | | | | | 3,231 | | | | 3,548,380 | �� |
Series 2003 5.00%, 11/01/33 | | | | | | | 246 | | | | 266,923 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Series 2004 5.50%, 2/01/34-11/01/34 | | US$ | | | | | 348 | | | $ | 383,123 | |
6.00%, 9/01/34-11/01/34 | | | | | | | 310 | | | | 345,157 | |
Series 2005 4.50%, 8/01/35 | | | | | | | 259 | | | | 278,134 | |
Series 2006 5.00%, 2/01/36 | | | | | | | 906 | | | | 980,659 | |
6.00%, 3/01/36 | | | | | | | 128 | | | | 141,477 | |
Series 2007 4.50%, 9/01/35 | | | | | | | 221 | | | | 237,552 | |
5.00%, 11/01/35-7/01/36 | | | | | | | 275 | | | | 298,103 | |
5.50%, 1/01/37-8/01/37 | | | | | | | 1,334 | | | | 1,465,118 | |
Series 2008 5.50%, 8/01/37 | | | | | | | 619 | | | | 677,517 | |
6.00%, 3/01/37-5/01/38 | | | | | | | 1,881 | | | | 2,072,639 | |
Series 2010 6.00%, 2/01/40-4/01/40 | | | | | | | 910 | | | | 998,200 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 38,371,598 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
AGENCY FIXED RATE 15-YEAR–1.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Federal National Mortgage Association | | | | | | | | | | | | |
3.00%, TBA | | | | | | | 1,890 | | | | 1,980,070 | |
4.50%, TBA | | | | | | | 790 | | | | 846,658 | |
4.50%, 6/01/26 | | | | | | | 2,904 | | | | 3,109,343 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 5,936,071 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
AGENCY ARMS–0.3% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp. 2.393%, 4/01/35(e) | | | | | | | 913 | | | | 964,574 | |
Series 2008 3.071%, 11/01/37(f) | | | | | | | 86 | | | | 90,138 | |
Federal National Mortgage Association 3.208%, 8/01/37(e) | | | | | | | 431 | | | | 450,512 | |
Series 2007 2.336%, 3/01/34(f) | | | | | | | 250 | | | | 262,844 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 1,768,068 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Mortgage Pass-Throughs (cost $44,818,576) | | | | | | | | | | | 46,075,737 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
GOVERNMENTS– TREASURIES–5.9% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
UNITED STATES–5.9% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
U.S. Treasury Bonds 3.00%, 5/15/42 | | | | | | | 900 | | | | 942,610 | |
4.50%, 2/15/36 | | | | | | | 1,490 | | | | 2,001,256 | |
4.625%, 2/15/40 | | | | | | | 3,835 | | | | 5,304,883 | |
5.375%, 2/15/31 | | | | | | | 5 | | | | 7,286 | |
U.S. Treasury Notes 0.875%, 11/30/16-1/31/17 | | | | | | | 9,360 | | | | 9,450,326 | |
1.00%, 8/31/16-3/31/17 | | | | | | | 10,490 | | | | 10,649,275 | |
1.75%, 5/15/22 | | | | | | | 1,200 | | | | 1,209,750 | |
2.00%, 11/15/21 | | | | | | | 2,070 | | | | 2,146,170 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Governments–Treasuries (cost $29,700,907) | | | | | | | | | | | 31,711,556 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
13
| | |
BALANCED WEALTH STRATEGY PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Principal Amount (000) | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
ASSET-BACKED SECURITIES–3.8% | | | | | | | | | |
AUTOS–FIXED RATE–1.9% | | | | | | | | | |
Ally Auto Receivables Trust Series 2011-5, Class A2 0.80%, 6/16/14 | | US$ | | | | | 614 | | | $ | 614,631 | |
AmeriCredit Automobile Receivables Trust Series 2011-4, Class A2 0.92%, 3/09/15 | | | | | | | 247 | | | | 246,847 | |
Series 2011-5, Class A2 1.19%, 8/08/15 | | | | | | | 201 | | | | 201,165 | |
Series 2011-3, Class A2 0.84%, 11/10/14 | | | | | | | 457 | | | | 457,625 | |
Bank of America Auto Trust Series 2012-1, Class A4 1.03%, 12/15/16 | | | | | | | 395 | | | | 394,779 | |
BMW Vehicle Lease Trust Series 2011-1, Class A2 0.64%, 9/20/12 | | | | | | | 276 | | | | 276,448 | |
Exeter Automobile Receivables Trust Series 2012-1A, Class A 2.02%, 8/15/16(c) | | | | | | | 332 | | | | 332,502 | |
Ford Auto Securitization Trust Series 2011-R3A, Class A2 1.96%, 7/15/15(c) | | | CAD | | | | 655 | | | | 645,305 | |
Ford Credit Auto Lease Trust Series 2011-B, Class A2 0.82%, 1/15/14 | | US$ | | | | | 285 | | | | 285,281 | |
Series 2011-A, Class A2 0.74%, 9/15/13 | | | | | | | 520 | | | | 520,657 | |
Ford Credit Auto Owner Trust Series 2011-B, Class A2 0.68%, 1/15/14 | | | | | | | 344 | | | | 344,267 | |
Huntington Auto Trust Series 2011-1A, Class A3 1.01%, 1/15/16(c) | | | | | | | 297 | | | | 298,687 | |
Hyundai Auto Lease Securitization Trust 2011-A Series 2011-A, Class A2 0.69%, 11/15/13(c) | | | | | | | 262 | | | | 261,676 | |
Mercedes-Benz Auto Lease Trust Series 2011-1A, Class A2 0.79%, 4/15/13(c) | | | | | | | 28 | | | | 27,802 | |
Series 2012-A, Class A2 0.66%, 4/15/14 | | | | | | | 605 | | | | 605,054 | |
Navistar Financial Corp. Owner Trust Series 2012-A, Class A2 0.85%, 3/18/15(c) | | | | | | | 570 | | | | 569,983 | |
Nissan Auto Lease Trust Series 2012-A, Class A2A 0.68%, 7/15/14 | | | | | | | 440 | | | | 440,153 | |
Santander Drive Auto Receivables Trust Series 2012-3, Class A3 1.08%, 4/15/16 | | | | | | | 530 | | | | 530,115 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Principal Amount (000) | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Series 2012-4, Class A2 1.06%, 8/17/15 | | | US$ | | | | 353 | | | $ | 352,978 | |
SMART Trust/Australia Series 2011-2USA, Class A2A 1.22%, 11/14/13(c) | | | | | | | 461 | | | | 461,286 | |
Volkswagen Auto Loan Enhanced Trust Series 2011-1, Class A3 1.22%, 6/22/15 | | | | | | | 1,040 | | | | 1,046,786 | |
World Omni Automobile Lease Securitization Trust Series 2011-A, Class A2 0.81%, 10/15/13 | | | | | | | 605 | | | | 605,809 | |
Series 2012-A, Class A3 0.93%, 11/16/15 | | | | | | | 572 | | | | 572,308 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 10,092,144 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
AUTOS–FLOATING RATE–0.8% | | | | | | | | | |
Ford Credit Floorplan Master Owner Trust Series 2012-1, Class A 0.712%, 1/15/16(e) | | | | | | | 931 | | | | 933,806 | |
GE Dealer Floorplan Master Note Trust Series 2009-2A, Class A 1.792%, 10/20/14(c) (e) | | | | | | | 794 | | | | 797,062 | |
Series 2012-2, Class A 0.994%, 4/22/19(e) | | | | | | | 790 | | | | 790,000 | |
Hyundai Floorplan Master Owner Trust Series 2009-1A, Class A 1.492%, 11/17/14(c) (e) | | | | | | | 595 | | | | 596,403 | |
Nissan Master Owner Trust Receivables Series 2012-A, Class A 0.712%, 5/15/17(e) | | | | | | | 1,022 | | | | 1,024,624 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 4,141,895 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
CREDIT CARDS–FLOATING RATE–0.7% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
American Express Credit Account Master Trust Series 2011-1, Class A 0.412%, 4/17/17(e) | | | | | | | 935 | | | | 936,079 | |
Discover Card Master Trust Series 2010-A1, Class A1 0.892%, 9/15/15(e) | | | | | | | 184 | | | | 184,734 | |
Series 2009-A2, Class A 1.542%, 2/17/15(e) | | | | | | | 200 | | | | 200,264 | |
GE Capital Credit Card Master Note Trust Series 2011-1, Class A 0.792%, 1/15/17(e) | | | | | | | 425 | | | | 427,455 | |
Series 2011-2, Class A 0.722%, 5/15/19(e) | | | | | | | 715 | | | | 718,850 | |
Gracechurch Card Funding PLC Series 2012-1A, Class A1 0.942%, 2/15/17(c) (e) | | | | | | | 490 | | | | 490,257 | |
14
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | Principal Amount (000) | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Penarth Master Issuer PLC Series 2012-1A, Class A1 0.813%, 3/18/14(c) (e) | | US$ | | | | | 545 | | | $ | 545,373 | |
Series 2010-2A, Class A2 | | | | | | | | | | | | |
0.994%, 12/18/14(c) (e) | | | | | | | 420 | | | | 420,773 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 3,923,785 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
OTHER ABS–FIXED RATE–0.3% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CIT Equipment Collateral Series 2012-VT1, Class A3 1.10%, 8/22/16(c) | | | | | | | 268 | | | | 267,624 | |
CNH Equipment Trust Series 2010-C, Class A3 1.17%, 5/15/15 | | | | | | | 289 | | | | 289,600 | |
Series 2012-A, Class A3 0.94%, 5/15/17 | | | | | | | 375 | | | | 375,730 | |
GE Equipment Midticket LLC Series 2011-1, Class A3 1.00%, 8/22/14 | | | | | | | 195 | | | | 195,686 | |
GE Equipment Small Ticket LLC Series 2011-2A, Class A2 1.14%, 6/23/14(c) | | | | | | | 275 | | | | 275,166 | |
John Deere Owner Trust Series 2011-A, Class A2 0.64%, 6/16/14 | | | | | | | 231 | | | | 231,503 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 1,635,309 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
CREDIT CARDS–FIXED RATE–0.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Discover Card Master Trust Series 2012-A1, Class A1 0.81%, 8/15/17 | | | | | | | 304 | | | | 304,749 | |
Series 2012-A3, Class A3 0.86%, 11/15/17 | | | | | | | 260 | | | | 260,302 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 565,051 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
HOME EQUITY LOANS–FLOATING RATE–0.0% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Bear Stearns Asset Backed Securities Trust Series 2007-HE3, Class M1 0.695%, 4/25/37(e) (g) | | | | | | | 100 | | | | 1,566 | |
HSBC Home Equity Loan Trust Series 2007-1, Class M1 0.624%, 3/20/36(e) | | | | | | | 365 | | | | 262,821 | |
Option One Mortgage Loan Trust Series 2007-2, Class M1 0.605%, 3/25/37(e) (g) | | | | | | | 88 | | | | 671 | |
RASC Trust Series 2003-KS3, Class A2 0.845%, 5/25/33(e) | | | | | | | 1 | | | | 951 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 266,009 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
HOME EQUITY LOANS–FIXED RATE–0.0% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Credit-Based Asset Servicing and Securitization LLC Series 2003-CB1, Class AF 3.95%, 1/25/33 | | | | | | | 127 | | | | 115,222 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Asset-Backed Securities (cost $21,012,649) | | | | | | | | | | | 20,739,415 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | Principal Amount (000) | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
AGENCIES–3.4% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
AGENCY DEBENTURES–3.0% | | | | | | | | | |
Federal Farm Credit Bank 0.251%, 11/13/12(e) | | | US$ | | | | 900 | | | $ | 900,341 | |
0.261%, 10/12/12(e) | | | | | | | 1,200 | | | | 1,200,391 | |
0.274%, 9/20/12(e) | | | | | | | 1,100 | | | | 1,100,311 | |
0.305%, 6/26/13(e) | | | | | | | 2,500 | | | | 2,503,208 | |
Federal National Mortgage Association 0.273%, 9/17/12-10/18/12(e) | | | | | | | 1,810 | | | | 1,810,295 | |
6.25%, 5/15/29 | | | | | | | 740 | | | | 1,065,628 | |
6.625%, 11/15/30 | | | | | | | 2,277 | | | | 3,454,537 | |
Residual Funding Corp. Principal Strip Zero Coupon, 7/15/20 | | | | | | | 4,770 | | | | 4,156,373 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 16,191,084 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
AGENCY SUBORDINATED–0.4% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp. 2.375%, 1/13/22 | | | | | | | 2,198 | | | | 2,255,706 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Agencies (cost $16,813,644) | | | | | | | | | | | 18,446,790 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE-BACKED SECURITIES–2.7% | | | | | | | | | |
NON-AGENCY FIXED RATE CMBS–2.3% | | | | | | | | | |
Citigroup Commercial Mortgage Trust Series 2004-C1, Class A4 5.534%, 4/15/40 | | | | | | | 110 | | | | 117,339 | |
Credit Suisse First Boston Mortgage Securities Corp. Series 2004-C1, Class A4 4.75%, 1/15/37 | | | | | | | 70 | | | | 72,599 | |
Series 2005-C1, Class A4 5.014%, 2/15/38 | | | | | | | 260 | | | | 281,752 | |
Credit Suisse Mortgage Capital Certificates Series 2006-C3, Class A3 6.008%, 6/15/38 | | | | | | | 620 | | | | 702,553 | |
Greenwich Capital Commercial Funding Corp. Series 2005-GG5, Class AJ 5.417%, 4/10/37 | | | | | | | 215 | | | | 150,491 | |
Series 2007-GG9, Class A4 5.444%, 3/10/39 | | | | | | | 885 | | | | 981,756 | |
GS Mortgage Securities Corp. II Series 2004-GG2, Class A6 5.396%, 8/10/38 | | | | | | | 80 | | | | 85,693 | |
Series 2012-GCJ7, Class A4 3.377%, 5/10/45 | | | | | | | 960 | | | | 980,442 | |
15
| | |
BALANCED WEALTH STRATEGY PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Principal Amount (000) | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
JP Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Corp. Series 2005-CB11, Class A4 5.335%, 8/12/37 | | | US$ | | | | 170 | | | $ | 186,770 | |
Series 2006-CB14, Class A4 5.481%, 12/12/44 | | | | | | | 315 | | | | 351,228 | |
Series 2006-CB16, Class A4 5.552%, 5/12/45 | | | | | | | 335 | | | | 378,094 | |
Series 2007-LD11, Class A4 | | | | | | | | | | | | |
6.009%, 6/15/49 | | | | | | | 895 | | | | 982,535 | |
Series 2010-C2, Class A1 2.749%, 11/15/43(c) | | | | | | | 408 | | | | 422,327 | |
LB-UBS Commercial Mortgage Trust Series 2004-C4, Class A4 5.447%, 6/15/29 | | | | | | | 40 | | | | 42,561 | |
Series 2006-C1, Class A4 5.156%, 2/15/31 | | | | | | | 1,095 | | | | 1,219,795 | |
Series 2006-C3, Class A4 5.661%, 3/15/39 | | | | | | | 285 | | | | 320,120 | |
Series 2006-C4, Class A4 6.067%, 6/15/38 | | | | | | | 275 | | | | 313,873 | |
Series 2007-C2, Class A3 5.43%, 2/15/40 | | | | | | | 895 | | | | 999,057 | |
Merrill Lynch Mortgage Trust Series 2005-CIP1, Class A2 4.96%, 7/12/38 | | | | | | | 377 | | | | 382,570 | |
Merrill Lynch/Countrywide Commercial Mortgage Trust Series 2006-2, Class A4 6.093%, 6/12/46 | | | | | | | 110 | | | | 124,692 | |
Series 2006-3, Class A2 5.291%, 7/12/46 | | | | | | | 859 | | | | 876,056 | |
Series 2006-3, Class A4 5.414%, 7/12/46 | | | | | | | 480 | | | | 542,491 | |
Series 2006-4, Class AM 5.204%, 12/12/49 | | | | | | | 265 | | | | 262,170 | |
Morgan Stanley Capital I Series 2006-IQ12, Class A4 5.332%, 12/15/43 | | | | | | | 780 | | | | 886,082 | |
UBS Barclays Commercial Mortgage Trust Series 2007-C2, Class A4 3.525%, 6/10/22 | | | | | | | 524 | | | | 520,180 | |
WF-RBS Commercial Mortgage Trust Series 2011-C3, Class A2 3.24%, 3/15/44(c) | | | | | | | 428 | | | | 452,521 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 12,635,747 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
NON-AGENCY FLOATING RATE CMBS–0.2% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CW Capital Cobalt Ltd. Series 2007-C3, Class A4 6.007%, 5/15/46(e) | | | | | | | 905 | | | | 1,000,410 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
GS Mortgage Securities Corp. II Series 2007-EOP, Class E 2.476%, 3/06/20(c) (e) | | US$ | | | | | 75 | | | $ | 74,286 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 1,074,696 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
AGENCY CMBS–0.2% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
FHLMC Multifamily Structured Pass Through Certificates Series K008, Class A2 3.531%, 6/25/20 | | | | | | | 634 | | | | 691,648 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securities (cost $13,580,879) | | | | | | | | | | | 14,402,091 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
CORPORATES–NON-INVESTMENT GRADES–0.4% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
INDUSTRIAL–0.3% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
BASIC–0.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
LyondellBasell Industries NV 5.75%, 4/15/24(c) | | | | | | | 435 | | | | 461,740 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
CAPITAL GOODS–0.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Ball Corp. 5.00%, 3/15/22 | | | | | | | 290 | | | | 301,600 | |
BE Aerospace, Inc. 5.25%, 4/01/22 | | | | | | | 295 | | | | 303,850 | |
Hanson Australia Funding Ltd. 5.25%, 3/15/13 | | | | | | | 120 | | | | 122,700 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 728,150 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER CYCLICAL–OTHER–0.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Host Hotels & Resorts LP 5.25%, 3/15/22(b)(c) | | | | | | | 195 | | | | 199,875 | |
Wynn Las Vegas LLC/Wynn Las Vegas Capital Corp. 5.375%, 3/15/22(b)(c) | | | | | | | 295 | | | | 292,787 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 492,662 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER CYCLICAL–RETAILERS–0.0% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Dollar General Corp. 4.125%, 7/15/17 | | | | | | | 79 | | | | 80,086 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
ENERGY–0.0% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Cimarex Energy Co. 5.875%, 5/01/22 | | | | | | | 145 | | | | 150,619 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 1,913,257 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS–0.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
BANKING–0.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
ABN Amro Bank NV 4.31%, 3/10/16 | | | EUR | | | | 90 | | | | 75,171 | |
LBG Capital No. 1 PLC 8.00%, 6/15/20(c) | | | US$ | | | | 235 | | | | 197,400 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 272,571 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
16
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Principal Amount (000) | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
UTILITY–0.0% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
ELECTRIC–0.0% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CMS Energy Corp. 5.05%, 3/15/22 | | US$ | | | | | 155 | | | $ | 160,772 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Corporates–Non-Investment Grades (cost $2,128,714) | | | | | | | | | | | 2,346,600 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
QUASI-SOVEREIGNS–0.4% | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
QUASI-SOVEREIGN BONDS–0.4% | | | | | | | | | |
INDONESIA–0.0% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Perusahaan Listrik Negara PT 5.50%, 11/22/21(c) | | | | | | | 250 | | | | 261,250 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
KAZAKHSTAN–0.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
KazMunayGas National Co. 7.00%, 5/05/20(c) | | | | | | | 251 | | | | 284,885 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
MALAYSIA–0.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Petronas Capital Ltd. 5.25%, 8/12/19(c) | | | | | | | 460 | | | | 528,608 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
MEXICO–0.0% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Petroleos Mexicanos 5.50%, 6/27/44(c) | | | | | | | 182 | | | | 186,095 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
SOUTH KOREA–0.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Korea National Oil Corp. 3.125%, 4/03/17(c) | | | | | | | 485 | | | | 494,565 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
UNITED ARAB EMIRATES–0.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
IPIC GMTN Ltd. 3.75%, 3/01/17(c) | | | | | | | 465 | | | | 483,600 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Quasi-Sovereigns (cost $2,087,409) | | | | | | | | | | | 2,239,003 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
INFLATION-LINKED SECURITIES–0.2% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
UNITED STATES–0.2% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
U.S. Treasury Inflation Index 3.00%, 7/15/12 (TIPS) (cost $1,200,029) | | | | | | | 1,197 | | | | 1,197,471 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
GOVERNMENTS–SOVEREIGN BONDS–0.2% | | | | | | | | | |
INDONESIA–0.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Indonesia Government International Bond 5.25%, 1/17/42(c) | | | | | | | 475 | | | | 496,969 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
QATAR–0.0% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
State of Qatar 4.50%, 1/20/22(c) | | | | | | | 270 | | | | 297,945 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
RUSSIA–0.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Russian Foreign Bond–Eurobond 7.50%, 3/31/30(c) | | | | | | | 250 | | | | 299,607 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Governments–Sovereign Bonds (cost $1,010,096) | | | | | | | | | | | 1,094,521 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS–MUNICIPAL BONDS–0.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
UNITED STATES–0.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
California GO 7.625%, 3/01/40 (cost $464,450) | | US$ | | | | | 455 | | | $ | 588,242 | |
OPTIONS PURCHASED– PUTS–0.0% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
OPTION ON EQUITY INDICES–0.0% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
STOXX Europe Mid 200 Index Expiration: Dec 2012, Exercise Price: $225.00(a) (cost $292,224) | | | | | | | 14,270 | | | | 184,198 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Shares | | | | |
PREFERRED STOCKS–0.0% | | | | | | | | | |
FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS–0.0% | | | | | | | | | |
FINANCE–0.0% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Citigroup Capital XII 8.50% (cost $175,000) | | | | | | | 7,000 | | | | 175,875 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Principal Amount (000) | | | | |
COLLATERALIZED MORTGAGE OBLIGATIONS–0.0% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
NON-AGENCY FIXED RATE–0.0% | | | | | | | | | |
Citigroup Mortgage Loan Trust, Inc. Series 2005-2, Class 1A4 2.771%, 5/25/35 | | US$ | | | | | 47 | | | | 41,354 | |
Merrill Lynch Mortgage Investors, Inc. Series 2005-A8, Class A1C1 5.25%, 8/25/36 | | | | | | | 28 | | | | 27,655 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 69,009 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
NON-AGENCY FLOATING RATE–0.0% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Countrywide Alternative Loan Trust Series 2005-62, Class 2A1 1.147%, 12/25/35(e) | | | | | | | 31 | | | | 17,244 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Collateralized Mortgage Obligations (cost $105,388) | | | | | | | | | | | 86,253 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
SHORT-TERM INVESTMENTS–3.0% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
TIME DEPOSIT–2.2% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
State Street Time Deposit 0.01%, 7/02/12 (cost $12,123,280) | | | | | | | 12,123 | | | | 12,123,280 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
U.S. TREASURY BILL–0.5% | | | | | | | | | |
U.S. Treasury Bill Zero Coupon, 8/09/12 (cost $2,464,763) | | | | | | | 2,465 | | | | 2,464,763 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
17
| | |
BALANCED WEALTH STRATEGY PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Principal Amount (000) | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
GOVERNMENTS– TREASURIES–0.3% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Japan Treasury Discount Bill 0.01%, 8/20/12 (cost $1,290,148) | | | JPY | | | | 110,000 | | | $ | 1,375,935 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Short-Term Investments (cost $15,878,191) | | | | | | | | | | | 15,963,978 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Investments Before Security Lending Collateral for Securities Loaned–101.5% (cost $517,496,608) | | | | | | | | | | $ | 551,105,372 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
INVESTMENTS OF CASH COLLATERAL FOR SECURITY LOANED–2.3% | | | | | | | | |
INVESTMENT COMPANIES–2.3% | | | | | | | | |
AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves–Class I, 0.20%(h) (cost $12,325,237) | | | 12,325,237 | | | $ | 12,325,237 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TOTAL INVESTMENTS–103.8% (cost $529,821,845) | | | | | | | 563,430,609 | |
Other assets less liabilities–(3.8)% | | | | | | | (20,447,105 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
NET ASSETS–100.0% | | | | | | $ | 542,983,504 | |
| | | | | | | | |
FUTURES CONTRACTS (see Note D)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Type | | Number of Contracts | | | Expiration Month | | | Original Value | | | Value at June 30, 2012 | | | Unrealized Appreciation/ (Depreciation) | |
Purchased Contracts | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Euro STOXX 50 Index Futures | | | 7 | | | | September 2012 | | | $ | 189,672 | | | $ | 199,759 | | | $ | 10,087 | |
TOPIX Index Futures | | | 1 | | | | September 2012 | | | | 87,167 | | | | 96,203 | | | | 9,036 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | $ | 19,123 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
FORWARD CURRENCY EXCHANGE CONTRACTS (see Note D)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Counterparty & Description | | Contract Amount (000) | | | U.S. $ Value on Origination Date | | | U.S. $ Value at June 30, 2012 | | | Unrealized Appreciation/ (Depreciation) | |
Buy Contracts | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Barclays Bank PLC Wholesale: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Japanese Yen settling 8/14/12 | | | 208,045 | | | $ | 2,632,878 | | | $ | 2,604,204 | | | $ | (28,674 | ) |
Citibank NA: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Hong Kong Dollar settling 8/14/12 | | | 4,236 | | | | 545,641 | | | | 546,092 | | | | 451 | |
Japanese Yen settling 8/14/12 | | | 96,227 | | | | 1,228,600 | | | | 1,204,522 | | | | (24,078 | ) |
Credit Suisse London Branch (GFX): | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Euro settling 8/14/12 | | | 2,445 | | | | 3,183,806 | | | | 3,095,265 | | | | (88,541 | ) |
Great British Pound settling 8/14/12 | | | 1,306 | | | | 2,112,420 | | | | 2,045,174 | | | | (67,246 | ) |
Deutsche Bank AG London: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Australian Dollar settling 8/14/12 | | | 342 | | | | 349,636 | | | | 348,657 | | | | (979 | ) |
Great British Pound settling 8/14/12 | | | 1,523 | | | | 2,425,162 | | | | 2,384,992 | | | | (40,170 | ) |
Great British Pound settling 9/14/12 | | | 344 | | | | 544,002 | | | | 538,652 | | | | (5,350 | ) |
Japanese Yen settling 8/14/12 | | | 112,467 | | | | 1,410,775 | | | | 1,407,806 | | | | (2,969 | ) |
Swedish Krona settling 8/14/12 | | | 3,104 | | | | 459,797 | | | | 448,027 | | | | (11,770 | ) |
Swiss Franc settling 8/14/12 | | | 1,354 | | | | 1,468,894 | | | | 1,427,966 | | | | (40,928 | ) |
Goldman Sachs International: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Norwegian Krone settling 8/14/12 | | | 16,110 | | | | 2,755,400 | | | | 2,704,099 | | | | (51,301 | ) |
18
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Counterparty & Description | | Contract Amount (000) | | | U.S. $ Value on Origination Date | | | U.S. $ Value at June 30, 2012 | | | Unrealized Appreciation/ (Depreciation) | |
Buy Contracts (continued) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
HSBC BankUSA: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Canadian Dollar settling 8/14/12 | | | 901 | | | $ | 881,398 | | | $ | 884,165 | | | $ | 2,767 | |
Hong Kong Dollar settling 8/14/12 | | | 15,422 | | | | 1,986,524 | | | | 1,988,158 | | | | 1,634 | |
Norwegian Krone settling 9/14/12 | | | 2,312 | | | | 381,161 | | | | 387,629 | | | | 6,468 | |
Royal Bank of Scotland PLC: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Japanese Yen settling 8/14/12 | | | 183,719 | | | | 2,320,241 | | | | 2,299,703 | | | | (20,538 | ) |
State Street Bank & Trust Co.: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Great British Pound settling 9/14/12 | | | 88 | | | | 136,118 | | | | 137,795 | | | | 1,677 | |
Swedish Krona settling 8/14/12 | | | 26,004 | | | | 3,785,946 | | | | 3,753,380 | | | | (32,566 | ) |
Swiss Franc settling 8/14/12 | | | 1,337 | | | | 1,412,708 | | | | 1,410,038 | | | | (2,670 | ) |
UBS AG: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Swedish Krona settling 9/14/12 | | | 11,481 | | | | 1,611,848 | | | | 1,655,345 | | | | 43,497 | |
| | | | |
Sale Contracts | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Barclays Bank PLC Wholesale: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Euro settling 8/14/12 | | | 1,115 | | | | 1,413,998 | | | | 1,411,542 | | | | 2,456 | |
Japanese Yen settling 8/20/12 | | | 109,978 | | | | 1,406,695 | | | | 1,376,761 | | | | 29,934 | |
BNP Paribas SA: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Australian Dollar settling 8/14/12 | | | 342 | | | | 347,520 | | | | 348,657 | | | | (1,137 | ) |
Citibank NA: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Great British Pound settling 8/14/12 | | | 700 | | | | 1,123,338 | | | | 1,096,188 | | | | 27,150 | |
Indian Rupee settling 8/14/12(1) | | | 9,228 | | | | 166,061 | | | | 165,230 | | | | 831 | |
Swiss Franc settling 8/14/12 | | | 2,247 | | | | 2,382,025 | | | | 2,369,749 | | | | 12,276 | |
Credit Suisse London Branch (GFX): | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Australian Dollar settling 8/14/12 | | | 1,041 | | | | 1,018,232 | | | | 1,061,264 | | | | (43,032 | ) |
Australian Dollar settling 9/14/12 | | | 412 | | | | 402,021 | | | | 418,848 | | | | (16,827 | ) |
Canadian Dollar settling 8/14/12 | | | 1,976 | | | | 1,967,736 | | | | 1,939,079 | | | | 28,657 | |
Euro settling 8/14/12 | | | 2,115 | | | | 2,754,090 | | | | 2,677,499 | | | | 76,591 | |
Norwegian Krone settling 8/14/12 | | | 3,500 | | | | 573,519 | | | | 587,483 | | | | (13,964 | ) |
Deutsche Bank AG London: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Australian Dollar settling 8/14/12 | | | 810 | | | | 831,708 | | | | 825,768 | | | | 5,940 | |
Canadian Dollar settling 8/10/12 | | | 653 | | | | 637,236 | | | | 641,295 | | | | (4,059 | ) |
Euro settling 8/14/12 | | | 724 | | | | 904,891 | | | | 916,553 | | | | (11,662 | ) |
Euro settling 9/14/12 | | | 394 | | | | 492,618 | | | | 498,951 | | | | (6,333 | ) |
Great British Pound settling 8/14/12 | | | 814 | | | | 1,252,732 | | | | 1,274,710 | | | | (21,978 | ) |
Japanese Yen settling 8/14/12 | | | 322,199 | | | | 4,041,633 | | | | 4,033,126 | | | | 8,507 | |
Goldman Sachs International: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Swedish Krona settling 8/14/12 | | | 13,123 | | | | 1,822,006 | | | | 1,894,155 | | | | (72,149 | ) |
HSBC BankUSA: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Brazilian Real settling 8/14/12 | | | 844 | | | | 417,629 | | | | 416,678 | | | | 951 | |
Euro settling 8/14/12 | | | 1,516 | | | | 1,931,050 | | | | 1,919,191 | | | | 11,859 | |
Great British Pound settling 8/14/12 | | | 669 | | | | 1,056,057 | | | | 1,047,643 | | | | 8,414 | |
Hong Kong Dollar settling 8/14/12 | | | 35,980 | | | | 4,636,986 | | | | 4,638,433 | | | | (1,447 | ) |
Swiss Franc settling 8/14/12 | | | 444 | | | | 471,223 | | | | 468,255 | | | | 2,968 | |
Royal Bank of Canada: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Canadian Dollar settling 9/14/12 | | | 771 | | | | 746,616 | | | | 756,072 | | | | (9,456 | ) |
Euro settling 9/14/12 | | | 1,330 | | | | 1,660,764 | | | | 1,684,277 | | | | (23,513 | ) |
Royal Bank of Scotland PLC: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Euro settling 8/14/12 | | | 431 | | | | 532,953 | | | | 545,627 | | | | (12,674 | ) |
Great British Pound settling 8/14/12 | | | 344 | | | | 531,903 | | | | 538,698 | | | | (6,795 | ) |
19
| | |
BALANCED WEALTH STRATEGY PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Counterparty & Description | | Contract Amount (000) | | | U.S. $ Value on Origination Date | | | U.S. $ Value at June 30, 2012 | | | Unrealized Appreciation/ (Depreciation) | |
Sale Contracts (continued) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Standard Chartered Bank: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Euro settling 9/14/12 | | | 330 | | | $ | 419,932 | | | $ | 417,903 | | | $ | 2,029 | |
Indian Rupee settling 8/14/12 | | | 14,146 | | | | 263,348 | | | | 253,288 | | | | 10,060 | |
State Street Bank & Trust Co.: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Australian Dollar settling 9/14/12 | | | 308 | | | | 301,554 | | | | 313,120 | | | | (11,566 | ) |
Euro settling 8/03/12 | | | 127 | | | | 160,558 | | | | 160,322 | | | | 236 | |
Great British Pound settling 8/14/12 | | | 121 | | | | 195,071 | | | | 189,484 | | | | 5,587 | |
Norwegian Krone settling 8/14/12 | | | 757 | | | | 125,866 | | | | 127,064 | | | | (1,198 | ) |
Swedish Krona settling 8/14/12 | | | 1,637 | | | | 226,522 | | | | 236,283 | | | | (9,761 | ) |
UBS AG: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Canadian Dollar settling 8/14/12 | | | 2,330 | | | | 2,256,200 | | | | 2,286,465 | | | | (30,265 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | $ | (424,656 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
(1) | Contract represents non-deliverable forward where payment is received from or paid to a counterparty based on the net realized gain/loss on settlement date. |
PUT OPTIONS WRITTEN (see Note D)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Description | | Contracts | | | Exercise Price | | | Expiration Month | | | U.S. $ Value | |
STOXX Europe Mid 200 Index (premium received $(117,034)) | | | 14,270 | | | $ | 190.00 | | | | December 2012 | | | $ | (63,205 | ) |
INTEREST RATE SWAP TRANSACTIONS (see Note D)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Rate Type | | | | |
Swap Counterparty | | Notional Amount (000) | | | Termination Date | | | Payments made by the Fund | | | Payments received by the Fund | | | Unrealized Appreciation/ (Depreciation) | |
JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA | | $ | 1,970 | | | | 1/30/17 | | | | 1.059 | % | | | 3 Month LIBOR | | | $ | (21,004 | ) |
JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA | | | 2,200 | | | | 2/7/22 | | | | 2.043 | % | | | 3 Month LIBOR | | | | (75,458 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | $ | (96,462 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
(a) | | Non-income producing security. |
(b) | | Represents entire or partial securities out on loan. See Note E for securities lending information. |
(c) | | Security is exempt from registration under Rule 144A of the Securities Act of 1933. These securities are considered liquid and may be resold in transactions exempt from registration, normally to qualified institutional buyers. At June 30, 2012, the aggregate market value of these securities amounted to $19,520,474 or 3.6% of net assets. |
(d) | | Coupon rate adjusts periodically based upon a predetermined schedule. Stated interest rate in effect at June 30, 2012. |
(e) | | Floating Rate Security. Stated interest rate was in effect at June 30, 2012. |
(f) | | Variable rate coupon, rate shown as of June 30, 2012. |
(h) | | Investment in affiliated money market mutual fund. The rate shown represents the 7-day yield as of period end. |
20
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Currency Abbreviation:
CAD—Canadian Dollar
EUR—Euro
JPY—Japanese Yen
Glossary:
ABS—Asset-Backed Securities
ADR—American Depositary Receipt
ARMs—Adjustable Rate Mortgages
CMBS—Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securities
FHLMC—Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation
GDR—Global Depositary Receipt
GO—General Obligation
LIBOR—London Interbank Offered Rates
TBA—To Be Announced
TIPS—Treasury Inflation Protected Security
See notes to financial statements.
21
| | |
BALANCED WEALTH STRATEGY PORTFOLIO |
STATEMENTOF ASSETS & LIABILITIES |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | |
ASSETS | | | | |
Investments in securities, at value | | | | |
Unaffiliated issuers (cost $517,496,608) | | $ | 551,105,372 | (a) |
Affiliated issuers (cost $12,325,237—including investment of cash collateral for securities loaned of $12,325,237) | | | 12,325,237 | |
Cash | | | 17,372 | (b) |
Foreign currencies, at value (cost $1,443,802) | | | 1,440,484 | |
Receivable for investment securities sold and foreign currency transactions | | | 5,280,202 | |
Interest and dividends receivable | | | 2,120,162 | |
Unrealized appreciation of forward currency exchange contracts | | | 290,940 | |
Receivable for capital stock sold | | | 122,552 | |
Receivable for variation margin on futures contracts | | | 10,580 | |
| | | | |
Total assets | | | 572,712,901 | |
| | | | |
LIABILITIES | | | | |
Options written, at value (premium received $117,034) | | | 63,205 | |
Payable for investment securities purchased and foreign currency transactions | | | 15,851,523 | |
Payable for collateral received on securities loaned | | | 12,325,237 | |
Unrealized depreciation of forward currency exchange contracts | | | 715,596 | |
Advisory fee payable | | | 248,436 | |
Payable for capital stock redeemed | | | 122,334 | |
Distribution fee payable | | | 103,605 | |
Unrealized depreciation on interest rate swap contracts | | | 96,462 | |
Administrative fee payable | | | 16,971 | |
Transfer Agent fee payable | | | 137 | |
Accrued expenses and other liabilities | | | 185,891 | |
| | | | |
Total liabilities | | | 29,729,397 | |
| | | | |
NET ASSETS | | $ | 542,983,504 | |
| | | | |
COMPOSITION OF NET ASSETS | | | | |
Capital stock, at par | | $ | 47,450 | |
Additional paid-in capital | | | 515,276,352 | |
Undistributed net investment income | | | 14,919,947 | |
Accumulated net realized loss on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | (20,419,524 | ) |
Net unrealized appreciation on investments and foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities | | | 33,159,279 | |
| | | | |
| | $ | 542,983,504 | |
| | | | |
Net Asset Value Per Share—1 billion shares of capital stock authorized, $.001 par value
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class | | Net Assets | | | Shares Outstanding | | | Net Asset Value | |
A | | $ | 44,214,971 | | | | 3,828,588 | | | $ | 11.55 | |
B | | $ | 498,768,533 | | | | 43,621,167 | | | $ | 11.43 | |
(a) | | Includes securities on loan with a value of $12,129,734 (see Note E). |
(b) | | An amount of $16,678 has been segregated to collateralize margin requirements for open futures contracts outstanding at June 30, 2012. |
See notes to financial statements.
22
| | |
BALANCED WEALTH STRATEGY PORTFOLIO |
STATEMENTOF OPERATIONS | | |
Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | |
INVESTMENT INCOME | | | | |
Dividends | | | | |
Unaffiliated issuers (net of foreign taxes withheld of $167,662) | | $ | 4,772,121 | |
Affiliated issuers | | | 8,376 | |
Interest | | | 2,860,811 | |
Securities lending income | | | 94,788 | |
| | | | |
| | | 7,736,096 | |
| | | | |
EXPENSES | | | | |
Advisory fee (see Note B) | | | 1,534,562 | |
Distribution fee—Class B | | | 635,891 | |
Transfer agency—Class A | | | 271 | |
Transfer agency—Class B | | | 2,818 | |
Custodian | | | 151,194 | |
Audit | | | 33,944 | |
Administrative | | | 27,854 | |
Legal | | | 19,784 | |
Printing | | | 16,502 | |
Directors’ fees | | | 1,913 | |
Miscellaneous | | | 21,146 | |
| | | | |
Total expenses | | | 2,445,879 | |
| | | | |
Net investment income | | | 5,290,217 | |
| | | | |
REALIZED AND UNREALIZED GAIN (LOSS) ON INVESTMENT AND FOREIGN CURRENCY TRANSACTIONS | | | | |
Net realized gain (loss) on: | | | | |
Investment transactions | | | 13,016,633 | (a) |
Futures contracts | | | (6,345 | ) |
Swap contracts | | | (211,977 | ) |
Foreign currency transactions | | | (978,867 | ) |
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of: | | | | |
Investments | | | 14,890,283 | (b) |
Futures contracts | | | 18,014 | |
Options written | | | 53,829 | |
Swap contracts | | | (11,315 | ) |
Foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities | | | (351,562 | ) |
| | | | |
Net gain on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | 26,418,693 | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
NET INCREASE IN NET ASSETS FROM OPERATIONS | | $ | 31,708,910 | |
| | | | |
(a) | | Net of foreign capital gains taxes of $1,228. |
(b) | | Net of increase in accrued foreign capital gains taxes of $3,629. |
See notes to financial statements.
23
| | |
|
BALANCED WEALTH STRATEGY PORTFOLIO |
STATEMENTOF CHANGESIN NET ASSETS | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | |
INCREASE (DECREASE) IN NET ASSETS FROM OPERATIONS | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income | | $ | 5,290,217 | | | $ | 10,292,931 | |
Net realized gain on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | 11,819,444 | | | | 23,530,062 | |
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of investments and foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities | | | 14,599,249 | | | | (50,646,990 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) in net assets from operations | | | 31,708,910 | | | | (16,823,997 | ) |
DIVIDENDS TO SHAREHOLDERS FROM | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income | | | | | | | | |
Class A | | | –0 | – | | | (1,640,050 | ) |
Class B | | | –0 | – | | | (11,281,113 | ) |
CAPITAL STOCK TRANSACTIONS | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (27,167,832 | ) | | | (19,298,555 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Total increase (decrease) | | | 4,541,078 | | | | (49,043,715 | ) |
NET ASSETS | | | | | | | | |
Beginning of period | | | 538,442,426 | | | | 587,486,141 | |
| | | | | | | | |
End of period (including undistributed net investment income of $14,919,947 and $9,629,730, respectively) | | $ | 542,983,504 | | | $ | 538,442,426 | |
| | | | | | | | |
See notes to financial statements.
24
| | |
BALANCED WEALTH STRATEGY PORTFOLIO |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
NOTE A: Significant Accounting Policies
The AllianceBernstein Balanced Wealth Strategy Portfolio (the “Portfolio”) is a series of AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund, Inc. (the “Fund”). The Portfolio’s investment objective is to maximize total return consistent with the Adviser’s determination of reasonable risk. The Portfolio is diversified as defined under the Investment Company Act of 1940. The Fund was incorporated in the State of Maryland on November 17, 1987, as an open-end series investment company. The Fund offers thirteen separately managed pools of assets which have differing investment objectives and policies. The Portfolio offers Class A and Class B shares. Both classes of shares have identical voting, dividend, liquidating and other rights, except that Class B shares bear a distribution expense and have exclusive voting rights with respect to the Class B distribution plan.
The Portfolio offers and sells its shares only to separate accounts of certain life insurance companies for the purpose of funding variable annuity contracts and variable life insurance policies. Sales are made without a sales charge at the Portfolio’s net asset value per share.
The financial statements have been prepared in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“U.S. GAAP”) which require management to make certain estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities in the financial statements and amounts of income and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. The following is a summary of significant accounting policies followed by the Portfolio.
1. Security Valuation
Portfolio securities are valued at their current market value determined on the basis of market quotations or, if market quotations are not readily available or are deemed unreliable, at “fair value” as determined in accordance with procedures established by and under the general supervision of the Fund’s Board of Directors.
In general, the market value of securities which are readily available and deemed reliable are determined as follows: Securities listed on a national securities exchange (other than securities listed on the NASDAQ Stock Market, Inc. (“NASDAQ”)) or on a foreign securities exchange are valued at the last sale price at the close of the exchange or foreign securities exchange. If there has been no sale on such day, the securities are valued at the last traded price from the previous day. Securities listed on more than one exchange are valued by reference to the principal exchange on which the securities are traded; securities listed only on NASDAQ are valued in accordance with the NASDAQ Official Closing Price; listed or over the counter market (“OTC”) put or call options are valued at the mid level between the current bid and ask prices. If either a current bid or current ask price is unavailable, AllianceBernstein L.P. (the “Adviser”) will have discretion to determine the best valuation (e.g. last trade price in the case of listed options); open futures contracts are valued using the closing settlement price or, in the absence of such a price, the most recent quoted bid price. If there are no quotations available for the day of valuation, the last available closing settlement price is used; U.S. government securities and other debt instruments having 60 days or less remaining until maturity are valued at amortized cost if their original maturity was 60 days or less; or by amortizing their fair value as of the 61st day prior to maturity if their original term to maturity exceeded 60 days; fixed-income securities, including mortgage backed and asset backed securities, may be valued on the basis of prices provided by a pricing service or at a price obtained from one or more of the major broker/dealers. In cases where broker/dealer quotes are obtained, the Adviser may establish procedures whereby changes in market yields or spreads are used to adjust, on a daily basis, a recently obtained quoted price on a security. Swaps and other derivatives are valued daily, primarily using independent pricing services, independent pricing models using market inputs, as well as third party broker-dealers or counterparties.
Securities for which market quotations are not readily available (including restricted securities) or are deemed unreliable are valued at fair value. Factors considered in making this determination may include, but are not limited to, information obtained by contacting the issuer, analysts, analysis of the issuer’s financial statements or other available documents. In addition, the Portfolio may use fair value pricing for securities primarily traded in non-U.S. markets because most foreign markets close well before the Portfolio values its securities at 4:00 p.m., Eastern Time. The earlier close of these foreign markets gives rise to the possibility that significant events, including broad market moves, may have occurred in the interim and may materially affect the value of those securities. To account for this, the Portfolio may frequently value many of its foreign equity securities using fair value prices based on third party vendor modeling tools to the extent available.
25
| | |
BALANCED WEALTH STRATEGY PORTFOLIO |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
2. Fair Value Measurements
In accordance with U.S. GAAP regarding fair value measurements, fair value is defined as the price that the Portfolio would receive to sell an asset or pay to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. The U.S. GAAP disclosure requirements establish a framework for measuring fair value, and a three-level hierarchy for fair value measurements based upon the transparency of inputs to the valuation of an asset or liability. Inputs may be observable or unobservable and refer broadly to the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability. Observable inputs reflect the assumptions market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability based on market data obtained from sources independent of the Portfolio. Unobservable inputs reflect the Portfolio’s own assumptions about the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability based on the best information available in the circumstances. Each investment is assigned a level based upon the observability of the inputs which are significant to the overall valuation. The three-tier hierarchy of inputs is summarized below.
| • | | Level 1—quoted prices in active markets for identical investments |
| • | | Level 2—other significant observable inputs (including quoted prices for similar investments, interest rates, prepayment speeds, credit risk, etc.) |
| • | | Level 3—significant unobservable inputs (including the Portfolio’s own assumptions in determining the fair value of investments) |
The following table summarizes the valuation of the Portfolio’s investments by the above fair value hierarchy levels as of June 30, 2012:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Level 1 | | | Level 2 | | | Level 3 | | | Total | |
Investments in Securities: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Assets: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Common Stocks: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Financials | | $ | 49,059,751 | | | $ | 43,688,409 | | | $ | –0 | – | | $ | 92,748,160 | |
Information Technology | | | 46,961,273 | | | | 5,293,814 | | | | –0 | – | | | 52,255,087 | |
Consumer Discretionary | | | 36,031,363 | | | | 14,442,918 | | | | –0 | – | | | 50,474,281 | |
Energy | | | 29,524,299 | | | | 9,474,835 | | | | –0 | – | | | 38,999,134 | |
Health Care | | | 30,421,266 | | | | 4,630,370 | | | | –0 | – | | | 35,051,636 | |
Industrials | | | 19,708,906 | | | | 10,705,835 | | | | –0 | – | | | 30,414,741 | |
Consumer Staples | | | 11,758,091 | | | | 7,878,614 | | | | –0 | – | | | 19,636,705 | |
Materials | | | 3,965,952 | | | | 4,453,903 | | | | –0 | – | | | 8,419,855 | |
Telecommunication Services | | | 4,325,141 | | | | 3,371,462 | | | | –0 | – | | | 7,696,603 | |
Utilities | | | 5,551,928 | | | | 1,266,213 | | | | –0 | – | | | 6,818,141 | |
Other Instruments | | | 567,073 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 567,073 | |
Corporates—Investment Grades | | | 110,369 | | | | 52,661,857 | | | | –0 | – | | | 52,772,226 | |
Mortgage Pass-Throughs | | | –0 | – | | | 46,075,737 | | | | –0 | – | | | 46,075,737 | |
Governments—Treasuries | | | –0 | – | | | 31,711,556 | | | | –0 | – | | | 31,711,556 | |
Asset-Backed Securities | | | –0 | – | | | 17,932,875 | | | | 2,806,540 | | | | 20,739,415 | |
Agencies | | | –0 | – | | | 18,446,790 | | | | –0 | – | | | 18,446,790 | |
Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securities | | | –0 | – | | | 10,933,142 | | | | 3,468,949 | | | | 14,402,091 | |
Corporates—Non-Investment Grades | | | –0 | – | | | 2,346,600 | | | | –0 | – | | | 2,346,600 | |
Quasi-Sovereigns | | | –0 | – | | | 2,239,003 | | | | –0 | – | | | 2,239,003 | |
Inflation-Linked Securities | | | –0 | – | | | 1,197,471 | | | | –0 | – | | | 1,197,471 | |
Governments—Sovereign Bonds | | | –0 | – | | | 1,094,521 | | | | –0 | – | | | 1,094,521 | |
Local Governments—Municipal Bonds | | | –0 | – | | | 588,242 | | | | –0 | – | | | 588,242 | |
Preferred Stocks | | | 175,875 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 175,875 | |
Collateralized Mortgage Obligations | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 86,253 | | | | 86,253 | |
Options Purchased—Puts | | | –0 | – | | | 184,198 | | | | –0 | – | | | 184,198 | |
Short-Term Investments: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Time Deposit | | | –0 | – | | | 12,123,280 | | | | –0 | – | | | 12,123,280 | |
U.S. Treasury Bill | | | –0 | – | | | 2,464,763 | | | | –0 | – | | | 2,464,763 | |
Governments—Treasuries | | | –0 | – | | | 1,375,935 | | | | –0 | – | | | 1,375,935 | |
Investments of Cash Collateral for Security Loaned in Affiliated Money Market Fund | | | 12,325,237 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 12,325,237 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Investments in Securities | | | 250,486,524 | | | | 306,582,343 | + | | | 6,361,742 | | | | 563,430,609 | |
26
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Level 1 | | | Level 2 | | | Level 3 | | | Total | |
Other Financial Instruments* : | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Assets: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Futures Contracts | | $ | 19,123 | | | $ | –0 | – | | $ | –0 | – | | $ | 19,123 | # |
Forward Currency Exchange Contracts | | | –0 | – | | | 290,940 | | | | –0 | – | | | 290,940 | |
Liabilities: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Forward Currency Exchange Contracts | | | –0 | – | | | (715,596 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | (715,596 | ) |
Put Options Written | | | –0 | – | | | (63,205 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | (63,205 | ) |
Interest Rate Swap Contracts | | | –0 | – | | | (96,462 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | (96,462 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total | | $ | 250,505,647 | | | $ | 305,998,020 | | | $ | 6,361,742 | | | $ | 562,865,409 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
* | | Other financial instruments are derivative instruments, such as futures, forwards and swap contracts, which are valued at the unrealized appreciation/depreciation on the instrument. Other financial instruments may also include options written which are valued at market value. |
+ | | A significant portion of the Portfolio’s foreign equity investments are categorized as Level 2 investments since they are valued using fair value prices based on third party vendor modeling tools to the extent available, see Note A.1. |
# | | Only variation margin receivable/payable at period end is reported within the statement of assets and liabilities. This amount reflects cumulative appreciation/(depreciation) of futures contracts as reported in the portfolio of investments. |
Following is a reconciliation of investments in which significant unobservable inputs (Level 3) were used in determining fair value. The transfers between levels of the fair value hierarchy assumes the financial instrument was transferred at the beginning of the reporting period.
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Asset-Backed Securities | | | Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securities | | | Collateralized Mortgage Obligations | |
Balance as of 12/31/11 | | $ | 1,850,013 | | | $ | 453,065 | | | $ | 311,631 | |
Accrued discounts/(premiums) | | | 599 | | | | 9,885 | | | | 19 | |
Realized gain (loss) | | | (31,028 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | (271,800 | ) |
Change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation | | | 42,587 | | | | 35,580 | | | | 305,924 | |
Purchases | | | 1,432,047 | | | | 2,970,419 | | | | –0 | – |
Sales | | | (487,678 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | (259,521 | ) |
Transfers in to Level 3 | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
Transfers out of Level 3 | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Balance as of 6/30/12 | | $ | 2,806,540 | | | $ | 3,468,949 | | | $ | 86,253 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation from Investments held as of 6/30/12* | | $ | 42,587 | | | $ | 35,580 | | | $ | 2,432 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | |
| | Total | | | | | | | |
Balance as of 12/31/11 | | $ | 2,614,709 | | | | | | | | | |
Accrued discounts/(premiums) | | | 10,503 | | | | | | | | | |
Realized gain (loss) | | | (302,828 | ) | | | | | | | | |
Change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation | | | 384,091 | | | | | | | | | |
Purchases | | | 4,402,466 | | | | | | | | | |
Sales | | | (747,199 | ) | | | | | | | | |
Transfers in to Level 3 | | | –0 | – | | | | | | | | |
Transfers out of Level 3 | | | –0 | – | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Balance as of 6/30/12 | | $ | 6,361,742 | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation from Investments held as of 6/30/12* | | $ | 80,599 | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
* | | The unrealized appreciation/depreciation is included in net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of investments in the accompanying statement of operations. |
27
| | |
BALANCED WEALTH STRATEGY PORTFOLIO |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
3. Currency Translation
Assets and liabilities denominated in foreign currencies and commitments under forward currency exchange contracts are translated into U.S. dollars at the mean of the quoted bid and ask prices of such currencies against the U.S. dollar. Purchases and sales of portfolio securities are translated into U.S. dollars at the rates of exchange prevailing when such securities were acquired or sold. Income and expenses are translated into U.S. dollars at rates of exchange prevailing when accrued.
Net realized gain or loss on foreign currency transactions represents foreign exchange gains and losses from sales and maturities of foreign fixed income investments, foreign currency exchange contracts, holding of foreign currencies, currency gains or losses realized between the trade and settlement dates on foreign investment transactions, and the difference between the amounts of dividends, interest and foreign withholding taxes recorded on the Portfolio’s books and the U.S. dollar equivalent amounts actually received or paid. Net unrealized currency gains and losses from valuing foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities at period end exchange rates are reflected as a component of net unrealized appreciation or depreciation of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities.
4. Taxes
It is the Portfolio’s policy to meet the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code applicable to regulated investment companies and to distribute all of its investment company taxable income and net realized gains, if any, to shareholders. Therefore, no provisions for federal income or excise taxes are required. The Portfolio may be subject to taxes imposed by countries in which it invests. Such taxes are generally based on income and/or capital gains earned or repatriated. Taxes are accrued and applied to net investment income, net realized gains and net unrealized appreciation/depreciation as such income and/or gains are earned.
In accordance with U.S. GAAP requirements regarding accounting for uncertainties in income taxes, management has analyzed the Portfolio’s tax positions taken or expected to be taken on federal and state income tax returns for all open tax years (the current and the prior three tax years) and has concluded that no provision for income tax is required in the Portfolio’s financial statements.
5. Investment Income and Investment Transactions
Dividend income is recorded on the ex-dividend date or as soon as the Portfolio is informed of the dividend. Interest income is accrued daily. Investment transactions are accounted for on the date the securities are purchased or sold. Investment gains or losses are determined on the identified cost basis. The Portfolio amortizes premiums and accretes discounts as adjustments to interest income.
6. Class Allocations
All income earned and expenses incurred by the Portfolio are borne on a pro-rata basis by each outstanding class of shares, based on the proportionate interest in the Portfolio represented by the net assets of such class, except for class specific expenses which are allocated to the respective class. Expenses of the Fund are charged to each Portfolio in proportion to net assets. Realized and unrealized gains and losses are allocated among the various share classes based on respective net assets.
7. Dividends and Distributions
Dividends and distributions to shareholders, if any, are recorded on the ex-dividend date. Income dividends and capital gains distributions are determined in accordance with federal tax regulations and may differ from those determined in accordance with U.S. GAAP. To the extent these differences are permanent, such amounts are reclassified within the capital accounts based on their federal tax basis treatment; temporary differences do not require such reclassification.
8. Repurchase Agreements
It is the Portfolio’s policy that its custodian or designated subcustodian take control of securities as collateral under repurchase agreements and to determine on a daily basis that the value of such securities are sufficient to cover the value of the repurchase agreements. If the seller defaults and the value of the collateral declines or if bankruptcy proceedings are commenced with respect to the seller of the security, realization of collateral by the Portfolio may be delayed or limited.
NOTE B: Advisory Fee and Other Transactions with Affiliates
Under the terms of the investment advisory agreement, the Portfolio pays the Adviser an advisory fee at an annual rate of .55% of the first $2.5 billion, .45% of the next $2.5 billion and .40% in excess of $5 billion, of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets. The fee is accrued daily and paid monthly. The Adviser has agreed to waive its fees and bear certain expenses to the extent necessary to limit total operating expenses on an annual basis to .75% and 1.00% of daily average net assets for
28
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Class A and Class B shares, respectively (the “Expense Caps”). The Expense Caps extend through May 1, 2013 and then may be extended by the Adviser for additional one-year terms. For the six months ended June 30, 2012, there were no expenses waived by the Adviser.
Pursuant to the investment advisory agreement, the Portfolio may reimburse the Adviser for certain legal and accounting services provided to the Portfolio by the Adviser. For the six months ended June 30, 2012, such fee amounted to $27,854.
Brokerage commissions paid on investment transactions for the six months ended June 30, 2012 amounted to $275,425, of which $0 and $263, respectively, was paid to Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. LLC and Sanford C. Bernstein Limited, affiliates of the Adviser.
The Portfolio compensates AllianceBernstein Investor Services, Inc. (“ABIS”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Adviser, under a Transfer Agency Agreement for providing personnel and facilities to perform transfer agency services for the Portfolio. Such compensation retained by ABIS amounted to $692 for the six months ended June 30, 2012.
NOTE C: Distribution Plan
The Portfolio has adopted a Distribution Plan (the “Plan”) for Class B shares pursuant to Rule 12b-1 under the Investment Company Act of 1940. Under the Plan, the Portfolio pays distribution and servicing fees to AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (the “Distributor”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Adviser, at an annual rate of up to .50% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The fees are accrued daily and paid monthly. The Board of Directors currently limits payments under the Plan to .25% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The Plan provides that the Distributor will use such payments in their entirety for distribution assistance and promotional activities.
The Portfolio is not obligated under the Plan to pay any distribution and servicing fees in excess of the amounts set forth above. The purpose of the payments to the Distributor under the Plan is to compensate the Distributor for its distribution services with respect to the sale of the Portfolio’s Class B shares. Since the Distributor’s compensation is not directly tied to its expenses, the amount of compensation received by it under the Plan during any year may be more or less than its actual expenses. For this reason, the Plan is characterized by the staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission as being of the “compensation” variety.
In the event that the Plan is terminated or not continued, no distribution or servicing fees (other than current amounts accrued but not yet paid) would be owed by the Portfolio to the Distributor.
The Plan also provides that the Adviser may use its own resources to finance the distribution of the Portfolio’s shares.
NOTE D: Investment Transactions
Purchases and sales of investment securities (excluding short-term investments) for the six months ended June 30, 2012 were as follows:
| | | | | | | | |
| | Purchases | | | Sales | |
Investment securities (excluding U.S. government securities) | | $ | 182,997,814 | | | $ | 183,166,971 | |
U.S. government securities | | | 91,954,967 | | | | 99,988,806 | |
The cost of investments for federal income tax purposes was substantially the same as the cost for financial reporting purposes. Accordingly, gross unrealized appreciation and unrealized depreciation (excluding futures, swap contracts and foreign currency transactions) are as follows:
| | | | |
Gross unrealized appreciation | | $ | 51,934,488 | |
Gross unrealized depreciation | | | (18,325,724 | ) |
| | | | |
Net unrealized appreciation | | $ | 33,608,764 | |
| | | | |
1. Derivative Financial Instruments
The Portfolio may use derivatives in an effort to earn income and enhance returns, to replace more traditional direct investments, to obtain exposure to otherwise inaccessible markets (collectively, “investment purposes”), or to hedge or adjust the risk profile of its portfolio.
29
| | |
BALANCED WEALTH STRATEGY PORTFOLIO |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
The principal types of derivatives utilized by the Portfolio, as well as the methods in which they may be used are:
The Portfolio may buy or sell futures contracts for investment purposes or for the purpose of hedging its portfolio against adverse effects of potential movements in the market or for investment purposes. The Portfolio bears the market risk that arises from changes in the value of these instruments and the imperfect correlation between movements in the price of the futures contracts and movements in the price of the assets, reference rates or indices which they are designed to track. Among other things, the Portfolio may purchase or sell futures contracts for foreign currencies or options thereon for non-hedging purposes as a means of making direct investment in foreign currencies, as described below under “Currency Transactions”.
At the time the Portfolio enters into a futures contract, the Portfolio deposits and maintains as collateral an initial margin with the broker, as required by the exchange on which the transaction is effected. Pursuant to the contract, the Portfolio agrees to receive from or pay to the broker an amount of cash equal to the daily fluctuation in the value of the contract. Such receipts or payments are known as variation margin and are recorded by the Portfolio as unrealized gains or losses. Risks may arise from the potential inability of a counterparty to meet the terms of the contract. The credit/counterparty risk for exchange-traded futures contracts is generally less than privately negotiated futures contracts, since the clearinghouse, which is the issuer or counterparty to each exchange-traded future, provides a guarantee of performance. This guarantee is supported by a daily payment system (i.e., margin requirements). When the contract is closed, the Portfolio records a realized gain or loss equal to the difference between the value of the contract at the time it was opened and the time it was closed.
Use of long futures contracts subjects the Portfolio to risk of loss in excess of the amounts shown on the statement of assets and liabilities, up to the notional value of the futures contracts. Use of short futures contracts subjects the Portfolio to unlimited risk of loss. Under some circumstances, futures exchanges may establish daily limits on the amount that the price of a futures contract can vary from the previous day’s settlement price, which could effectively prevent liquidation of unfavorable positions.
During the six months ended June 30, 2012, the Portfolio held futures contracts for hedging purposes.
| • | | Forward Currency Exchange Contracts |
The Portfolio may enter into forward currency exchange contracts in order to hedge its exposure to changes in foreign currency exchange rates on its foreign portfolio holdings, to hedge certain firm purchase and sale commitments denominated in foreign currencies and for non-hedging purposes as a means of making direct investments in foreign currencies, as described below under “Currency Transactions”.
A forward currency exchange contract is a commitment to purchase or sell a foreign currency at a future date at a negotiated forward rate. The gain or loss arising from the difference between the original contract and the closing of such contract would be included in net realized gain or loss on foreign currency transactions. Fluctuations in the value of open forward currency exchange contracts are recorded for financial reporting purposes as unrealized appreciation and/or depreciation by the Portfolio. Risks may arise from the potential inability of a counterparty to meet the terms of a contract and from unanticipated movements in the value of a foreign currency relative to the U.S. dollar. The face or contract amount, in U.S. dollars reflects the total exposure the Portfolio has in that particular currency contract.
During the six months ended June 30, 2012, the Portfolio held forward currency exchange contracts for hedging purposes.
For hedging and investment purposes, the Portfolio may purchase and write (sell) put and call options on U.S. and foreign securities, including government securities, and foreign currencies that are traded on U.S. and foreign securities exchanges and over-the-counter markets. Among other things, the Portfolio may use options transactions for non-hedging purposes as a means of making direct investments in foreign currencies, as described below under “Currency Transactions” and may use options strategies involving the purchase and/or writing of various combinations of call and/or put options, for hedging and investment purposes.
30
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
The risk associated with purchasing an option is that the Portfolio pays a premium whether or not the option is exercised. Additionally, the Portfolio bears the risk of loss of the premium and change in market value should the counterparty not perform under the contract. Put and call options purchased are accounted for in the same manner as portfolio securities. The cost of securities acquired through the exercise of call options is increased by premiums paid. The proceeds from securities sold through the exercise of put options are decreased by the premiums paid.
When the Portfolio writes an option, the premium received by the Portfolio is recorded as a liability and is subsequently adjusted to the current market value of the option written. Premiums received from written options which expire unexercised are recorded by the Portfolio on the expiration date as realized gains from options written. The difference between the premium received and the amount paid on effecting a closing purchase transaction, including brokerage commissions, is also treated as a realized gain, or if the premium received is less than the amount paid for the closing purchase transaction, as a realized loss. If a call option is exercised, the premium received is added to the proceeds from the sale of the underlying security or currency in determining whether the Portfolio has realized a gain or loss. If a put option is exercised, the premium received reduces the cost basis of the security or currency purchased by the Portfolio. In writing an option, the Portfolio bears the market risk of an unfavorable change in the price of the security or currency underlying the written option. Exercise of an option written by the Portfolio could result in the Portfolio selling or buying a security or currency at a price different from the current market value.
During the six months ended June 30, 2012, the Portfolio held purchased options for hedging purposes. During the six months ended June 30, 2012, the Portfolio held written options for hedging purposes.
For the six months ended June 30, 2012, the Portfolio had the following transactions in written options:
| | | | | | | | |
| | Number of Contracts | | | Premiums Received | |
Options written outstanding as of 12/31/11 | | | –0 | – | | $ | –0 | – |
Options written | | | 14,270 | | | | 117,034 | |
Options expired | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
Options bought back | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
Options exercised | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | |
Options written outstanding as of 06/30/12 | | | 14,270 | | | $ | 117,034 | |
| | | | | | | | |
The Portfolio may enter into swaps to hedge its exposure to interest rates, credit risk, or currencies. The Portfolio may also enter into swaps for non-hedging purposes as a means of gaining market exposures, including by making direct investments in foreign currencies, as described below under “Currency Transactions”. A swap is an agreement that obligates two parties to exchange a series of cash flows at specified intervals based upon or calculated by reference to changes in specified prices or rates for a specified amount of an underlying asset. The payment flows are usually netted against each other, with the difference being paid by one party to the other. In addition, collateral may be pledged or received by the Portfolio in accordance with the terms of the respective swap agreements to provide value and recourse to the Portfolio or its counterparties in the event of default, bankruptcy or insolvency by one of the parties to the swap agreement.
Risks may arise as a result of the failure of the counterparty to the swap contract to comply with the terms of the swap contract. The loss incurred by the failure of a counterparty is generally limited to the net interim payment to be received by the Portfolio, and/or the termination value at the end of the contract. Therefore, the Portfolio considers the creditworthiness of each counterparty to a swap contract in evaluating potential counterparty risk. This risk is mitigated by having a netting arrangement between the Portfolio and the counterparty and by the posting of collateral by the counterparty to the Portfolio to cover the Portfolio’s exposure to the counterparty. Additionally, risks may arise from unanticipated movements in interest rates or in the value of the underlying securities. The Portfolio accrues for the interim payments on swap contracts on a daily basis, with the net amount recorded within unrealized appreciation/depreciation of swap contracts on the statement of assets and liabilities, where applicable. Once the interim payments are settled in cash, the net amount is recorded as realized gain/(loss) on swaps on the statement of operations, in addition to any realized gain/(loss) recorded upon the termination of swap contracts.
31
| | |
BALANCED WEALTH STRATEGY PORTFOLIO |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Fluctuations in the value of swap contracts are recorded as a component of net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of swap contracts on the statement of operations.
Interest Rate Swaps:
The Portfolio is subject to interest rate risk exposure in the normal course of pursuing its investment objectives. Because the Portfolio holds fixed rate bonds, the value of these bonds may decrease if interest rates rise. To help hedge against this risk and to maintain its ability to generate income at prevailing market rates, the Portfolio may enter into interest rate swap contracts. Interest rate swaps are agreements between two parties to exchange cash flows based on a notional amount. The Portfolio may elect to pay a fixed rate and receive a floating rate, or, receive a fixed rate and pay a floating rate on a notional amount.
In addition, the Portfolio may also enter into interest rate swap transactions to preserve a return or spread on a particular investment or portion of its portfolio, or protecting against an increase in the price of securities the Portfolio anticipates purchasing at a later date. Interest rate swaps involve the exchange by a Portfolio with another party of their respective commitments to pay or receive interest (e.g., an exchange of floating rate payments for fixed rate payments) computed based on a contractually-based principal (or “notional”) amount. Interest rate swaps are entered into on a net basis (i.e., the two payment streams are netted out, with the Portfolio receiving or paying, as the case may be, only the net amount of the two payments).
During the six months ended June 30, 2012, the Portfolio held interest rate swap contracts for hedging purposes.
Credit Default Swaps:
The Portfolio may enter into credit default swaps, including to manage its exposure to the market or certain sectors of the market, to reduce its risk exposure to defaults by corporate and sovereign issuers held by the Portfolio, or to create exposure to corporate or sovereign issuers to which it is not otherwise exposed. The Portfolio may purchase credit protection (“Buy Contract”) or provide credit protection (“Sale Contract”) on the referenced obligation of the credit default swap. During the term of the swap agreement, the Portfolio receives/(pays) fixed payments from/(to) the respective counterparty, calculated at the agreed upon rate applied to the notional amount. The accrual for these interim payments is recorded within unrealized appreciation/depreciation of swap contracts on the statement of assets and liabilities. Upfront premiums paid or received in connection with credit default swap contracts are recognized as cost or proceeds on the statement of assets and liabilities and are amortized on a straight line basis over the life of the contract. Amortized upfront premiums are included in net realized gain/(loss) from swaps on the statement of operations. If the Portfolio is a buyer/(seller) of protection and a credit event occurs, as defined under the terms of the swap agreement, the Portfolio will either (i) receive from the seller/(pay to the buyer) of protection an amount equal to the notional amount of the swap contract (the “Maximum Payout Amount”) and deliver/(take delivery of) the referenced obligation or (ii) receive/(pay) a net settlement amount in the form of cash or securities equal to the notional amount of the swap less the recovery value of the referenced obligation.
Credit default swaps may involve greater risks than if a Portfolio had invested in the referenced obligation directly. Credit default swaps are subject to general market risk, liquidity risk, counterparty risk and credit risk. If the Portfolio is a buyer of protection and no credit event occurs, it will lose the payments it made to its counterparty. If the Portfolio is a seller of protection and a credit event occurs, the value of the referenced obligation received by the Portfolio coupled with the periodic payments previously received, may be less than the Maximum Payout Amount it pays to the buyer, resulting in a net loss to the Portfolio.
During the six months ended June 30, 2012, the Portfolio held credit default swap contracts for hedging purposes.
Implied credit spreads utilized in determining the market value of credit default swaps on issuers as of period end are disclosed in the portfolio of investments. The implied spreads serve as an indicator of the current status of the payment/performance risk and typically reflect the likelihood of default by the issuer of the referenced obligation. The implied credit spread of a particular reference obligation also reflects the cost of buying/selling protection and may reflect upfront payments required to be made to enter into the agreement. Widening credit spreads typically represent a deterioration of the referenced obligation’s credit soundness and greater likelihood of default or other credit event occurring as defined under the terms of the agreement. A credit spread identified as “Defaulted” indicates a credit event has occurred for the referenced obligation.
32
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
In certain circumstances Maximum Payout Amounts may be partially offset by recovery values of the respective referenced obligations, upfront premium received upon entering into the agreement, or net amounts received from settlement of buy protection credit default swap agreements entered into by the Portfolio for the same reference obligation with the same counterparty. As of June 30, 2012, the Portfolio did not have Buy Contracts outstanding with respect to the same referenced obligation and same counterparty for its Sale Contracts outstanding.
Documentation governing the Portfolio’s OTC derivatives may contain provisions for early termination of such transaction in the event the net assets of the Portfolio decline below specific levels set forth in the documentation (“net asset contingent features”). If these levels are triggered, the Portfolio’s counterparty has the right to terminate such transaction and require the Portfolio to pay or receive a settlement amount in connection with the terminated transaction. As of June 30, 2012, the Portfolio had OTC derivatives with contingent features in net liability positions in the amount of $579,238. If a trigger event had occurred at June 30, 2012, for those derivatives in a net liability position, an amount of $579,238 would be required to be posted by the Portfolio.
At June 30, 2012, the Portfolio had entered into the following derivatives:
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Asset Derivatives | | | Liability Derivatives | |
Derivative Type | | Statement of Assets and Liabilities Location | | Fair Value | | | Statement of Assets and Liabilities Location | | Fair Value | |
Foreign exchange contracts | | Unrealized appreciation of forward currency exchange contracts | | $ | 290,940 | | | Unrealized depreciation of forward currency exchange contracts | | $ | 715,596 | |
Equity contracts | | Receivable/Payable for variation margin on futures contracts | | | 19,123 | * | | | | | | |
Interest rate contracts | | | | | | | | Unrealized depreciation on interest rate swap contracts | | | 96,462 | |
Equity contracts | | Investments in securities, at value | | | 184,198 | | | | | | | |
Equity contracts | | | | | | | | Options written, at value | | | 63,205 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total | | | | $ | 494,261 | | | | | $ | 875,263 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
* | | Only variation margin receivable/payable at period end is reported within the statement of assets and liabilities. This amount reflects cumulative appreciation/(depreciation) of futures contracts as reported in the portfolio of investments. |
The effect of derivative instruments on the statement of operations for the six months ended June 30, 2012:
| | | | | | | | | | |
Derivative Type | | Location of Gain or (Loss) on Derivatives | | Realized Gain or (Loss) on Derivatives | | | Change in Unrealized Appreciation or (Depreciation) | |
Foreign exchange contracts | | Net realized gain (loss) on foreign currency transactions; Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities | | $ | (657,772 | ) | | $ | (355,798 | ) |
Equity contracts | | Net realized gain (loss) on futures contracts; Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of futures contracts | | | (6,345 | ) | | | 18,014 | |
Interest rate contracts | | Net realized gain (loss) on swap contracts; Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of swap contracts | | | 31,157 | | | | (96,462 | ) |
33
| | |
BALANCED WEALTH STRATEGY PORTFOLIO |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Derivative Type | | Location of Gain or (Loss) on Derivatives | | Realized Gain or (Loss) on Derivatives | | | Change in Unrealized Appreciation or (Depreciation) | |
Credit contracts | | Net realized gain (loss) on swap contracts; Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of swap contracts | | $ | (243,134 | ) | | $ | 85,147 | |
Equity contracts | | Net realized gain (loss) on investment transactions; Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of investments | | | –0 | – | | | (108,026 | ) |
Equity contracts | | Net realized gain (loss) on options written; Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of options written | | | –0 | – | | | 53,829 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Total | | | | $ | (876,094 | ) | | $ | (403,296 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | |
For the six months ended June 30, 2012, the average monthly principal amount of foreign currency exchange contracts was $72,672,135, the average monthly original value of futures contracts was $318,554, and the average monthly notional amount of interest rate swaps was $5,099,515. For two months of the period, the average monthly notional amount of credit default swaps was $4,278,199. For one month of the period, the average monthly cost of purchased options contracts was $293,092.
2. Currency Transactions
The Portfolio may invest in non-U.S. Dollar securities on a currency hedged or unhedged basis. The Portfolio may seek investment opportunities by taking long or short positions in currencies through the use of currency-related derivatives, including forward currency exchange contracts, futures and options on futures, swaps, and other options. The Portfolio may enter into transactions for investment opportunities when it anticipates that a foreign currency will appreciate or depreciate in value but securities denominated in that currency are not held by the Portfolio and do not present attractive investment opportunities. Such transactions may also be used when the Adviser believes that it may be more efficient than a direct investment in a foreign currency-denominated security. The Portfolio may also conduct currency exchange contracts on a spot basis (i.e., for cash at the spot rate prevailing in the currency exchange market for buying or selling currencies).
3. Dollar Rolls
The Portfolio may enter into dollar rolls. Dollar rolls involve sales by the Portfolio of securities for delivery in the current month and the Portfolio’s simultaneously contracting to repurchase substantially similar (same type and coupon) securities on a specified future date. During the roll period, the Portfolio forgoes principal and interest paid on the securities. The Portfolio is compensated by the difference between the current sales price and the lower forward price for the future purchase (often referred to as the “drop”) as well as by the interest earned on the cash proceeds of the initial sale. Dollar rolls involve the risk that the market value of the securities the Portfolio is obligated to repurchase under the agreement may decline below the repurchase price. Dollar rolls are speculative techniques and may be considered to be borrowings by the Portfolio. For the six months ended June 30, 2012, the Portfolio earned drop income of $69,824 which is included in interest income in the accompanying statement of operations.
NOTE E: Securities Lending
The Portfolio may enter into securities lending transactions. Under the Portfolio’s securities lending program, all securities loans will be collateralized continually by cash. The Portfolio will be compensated for the loan from a portion of the net return from the income earned on cash collateral after a rebate is paid to the borrower (in some cases, this rebate may be a “negative rebate” or fee paid by the borrower to the Portfolio in connection with the loan), and payments for fees of the securities lending agent and for certain other administrative expenses. It is the policy of the Portfolio to receive collateral consisting of cash in an amount exceeding the value of the securities loaned. The Portfolio will have the right to call a loan and obtain the securities loaned at any time on notice to the borrower within the normal and customary settlement time for the securities. While the securities are on loan, the borrower is obligated to pay the Portfolio amounts equal to any income or other distributions from the securities. The Portfolio will not have the right to vote any securities during the existence of a
34
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
loan, but will have the right to regain ownership of loaned securities in order to exercise voting or other ownership rights. The lending agent has agreed to indemnify the Portfolio in the case of default of any securities borrower. Collateral received and securities loaned are marked to market daily to ensure that the securities loaned are secured by collateral. The lending agent will invest the cash collateral received in AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves, an eligible money market vehicle, in accordance with the investment restrictions of the Portfolio, and as approved by the Fund’s Board of Directors. The collateral received on securities loaned is recorded as an asset as well as a corresponding liability in the statement of assets and liabilities. When the Portfolio lends securities, its investment performance will continue to reflect changes in the value of the securities loaned. At June 30, 2012, the Portfolio had securities on loan with a value of $12,129,734 and had received cash collateral which has been invested into AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves of $12,325,237. The cash collateral will be adjusted on the next business day after period end to maintain the required collateral amount. The Portfolio earned securities lending income of $94,788 and $8,376 from the borrowers and AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves, respectively, for the six months ended June 30, 2012; these amounts are reflected in the statement of operations. A principal risk of lending portfolio securities is that the borrower will fail to return the loaned securities upon termination of the loan and that the collateral will not be sufficient to replace the loaned securities. A summary of the Portfolio’s transactions in shares of AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves for the six months ended June 30, 2012 is as follows:
| | | | | | | | |
Market Value December 31, 2011 (000) | | Purchases at Cost (000) | | Sales Proceeds (000) | | Market Value June 30, 2012 (000) | | Dividend Income (000) |
$4,229 | | $49,768 | | $41,672 | | $12,325 | | $8 |
NOTE F: Capital Stock
Each class consists of 500,000,000 authorized shares. Transactions in capital shares for each class were as follows:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | SHARES | | | | | AMOUNT | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | | | | | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | |
Class A | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Shares sold | | | 36,468 | | | | 340,171 | | | | | $ | 424,393 | | | $ | 3,980,963 | |
Shares issued in reinvestment of dividends | | | –0 | – | | | 138,870 | | | | | | –0 | – | | | 1,640,050 | |
Shares redeemed | | | (1,291,900 | ) | | | (1,399,958 | ) | | | | | (14,923,292 | ) | | | (15,753,756 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (1,255,432 | ) | | | (920,917 | ) | | | | $ | (14,498,899 | ) | | $ | (10,132,743 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class B | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Shares sold | | | 2,339,947 | | | | 6,176,389 | | | | | $ | 26,725,675 | | | $ | 69,344,485 | |
Shares issued in reinvestment of dividends | | | –0 | – | | | 962,552 | | | | | | –0 | – | | | 11,281,113 | |
Shares redeemed | | | (3,439,726 | ) | | | (7,981,306 | ) | | | | | (39,394,608 | ) | | | (89,791,410 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (1,099,779 | ) | | | (842,365 | ) | | | | $ | (12,668,933 | ) | | $ | (9,165,812 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
NOTE G: Risks Involved in Investing in the Portfolio
Interest Rate Risk and Credit Risk—Interest rate risk is the risk that changes in interest rates will affect the value of the Portfolio’s investments in fixed-income debt securities such as bonds or notes. Increases in interest rates may cause the value of the Portfolio’s investments to decline. Credit risk is the risk that the issuer or guarantor of a debt security, or the counterparty to a derivative contract, will be unable or unwilling to make timely principal and/or interest payments, or to otherwise honor its obligations. The degree of risk for a particular security may be reflected in its credit risk rating. Credit risk is greater for medium quality and lower-rated securities. Lower-rated debt securities and similar unrated securities (commonly known as “junk bonds”) have speculative elements or are predominantly speculative risks.
Foreign Securities Risk—Investing in securities of foreign companies or foreign governments involves special risks which include changes in foreign currency exchange rates and the possibility of future political and economic developments which could adversely affect the value of such securities. Moreover, securities of many foreign companies or foreign governments and their markets may be less liquid and their prices more volatile than those of comparable U.S. companies or of the U.S. government.
35
| | |
BALANCED WEALTH STRATEGY PORTFOLIO |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Currency Risk—This is the risk that changes in foreign currency exchange rates may negatively affect the value of the Portfolio’s investments or reduce the returns of the Portfolio. For example, the value of the Portfolio’s investments in foreign currency-denominated securities or currencies may decrease if the U.S. Dollar is strong (i.e., gaining value relative to other currencies) and other currencies are weak (i.e., losing value relative to the U.S. Dollar). Currency markets are generally not as regulated as securities markets. Independent of the Portfolio’s investments denominated in foreign currencies, the Portfolio’s positions in various foreign currencies may cause the Portfolio to experience investment losses due to the changes in exchange rates and interest rates.
Derivatives Risk—The Portfolio may enter into derivative transactions such as forwards, options, futures and swaps. Derivatives may be illiquid, difficult to price, and leveraged so that small changes may produce disproportionate losses for the Portfolio, and subject to counterparty risk to a greater degree than more traditional investments. Derivatives may result in significant losses, including losses that are far greater than the value of the derivatives reflected in the statement of assets and liabilities.
Indemnification Risk—In the ordinary course of business, the Portfolio enters into contracts that contain a variety of indemnifications. The Portfolio’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown. However, the Portfolio has not had prior claims or losses pursuant to these indemnification provisions and expects the risk of loss thereunder to be remote. Therefore, the Portfolio has not accrued any liability in connection with these indemnification provisions.
NOTE H: Joint Credit Facility
A number of open-end mutual funds managed by the Adviser, including the Portfolio, participate in a $140 million revolving credit facility (the “Facility”) intended to provide short-term financing, if necessary, subject to certain restrictions in connection with abnormal redemption activity. Commitment fees related to the Facility are paid by the participating funds and are included in miscellaneous expenses in the statement of operations. The Portfolio did not utilize the Facility during the six months ended June 30, 2012.
NOTE I: Distributions to Shareholders
The tax character of distributions to be paid for the year ending December 31, 2012 will be determined at the end of the current fiscal year. The tax character of distributions paid during the fiscal years ended December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010 were as follows:
| | | | | | | | |
| | 2011 | | | 2010 | |
Distributions paid from: | | | | | | | | |
Ordinary income | | $ | 12,921,163 | | | $ | 13,766,301 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total taxable distributions | | | 12,921,163 | | | | 13,766,301 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total distributions paid | | $ | 12,921,163 | | | $ | 13,766,301 | |
| | | | | | | | |
As of December 31, 2011, the components of accumulated earnings/(deficit) on a tax basis were as follows:
| | | | |
Undistributed ordinary income | | $ | 10,669,101 | |
Accumulated capital and other losses | | | (26,480,631 | )(a) |
Unrealized appreciation/(depreciation) | | | 11,762,319 | (b) |
| | | | |
Total accumulated earnings/(deficit) | | $ | (4,049,211 | ) |
| | | | |
(a) | | On December 31, 2011, the Portfolio had a net capital loss carryforward of $23,949,717. During the fiscal year, the Portfolio utilized $23,208,874 of capital loss carryforwards to offset current year net realized gains. At December 31, 2011, the Portfolio had a post-October short-term capital loss deferral of $2,530,914, which is deemed to arise on January 1, 2012. |
(b) | | The differences between book-basis and tax-basis unrealized appreciation/(depreciation) are attributable primarily to the tax deferral of losses on wash sales, the tax treatment of swaps, the realization for tax purposes of gains/losses on certain derivative instruments, the tax treatment of Treasury inflation-protected securities and passive foreign investment companies (PFICs), return of capital distributions received from underlying securities, and the tax treatment of partnership investments. |
For tax purposes, net capital losses may be carried over to offset future capital gains, if any. Under the Regulated Investment Company Modernization Act of 2010, funds are permitted to carry forward capital losses incurred in taxable years beginning after December 22, 2010 for an indefinite period. These post-enactment capital losses must be utilized prior to the pre-enactment capital losses, which are subject to expiration. Post-enactment capital loss carryforwards will retain their character as either short-term or long-term capital losses rather than being considered short-term as under previous regulation.
36
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
As of December 31, 2011, the Portfolio had a net capital loss carryforward of $23,949,717 which will expire as follows:
| | | | |
SHORT-TERM AMOUNT | | LONG-TERM AMOUNT | | EXPIRATION |
$ 23,949,717 | | n/a | | 2017 |
NOTE J: Recent Accounting Pronouncement
In December 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued an Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) related to disclosures about offsetting assets and liabilities in financial statements. The amendments in this update require an entity to disclose both gross and net information for derivatives and other financial instruments that are either offset in the statement of assets and liabilities or subject to an enforceable master netting arrangement or similar agreement. The ASU is effective during interim or annual reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2013. At this time, management is evaluating the implication of this ASU and its impact on the financial statements has not been determined.
NOTE K: Subsequent Events
Management has evaluated subsequent events for possible recognition or disclosure in the financial statements through the date the financial statements are issued. Management has determined that there are no material events that would require disclosure in the Portfolio’s financial statements through this date.
37
| | |
|
BALANCED WEALTH STRATEGY PORTFOLIO |
FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Selected Data For A Share Of Capital Stock Outstanding Throughout Each Period
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | CLASS A | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, | |
| | 2011 | | | 2010 | | | 2009 | | | 2008 | | | 2007 | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | | | $10.90 | | | | $11.48 | | | | $10.66 | | | | $8.63 | | | | $13.05 | | | | $12.87 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Income From Investment Operations | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income (a) | | | .12 | | | | .23 | | | | .23 | | | | .24 | | | | .22 | (b) | | | .31 | (b) |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | .53 | | | | (.53 | ) | | | .88 | | | | 1.89 | | | | (3.97 | ) | | | .41 | |
Contributions from Adviser | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | .00 | (c) | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) in net asset value from operations | | | .65 | | | | (.30 | ) | | | 1.11 | | | | 2.13 | | | | (3.75 | ) | | | .72 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Less: Dividends and Distributions | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Dividends from net investment income | | | –0 | – | | | (.28 | ) | | | (.29 | ) | | | (.10 | ) | | | (.39 | ) | | | (.32 | ) |
Distributions from net realized gain on investment transactions | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | (.28 | ) | | | (.22 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total dividends and distributions | | | –0 | – | | | (.28 | ) | | | (.29 | ) | | | (.10 | ) | | | (.67 | ) | | | (.54 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net asset value, end of period | | | $11.55 | | | | $10.90 | | | | $11.48 | | | | $10.66 | | | | $8.63 | | | | $13.05 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Return | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total investment return based on net asset value (d) | | | 5.96 | % | | | (2.81 | )%* | | | 10.61 | %* | | | 24.88 | %* | | | (30.01 | )%* | | | 5.55 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Ratios/Supplemental Data | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net assets, end of period (000’s omitted) | | | $44,215 | | | | $55,395 | | | | $68,914 | | | | $73,120 | | | | $67,526 | | | | $10 | |
Ratio to average net assets of: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Expenses, net of waivers/reimbursements | | | .65 | %(e) | | | .66 | % | | | .68 | %(f) | | | .69 | % | | | .75 | %(f) | | | .76 | % |
Expenses, before waivers/reimbursements | | | .65 | %(e) | | | .66 | % | | | .68 | %(f) | | | .69 | % | | | .78 | %(f) | | | .85 | % |
Net investment income | | | 2.09 | %(e) | | | 2.03 | % | | | 2.14 | %(f) | | | 2.66 | % | | | 3.08 | %(b)(f) | | | 2.33 | %(b) |
Portfolio turnover rate | | | 50 | % | | | 94 | % | | | 101 | % | | | 85 | % | | | 93 | % | | | 77 | % |
See footnote summary on page 40.
38
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Selected Data For A Share Of Capital Stock Outstanding Throughout Each Period
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | CLASS B | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, | |
| | 2011 | | | 2010 | | | 2009 | | | 2008 | | | 2007 | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | | | $10.80 | | | | $11.38 | | | | $10.58 | | | | $8.58 | | | | $12.97 | | | | $12.81 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Income From Investment Operations | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income (a) | | | .11 | | | | .20 | | | | .20 | | | | .22 | | | | .26 | (b) | | | .27 | (b) |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | .52 | | | | (.53 | ) | | | .87 | | | | 1.86 | | | | (4.02 | ) | | | .41 | |
Contributions from Adviser | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | .00 | (c) | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) in net asset value from operations | | | .63 | | | | (.33 | ) | | | 1.07 | | | | 2.08 | | | | (3.76 | ) | | | .68 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Less: Dividends and Distributions | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Dividends from net investment income | | | –0 | – | | | (.25 | ) | | | (.27 | ) | | | (.08 | ) | | | (.35 | ) | | | (.30 | ) |
Distributions from net realized gain on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | (.28 | ) | | | (.22 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total dividends and distributions | | | –0 | – | | | (.25 | ) | | | (.27 | ) | | | (.08 | ) | | | (.63 | ) | | | (.52 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net asset value, end of period | | | $11.43 | | | | $10.80 | | | | $11.38 | | | | $10.58 | | | | $8.58 | | | | $12.97 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Return | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total investment return based on net asset value (d) | | | 5.83 | % | | | (3.06 | )%* | | | 10.30 | %* | | | 24.45 | %* | | | (30.20 | )%* | | | 5.26 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Ratios/Supplemental Data | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net assets, end of period (000’s omitted) | | | $498,769 | | | | $483,047 | | | | $518,572 | | | | $458,669 | | | | $285,962 | | | | $211,440 | |
Ratio to average net assets of: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Expenses, net of waivers/reimbursements | | | .90 | %(e) | | | .91 | % | | | .93 | %(f) | | | .95 | % | | | 1.00 | %(f) | | | 1.01 | % |
Expenses, before waivers/reimbursements | | | .90 | %(e) | | | .91 | % | | | .93 | %(f) | | | .95 | % | | | 1.02 | %(f) | | | 1.07 | % |
Net investment income | | | 1.88 | %(e) | | | 1.78 | % | | | 1.89 | %(f) | | | 2.36 | % | | | 2.48 | %(b)(f) | | | 2.11 | %(b) |
Portfolio turnover rate | | | 50 | % | | | 94 | % | | | 101 | % | | | 85 | % | | | 93 | % | | | 77 | % |
See footnote summary on page 40.
39
| | |
BALANCED WEALTH STRATEGY PORTFOLIO |
FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
(a) | | Based on average shares outstanding. |
(b) | | Net of expenses waived or reimbursed by the Adviser. |
(c) | | Amount is less than $.005. |
(d) | | Total investment return is calculated assuming an initial investment made at the net asset value at the beginning of the period, reinvestment of all dividends and distributions at net asset value during the period, and redemption on the last day of the period. Total return does not reflect (i) insurance company’s separate account related expense charges and (ii) the deductions of taxes that a shareholder would pay on Portfolio distributions or the redemption of Portfolio shares. Total investment return calculated for a period of less than one year is not annualized. |
(f) | | The ratio includes expenses attributable to costs of proxy solicitation. |
* | | Includes the impact of proceeds received and credited to the Portfolio resulting from class action settlements, which enhanced the Portfolio’s performance for the years ended December 31, 2011, December 31, 2010, December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008 by 0.02%, 0.03%, 0.06% and 0.10%, respectively. |
See notes to financial statements.
40
| | |
| | |
BALANCED WEALTH STRATEGY PORTFOLIO |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
THE FOLLOWING IS NOT PART OF THE SHAREHOLDER REPORT OR THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
SUMMARY OF SENIOR OFFICER’S EVALUATION OF INVESTMENT ADVISORY AGREEMENT1
The following is a summary of the evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement between AllianceBernstein L.P. (the “Adviser”) and the AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund (the “Fund”), in respect of AllianceBernstein Balanced Wealth Strategy Portfolio (the “Portfolio”).2 The evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement was prepared by Philip L. Kirstein, the Senior Officer of the Fund, for the Directors of the Fund, as required by the August 2004 agreement between the Adviser and the New York State Attorney General (the “NYAG”). The purpose of the summary is to provide shareholders with a synopsis of the independent evaluation of the reasonableness of the advisory fees proposed to be paid by the Portfolio which was provided to the Directors in connection with their review of the proposed approval of the continuance of the Investment Advisory Agreement.
The Senior Officer’s evaluation considered the following factors:
| 1. | Management fees charged to institutional and other clients of the Adviser for like services; |
| 2. | Management fees charged by other mutual fund companies for like services; |
| 3. | Costs to the Adviser and its affiliates of supplying services pursuant to the advisory agreement, excluding any intra-corporate profit; |
| 4. | Profit margins of the Adviser and its affiliates from supplying such services; |
| 5. | Possible economies of scale as the Portfolio grows larger; and |
| 6. | Nature and quality of the Adviser’s services including the performance of the Portfolio. |
These factors, with the exception of the first factor, are generally referred to as the “Gartenberg factors,” which were articulated by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in 1982. Gartenberg v. Merrill Lynch Asset Management, Inc., 694 F. 2d 923 (2d Cir. 1982). On March 30, 2010, the Supreme Court held the Gartenberg decision was correct in its basic formulation of what §36(b) requires: to face liability under §36(b), “an investment adviser must charge a fee that is so disproportionately large that it bears no reasonable relationship to the services rendered and could not have been the product of arms length bargaining.” Jones v. Harris Associates L.P.,130 U.S. 1418 (2010). In Jones, the Court stated the Gartenberg approach fully incorporates the correct understanding of fiduciary duty within the context of section 36(b) and noted with approval that “Gartenberg insists that all relevant circumstances be taken into account” and “uses the range of fees that might result from arms-length bargaining as the benchmark for reviewing challenged fees.”
PORTFOLIO ADVISORY FEES, NET ASSETS & EXPENSE RATIOS
The Adviser proposed that the Portfolio pay the advisory fee set forth in the table below for receiving the services to be provided pursuant to the Investment Advisory Agreement. The fee schedule below, implemented in January 2004 in consideration of the Adviser’s settlement with the NYAG in December 2003, is based on a master schedule that contemplates eight categories of funds with almost all funds in each category having the same advisory fee schedule.3
| | | | | | | | |
Category | | Advisory Fee Based on % of Average Daily Net Assets | | Net Assets 06/30/11 ($MIL) | | | Portfolio |
Balanced | | 55 bp on 1st $2.5 billion 45 bp on next $2.5 billion 40 bp on the balance | | $ | 593.8 | | | Balanced Wealth Strategy Portfolio |
The Adviser is reimbursed as specified in the Investment Advisory Agreement for certain clerical, legal, accounting, administrative and other services provided to the Portfolio. During the Portfolio’s most recently completed fiscal year, the Adviser received $72,218 (0.01% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets) for such services.
1 | | It should be noted that the information in the fee evaluation was completed on July 21, 2011 and discussed with the Board of Directors on August 2-4, 2011. |
2 | | Future references to the Fund and the Portfolio do not include “AllianceBernstein.” References in the fee summary pertaining to performance and expense ratios refer to the Class A shares of the Portfolio. |
3 | | Most of the AllianceBernstein Mutual Funds, which the Adviser manages, were affected by the Adviser’s settlement with the NYAG. |
41
| | |
BALANCED WEALTH STRATEGY PORTFOLIO |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
The Adviser agreed to waive that portion of its management fees and/or reimburse the Portfolio for that portion of its total operating expenses to the degree necessary to limit the Portfolio’s expense ratios to the amounts set forth below for the Portfolio’s fiscal year. The agreement for such reimbursement is terminable by the Adviser on May 1st of each year upon at least 60 days of written notice. Also set forth below are the Portfolio’s gross expense ratios for the most recently completed fiscal year:
| | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Expense Cap Pursuant to Expense Limitation Undertaking | | Gross Expense Ratio (12/31/10) | | | Fiscal Year End |
Balanced Wealth Strategy Portfolio | | Class A 0.75% | | | 0.68% | | | December 31 |
| | Class B 1.00% | | | 0.93% | | | |
I. ADVISORY FEES CHARGED TO INSTITUTIONAL AND OTHER CLIENTS
The advisory fees charged to investment companies which the Adviser manages and sponsors are normally higher than those charged to similar sized institutional accounts, including pension plans and sub-advised investment companies. The fee differential reflects, among other things, different services provided to such clients, and different liabilities assumed. Services provided by the Adviser to the Portfolio that are not provided to non-investment company clients and sub-advised investment companies include providing office space and personnel to serve as Fund Officers, who among other responsibilities make the certifications required under the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002, and coordinating with and monitoring the Portfolio’s third party service providers such as Fund counsel, auditors, custodians, transfer agents and pricing services. The accounting, administrative, legal and compliance requirements for the Portfolio are more costly than those for institutional assets due to the greater complexities and time required for investment companies, although as previously noted, the Adviser is reimbursed for providing such services. Also, retail mutual funds managed by the Adviser are widely held. Servicing the Portfolio’s investors is more time consuming and labor intensive compared to institutional clients since the Adviser needs to communicate with a more extensive network of financial intermediaries and shareholders. The Adviser also believes that it incurs substantial entrepreneurial risk when offering a new mutual fund since establishing a new mutual fund requires a large upfront investment, and it may take a long time for the fund to achieve profitability since the fund must be priced to scale from inception in order to be competitive and assets are acquired one account at a time. In addition, managing the cash flow of an investment company may be more difficult than managing a stable pool of assets, such as an institutional account with little cash movement in either direction, particularly, if a fund is in net redemption and the Adviser is frequently forced to sell securities to raise cash for redemptions. However, managing a fund with positive cash flow may be easier at times than managing a stable pool of assets. Finally, in recent years, investment advisers have been sued by institutional clients and have suffered reputational damage both by the attendant publicity and outcomes other than complete victories. Accordingly, the legal and reputational risks associated with institutional accounts are greater than previously thought, although still not equal to those related to the mutual fund industry.
Notwithstanding the Adviser’s view that managing an investment company is not comparable to managing other institutional accounts because the services provided are different and legal and reputational risks are greater, the Supreme Court has indicated consideration should be given to the advisory fees charged to institutional accounts with similar investment styles as the Portfolio.4 With respect to the Portfolio, the Adviser represented that there is no category in the Form ADV for institutional products that has a similar investment style as the Portfolio.
The Adviser manages The AllianceBernstein Portfolios—Balanced Wealth Strategy (“Balanced Wealth Strategy”), a retail mutual fund which has a substantially similar investment style as the Portfolio.5 The Adviser also manages AllianceBernstein Balanced Shares, Inc. (“Balanced Shares, Inc.), a retail mutual fund in the Balanced category, and the advisory fee schedules of Balanced Wealth Strategy and Balanced Shares, Inc. are also shown in the table below.6
4 | | The Supreme Court stated that “courts may give such comparisons the weight that they merit in light of the similarities and differences between the services that the clients in question require, but the courts must be wary of inapt comparisons.” Among the significant differences the Supreme Court noted that may exist between services provided to mutual funds and institutional accounts are “higher marketing costs.” Jones v. Harris at 1428. |
5 | | The AllianceBernstein Mutual Fund was also affected by the settlement between the Adviser and the NYAG. As a result, the Portfolio has the same breakpoints in its advisory fee schedule as the AllianceBernstein Mutual Fund. |
6 | | There was no change to the advisory fee schedule of AllianceBernstein Balanced Shares, Inc. since the retail mutual fund had already lower breakpoints than that of the NYAG related category. |
42
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | |
Portfolio | | AllianceBernstein Mutual Fund | | Fee Schedule |
Balanced Wealth Strategy Portfolio | | Balanced Wealth Strategy | | 0.55% on first $2.5 billion 0.45% on next $2.5 billion 0.40% on the balance |
| | |
| | Balanced Shares, Inc. | | 0.60% on first $200 million 0.50% on next $200 million 0.40% on the balance |
The Adviser also manages and sponsors retail mutual funds, which are organized in jurisdictions outside the United States, generally Luxembourg and Japan, and sold to non-United States resident investors. The Adviser charges the following fees for Global Balanced Portfolio, which is a Luxembourg fund that has a somewhat similar investment style as the Portfolio:
| | | | |
Portfolio | | Luxembourg Fund | | Fee7 |
Balanced Wealth Strategy Portfolio | | Global Balanced Portfolio Class A | | 1.40% |
| | Class I (Institutional) | | 0.70% |
The AllianceBernstein Investment Trust Management mutual funds (“ITM”), which are offered to investors in Japan, have an “all-in” fee to compensate the Adviser for investment advisory as well as fund accounting and administrative services, but not for distribution services. The fee schedule of the ITM mutual fund that has a somewhat similar investment style as the Portfolio is as follows:
| | | | |
Portfolio | | ITM Mutual Fund | | Fee |
Balanced Wealth Strategy Portfolio | | Alliance Global Balance Neutral | | 0.70% |
The Adviser represented that it does not sub-advise any registered investment company with a substantially similar investment style as the Portfolio.
II. MANAGEMENT FEES CHARGED BY OTHER MUTUAL FUND COMPANIES FOR LIKE SERVICES.
Lipper, Inc. (“Lipper”), an analytical service that is not affiliated with the Adviser, compared the fees charged to the Portfolio with fees charged to other investment companies for similar services offered by other investment advisers.8 Lipper’s analysis included the Portfolio’s ranking with respect to the contractual management fee relative to the median of the Portfolio’s Lipper Expense Group (“EG”)9 at the approximate current asset level of the Portfolio.10
Lipper describes an EG as a representative sample of comparable funds. Lipper’s standard methodology for screening funds to be included in an EG entails the consideration of several fund criteria, including fund type, investment classification/objective, load type and similar 12b-1/non-12b-1 service fees, asset (size) comparability, expense components and attributes. An EG will typically consist of seven to twenty funds.
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Contractual Management Fee11 | | | Lipper Group Median (%) | | | Rank | |
Balanced Wealth Strategy Portfolio | | | 0.550 | | | | 0.539 | | | | 6/10 | |
7 | | Class A shares of the Luxembourg funds are charged an “all-in” fee, which covers investment advisory and distribution-related services, unlike class I shares, whose fee is for only investment advisory services. |
8 | | The Supreme Court cautioned against accepting mutual fund fee comparisons without careful scrutiny since “these comparisons are problematic because these fees, like those challenged, may not be the product of the negotiations conducted at arms length.” Jones v. Harris at 1429. |
9 | | Note that Lipper does not consider average account size when constructing EGs. Funds with relatively small average account sizes tend to have higher transfer agent expense ratios than comparable sized funds that have relatively large average account sizes. Note that there are limitations on Lipper expense category data because different funds categorize expenses differently. |
10 | | The contractual management fee is calculated by Lipper using the Portfolio’s contractual management fee rate at a hypothetical asset level. The hypothetical asset level is based on the combined net assets of all classes of the Portfolio, rounded up to the next $25 million. Lipper’s total expense ratio information is based on the most recent annual report except as otherwise noted. A ranking of “1” would mean that the Portfolio had the lowest effective fee rate in the Lipper peer group. |
11 | | The contractual management fee would not reflect any expense reimbursements made by the Portfolio to the Adviser for certain clerical, legal, accounting, administrative and other services. In addition, the contractual management fee does not reflect any advisory fee waivers for expense caps that would effectively reduce the actual management fee. |
43
| | |
BALANCED WEALTH STRATEGY PORTFOLIO |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Lipper also compared the Portfolio’s most recently completed fiscal year total expense ratio to the medians of the Portfolio’s EG and Lipper Expense Universe (“EU”). The EU is a broader group compared to the EG, consisting of all funds that have the same investment classification/objective and load type as the subject Portfolio.12
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Total Expense Ratio (%)13 | | | Lipper Exp. Group Median (%) | | | Lipper Exp. Group Rank | | | Lipper Exp. Universe Median (%) | | | Lipper Exp. Universe Rank | |
Balanced Wealth Strategy Portfolio | | | 0.678 | | | | 0.704 | | | | 5/10 | | | | 0.690 | | | | 13/26 | |
Based on this analysis, the Portfolio has a more favorable ranking on a total expense ratio basis than on a management fee basis.
III. COSTS TO THE ADVISER AND ITS AFFILIATES OF SUPPLYING SERVICES PURSUANT TO THE ADVISORY FEE ARRANGEMENT, EXCLUDING ANY INTRA-CORPORATE PROFIT.
The Adviser utilizes two profitability reporting systems, which operate independently but are aligned with each other, to estimate the Adviser’s profitability in connection with investment advisory services provided to the Portfolio. The Senior Officer has retained a consultant to provide independent advice regarding the alignment of the two profitability systems as well as the methodologies and allocations utilized by both profitability systems.
IV. PROFIT MARGINS OF THE ADVISER AND ITS AFFILIATES FOR SUPPLYING SUCH SERVICES.
The Portfolio’s profitability information, prepared by the Adviser for the Board of Directors, was reviewed by the Senior Officer and the consultant. The Adviser’s profitability from providing investment advisory services to the Portfolio increased during calendar year 2010, relative to 2009.14
In addition to the Adviser’s direct profits from managing the Portfolio, certain of the Adviser’s affiliates have business relationships with the Portfolio and may earn a profit from providing other services to the Portfolio. The courts have referred to this type of business opportunity as “fall-out benefits” to the Adviser and indicated that such benefits should be factored into the evaluation of the total relationship between the Portfolio and the Adviser. Neither case law nor common business practice precludes the Adviser’s affiliates from earning a reasonable profit on this type of relationship. These affiliates provide transfer agent, distribution and brokerage related services to the Portfolio and receive transfer agent fees, Rule 12b-1 payments, and brokerage commissions. In addition, the Adviser benefits from soft dollar arrangements which offset expenses the Adviser would otherwise incur.
The Portfolio has adopted a distribution plan for Class B shares pursuant to Rule 12b-1 under the 40 Act. Under the distribution plan, the Portfolio pays distribution and servicing fees to its principal underwriter and distributor, AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (“ABI”), an affiliate of the Adviser, at an annual rate of up to 0.50% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The current annual rate that the Portfolio pays to ABI for 12b-1 fees is 0.25%. During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010, ABI received $1,184,285 in Rule 12b-1 fees from the Portfolio.
The Adviser may compensate ABI for payments made by ABI to brokers for registration fees and services related to printing, distribution and advertising in connection with Class B shares. During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010, the Adviser determined that it made payments in the amount of $1,344.54 on behalf of the Portfolio to ABI.
Financial intermediaries, such as insurers, market and sell shares of the Portfolio and typically receive compensation from ABI, the Advisers and/or the Portfolio for selling shares of the Portfolio. These financial intermediaries receive compensation in any or all of the following forms: 12b-1 fees, defrayal of costs for educational seminars and training, additional distribution support, recordkeeping and/or administrative services. Payments related to providing contract-holder recordkeeping and/or administrative services will generally not exceed 0.35% of the average daily net assets of the Portfolio attributable to the relevant intermediary over the year.
12 | | Except for asset (size) comparability, Lipper uses the same criteria for selecting an EG when selecting an EU. Unlike the EG, the EU allows for the same adviser to be represented by more than just one fund. |
13 | | Most recently completed fiscal year Class A total expense ratio. |
14 | | It should be noted that at the August 2, 2011 meeting, the Adviser presented to the Board revised profitability figures with respect to the Portfolio. |
44
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
The transfer agent of the Portfolio is AllianceBernstein Investor Services, Inc. (“ABIS”). During the most recently completed fiscal year, ABIS received a fee of approximately $1,250 from the Portfolio.15
The Portfolio effected brokerage transactions through the Adviser’s affiliate, Sanford C. Bernstein & Co., LLC (“SCB & Co.”) and/or its U.K. affiliate, Sanford C. Bernstein Limited (“SCB Ltd.”), collectively “SCB,” and paid commissions for such transactions during the Portfolio’s most recently completed fiscal year. The Adviser represented that SCB’s profitability from business conducted with the Portfolio is comparable to the profitability of SCB’s dealings with other similar third party clients. In the ordinary course of business, SCB receives and pays liquidity rebates from electronic communications networks (“ECNs”) derived from trading for its clients. These credits and charges are not being passed onto any SCB client. The Adviser also receives certain soft dollar benefits from brokers that execute agency trades for its clients. These soft dollar benefits reduce the Adviser’s cost of doing business and increase its profitability.
V. POSSIBLE ECONOMIES OF SCALE
Although it is clear that economies of scale may have been shared through the existence of breakpoints in the investment advisory fee schedule, it should be noted that sufficient data does not exist to evaluate the extent to which economies of scale or scope are being shared with the AllianceBernstein Mutual Funds’ shareholders. The Adviser has indicated that economies of scale are being shared with shareholders through fee structures, subsidies and enhancement to services. Based on some of the professional literature that has considered economies of scale in the mutual fund industry, it is thought that to the extent economies of scale exist, they may more often exist across a fund family as opposed to a specific fund. This is because the costs incurred by the Adviser, such as investment research or technology for trading or compliance systems can be spread across a greater asset base as the fund family increases in size. It is also possible that as the level of services required to operate a successful investment company has increased over time, and advisory firms make such investments in their business to provide services, there may be a sharing of economies of scale without a reduction in advisory fees.
In February 2008, an independent consultant, retained by the Senior Officer, provided the Board of Directors an update of the Deli16 study on advisory fees and various fund characteristics.17 The independent consultant first reiterated the results of his previous two dimensional comparison analysis (fund size and family size) with the Board of Directors.18 The independent consultant then discussed the results of the regression model that was utilized to study the effects of various factors on advisory fees. The regression model output indicated that the bulk of the variation in fees predicted were explained by various factors, but substantially by fund AUM, family AUM, index fund indicator and investment style. The independent consultant also compared the advisory fees of the AllianceBernstein Mutual Funds to similar funds managed by 19 other large asset managers, regardless of the fund size and each Adviser’s proportion of mutual fund assets to non-mutual fund assets.
VI. NATURE AND QUALITY OF THE ADVISER’S SERVICES, INCLUDING THE PERFORMANCE OF THE PORTFOLIO
With assets under management of approximately $461 billion as of June 30, 2011, the Adviser has the investment experience to manage and provide non-investment services (described in Section I) to the Portfolio.
The information prepared by Lipper shows the 1, 3 and 5 year net performance rankings19 of the Portfolio relative to its Lipper Performance Group (“PG”) and Lipper Performance Universe (“PU”)20 for the periods ended May 31, 2011.21
15 | | The Fund (which includes the Portfolio and other series of the Fund) paid ABIS a flat fee of $18,000 in 2010. |
16 | | The Deli study was originally published in 2002 based on 1997 data. |
17 | | As mentioned previously, the Supreme Court cautioned against accepting mutual fund fee comparisons without careful scrutiny since the fees may not be the product of negotiations conducted at arms length. See Jones V. Harris at 1429. |
18 | | The two dimensional analysis showed patterns of lower advisory fees for funds with larger asset sizes and funds from larger family sizes compared to funds with smaller asset sizes and funds from smaller family sizes, which according to the independent consultant is indicative of a sharing of economies of scale and scope. However, in less liquid and active markets, such is not the case, as the empirical analysis showed potential for diseconomies of scale in those markets. The empirical analysis also showed diminishing economies of scale and scope as funds surpassed a certain high level of assets. |
19 | | The performance rankings are for the Class A shares of the Portfolio. It should be noted that the performance returns of the Portfolio shown were provided by Lipper. |
20 | | The Portfolio’s PG is identical to the Portfolio’s respective EG. The Portfolio’s PU is not identical to the Portfolio’s EU as the criteria for including/excluding a fund from a PU is somewhat different from that of an EU. |
21 | | The current Lipper investment classification/objective dictates the PG and PU throughout the life of the fund even if a fund had a different investment classification/objective at a different point in time. |
45
| | |
BALANCED WEALTH STRATEGY PORTFOLIO |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Portfolio Return (%) | | | PG Median (%) | | | PU Median (%) | | | PG Rank | | | PU Rank | |
Balanced Wealth Strategy Portfolio | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
1 year | | | 18.89 | | | | 18.13 | | | | 18.62 | | | | 3/10 | | | | 12/26 | |
3 year | | | 1.44 | | | | 2.67 | | | | 3.40 | | | | 8/10 | | | | 23/25 | |
5 year | | | 3.64 | | | | 4.38 | | | | 4.87 | | | | 7/10 | | | | 21/24 | |
Set forth below are the 1, 3 and 5 year and since inception performance returns of the Portfolio (in bold) versus its benchmark for the periods ended May 31, 2011.22
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Periods Ending May 31, 2011 Annualized Net Performance (%) | |
| | 1 Year (%) | | | 3 Year (%) | | | 5 Year (%) | | | Since Inception (%) | |
Balanced Wealth Strategy Portfolio | | | 18.89 | | | | 1.44 | | | | 3.64 | | | | 5.02 | |
60% S&P 500 Stock Index / 40% Barclays Capital U.S. Aggregate Bond Index | | | 17.88 | | | | 3.69 | | | | 5.03 | | | | 5.58 | |
S&P 500 Stock Index | | | 25.95 | | | | 0.91 | | | | 3.32 | | | | 4.67 | |
Barclays Capital U.S. Aggregate Bond Index | | | 5.84 | | | | 6.53 | | | | 6.63 | | | | 5.54 | |
Inception Date: July 1, 2004 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CONCLUSION:
Based on the factors discussed above the Senior Officer’s conclusion is that the proposed advisory fee for the Portfolio is reasonable and within the range of what would have been negotiated at arm’s-length in light of all the surrounding circumstances. This conclusion in respect of the Portfolio is based on an evaluation of all of these factors and no single factor was dispositive.
Dated: August 30, 2011
22 | | The performance returns shown in the table are for the Class A shares of the Portfolio. It should be noted that the performance returns for the Portfolio and the benchmark were provided by the Adviser. |
46
AllianceBernstein
Variable Products Series Fund, Inc.
| | |
![LOGO](https://capedge.com/proxy/N-CSRS/0001193125-12-366259/g374621g16n16.jpg) | | AllianceBernstein Dynamic Asset Allocation Portfolio |
Semi-Annual Report
![LOGO](https://capedge.com/proxy/N-CSRS/0001193125-12-366259/g374621g81g54.jpg)
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT
Investment Products Offered
| Ø | | Are Not Bank Guaranteed |
AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (ABI) is the distributor of the AllianceBernstein family of mutual funds. ABI is a member of FINRA and is an affiliate of AllianceBernstein L.P., the manager of the funds.
You may obtain a description of the Fund’s proxy voting policies and procedures, and information regarding how the Fund voted proxies relating to portfolio securities during the most recent 12-month period ended June 30, without charge. Simply visit AllianceBernstein’s website at www.alliancebernstein.com or go to the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (the “Commission”) website at www.sec.gov, or call AllianceBernstein at (800) 227-4618.
The Fund files its complete schedule of portfolio holdings with the Commission for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year on Form N-Q. The Fund’s Forms N-Q are available on the Commission’s website at www.sec.gov. The Fund’s Forms N-Q may also be reviewed and copied at the Commission’s Public Reference Room in Washington, DC; information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling (800) SEC-0330.
AllianceBernstein® and the AB Logo are registered trademarks and service marks used by permission of the owner, AllianceBernstein L.P.
| | |
| | |
DYNAMIC ASSET ALLOCATION PORTFOLIO |
FUND EXPENSES (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
As a shareholder of the Fund, you incur two types of costs: (1) transaction costs, including sales charges (loads) on purchase payments, contingent deferred sales charges on redemptions and (2) ongoing costs, including management fees; distribution (12b-1) fees; and other Fund expenses. This example is intended to help you understand your ongoing costs (in dollars) of investing in the Fund and to compare these costs with the ongoing costs of investing in other mutual funds.
The Example is based on an investment of $1,000 invested at the beginning of the period and held for the entire period as indicated below.
Actual Expenses
The table below provides information about actual account values and actual expenses. You may use the information in this line, together with the amount you invested, to estimate the expenses that you paid over the period. Simply divide your account value by $1,000 (for example, an $8,600 account value divided by $1,000 = 8.6), then multiply the result by the number in the first line under the heading entitled “Expenses Paid During Period” to estimate the expenses you paid on your account during this period. The estimate of expenses does not include fees or other expenses of any variable insurance product. If such expenses were included, the estimate of expenses you paid during the period would be higher and your ending account value would be lower.
Hypothetical Example for Comparison Purposes
The table below provides information about hypothetical account values and hypothetical expenses based on the Fund’s actual expense ratio and an assumed annual rate of return of 5% before expenses, which is not the Fund’s actual return. The hypothetical account values and expenses may not be used to estimate the actual ending account balance or expenses you paid for the period. You may use this information to compare the ongoing costs of investing in the Fund and other funds by comparing this 5% hypothetical example with the 5% hypothetical examples that appear in the shareholder reports of other funds. The estimate of expenses does not include fees or other expenses of any variable insurance product. If such expenses were included, the estimate of expenses you paid during the period would be higher and your ending account value would be lower.
Please note that the expenses shown in the table are meant to highlight your ongoing costs only and do not reflect any transactional costs, such as sales charges (loads), or contingent deferred sales charges on redemptions. Therefore, the second line of each class’ table is useful in comparing ongoing costs only, and will not help you determine the relative total costs of owning different funds. In addition, if these transactional costs were included, your costs would have been higher.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Beginning Account Value January 1, 2012 | | | Ending Account Value June 30, 2012 | | | Expenses Paid During Period* | | | Annualized Expense Ratio* | |
Class A | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Actual | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,026.70 | | | $ | 4.28 | | | | 0.85 | % |
Hypothetical (5% return before expenses) | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,020.64 | | | $ | 4.27 | | | | 0.85 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class B | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Actual | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,025.70 | | | $ | 5.54 | | | | 1.10 | % |
Hypothetical (5% return before expenses) | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,019.39 | | | $ | 5.52 | | | | 1.10 | % |
* | | Expenses are equal to each classes’ annualized expense ratios, multiplied by the average account value over the period, multiplied by 182/366 (to reflect the one-half year period). |
1
| | |
DYNAMIC ASSET ALLOCATION PORTFOLIO |
TEN LARGEST HOLDINGS* | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
COMPANY | | U.S. $ VALUE | | | PERCENT OF NET ASSETS | |
U.S. Treasury Bonds & Notes | | $ | 39,344,274 | | | | 27.0 | % |
Vanguard MSCI Emerging Markets ETF | | | 6,041,239 | | | | 4.1 | |
Apple, Inc. | | | 1,315,752 | | | | 0.9 | |
Exxon Mobil Corp. | | | 955,731 | | | | 0.7 | |
Royal Dutch Shell PLC—Class B | | | 582,124 | | | | 0.4 | |
Microsoft Corp. | | | 545,725 | | | | 0.4 | |
International Business Machines Corp. | | | 544,690 | | | | 0.4 | |
Nestle SA | | | 529,402 | | | | 0.4 | |
General Electric Co. | | | 526,627 | | | | 0.4 | |
Chevron Corp. | | | 499,015 | | | | 0.3 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | $ | 50,884,579 | | | | 35.0 | % |
PORTFOLIO BREAKDOWN**
June 30, 2012 (unaudited)
| | | | |
ASSET CLASSES | | CURRENT ALLOCATION | |
Equities | | | | |
US Large Cap | | | 21.4 | % |
International Large Cap | | | 20.4 | |
US Mid-Cap | | | 2.1 | |
US Small-Cap | | | 2.2 | |
Emerging Market Equities | | | 4.5 | |
Real Estate Equities | | | 2.8 | |
| | | | |
Sub-Total | | | 53.4 | |
| | | | |
Fixed Income | | | | |
US Bonds | | | 28.4 | |
International Bonds | | | 1.9 | |
| | | | |
Sub-Total | | | 30.3 | |
| | | | |
Cash | | | 16.3 | |
| | | | |
Total | | | 100.0 | % |
** | | All data are as of June 30, 2012. The Portfolio breakdown is expressed as an approximate percentage of the Portfolio’s total investments inclusive of derivative exposure, based on the Adviser’s internal classification guidelines. |
2
| | |
DYNAMIC ASSET ALLOCATION PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMMON STOCKS–37.9% | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
FINANCIALS–6.9% | | | | | | | | |
CAPITAL MARKETS–0.6% | | | | | | | | |
Aberdeen Asset Management PLC | | | 3,678 | | | $ | 14,980 | |
Ameriprise Financial, Inc. | | | 495 | | | | 25,869 | |
Bank of New York Mellon Corp. (The) | | | 2,815 | | | | 61,789 | |
BlackRock, Inc.–Class A | | | 327 | | | | 55,531 | |
Charles Schwab Corp. (The) | | | 2,540 | | | | 32,842 | |
Credit Suisse Group AG | | | 3,127 | | | | 57,215 | |
Daiwa Securities Group, Inc. | | | 4,000 | | | | 15,075 | |
Deutsche Bank AG | | | 2,499 | | | | 90,197 | |
E*Trade Financial Corp.(a) | | | 570 | | | | 4,583 | |
Federated Investors, Inc.–Class B(b) | | | 210 | | | | 4,589 | |
Franklin Resources, Inc. | | | 340 | | | | 37,737 | |
Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (The) | | | 1,188 | | | | 113,882 | |
Invesco Ltd. | | | 1,030 | | | | 23,278 | |
Julius Baer Group Ltd.(a) | | | 1,220 | | | | 44,233 | |
Legg Mason, Inc. | | | 260 | | | | 6,856 | |
Macquarie Group Ltd. | | | 890 | | | | 24,033 | |
Morgan Stanley | | | 3,620 | | | | 52,816 | |
Nomura Holdings, Inc. | | | 9,800 | | | | 36,638 | |
Northern Trust Corp. | | | 560 | | | | 25,771 | |
Partners Group Holding AG | | | 133 | | | | 23,654 | |
Schroders PLC | | | 729 | | | | 15,281 | |
State Street Corp. | | | 1,135 | | | | 50,666 | |
T Rowe Price Group, Inc. | | | 625 | | | | 39,350 | |
UBS AG(a) | | | 9,783 | | | | 114,482 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 971,347 | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMMERCIAL BANKS–2.6% | | | | | | | | |
Aozora Bank Ltd. | | | 6,000 | | | | 14,288 | |
Australia & New Zealand Banking Group Ltd. | | | 7,203 | | | | 164,085 | |
Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria SA | | | 12,732 | | | | 90,924 | |
Banco de Sabadell SA | | | 5,579 | | | | 10,835 | |
Banco Espirito Santo SA(a) | | | 5,403 | | | | 3,694 | |
Banco Popular Espanol SA | | | 2,820 | | | | 6,379 | |
Banco Santander SA | | | 25,164 | | | | 166,466 | |
Bank of Yokohama Ltd. (The) | | | 3,000 | | | | 14,184 | |
Barclays PLC | | | 31,160 | | | | 79,622 | |
BB&T Corp. | | | 1,650 | | | | 50,902 | |
BOC Hong Kong Holdings Ltd. | | | 10,000 | | | | 30,850 | |
CaixaBank | | | 2,117 | | | | 6,893 | |
Chiba Bank Ltd. (The) | | | 2,000 | | | | 12,013 | |
Comerica, Inc. | | | 450 | | | | 13,819 | |
Commerzbank AG(a) | | | 11,674 | | | | 19,828 | |
Commonwealth Bank of Australia | | | 4,251 | | | | 232,804 | |
Credit Agricole SA(a) | | | 5,455 | | | | 24,070 | |
Danske Bank A/S(a) | | | 1,753 | | | | 24,374 | |
DBS Group Holdings Ltd. | | | 5,000 | | | | 55,228 | |
DnB NOR ASA | | | 2,627 | | | | 26,122 | |
Erste Group Bank AG(a) | | | 578 | | | | 10,977 | |
Fifth Third Bancorp | | | 2,190 | | | | 29,346 | |
First Horizon National Corp. | | | 585 | | | | 5,060 | |
Fukuoka Financial Group, Inc. | | | 4,000 | | | | 15,620 | |
Hang Seng Bank Ltd. | | | 2,100 | | | | 28,762 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
HSBC Holdings PLC | | | 48,399 | | | $ | 426,484 | |
Huntington Bancshares, Inc./OH | | | 2,015 | | | | 12,896 | |
Intesa Sanpaolo SpA | | | 27,085 | | | | 38,549 | |
Joyo Bank Ltd. (The) | | | 3,000 | | | | 13,651 | |
KBC Groep NV | | | 433 | | | | 9,157 | |
KeyCorp | | | 2,225 | | | | 17,221 | |
Lloyds Banking Group PLC(a) | | | 111,087 | | | | 54,267 | |
M&T Bank Corp. | | | 315 | | | | 26,010 | |
Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Inc. | | | 34,200 | | | | 163,848 | |
Mizuho Financial Group, Inc. | | | 61,400 | | | | 103,720 | |
National Australia Bank Ltd. | | | 6,018 | | | | 146,584 | |
Natixis | | | 9,006 | | | | 24,259 | |
Nordea Bank AB | | | 7,072 | | | | 60,946 | |
Oversea-Chinese Banking Corp., Ltd. | | | 7,000 | | | | 48,950 | |
PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. | | | 1,280 | | | | 78,221 | |
Raiffeisen Bank International AG | | | 176 | | | | 5,762 | |
Regions Financial Corp. | | | 3,325 | | | | 22,444 | |
Resona Holdings, Inc. | | | 5,100 | | | | 21,010 | |
Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC(a) | | | 5,577 | | | | 18,891 | |
Seven Bank Ltd. | | | 5,324 | | | | 13,587 | |
Shinsei Bank Ltd. | | | 12,000 | | | | 14,599 | |
Shizuoka Bank Ltd. (The) | | | 1,000 | | | | 10,289 | |
Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB | | | 4,967 | | | | 32,258 | |
Societe Generale SA(a) | | | 1,878 | | | | 44,038 | |
Standard Chartered PLC | | | 6,409 | | | | 139,223 | |
Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group, Inc. | | | 3,600 | | | | 118,926 | |
Sumitomo Mitsui Trust Holdings, Inc. | | | 8,000 | | | | 23,909 | |
SunTrust Banks, Inc. | | | 1,240 | | | | 30,045 | |
Svenska Handelsbanken AB | | | 1,317 | | | | 43,297 | |
Swedbank AB | | | 2,205 | | | | 34,737 | |
UniCredit SpA(a) | | | 10,889 | | | | 41,287 | |
United Overseas Bank Ltd. | | | 3,000 | | | | 44,549 | |
US Bancorp | | | 4,515 | | | | 145,202 | |
Wells Fargo & Co. | | | 12,675 | | | | 423,852 | |
Westpac Banking Corp. | | | 8,210 | | | | 179,275 | |
Zions Bancorporation | | | 430 | | | | 8,351 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 3,777,439 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER FINANCE–0.2% | | | | | | | | |
American Express Co. | | | 2,410 | | | | 140,286 | |
Capital One Financial Corp. | | | 1,363 | | | | 74,502 | |
Credit Saison Co., Ltd. | | | 700 | | | | 15,564 | |
Discover Financial Services | | | 1,260 | | | | 43,571 | |
SLM Corp. | | | 1,150 | | | | 18,066 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 291,989 | |
| | | | | | | | |
DIVERSIFIED FINANCIAL SERVICES–0.8% | | | | | | | | |
ASX Ltd. | | | 744 | | | | 22,838 | |
Bank of America Corp. | | | 25,695 | | | | 210,185 | |
Citigroup, Inc. | | | 6,978 | | | | 191,267 | |
CME Group, Inc.–Class A | | | 190 | | | | 50,941 | |
Deutsche Boerse AG | | | 524 | | | | 28,270 | |
3
| | |
DYNAMIC ASSET ALLOCATION PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
Eurazeo | | | 427 | | | $ | 16,443 | |
Exor SpA | | | 1,279 | | | | 27,496 | |
Groupe Bruxelles Lambert SA | | | 217 | | | | 14,730 | |
Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing Ltd. | | | 2,800 | | | | 40,252 | |
ING Groep NV(a) | | | 10,296 | | | | 69,025 | |
IntercontinentalExchange, Inc.(a) | | | 200 | | | | 27,196 | |
Investor AB | | | 1,705 | | | | 32,554 | |
JPMorgan Chase & Co. | | | 9,065 | | | | 323,892 | |
Leucadia National Corp. | | | 455 | | | | 9,678 | |
London Stock Exchange Group PLC | | | 969 | | | | 15,297 | |
Mitsubishi UFJ Lease & Finance Co., Ltd. | | | 350 | | | | 14,558 | |
Moody’s Corp. | | | 445 | | | | 16,265 | |
NASDAQ OMX Group, Inc. (The) | | | 260 | | | | 5,894 | |
NYSE Euronext | | | 585 | | | | 14,964 | |
ORIX Corp. | | | 280 | | | | 26,095 | |
Pohjola Bank PLC | | | 371 | | | | 4,330 | |
Resolution Ltd. | | | 3,866 | | | | 11,892 | |
Singapore Exchange Ltd. | | | 3,000 | | | | 15,072 | |
Wendel SA | | | 322 | | | | 23,844 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,212,978 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INSURANCE–1.5% | | | | | | | | |
ACE Ltd. | | | 835 | | | | 61,899 | |
Admiral Group PLC | | | 819 | | | | 15,278 | |
Aegon NV | | | 7,148 | | | | 33,149 | |
Aflac, Inc. | | | 1,105 | | | | 47,062 | |
Ageas | | | 6,278 | | | | 12,467 | |
AIA Group Ltd. | | | 27,520 | | | | 95,056 | |
Allianz SE | | | 1,224 | | | | 123,116 | |
Allstate Corp. (The) | | | 1,150 | | | | 40,354 | |
American International Group, Inc.(a) | | | 1,512 | | | | 48,520 | |
AON PLC | | | 765 | | | | 35,787 | |
Assicurazioni Generali SpA | | | 3,139 | | | | 42,561 | |
Assurant, Inc. | | | 210 | | | | 7,316 | |
Aviva PLC | | | 7,812 | | | | 33,451 | |
Berkshire Hathaway, Inc.(a) | | | 4,180 | | | | 348,319 | |
Chubb Corp. (The) | | | 660 | | | | 48,061 | |
Cincinnati Financial Corp. | | | 360 | | | | 13,705 | |
CNP Assurances(a) | | | 2,026 | | | | 24,745 | |
Dai-ichi Life Insurance Co., Ltd. (The) | | | 23 | | | | 26,637 | |
Genworth Financial, Inc.–Class A(a) | | | 1,135 | | | | 6,424 | |
Hannover Rueckversicherung AG | | | 173 | | | | 10,305 | |
Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. | | | 1,025 | | | | 18,071 | |
Insurance Australia Group Ltd. | | | 6,220 | | | | 22,309 | |
Legal & General Group PLC | | | 15,786 | | | | 31,561 | |
Lincoln National Corp. | | | 640 | | | | 13,997 | |
Loews Corp. | | | 740 | | | | 30,273 | |
Mapfre SA | | | 3,353 | | | | 6,821 | |
Marsh & McLennan Cos., Inc. | | | 1,290 | | | | 41,577 | |
MetLife, Inc. | | | 2,520 | | | | 77,742 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MS&AD Insurance Group Holdings | | | 1,400 | | | $ | 24,493 | |
Muenchener Rueckversicherungs AG | | | 482 | | | | 68,012 | |
NKSJ Holdings, Inc. | | | 1,000 | | | | 21,288 | |
Old Mutual PLC | | | 13,083 | | | | 31,115 | |
Principal Financial Group, Inc. | | | 690 | | | | 18,099 | |
Progressive Corp. (The) | | | 1,445 | | | | 30,099 | |
Prudential Financial, Inc. | | | 1,115 | | | | 53,999 | |
Prudential PLC | | | 6,850 | | | | 79,426 | |
QBE Insurance Group Ltd. | | | 3,112 | | | | 43,010 | |
RSA Insurance Group PLC | | | 9,493 | | | | 16,115 | |
Sampo Oyj–Class A | | | 1,127 | | | | 29,240 | |
SCOR SE | | | 935 | | | | 22,667 | |
Sony Financial Holdings, Inc. | | | 875 | | | | 14,165 | |
Standard Life PLC | | | 6,327 | | | | 23,166 | |
Suncorp Group Ltd. | | | 3,459 | | | | 28,904 | |
Swiss Re AG(a) | | | 947 | | | | 59,701 | |
T&D Holdings, Inc. | | | 1,550 | | | | 16,346 | |
Tokio Marine Holdings, Inc. | | | 1,900 | | | | 47,677 | |
Torchmark Corp. | | | 235 | | | | 11,879 | |
Travelers Cos., Inc. (The) | | | 930 | | | | 59,371 | |
Tryg AS | | | 78 | | | | 4,385 | |
Unum Group | | | 670 | | | | 12,817 | |
Vienna Insurance Group AG Wiener Versicherung Gruppe | | | 71 | | | | 2,870 | |
XL Group PLC | | | 710 | | | | 14,938 | |
Zurich Financial Services AG(a) | | | 396 | | | | 89,545 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,139,890 | |
| | | | | | | | |
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUSTS (REITs)–0.8% | | | | | | | | |
American Tower Corp. | | | 955 | | | | 66,764 | |
Apartment Investment & Management Co.–Class A | | | 305 | | | | 8,244 | |
AvalonBay Communities, Inc. | | | 225 | | | | 31,833 | |
Boston Properties, Inc. | | | 390 | | | | 42,264 | |
British Land Co. PLC | | | 2,299 | | | | 18,409 | |
Capital Shopping Centres Group PLC | | | 2,951 | | | | 14,908 | |
CFS Retail Property Trust Group | | | 11,279 | | | | 22,512 | |
Dexus Property Group | | | 23,282 | | | | 22,279 | |
Equity Residential | | | 730 | | | | 45,523 | |
Fonciere Des Regions | | | 329 | | | | 23,655 | |
Gecina SA | | | 253 | | | | 22,554 | |
Goodman Group | | | 5,915 | | | | 22,397 | |
GPT Group | | | 6,698 | | | | 22,656 | |
Hammerson PLC | | | 2,197 | | | | 15,259 | |
HCP, Inc. | | | 980 | | | | 43,267 | |
Health Care REIT, Inc. | | | 515 | | | | 30,024 | |
Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc. | | | 1,710 | | | | 27,052 | |
ICADE | | | 296 | | | | 22,387 | |
Japan Real Estate Investment Corp. | | | 2 | | | | 18,337 | |
Japan Retail Fund Investment Corp. | | | 8 | | | | 12,690 | |
Kimco Realty Corp. | | | 970 | | | | 18,459 | |
Klepierre | | | 695 | | | | 22,840 | |
Land Securities Group PLC | | | 2,095 | | | | 24,273 | |
4
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
Link REIT (The) | | | 6,000 | | | $ | 24,554 | |
Mirvac Group | | | 12,834 | | | | 16,864 | |
Nippon Building Fund, Inc. | | | 2 | | | | 19,337 | |
Plum Creek Timber Co., Inc. | | | 360 | | | | 14,292 | |
ProLogis, Inc. | | | 1,090 | | | | 36,221 | |
Public Storage | | | 340 | | | | 49,099 | |
Simon Property Group, Inc. | | | 736 | | | | 114,566 | |
Stockland | | | 6,911 | | | | 21,935 | |
Unibail-Rodamco SE | | | 247 | | | | 45,500 | |
Ventas, Inc. | | | 671 | | | | 42,354 | |
Vornado Realty Trust | | | 445 | | | | 37,371 | |
Westfield Group | | | 5,897 | | | | 57,740 | |
Westfield Retail Trust | | | 7,800 | | | | 22,879 | |
Weyerhaeuser Co. | | | 1,240 | | | | 27,726 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,129,024 | |
| | | | | | | | |
REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT & DEVELOPMENT–0.4% | | | | | | | | |
Aeon Mall Co., Ltd. | | | 700 | | | | 14,916 | |
CapitaLand Ltd. | | | 11,000 | | | | 23,718 | |
CBRE Group, Inc.(a) | | | 765 | | | | 12,515 | |
Cheung Kong Holdings Ltd. | | | 4,000 | | | | 49,437 | |
City Developments Ltd. | | | 3,000 | | | | 26,742 | |
Daito Trust Construction Co., Ltd. | | | 200 | | | | 18,958 | |
Daiwa House Industry Co., Ltd. | | | 1,000 | | | | 14,185 | |
Global Logistic Properties Ltd.(a) | | | 14,661 | | | | 24,407 | |
Hang Lung Group Ltd. | | | 4,000 | | | | 24,733 | |
Hang Lung Properties Ltd. | | | 7,000 | | | | 23,944 | |
Henderson Land Development Co., Ltd. | | | 4,000 | | | | 22,290 | |
IMMOFINANZ AG(a) | | | 2,501 | | | | 7,958 | |
Mitsubishi Estate Co., Ltd. | | | 3,000 | | | | 53,822 | |
Mitsui Fudosan Co., Ltd. | | | 2,000 | | | | 38,806 | |
Nomura Real Estate Holdings, Inc. | | | 800 | | | | 14,650 | |
Sino Land Co., Ltd. | | | 16,000 | | | | 24,254 | |
Sumitomo Realty & Development Co., Ltd. | | | 1,000 | | | | 24,596 | |
Sun Hung Kai Properties Ltd. | | | 4,000 | | | | 47,530 | |
Swire Pacific Ltd. | | | 2,000 | | | | 23,236 | |
Wharf Holdings Ltd. | | | 4,000 | | | | 22,270 | |
Wheelock & Co., Ltd. | | | 6,000 | | | | 22,682 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 535,649 | |
| | | | | | | | |
THRIFTS & MORTGAGE FINANCE–0.0% | | | | | | | | |
Hudson City Bancorp, Inc. | | | 1,230 | | | | 7,835 | |
People’s United Financial, Inc. | | | 815 | | | | 9,462 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 17,297 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 10,075,613 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY–4.8% | | | | | | | | |
COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT–0.4% | | | | | | | | |
Cisco Systems, Inc. | | | 12,760 | | | | 219,089 | |
F5 Networks, Inc.(a) | | | 210 | | | | 20,908 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Harris Corp. | | | 245 | | | $ | 10,253 | |
JDS Uniphase Corp.(a) | | | 540 | | | | 5,940 | |
Juniper Networks, Inc.(a) | | | 1,230 | | | | 20,061 | |
Motorola Solutions, Inc. | | | 675 | | | | 32,474 | |
Nokia Oyj | | | 10,067 | | | | 20,537 | |
QUALCOMM, Inc. | | | 4,080 | | | | 227,175 | |
Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson–Class B | | | 8,096 | | | | 74,076 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 630,513 | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMPUTERS & PERIPHERALS–1.2% | | | | | | | | |
Apple, Inc.(a) | | | 2,253 | | | | 1,315,752 | |
Dell, Inc.(a) | | | 3,520 | | | | 44,070 | |
EMC Corp./MA(a) | | | 4,985 | | | | 127,766 | |
Fujitsu Ltd. | | | 5,000 | | | | 23,929 | |
Gemalto NV | | | 323 | | | | 23,199 | |
Hewlett-Packard Co. | | | 4,670 | | | | 93,914 | |
Lexmark International, Inc.–Class A | | | 140 | | | | 3,721 | |
NEC Corp.(a) | | | 9,000 | | | | 14,004 | |
NetApp, Inc.(a) | | | 860 | | | | 27,365 | |
SanDisk Corp.(a) | | | 560 | | | | 20,429 | |
Seagate Technology PLC | | | 910 | | | | 22,504 | |
Toshiba Corp. | | | 11,000 | | | | 41,870 | |
Western Digital Corp.(a) | | | 550 | | | | 16,764 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,775,287 | |
| | | | | | | | |
ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT, INSTRUMENTS & COMPONENTS–0.3% | | | | | | | | |
Amphenol Corp.–Class A | | | 365 | | | | 20,046 | |
Corning, Inc. | | | 3,585 | | | | 46,354 | |
FLIR Systems, Inc. | | | 350 | | | | 6,825 | |
Fujifilm Holdings Corp. | | | 1,200 | | | | 22,736 | |
Hirose Electric Co., Ltd. | | | 100 | | | | 9,899 | |
Hitachi High-Technologies Corp. | | | 600 | | | | 14,774 | |
Hitachi Ltd. | | | 12,000 | | | | 73,990 | |
Hoya Corp. | | | 1,200 | | | | 26,436 | |
Jabil Circuit, Inc. | | | 385 | | | | 7,827 | |
Keyence Corp. | | | 100 | | | | 24,737 | |
Kyocera Corp. | | | 400 | | | | 34,616 | |
Molex, Inc.(b) | | | 325 | | | | 7,781 | |
Murata Manufacturing Co., Ltd. | | | 500 | | | | 26,300 | |
Omron Corp. | | | 700 | | | | 14,834 | |
TDK Corp. | | | 300 | | | | 12,213 | |
TE Connectivity Ltd. | | | 1,000 | | | | 31,910 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 381,278 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INTERNET SOFTWARE & SERVICES–0.4% | | | | | | | | |
Akamai Technologies, Inc.(a)(b) | | | 425 | | | | 13,494 | |
Dena Co., Ltd. | | | 529 | | | | 13,812 | |
eBay, Inc.(a) | | | 2,735 | | | | 114,897 | |
Google, Inc.–Class A(a) | | | 607 | | | | 352,102 | |
VeriSign, Inc.(a) | | | 355 | | | | 15,467 | |
Yahoo! Japan Corp. | | | 43 | | | | 13,922 | |
Yahoo!, Inc.(a) | | | 2,905 | | | | 45,986 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 569,680 | |
| | | | | | | | |
5
| | |
DYNAMIC ASSET ALLOCATION PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
IT SERVICES–0.9% | | | | | | | | |
Accenture PLC | | | 1,525 | | | $ | 91,637 | |
Amadeus IT Holding SA | | | 842 | | | | 17,839 | |
Automatic Data Processing, Inc. | | | 1,180 | | | | 65,679 | |
Cap Gemini SA | | | 638 | | | | 23,482 | |
Cognizant Technology Solutions Corp.–Class A(a) | | | 745 | | | | 44,700 | |
Computer Sciences Corp. | | | 350 | | | | 8,687 | |
Computershare Ltd. | | | 1,449 | | | | 11,076 | |
Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. | | | 560 | | | | 19,085 | |
Fiserv, Inc.(a) | | | 330 | | | | 23,833 | |
International Business Machines Corp. | | | 2,785 | | | | 544,690 | |
Mastercard, Inc.–Class A | | | 265 | | | | 113,979 | |
Nomura Research Institute Ltd. | | | 600 | | | | 13,203 | |
NTT Data Corp. | | | 5 | | | | 15,346 | |
Paychex, Inc. | | | 765 | | | | 24,029 | |
SAIC, Inc. | | | 655 | | | | 7,939 | |
Teradata Corp.(a) | | | 415 | | | | 29,884 | |
Total System Services, Inc. | | | 350 | | | | 8,375 | |
Visa, Inc.–Class A | | | 1,215 | | | | 150,210 | |
Western Union Co. (The)–Class W | | | 1,450 | | | | 24,418 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,238,091 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MACHINERY–0.0% | | | | | | | | |
Hexagon AB | | | 938 | | | | 16,101 | |
| | | | | | | | |
OFFICE ELECTRONICS–0.1% | | | | | | | | |
Canon, Inc. | | | 3,000 | | | | 119,731 | |
Konica Minolta Holdings, Inc. | | | 2,000 | | | | 15,756 | |
Ricoh Co., Ltd. | | | 2,000 | | | | 16,879 | |
Xerox Corp. | | | 3,195 | | | | 25,145 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 177,511 | |
| | | | | | | | |
SEMICONDUCTORS & SEMICONDUCTOR EQUIPMENT–0.6% | | | | | | | | |
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.(a) | | | 1,405 | | | | 8,051 | |
Altera Corp. | | | 760 | | | | 25,718 | |
Analog Devices, Inc. | | | 680 | | | | 25,616 | |
Applied Materials, Inc. | | | 3,035 | | | | 34,781 | |
ARM Holdings PLC | | | 3,698 | | | | 29,298 | |
ASM Pacific Technology Ltd. | | | 900 | | | | 11,510 | |
ASML Holding NV | | | 1,129 | | | | 57,981 | |
Broadcom Corp.–Class A(a) | | | 1,170 | | | | 39,546 | |
Infineon Technologies AG | | | 3,026 | | | | 20,481 | |
Intel Corp. | | | 11,990 | | | | 319,533 | |
KLA-Tencor Corp. | | | 410 | | | | 20,193 | |
Lam Research Corp.(a) | | | 479 | | | | 18,077 | |
Linear Technology Corp. | | | 540 | | | | 16,918 | |
LSI Corp.(a) | | | 1,320 | | | | 8,408 | |
Microchip Technology, Inc.(b) | | | 445 | | | | 14,721 | |
Micron Technology, Inc.(a) | | | 2,320 | | | | 14,639 | |
NVIDIA Corp.(a) | | | 1,435 | | | | 19,832 | |
Rohm Co., Ltd. | | | 400 | | | | 15,414 | |
Teradyne, Inc.(a) | | | 430 | | | | 6,046 | |
Texas Instruments, Inc. | | | 2,725 | | | | 78,180 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Tokyo Electron Ltd. | | | 500 | | | $ | 23,447 | |
Xilinx, Inc. | | | 585 | | | | 19,638 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 828,028 | |
| | | | | | | | |
SOFTWARE–0.9% | | | | | | | | |
Adobe Systems, Inc.(a) | | | 1,180 | | | | 38,196 | |
Autodesk, Inc.(a) | | | 535 | | | | 18,720 | |
BMC Software, Inc.(a) | | | 365 | | | | 15,578 | |
CA, Inc. | | | 825 | | | | 22,349 | |
Citrix Systems, Inc.(a) | | | 440 | | | | 36,934 | |
Dassault Systemes SA | | | 243 | | | | 22,799 | |
Electronic Arts, Inc.(a) | | | 725 | | | | 8,954 | |
Intuit, Inc. | | | 680 | | | | 40,358 | |
Microsoft Corp. | | | 17,840 | | | | 545,725 | |
Nexon Co., Ltd.(a) | | | 735 | | | | 14,252 | |
Nintendo Co., Ltd. | | | 300 | | | | 35,034 | |
Oracle Corp. | | | 9,240 | | | | 274,428 | |
Oracle Corp. Japan | | | 300 | | | | 12,913 | |
Red Hat, Inc.(a) | | | 450 | | | | 25,416 | |
Sage Group PLC (The) | | | 3,508 | | | | 15,268 | |
Salesforce.com, Inc.(a) | | | 331 | | | | 45,764 | |
SAP AG | | | 2,473 | | | | 146,440 | |
Symantec Corp.(a) | | | 1,695 | | | | 24,764 | |
Trend Micro, Inc. | | | 500 | | | | 14,730 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,358,622 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 6,975,111 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER STAPLES–4.4% | | | | | | | | |
BEVERAGES–1.0% | | | | | | | | |
Anheuser-Busch InBev NV | | | 2,159 | | | | 170,218 | |
Asahi Group Holdings Ltd. | | | 1,000 | | | | 21,484 | |
Beam, Inc. | | | 400 | | | | 24,996 | |
Brown-Forman Corp.–Class B | | | 235 | | | | 22,760 | |
Carlsberg A/S | | | 288 | | | | 22,733 | |
Coca Cola Hellenic Bottling Co. SA(a) | | | 542 | | | | 9,471 | |
Coca-Cola Amatil Ltd. | | | 1,634 | | | | 22,455 | |
Coca-Cola Co. (The) | | | 5,390 | | | | 421,444 | |
Coca-Cola Enterprises, Inc. | | | 700 | | | | 19,628 | |
Constellation Brands, Inc.–Class A(a) | | | 370 | | | | 10,012 | |
Diageo PLC | | | 6,728 | | | | 173,414 | |
Dr Pepper Snapple Group, Inc. | | | 520 | | | | 22,750 | |
Heineken NV | | | 1,254 | | | | 65,392 | |
Kirin Holdings Co., Ltd. | | | 2,000 | | | | 23,572 | |
Molson Coors Brewing Co.–Class B | | | 350 | | | | 14,564 | |
Monster Beverage Corp.(a) | | | 360 | | | | 25,632 | |
PepsiCo, Inc. | | | 3,725 | | | | 263,209 | |
Pernod-Ricard SA | | | 569 | | | | 60,844 | |
SABMiller PLC | | | 2,567 | | | | 102,991 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,497,569 | |
| | | | | | | | |
FOOD & STAPLES RETAILING–0.9% | | | | | | | | |
Aeon Co., Ltd. | | | 1,600 | | | | 19,941 | |
Carrefour SA | | | 1,552 | | | | 28,658 | |
Casino Guichard Perrachon SA | | | 225 | | | | 19,777 | |
Colruyt SA | | | 204 | | | | 9,101 | |
6
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
Costco Wholesale Corp. | | | 1,065 | | | $ | 101,175 | |
CVS Caremark Corp. | | | 3,030 | | | | 141,592 | |
Delhaize Group SA | | | 274 | | | | 10,037 | |
Distribuidora Internacional de Alimentacion SA(a) | | | 1,644 | | | | 7,730 | |
FamilyMart Co., Ltd. | | | 300 | | | | 13,731 | |
J Sainsbury PLC | | | 3,281 | | | | 15,506 | |
Jeronimo Martins SGPS SA | | | 592 | | | | 10,009 | |
Kesko Oyj | | | 171 | | | | 4,470 | |
Kroger Co. (The) | | | 1,315 | | | | 30,495 | |
Lawson, Inc. | | | 200 | | | | 13,986 | |
Metro AG | | | 441 | | | | 12,860 | |
Safeway, Inc.(b) | | | 545 | | | | 9,892 | |
Seven & I Holdings Co., Ltd. | | | 2,000 | | | | 60,291 | |
Sysco Corp. | | | 1,355 | | | | 40,393 | |
Tesco PLC | | | 21,592 | | | | 104,933 | |
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. | | | 4,113 | | | | 286,758 | |
Walgreen Co. | | | 2,045 | | | | 60,491 | |
Wesfarmers Ltd. | | | 2,706 | | | | 83,295 | |
Whole Foods Market, Inc. | | | 410 | | | | 39,081 | |
WM Morrison Supermarkets PLC | | | 6,401 | | | | 26,710 | |
Woolworths Ltd. | | | 3,298 | | | | 90,788 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,241,700 | |
| | | | | | | | |
FOOD PRODUCTS–1.1% | | | | | | | | |
Ajinomoto Co., Inc. | | | 2,000 | | | | 27,835 | |
Archer-Daniels-Midland Co. | | | 1,565 | | | | 46,199 | |
Associated British Foods PLC | | | 958 | | | | 19,276 | |
Campbell Soup Co.(b) | | | 425 | | | | 14,187 | |
ConAgra Foods, Inc. | | | 985 | | | | 25,541 | |
Danone | | | 1,554 | | | | 96,576 | |
Dean Foods Co.(a) | | | 430 | | | | 7,323 | |
General Mills, Inc. | | | 1,535 | | | | 59,159 | |
Hershey Co. (The) | | | 350 | | | | 25,211 | |
HJ Heinz Co. | | | 765 | | | | 41,601 | |
Hormel Foods Corp. | | | 325 | | | | 9,887 | |
JM Smucker Co. (The) | | | 295 | | | | 22,278 | |
Kellogg Co. | | | 565 | | | | 27,872 | |
Kerry Group PLC | | | 401 | | | | 17,580 | |
Kraft Foods, Inc.–Class A | | | 4,235 | | | | 163,556 | |
Lindt & Spruengli AG(a) | | | 1 | | | | 36,724 | |
McCormick & Co., Inc./MD | | | 325 | | | | 19,711 | |
Mead Johnson Nutrition Co.–Class A | | | 510 | | | | 41,060 | |
MEIJI Holdings Co., Ltd. | | | 300 | | | | 13,776 | |
Nestle SA | | | 8,871 | | | | 529,402 | |
Nissin Foods Holdings Co., Ltd. | | | 400 | | | | 15,211 | |
Tate & Lyle PLC | | | 1,256 | | | | 12,756 | |
Tyson Foods, Inc.–Class A | | | 675 | | | | 12,710 | |
Unilever NV | | | 4,379 | | | | 146,282 | |
Unilever PLC | | | 3,450 | | | | 115,829 | |
Wilmar International Ltd. | | | 9,000 | | | | 25,950 | |
Yakult Honsha Co., Ltd. | | | 400 | | | | 15,664 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,589,156 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HOUSEHOLD PRODUCTS–0.6% | | | | | | | | |
Clorox Co. (The) | | | 320 | | | | 23,187 | |
Colgate-Palmolive Co. | | | 1,125 | | | | 117,113 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Henkel AG & Co. KGaA | | | 366 | | | $ | 20,310 | |
Henkel AG & Co. KGaA (Preference Shares) | | | 479 | | | | 31,828 | |
Kimberly-Clark Corp. | | | 965 | | | | 80,838 | |
Procter & Gamble Co. (The) | | | 6,515 | | | | 399,044 | |
Reckitt Benckiser Group PLC | | | 1,773 | | | | 93,715 | |
Unicharm Corp. | | | 300 | | | | 17,076 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 783,111 | |
| | | | | | | | |
PERSONAL PRODUCTS–0.1% | | | | | | | | |
Avon Products, Inc. | | | 1,005 | | | | 16,291 | |
Beiersdorf AG | | | 310 | | | | 20,096 | |
Estee Lauder Cos., Inc. (The)–Class A | | | 540 | | | | 29,225 | |
Kao Corp. | | | 1,400 | | | | 38,610 | |
L’Oreal SA | | | 646 | | | | 75,585 | |
Shiseido Co., Ltd. | | | 1,000 | | | | 15,780 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 195,587 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TOBACCO–0.7% | | | | | | | | |
Altria Group, Inc. | | | 4,860 | | | | 167,913 | |
British American Tobacco PLC | | | 5,292 | | | | 269,045 | |
Imperial Tobacco Group PLC | | | 2,690 | | | | 103,641 | |
Japan Tobacco, Inc. | | | 2,419 | | | | 71,664 | |
Lorillard, Inc. | | | 330 | | | | 43,544 | |
Philip Morris International, Inc. | | | 4,100 | | | | 357,766 | |
Reynolds American, Inc. | | | 785 | | | | 35,223 | |
Swedish Match AB | | | 573 | | | | 23,095 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,071,891 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 6,379,014 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INDUSTRIALS–4.3% | | | | | | | | |
AEROSPACE & DEFENSE–0.7% | | | | | | | | |
BAE Systems PLC | | | 8,702 | | | | 39,452 | |
Boeing Co. (The) | | | 1,810 | | | | 134,483 | |
Cobham PLC | | | 3,228 | | | | 11,760 | |
European Aeronautic Defence and Space Co. NV | | | 1,104 | | | | 39,182 | |
General Dynamics Corp. | | | 860 | | | | 56,726 | |
Goodrich Corp. | | | 310 | | | | 39,339 | |
Honeywell International, Inc. | | | 1,855 | | | | 103,583 | |
L-3 Communications Holdings, Inc. | | | 225 | | | | 16,652 | |
Lockheed Martin Corp. | | | 650 | | | | 56,602 | |
Meggitt PLC | | | 2,537 | | | | 15,351 | |
Northrop Grumman Corp. | �� | | 590 | | | | 37,636 | |
Precision Castparts Corp. | | | 340 | | | | 55,927 | |
Raytheon Co. | | | 800 | | | | 45,272 | |
Rockwell Collins, Inc. | | | 350 | | | | 17,272 | |
Rolls-Royce Holdings PLC(a) | | | 5,033 | | | | 67,833 | |
Safran SA | | | 629 | | | | 23,359 | |
Singapore Technologies Engineering Ltd. | | | 6,000 | | | | 14,792 | |
Textron, Inc. | | | 655 | | | | 16,290 | |
Thales SA | | | 694 | | | | 22,929 | |
United Technologies Corp. | | | 2,175 | | | | 164,278 | |
Zodiac Aerospace | | | 227 | | | | 23,091 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,001,809 | |
| | | | | | | | |
7
| | |
DYNAMIC ASSET ALLOCATION PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
AIR FREIGHT & LOGISTICS–0.3% | | | | | | | | |
CH Robinson Worldwide, Inc. | | | 365 | | | $ | 21,363 | |
Deutsche Post AG | | | 2,275 | | | | 40,253 | |
Expeditors International of Washington, Inc. | | | 470 | | | | 18,212 | |
FedEx Corp. | | | 765 | | | | 70,082 | |
Kuehne & Nagel International AG | | | 432 | | | | 45,767 | |
United Parcel Service, Inc.–Class B | | | 2,305 | | | | 181,542 | |
Yamato Holdings Co., Ltd. | | | 1,000 | | | | 16,102 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 393,321 | |
| | | | | | | | |
AIRLINES–0.1% | | | | | | | | |
All Nippon Airways Co., Ltd. | | | 5,000 | | | | 14,165 | |
Deutsche Lufthansa (REG) | | | 1,092 | | | | 12,625 | |
International Consolidated Airlines Group SA(a) | | | 2,643 | | | | 6,631 | |
Singapore Airlines Ltd. | | | 3,000 | | | | 24,823 | |
Southwest Airlines Co. | | | 1,805 | | | | 16,642 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 74,886 | |
| | | | | | | | |
BUILDING PRODUCTS–0.1% | | | | | | | | |
Asahi Glass Co., Ltd. | | | 3,000 | | | | 20,239 | |
Assa Abloy AB | | | 1,164 | | | | 32,506 | |
Cie de St-Gobain | | | 1,080 | | | | 39,905 | |
Daikin Industries Ltd. | | | 600 | | | | 16,897 | |
JS Group Corp. | | | 700 | | | | 14,773 | |
Masco Corp. | | | 805 | | | | 11,165 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 135,485 | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMMERCIAL SERVICES & SUPPLIES–0.2% | | | | | | | | |
Aggreko PLC | | | 718 | | | | 23,350 | |
Avery Dennison Corp. | | | 235 | | | | 6,425 | |
Babcock International Group PLC | | | 1,121 | | | | 15,014 | |
Brambles Ltd. | | | 4,179 | | | | 26,504 | |
Cintas Corp. | | | 235 | | | | 9,073 | |
Dai Nippon Printing Co., Ltd. | | | 2,000 | | | | 15,668 | |
Edenred | | | 818 | | | | 23,190 | |
G4S PLC | | | 3,792 | | | | 16,573 | |
Iron Mountain, Inc. | | | 385 | | | | 12,690 | |
Pitney Bowes, Inc.(b) | | | 455 | | | | 6,811 | |
Republic Services, Inc.–Class A | | | 750 | | | | 19,845 | |
RR Donnelley & Sons Co.(b) | | | 385 | | | | 4,531 | |
Secom Co., Ltd. | | | 600 | | | | 27,516 | |
Serco Group PLC | | | 1,802 | | | | 15,133 | |
Societe BIC SA | | | 221 | | | | 22,829 | |
Stericycle, Inc.(a) | | | 210 | | | | 19,251 | |
Toppan Printing Co., Ltd. | | | 2,000 | | | | 13,360 | |
Waste Management, Inc. | | | 1,095 | | | | 36,573 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 314,336 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSTRUCTION & ENGINEERING–0.1% | | | | | | | | |
ACS Actividades de Construccion y Servicios SA | | | 381 | | | | 8,161 | |
Bouygues SA | | | 871 | | | | 23,372 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Chiyoda Corp. | | | 1,000 | | | $ | 12,122 | |
Ferrovial SA | | | 1,084 | | | | 12,225 | |
Fluor Corp. | | | 415 | | | | 20,476 | |
Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc.(a) | | | 315 | | | | 11,926 | |
JGC Corp. | | | 1,000 | | | | 28,991 | |
Leighton Holdings Ltd. | | | 1,344 | | | | 22,638 | |
Obayashi Corp. | | | 3,000 | | | | 13,098 | |
Quanta Services, Inc.(a) | | | 465 | | | | 11,193 | |
Taisei Corp. | | | 5,000 | | | | 13,402 | |
Vinci SA | | | 1,219 | | | | 56,970 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 234,574 | |
| | | | | | | | |
ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT–0.3% | | | | | | | | |
ABB Ltd. (REG)(a) | | | 5,911 | | | | 96,516 | |
Alstom SA | | | 729 | | | | 23,064 | |
Cooper Industries PLC | | | 400 | | | | 27,272 | |
Emerson Electric Co. | | | 1,750 | | | | 81,515 | |
First Solar, Inc.(a)(b) | | | 120 | | | | 1,807 | |
Legrand SA | | | 689 | | | | 23,385 | |
Mitsubishi Electric Corp. | | | 5,000 | | | | 41,832 | |
Nidec Corp. | | | 300 | | | | 22,810 | |
Rockwell Automation, Inc. | | | 330 | | | | 21,800 | |
Roper Industries, Inc. | | | 225 | | | | 22,181 | |
Sumitomo Electric Industries Ltd. | | | 2,000 | | | | 24,922 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 387,104 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INDUSTRIAL CONGLOMERATES–0.8% | | | | | | | | |
3M Co. | | | 1,655 | | | | 148,288 | |
Danaher Corp. | | | 1,390 | | | | 72,391 | |
Fraser and Neave Ltd. | | | 4,000 | | | | 22,273 | |
General Electric Co. | | | 25,270 | | | | 526,627 | |
Hutchison Whampoa Ltd. | | | 6,000 | | | | 52,043 | |
Keppel Corp., Ltd. | | | 4,000 | | | | 32,770 | |
Koninklijke Philips Electronics NV | | | 3,341 | | | | 65,836 | |
Orkla ASA | | | 2,074 | | | | 15,051 | |
Siemens AG | | | 2,212 | | | | 185,868 | |
Smiths Group PLC | | | 1,055 | | | | 16,755 | |
Tyco International Ltd. | | | 1,095 | | | | 57,871 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,195,773 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MACHINERY–0.8% | | | | | | | | |
Alfa Laval AB | | | 1,184 | | | | 20,288 | |
Andritz AG | | | 196 | | | | 10,079 | |
Atlas Copco AB | | | 1,715 | | | | 32,680 | |
Atlas Copco AB–Class A | | | 1,805 | | | | 38,845 | |
Caterpillar, Inc. | | | 1,585 | | | | 134,582 | |
Cummins, Inc. | | | 450 | | | | 43,610 | |
Deere & Co. | | | 935 | | | | 75,613 | |
Dover Corp. | | | 435 | | | | 23,320 | |
Eaton Corp. | | | 785 | | | | 31,110 | |
FANUC Corp. | | | 500 | | | | 82,191 | |
Fiat Industrial SpA | | | 2,876 | | | | 28,309 | |
Flowserve Corp. | | | 120 | | | | 13,770 | |
Hino Motors Ltd. | | | 2,000 | | | | 14,476 | |
Hitachi Construction Machinery Co., Ltd. | | | 700 | | | | 13,220 | |
8
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
IHI Corp. | | | 6,000 | | | $ | 12,834 | |
Illinois Tool Works, Inc. | | | 1,125 | | | | 59,501 | |
IMI PLC | | | 1,172 | | | | 15,311 | |
Ingersoll-Rand PLC | | | 705 | | | | 29,737 | |
Joy Global, Inc. | | | 235 | | | | 13,332 | |
JTEKT Corp. | | | 1,400 | | | | 14,495 | |
Kawasaki Heavy Industries Ltd. | | | 5,000 | | | | 13,712 | |
Komatsu Ltd. | | | 2,500 | | | | 59,678 | |
Kone Oyj | | | 419 | | | | 25,305 | |
Kubota Corp. | | | 3,000 | | | | 27,724 | |
Makita Corp. | | | 400 | | | | 14,032 | |
MAN SE | | | 201 | | | | 20,557 | |
Metso Oyj | | | 344 | | | | 11,861 | |
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd. | | | 8,000 | | | | 32,521 | |
NGK Insulators Ltd. | | | 1,000 | | | | 11,074 | |
NSK Ltd. | | | 2,000 | | | | 12,760 | |
PACCAR, Inc. | | | 860 | | | | 33,703 | |
Pall Corp. | | | 295 | | | | 16,169 | |
Parker Hannifin Corp. | | | 345 | | | | 26,524 | |
Sandvik AB | | | 2,698 | | | | 34,601 | |
SembCorp Marine Ltd. | | | 7,000 | | | | 26,720 | |
SKF AB | | | 1,658 | | | | 32,682 | |
SMC Corp./Japan | | | 100 | | | | 17,338 | |
Snap-On, Inc. | | | 120 | | | | 7,470 | |
Stanley Black & Decker, Inc. | | | 415 | | | | 26,709 | |
Volvo AB–Class B | | | 3,741 | | | | 42,773 | |
Wartsila Oyj | | | 451 | | | | 14,776 | |
Weir Group PLC (The) | | | 651 | | | | 15,643 | |
Xylem, Inc./NY | | | 435 | | | | 10,949 | |
Zardoya Otis SA | | | 378 | | | | 4,202 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,246,786 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MARINE–0.0% | | | | | | | | |
AP Moeller–Maersk A/S | | | 4 | | | | 26,230 | |
AP Moeller–Maersk A/S (Line of “A” Shares) | | | 1 | | | | 6,224 | |
Mitsui OSK Lines Ltd. | | | 4,000 | | | | 14,420 | |
Nippon Yusen KK | | | 5,000 | | | | 13,224 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 60,098 | |
| | | | | | | | |
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES–0.1% | | | | | | | | |
Adecco SA(a) | | | 507 | | | | 22,546 | |
Bureau Veritas SA | | | 256 | | | | 22,774 | |
Capita PLC | | | 1,758 | | | | 18,065 | |
Dun & Bradstreet Corp. (The) | | | 115 | | | | 8,185 | |
Equifax, Inc. | | | 255 | | | | 11,883 | |
Experian PLC | | | 2,702 | | | | 38,120 | |
Intertek Group PLC | | | 431 | | | | 18,057 | |
Robert Half International, Inc. | | | 335 | | | | 9,571 | |
SGS SA | | | 24 | | | | 44,999 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 194,200 | |
| | | | | | | | |
ROAD & RAIL–0.4% | | | | | | | | |
Central Japan Railway Co. | | | 4 | | | | 31,503 | |
CSX Corp. | | | 2,460 | | | | 55,006 | |
DSV A/S | | | 511 | | | | 10,132 | |
East Japan Railway Co. | | | 900 | | | | 56,512 | |
Hankyu Hanshin Holdings, Inc. | | | 3,000 | | | | 15,087 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Keikyu Corp. | | | 2,000 | | | $ | 18,197 | |
Keio Corp. | | | 2,000 | | | | 14,496 | |
Kintetsu Corp. | | | 4,000 | | | | 15,948 | |
MTR Corp., Ltd | | | 7,000 | | | | 24,030 | |
Nippon Express Co., Ltd. | | | 3,000 | | | | 12,388 | |
Norfolk Southern Corp. | | | 790 | | | | 56,698 | |
Odakyu Electric Railway Co., Ltd. | | | 2,000 | | | | 19,885 | |
QR National Ltd. | | | 6,403 | | | | 22,429 | |
Ryder System, Inc. | | | 115 | | | | 4,141 | |
Tobu Railway Co., Ltd. | | | 3,000 | | | | 15,772 | |
Tokyu Corp. | | | 3,000 | | | | 14,074 | |
Union Pacific Corp. | | | 1,125 | | | | 134,224 | |
West Japan Railway Co. | | | 457 | | | | 18,800 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 539,322 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TRADING COMPANIES & DISTRIBUTORS–0.3% | | | | | | | | |
Brenntag AG | | | 189 | | | | 20,916 | |
Bunzl PLC | | | 916 | | | | 14,972 | |
Fastenal Co. | | | 680 | | | | 27,411 | |
ITOCHU Corp. | | | 4,000 | | | | 42,043 | |
Marubeni Corp. | | | 4,000 | | | | 26,652 | |
Mitsubishi Corp. | | | 3,800 | | | | 76,814 | |
Mitsui & Co., Ltd. | | | 4,700 | | | | 69,841 | |
Sumitomo Corp. | | | 3,000 | | | | 41,975 | |
Toyota Tsusho Corp. | | | 700 | | | | 13,381 | |
Wolseley PLC | | | 766 | | | | 28,551 | |
WW Grainger, Inc. | | | 180 | | | | 34,423 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 396,979 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE–0.1% | | | | | | | | |
Abertis Infraestructuras SA | | | 986 | | | | 13,325 | |
Aeroports de Paris | | | 305 | | | | 23,069 | |
Atlantia SpA | | | 1,440 | | | | 18,380 | |
Auckland International Airport Ltd. | | | 2,491 | | | | 4,886 | |
Koninklijke Vopak NV | | | 502 | | | | 32,199 | |
Sydney Airport | | | 3,846 | | | | 11,462 | |
Transurban Group | | | 3,826 | | | | 22,348 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 125,669 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 6,300,342 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HEALTH CARE–4.2% | | | | | | | | |
BIOTECHNOLOGY–0.4% | | | | | | | | |
Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.(a) | | | 460 | | | | 45,678 | |
Amgen, Inc. | | | 1,873 | | | | 136,804 | |
Biogen Idec, Inc.(a) | | | 565 | | | | 81,574 | |
Celgene Corp.(a) | | | 1,030 | | | | 66,085 | |
CSL Ltd. | | | 1,396 | | | | 56,624 | |
Gilead Sciences, Inc.(a) | | | 1,825 | | | | 93,586 | |
Grifols S.A.(a) | | | 401 | | | | 10,159 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 490,510 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HEALTH CARE EQUIPMENT & SUPPLIES–0.5% | | | | | | | | |
Baxter International, Inc. | | | 1,330 | | | | 70,689 | |
Becton Dickinson and Co. | | | 480 | | | | 35,880 | |
9
| | |
DYNAMIC ASSET ALLOCATION PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
Boston Scientific Corp.(a) | | | 3,410 | | | $ | 19,335 | |
CareFusion Corp.(a) | | | 490 | | | | 12,583 | |
Cie Generale d’Optique Essilor International SA | | | 547 | | | | 50,816 | |
Coloplast A/S | | | 61 | | | | 10,968 | |
Covidien PLC | | | 1,125 | | | | 60,187 | |
CR Bard, Inc. | | | 215 | | | | 23,100 | |
DENTSPLY International, Inc. | | | 330 | | | | 12,477 | |
Edwards Lifesciences Corp.(a) | | | 295 | | | | 30,474 | |
Fresenius SE & Co. KGaA | | | 333 | | | | 34,478 | |
Getinge AB | | | 997 | | | | 24,740 | |
Intuitive Surgical, Inc.(a) | | | 105 | | | | 58,148 | |
Medtronic, Inc. | | | 2,460 | | | | 95,276 | |
Olympus Corp.(a) | | | 900 | | | | 14,584 | |
Smith & Nephew PLC | | | 2,408 | | | | 24,086 | |
Sonova Holding AG(a) | | | 351 | | | | 33,950 | |
St Jude Medical, Inc. | | | 715 | | | | 28,536 | |
Stryker Corp. | | | 775 | | | | 42,702 | |
Sysmex Corp. | | | 200 | | | | 7,910 | |
Terumo Corp. | | | 400 | | | | 16,439 | |
Varian Medical Systems, Inc.(a) | | | 245 | | | | 14,889 | |
William Demant Holding AS(a) | | | 70 | | | | 6,292 | |
Zimmer Holdings, Inc. | | | 435 | | | | 27,997 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 756,536 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS & SERVICES–0.5% | | | | | | | | |
Aetna, Inc. | | | 820 | | | | 31,791 | |
AmerisourceBergen Corp.–Class A | | | 585 | | | | 23,020 | |
Cardinal Health, Inc. | | | 795 | | | | 33,390 | |
CIGNA Corp. | | | 665 | | | | 29,260 | |
Coventry Health Care, Inc. | | | 330 | | | | 10,491 | |
DaVita, Inc.(a)(b) | | | 225 | | | | 22,097 | |
Express Scripts Holding Co.(a) | | | 1,939 | | | | 108,254 | |
Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA | | | 564 | | | | 39,834 | |
Humana, Inc. | | | 415 | | | | 32,138 | |
Laboratory Corp. of America Holdings(a) | | | 225 | | | | 20,837 | |
McKesson Corp. | | | 565 | | | | 52,969 | |
Patterson Cos., Inc. | | | 210 | | | | 7,239 | |
Quest Diagnostics, Inc. | | | 400 | | | | 23,960 | |
Ramsay Health Care Ltd. | | | 490 | | | | 11,385 | |
Sonic Healthcare Ltd. | | | 1,715 | | | | 22,431 | |
Tenet Healthcare Corp.(a) | | | 975 | | | | 5,109 | |
UnitedHealth Group, Inc. | | | 2,485 | | | | 145,372 | |
WellPoint, Inc. | | | 800 | | | | 51,032 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 670,609 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HEALTH CARE TECHNOLOGY–0.0% | | | | | | | | |
Cerner Corp.(a) | | | 340 | | | | 28,104 | |
| | | | | | | | |
LIFE SCIENCES TOOLS & SERVICES–0.1% | | | | | | | | |
Agilent Technologies, Inc. | | | 795 | | | | 31,196 | |
Life Technologies Corp.(a) | | | 425 | | | | 19,121 | |
PerkinElmer, Inc. | | | 245 | | | | 6,321 | |
| | | | | | | | |
QIAGEN NV(a) | | | 667 | | | $ | 11,169 | |
Thermo Fisher Scientific, Inc. | | | 885 | | | | 45,940 | |
Waters Corp.(a) | | | 215 | | | | 17,086 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 130,833 | |
| | | | | | | | |
PHARMACEUTICALS–2.7% | | | | | | | | |
Abbott Laboratories | | | 3,765 | | | | 242,730 | |
Allergan, Inc./United States | | | 750 | | | | 69,427 | |
Astellas Pharma, Inc. | | | 1,200 | | | | 52,366 | |
AstraZeneca PLC | | | 3,432 | | | | 153,368 | |
Bayer AG | | | 2,223 | | | | 160,188 | |
Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. | | | 3,995 | | | | 143,620 | |
Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. | | | 700 | | | | 13,270 | |
Daiichi Sankyo Co., Ltd. | | | 1,800 | | | | 30,351 | |
Dainippon Sumitomo Pharma Co., Ltd. | | | 1,400 | | | | 14,304 | |
Eisai Co., Ltd. | | | 700 | | | | 30,654 | |
Elan Corp. PLC(a) | | | 1,351 | | | | 19,813 | |
Eli Lilly & Co. | | | 2,415 | | | | 103,628 | |
Forest Laboratories, Inc.(a) | | | 595 | | | | 20,819 | |
GlaxoSmithKline PLC | | | 13,572 | | | | 308,275 | |
Hisamitsu Pharmaceutical Co., Inc. | | | 300 | | | | 14,764 | |
Hospira, Inc.(a) | | | 360 | | | | 12,593 | |
Johnson & Johnson | | | 6,535 | | | | 441,505 | |
Kyowa Hakko Kirin Co., Ltd. | | | 1,000 | | | | 10,299 | |
Merck & Co., Inc. | | | 7,245 | | | | 302,479 | |
Merck KGaA | | | 204 | | | | 20,373 | |
Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma Corp. | | | 1,000 | | | | 14,380 | |
Mylan, Inc./PA(a) | | | 995 | | | | 21,263 | |
Novartis AG | | | 6,183 | | | | 345,700 | |
Novo Nordisk A/S–Class B | | | 1,095 | | | | 158,815 | |
Ono Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. | | | 200 | | | | 12,568 | |
Orion Oyj | | | 259 | | | | 4,906 | |
Otsuka Holdings Co., Ltd. | | | 975 | | | | 29,928 | |
Perrigo Co. | | | 220 | | | | 25,945 | |
Pfizer, Inc. | | | 17,850 | | | | 410,550 | |
Roche Holding AG | | | 1,889 | | | | 326,292 | |
Sanofi | | | 3,244 | | | | 245,573 | |
Shionogi & Co., Ltd. | | | 1,000 | | | | 13,597 | |
Shire PLC | | | 1,512 | | | | 43,500 | |
Taisho Pharmaceutical Holdings Co., Ltd. | | | 172 | | | | 14,438 | |
Takeda Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. | | | 2,100 | | | | 95,344 | |
UCB SA | | | 296 | | | | 14,952 | |
Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc.(a) | | | 315 | | | | 23,307 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 3,965,884 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 6,042,476 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER DISCRETIONARY–4.1% | | | | | | | | |
AUTO COMPONENTS–0.2% | | | | | | | | |
Aisin Seiki Co., Ltd. | | | 500 | | | | 16,714 | |
BorgWarner, Inc.(a) | | | 290 | | | | 19,021 | |
Bridgestone Corp. | | | 1,700 | | | | 39,039 | |
Cie Generale des Etablissements Michelin–Class B | | | 484 | | | | 31,666 | |
Continental AG | | | 255 | | | | 21,257 | |
10
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
Denso Corp. | | | 1,300 | | | $ | 44,422 | |
GKN PLC | | | 4,227 | | | | 11,984 | |
Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. (The)(a) | | | 560 | | | | 6,614 | |
Johnson Controls, Inc. | | | 1,580 | | | | 43,782 | |
NOK Corp. | | | 700 | | | | 14,946 | |
Nokian Renkaat OYJ | | | 298 | | | | 11,320 | |
Toyota Industries Corp. | | | 500 | | | | 14,336 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 275,101 | |
| | | | | | | | |
AUTOMOBILES–0.7% | | | | | | | | |
Bayerische Motoren Werke AG | | | 890 | | | | 64,407 | |
Daihatsu Motor Co., Ltd. | | | 1,000 | | | | 17,352 | |
Daimler AG | | | 2,436 | | | | 109,472 | |
Fiat SpA(a) | | | 1,624 | | | | 8,188 | |
Ford Motor Co. | | | 9,070 | | | | 86,981 | |
Fuji Heavy Industries Ltd. | | | 2,000 | | | | 16,204 | |
Harley-Davidson, Inc. | | | 550 | | | | 25,152 | |
Honda Motor Co., Ltd. | | | 4,400 | | | | 153,540 | |
Isuzu Motors Ltd. | | | 3,000 | | | | 16,069 | |
Mazda Motor Corp.(a) | | | 11,000 | | | | 14,979 | |
Mitsubishi Motors Corp.(a) | | | 14,000 | | | | 14,118 | |
Nissan Motor Co., Ltd. | | | 6,700 | | | | 63,621 | |
Porsche Automobil Holding SE (Preference Shares) | | | 412 | | | | 20,495 | |
Renault SA | | | 588 | | | | 23,480 | |
Suzuki Motor Corp. | | | 1,000 | | | | 20,533 | |
Toyota Motor Corp. | | | 7,400 | | | | 298,680 | |
Volkswagen AG | | | 140 | | | | 21,156 | |
Volkswagen AG (Preference Shares) | | | 389 | | | | 61,629 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,036,056 | |
| | | | | | | | |
DISTRIBUTORS–0.0% | | | | | | | | |
Genuine Parts Co. | | | 350 | | | | 21,088 | |
Li & Fung Ltd. | | | 16,000 | | | | 30,938 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 52,026 | |
| | | | | | | | |
DIVERSIFIED CONSUMER SERVICES–0.0% | | | | | | | | |
Apollo Group, Inc.–Class A(a) | | | 245 | | | | 8,866 | |
Benesse Holdings, Inc. | | | 300 | | | | 13,432 | |
DeVry, Inc. | | | 120 | | | | 3,716 | |
Gree, Inc. | | | 682 | | | | 13,489 | |
H&R Block, Inc. | | | 670 | | | | 10,707 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 50,210 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HOTELS, RESTAURANTS & LEISURE–0.6% | | | | | | | | |
Accor SA | | | 750 | | | | 23,503 | |
Carnival Corp. | | | 1,085 | | | | 37,183 | |
Carnival PLC | | | 487 | | | | 16,651 | |
Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc.–Class A(a) | | | 94 | | | | 35,715 | |
Compass Group PLC | | | 5,090 | | | | 53,430 | |
Crown Ltd. | | | 2,537 | | | | 22,045 | |
Darden Restaurants, Inc. | | | 320 | | | | 16,202 | |
Galaxy Entertainment Group Ltd.(a) | | | 8,911 | | | | 22,395 | |
Genting Singapore PLC | | | 22,000 | | | | 24,715 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Intercontinental Hotels Group PLC | | | 782 | | | $ | 18,826 | |
International Game Technology | | | 680 | | | | 10,710 | |
Marriott International, Inc./DE–Class A | | | 595 | | | | 23,324 | |
McDonald’s Corp. | | | 2,430 | | | | 215,128 | |
McDonald’s Holdings Co. Japan Ltd. | | | 500 | | | | 14,073 | |
OPAP SA | | | 600 | | | | 3,632 | |
Oriental Land Co., Ltd. | | | 100 | | | | 11,434 | |
Sands China Ltd. | | | 7,700 | | | | 24,771 | |
Sky City Entertainment Group Ltd. | | | 1,551 | | | | 4,237 | |
Sodexo | | | 292 | | | | 22,736 | |
Starbucks Corp. | | | 1,810 | | | | 96,509 | |
Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide, Inc. | | | 445 | | | | 23,603 | |
Tatts Group Ltd. | | | 6,512 | | | | 17,548 | |
Whitbread PLC | | | 478 | | | | 15,198 | |
Wyndham Worldwide Corp. | | | 350 | | | | 18,459 | |
Wynn Macau Ltd. | | | 10,107 | | | | 23,903 | |
Wynn Resorts Ltd. | | | 210 | | | | 21,781 | |
Yum! Brands, Inc. | | | 1,095 | | | | 70,540 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 888,251 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HOUSEHOLD DURABLES–0.2% | | | | | | | | |
DR Horton, Inc. | | | 655 | | | | 12,039 | |
Electrolux AB | | | 1,181 | | | | 23,502 | |
Harman International Industries, Inc. | | | 140 | | | | 5,544 | |
Leggett & Platt, Inc.(b) | | | 325 | | | | 6,867 | |
Lennar Corp.–Class A(b) | | | 350 | | | | 10,819 | |
Newell Rubbermaid, Inc. | | | 675 | | | | 12,245 | |
Panasonic Corp. | | | 5,900 | | | | 48,231 | |
Pulte Group, Inc.(a) | | | 785 | | | | 8,400 | |
Rinnai Corp. | | | 200 | | | | 13,800 | |
Sekisui Chemical Co., Ltd. | | | 2,000 | | | | 18,581 | |
Sekisui House Ltd. | | | 2,000 | | | | 18,884 | |
Sharp Corp./Japan | | | 3,000 | | | | 15,285 | |
Sony Corp. | | | 2,700 | | | | 38,608 | |
Whirlpool Corp. | | | 200 | | | | 12,232 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 245,037 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INTERNET & CATALOG RETAIL–0.2% | | | | | | | | |
Amazon.com, Inc.(a) | | | 870 | | | | 198,664 | |
Expedia, Inc. | | | 222 | | | | 10,672 | |
NetFlix, Inc.(a)(b) | | | 126 | | | | 8,627 | |
priceline.com, Inc.(a) | | | 117 | | | | 77,749 | |
Rakuten, Inc. | | | 1,951 | | | | 20,171 | |
TripAdvisor, Inc.(a) | | | 222 | | | | 9,921 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 325,804 | |
| | | | | | | | |
LEISURE EQUIPMENT & PRODUCTS–0.1% | | | | | | | | |
Hasbro, Inc. | | | 250 | | | | 8,467 | |
Mattel, Inc. | | | 785 | | | | 25,465 | |
Nikon Corp. | | | 900 | | | | 27,397 | |
Sankyo Co., Ltd. | | | 300 | | | | 14,640 | |
11
| | |
DYNAMIC ASSET ALLOCATION PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
Sega Sammy Holdings, Inc. | | | 700 | | | $ | 14,239 | |
Shimano, Inc. | | | 200 | | | | 13,113 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 103,321 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MEDIA–0.9% | | | | | | | | |
British Sky Broadcasting Group PLC | | | 3,006 | | | | 32,771 | |
Cablevision Systems Corp. | | | 480 | | | | 6,379 | |
CBS Corp.–Class B | | | 1,540 | | | | 50,481 | |
Comcast Corp.–Class A | | | 6,420 | | | | 205,247 | |
Dentsu, Inc. | | | 500 | | | | 14,820 | |
DIRECTV(a) | | | 1,565 | | | | 76,403 | |
Discovery Communications, Inc.–Class A(a) | | | 595 | | | | 32,130 | |
Gannett Co., Inc. | | | 550 | | | | 8,102 | |
Interpublic Group of Cos., Inc. (The) | | | 1,045 | | | | 11,338 | |
ITV PLC | | | 12,555 | | | | 15,107 | |
Jupiter Telecommunications Co., Ltd. | | | 13 | | | | 13,255 | |
Kabel Deutschland Holding AG(a) | | | 164 | | | | 10,220 | |
McGraw-Hill Cos., Inc. (The) | | | 660 | | | | 29,700 | |
News Corp.–Class A | | | 4,985 | | | | 111,116 | |
Omnicom Group, Inc. | | | 660 | | | | 32,076 | |
Pearson PLC | | | 2,193 | | | | 43,513 | |
Publicis Groupe SA | | | 494 | | | | 22,592 | |
Reed Elsevier NV | | | 2,970 | | | | 33,883 | |
Reed Elsevier PLC | | | 3,272 | | | | 26,226 | |
Scripps Networks Interactive, Inc.–Class A | | | 220 | | | | 12,509 | |
SES SA (FDR) | | | 971 | | | | 22,958 | |
Time Warner Cable, Inc.–Class A | | | 765 | | | | 62,807 | |
Time Warner, Inc. | | | 2,295 | | | | 88,358 | |
Viacom, Inc.–Class B | | | 1,260 | | | | 59,245 | |
Walt Disney Co. (The) | | | 4,275 | | | | 207,338 | |
Washington Post Co. (The)–Class B(b) | | | 11 | | | | 4,112 | |
WPP PLC | | | 3,388 | | | | 41,130 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,273,816 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MULTILINE RETAIL–0.2% | | | | | | | | |
Big Lots, Inc.(a) | | | 130 | | | | 5,303 | |
Dollar Tree, Inc.(a) | | | 320 | | | | 17,216 | |
Family Dollar Stores, Inc. | | | 305 | | | | 20,276 | |
Isetan Mitsukoshi Holdings Ltd. | | | 1,300 | | | | 13,812 | |
JC Penney Co., Inc.(b) | | | 330 | | | | 7,692 | |
Kohl’s Corp. | | | 580 | | | | 26,384 | |
Macy’s, Inc. | | | 945 | | | | 32,461 | |
Marks & Spencer Group PLC | | | 4,312 | | | | 21,990 | |
Next PLC | | | 452 | | | | 22,696 | |
Nordstrom, Inc. | | | 360 | | | | 17,888 | |
PPR | | | 205 | | | | 29,219 | |
Sears Holdings Corp.(a)(b) | | | 105 | | | | 6,269 | |
Target Corp. | | | 1,565 | | | | 91,067 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 312,273 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
SPECIALTY RETAIL–0.6% | | | | | | | | |
Abercrombie & Fitch Co.–Class A | | | 160 | | | $ | 5,462 | |
AutoNation, Inc.(a)(b) | | | 105 | | | | 3,704 | |
AutoZone, Inc.(a) | | | 85 | | | | 31,209 | |
Bed Bath & Beyond, Inc.(a) | | | 565 | | | | 34,917 | |
Best Buy Co., Inc. | | | 630 | | | | 13,205 | |
CarMax, Inc.(a) | | | 540 | | | | 14,008 | |
Fast Retailing Co., Ltd. | | | 100 | | | | 20,009 | |
GameStop Corp.–Class A(b) | | | 275 | | | | 5,049 | |
Gap, Inc. (The) | | | 745 | | | | 20,383 | |
Hennes & Mauritz AB–Class B | | | 2,552 | | | | 91,601 | |
Home Depot, Inc. (The) | | | 3,650 | | | | 193,414 | |
Inditex SA | | | 586 | | | | 60,572 | |
Kingfisher PLC | | | 6,368 | | | | 28,726 | |
Limited Brands, Inc. | | | 565 | | | | 24,029 | |
Lowe’s Cos., Inc. | | | 2,770 | | | | 78,779 | |
Nitori Holdings Co., Ltd. | | | 150 | | | | 14,184 | |
O’Reilly Automotive, Inc.(a) | | | 320 | | | | 26,806 | |
Ross Stores, Inc. | | | 550 | | | | 34,359 | |
Shimamura Co., Ltd. | | | 100 | | | | 11,556 | |
Staples, Inc. | | | 1,605 | | | | 20,945 | |
Tiffany & Co. | | | 315 | | | | 16,679 | |
TJX Cos., Inc. | | | 1,770 | | | | 75,986 | |
Urban Outfitters, Inc.(a) | | | 235 | | | | 6,484 | |
USS Co., Ltd. | | | 100 | | | | 10,790 | |
Yamada Denki Co., Ltd. | | | 270 | | | | 13,824 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 856,680 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TEXTILES, APPAREL & LUXURY GOODS–0.4% | | | | | | | | |
Adidas AG | | | 562 | | | | 40,283 | |
Burberry Group PLC | | | 1,179 | | | | 24,548 | |
Christian Dior SA | | | 166 | | | | 22,830 | |
Cie Financiere Richemont SA | | | 1,403 | | | | 77,038 | |
Coach, Inc. | | | 680 | | | | 39,766 | |
Fossil, Inc.(a) | | | 119 | | | | 9,108 | |
Hugo Boss AG | | | 198 | | | | 19,616 | |
Luxottica Group SpA | | | 759 | | | | 26,503 | |
LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton SA | | | 683 | | | | 103,946 | |
NIKE, Inc.–Class B | | | 880 | | | | 77,246 | |
Ralph Lauren Corp. | | | 190 | | | | 26,611 | |
Swatch Group AG (The) (SWX Exchange) | | | 103 | | | | 40,710 | |
VF Corp. | | | 215 | | | | 28,692 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 536,897 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 5,955,472 | |
| | | | | | | | |
ENERGY–3.7% | | | | | | | | |
ENERGY EQUIPMENT & SERVICES–0.5% | | | | | | | | |
AMEC PLC | | | 891 | | | | 14,046 | |
Baker Hughes, Inc. | | | 1,010 | | | | 41,511 | |
Cameron International Corp.(a) | | | 570 | | | | 24,345 | |
Cie Generale de Geophysique-Veritas(a) | | | 470 | | | | 12,156 | |
Diamond Offshore Drilling, Inc. | | | 140 | | | | 8,278 | |
12
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
FMC Technologies, Inc.(a) | | | 560 | | | $ | 21,969 | |
Fugro NV | | | 538 | | | | 32,634 | |
Halliburton Co. | | | 2,190 | | | | 62,174 | |
Helmerich & Payne, Inc. | | | 235 | | | | 10,218 | |
Nabors Industries Ltd.(a) | | | 665 | | | | 9,576 | |
National Oilwell Varco, Inc. | | | 1,005 | | | | 64,762 | |
Noble Corp.(a) | | | 575 | | | | 18,705 | |
Petrofac Ltd. | | | 697 | | | | 15,214 | |
Rowan Cos. PLC(a) | | | 255 | | | | 8,244 | |
Saipem SpA | | | 712 | | | | 31,708 | |
Schlumberger Ltd. | | | 3,185 | | | | 206,738 | |
Seadrill Ltd. | | | 946 | | | | 33,740 | |
Subsea 7 SA | | | 1,066 | | | | 21,096 | |
Technip SA | | | 267 | | | | 27,826 | |
Tenaris SA | | | 1,269 | | | | 22,317 | |
Transocean Ltd./Switzerland | | | 942 | | | | 42,243 | |
WorleyParsons Ltd. | | | 885 | | | | 22,981 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 752,481 | |
| | | | | | | | |
OIL, GAS & CONSUMABLE FUELS–3.2% | | | | | | | | |
Alpha Natural Resources, Inc.(a) | | | 482 | | | | 4,198 | |
Anadarko Petroleum Corp. | | | 1,195 | | | | 79,109 | |
Apache Corp. | | | 945 | | | | 83,056 | |
BG Group PLC | | | 9,129 | | | | 186,884 | |
BP PLC | | | 51,018 | | | | 340,708 | |
Cabot Oil & Gas Corp. | | | 470 | | | | 18,518 | |
Chesapeake Energy Corp.(b) | | | 1,545 | | | | 28,737 | |
Chevron Corp. | | | 4,730 | | | | 499,015 | |
ConocoPhillips | | | 3,020 | | | | 168,758 | |
Consol Energy, Inc. | | | 540 | | | | 16,330 | |
Denbury Resources, Inc.(a) | | | 910 | | | | 13,750 | |
Devon Energy Corp. | | | 970 | | | | 56,250 | |
ENI SpA | | | 6,460 | | | | 137,244 | |
EOG Resources, Inc. | | | 655 | | | | 59,022 | |
EQT Corp. | | | 340 | | | | 18,234 | |
Exxon Mobil Corp. | | | 11,169 | | | | 955,731 | |
Galp Energia SGPS SA | | | 622 | | | | 7,886 | |
Hess Corp. | | | 690 | | | | 29,981 | |
Inpex Corp. | | | 6 | | | | 33,699 | |
JX Holdings, Inc. | | | 6,000 | | | | 30,924 | |
Kinder Morgan, Inc./Delaware | | | 1,175 | | | | 37,859 | |
Lundin Petroleum AB(a) | | | 856 | | | | 16,025 | |
Marathon Oil Corp. | | | 1,655 | | | | 42,318 | |
Marathon Petroleum Corp. | | | 812 | | | | 36,475 | |
Murphy Oil Corp. | | | 455 | | | | 22,882 | |
Neste Oil Oyj | | | 339 | | | | 3,815 | |
Newfield Exploration Co.(a) | | | 320 | | | | 9,379 | |
Noble Energy, Inc. | | | 425 | | | | 36,049 | |
Occidental Petroleum Corp. | | | 1,950 | | | | 167,252 | |
OMV AG | | | 396 | | | | 12,454 | |
Origin Energy Ltd. | | | 2,920 | | | | 36,774 | |
Peabody Energy Corp. | | | 645 | | | | 15,815 | |
Phillips 66(a) | | | 1,460 | | | | 48,530 | |
Pioneer Natural Resources Co. | | | 315 | | | | 27,786 | |
QEP Resources, Inc. | | | 425 | | | | 12,737 | |
Range Resources Corp. | | | 400 | | | | 24,748 | |
Repsol YPF SA | | | 2,133 | | | | 34,288 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Royal Dutch Shell PLC–Class A | | | 9,862 | | | $ | 332,280 | |
Royal Dutch Shell PLC–Class B | | | 7,154 | | | | 249,844 | |
Santos Ltd. | | | 2,539 | | | | 27,963 | |
Southwestern Energy Co.(a) | | | 795 | | | | 25,384 | |
Spectra Energy Corp. | | | 1,535 | | | | 44,607 | |
Statoil ASA | | | 3,000 | | | | 71,546 | |
Sunoco, Inc. | | | 235 | | | | 11,163 | |
Tesoro Corp.(a) | | | 325 | | | | 8,112 | |
TonenGeneral Sekiyu KK | | | 2,000 | | | | 17,689 | |
Total SA | | | 5,706 | | | | 256,821 | |
Tullow Oil PLC | | | 2,433 | | | | 56,233 | |
Valero Energy Corp. | | | 1,275 | | | | 30,791 | |
Williams Cos., Inc. (The) | | | 1,455 | | | | 41,933 | |
Woodside Petroleum Ltd. | | | 1,733 | | | | 55,536 | |
WPX Energy, Inc.(a) | | | 445 | | | | 7,200 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 4,590,322 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 5,342,803 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MATERIALS–2.4% | | | | | | | | |
CHEMICALS–1.1% | | | | | | | | |
Air Liquide SA | | | 839 | | | | 95,922 | |
Air Products & Chemicals, Inc. | | | 520 | | | | 41,980 | |
Airgas, Inc. | | | 190 | | | | 15,962 | |
Akzo Nobel NV | | | 704 | | | | 33,133 | |
Arkema SA | | | 218 | | | | 14,294 | |
Asahi Kasei Corp. | | | 3,000 | | | | 16,262 | |
BASF SE | | | 2,469 | | | | 171,680 | |
CF Industries Holdings, Inc. | | | 190 | | | | 36,811 | |
Dow Chemical Co. (The)(b) | | | 2,825 | | | | 88,987 | |
Eastman Chemical Co. | | | 330 | | | | 16,622 | |
Ecolab, Inc. | | | 690 | | | | 47,286 | |
EI du Pont de Nemours & Co. | | | 2,245 | | | | 113,530 | |
FMC Corp. | | | 330 | | | | 17,648 | |
Givaudan SA(a) | | | 23 | | | | 22,574 | |
Hitachi Chemical Co., Ltd. | | | 900 | | | | 14,179 | |
Incitec Pivot Ltd. | | | 7,611 | | | | 22,485 | |
International Flavors & Fragrances, Inc. | | | 200 | | | | 10,960 | |
Johnson Matthey PLC | | | 577 | | | | 20,010 | |
JSR Corp. | | | 800 | | | | 13,881 | |
K&S AG | | | 463 | | | | 21,196 | |
Kansai Paint Co., Ltd. | | | 1,000 | | | | 10,716 | |
Kuraray Co., Ltd. | | | 1,000 | | | | 12,959 | |
Lanxess AG | | | 227 | | | | 14,366 | |
Linde AG | | | 460 | | | | 71,641 | |
Mitsubishi Chemical Holdings Corp. | | | 3,500 | | | | 15,429 | |
Mitsubishi Gas Chemical Co., Inc. | | | 2,000 | | | | 11,370 | |
Monsanto Co. | | | 1,290 | | | | 106,786 | |
Mosaic Co. (The) | | | 730 | | | | 39,975 | |
Nitto Denko Corp. | | | 400 | | | | 17,138 | |
Novozymes A/S | | | 656 | | | | 17,011 | |
Orica Ltd. | | | 981 | | | | 24,988 | |
PPG Industries, Inc. | | | 350 | | | | 37,142 | |
Praxair, Inc. | | | 740 | | | | 80,460 | |
Sherwin-Williams Co. (The) | | | 215 | | | | 28,455 | |
Shin-Etsu Chemical Co., Ltd. | | | 1,100 | | | | 60,575 | |
13
| | |
DYNAMIC ASSET ALLOCATION PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
Showa Denko KK | | | 7,000 | | | $ | 13,600 | |
Sigma-Aldrich Corp. | | | 305 | | | | 22,549 | |
Solvay SA | | | 159 | | | | 15,698 | |
Sumitomo Chemical Co., Ltd. | | | 4,000 | | | | 12,295 | |
Syngenta AG | | | 254 | | | | 86,951 | |
Teijin Ltd. | | | 5,000 | | | | 15,221 | |
Toray Industries, Inc. | | | 4,000 | | | | 27,275 | |
Yara International ASA | | | 541 | | | | 23,675 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,601,677 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS–0.1% | | | | | | | | |
CRH PLC | | | 1,933 | | | | 37,032 | |
Fletcher Building Ltd. | | | 1,830 | | | | 8,662 | |
HeidelbergCement AG | | | 440 | | | | 21,124 | |
Holcim Ltd.(a) | | | 816 | | | | 45,211 | |
James Hardie Industries SE | | | 1,640 | | | | 13,522 | |
Lafarge SA | | | 533 | | | | 23,803 | |
Taiheiyo Cement Corp. | | | 4,000 | | | | 9,185 | |
Vulcan Materials Co. | | | 315 | | | | 12,509 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 171,048 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONTAINERS & PACKAGING–0.1% | | | | | | | | |
Amcor Ltd./Australia | | | 3,244 | | | | 23,681 | |
Ball Corp. | | | 360 | | | | 14,778 | |
Bemis Co., Inc. | | | 230 | | | | 7,208 | |
Owens-Illinois, Inc.(a) | | | 360 | | | | 6,901 | |
Rexam PLC | | | 2,358 | | | | 15,563 | |
Sealed Air Corp. | | | 440 | | | | 6,794 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 74,925 | |
| | | | | | | | |
METALS & MINING–1.0% | | | | | | | | |
Acerinox SA | | | 318 | | | | 3,564 | |
Alcoa, Inc. | | | 2,520 | | | | 22,050 | |
Allegheny Technologies, Inc. | | | 235 | | | | 7,494 | |
Anglo American PLC | | | 3,567 | | | | 117,231 | |
Antofagasta PLC | | | 1,060 | | | | 18,132 | |
ArcelorMittal (Euronext Amsterdam) | | | 4,360 | | | | 66,706 | |
BHP Billiton Ltd. | | | 8,668 | | | | 282,337 | |
BHP Billiton PLC | | | 5,678 | | | | 161,383 | |
Cliffs Natural Resources, Inc. | | | 330 | | | | 16,266 | |
Eurasian Natural Resources Corp. PLC | | | 2,391 | | | | 15,605 | |
Fortescue Metals Group Ltd. | | | 4,488 | | | | 22,508 | |
Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold, Inc. | | | 2,225 | | | | 75,806 | |
Fresnillo PLC | | | 667 | | | | 15,278 | |
Glencore International PLC | | | 3,722 | | | | 17,260 | |
Hitachi Metals Ltd. | | | 1,000 | | | | 11,934 | |
Iluka Resources Ltd. | | | 2,008 | | | | 23,699 | |
JFE Holdings, Inc. | | | 1,200 | | | | 20,085 | |
Kazakhmys PLC | | | 1,371 | | | | 15,544 | |
Kobe Steel Ltd. | | | 12,000 | | | | 14,435 | |
Mitsubishi Materials Corp. | | | 5,000 | | | | 14,499 | |
Newcrest Mining Ltd. | | | 2,055 | | | | 47,822 | |
Newmont Mining Corp. | | | 1,195 | | | | 57,969 | |
Nippon Steel Corp. | | | 14,000 | | | | 31,754 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Norsk Hydro ASA | | | 2,654 | | | $ | 11,969 | |
Nucor Corp. | | | 760 | | | | 28,804 | |
Randgold Resources Ltd. | | | 234 | | | | 21,009 | |
Rio Tinto Ltd. | | | 1,171 | | | | 68,746 | |
Rio Tinto PLC | | | 3,620 | | | | 172,036 | |
Sumitomo Metal Industries Ltd. | | | 9,000 | | | | 14,846 | |
Sumitomo Metal Mining Co., Ltd. | | | 1,000 | | | | 11,269 | |
ThyssenKrupp AG | | | 1,305 | | | | 21,258 | |
Titanium Metals Corp. | | | 150 | | | | 1,696 | |
Umicore SA | | | 306 | | | | 14,148 | |
United States Steel Corp.(b) | | | 330 | | | | 6,798 | |
Voestalpine AG | | | 295 | | | | 7,835 | |
Xstrata PLC | | | 5,579 | | | | 70,147 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,529,922 | |
| | | | | | | | |
PAPER & FOREST PRODUCTS–0.1% | | | | | | | | |
International Paper Co. | | | 1,015 | | | | 29,344 | |
MeadWestvaco Corp. | | | 370 | | | | 10,638 | |
OJI Paper Co., Ltd. | | | 4,000 | | | | 15,326 | |
Stora Enso Oyj | | | 1,482 | | | | 9,124 | |
Svenska Cellulosa AB–Class B | | | 2,115 | | | | 31,732 | |
UPM-Kymmene Oyj | | | 1,411 | | | | 15,962 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 112,126 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 3,489,698 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES–1.6% | | | | | | | | |
DIVERSIFIED TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES–1.2% | | | | | | | | |
AT&T, Inc. | | | 13,970 | | | | 498,170 | |
Belgacom SA | | | 409 | | | | 11,631 | |
BT Group PLC | | | 20,918 | | | | 69,312 | |
CenturyLink, Inc. | | | 1,450 | | | | 57,260 | |
Deutsche Telekom AG | | | 7,551 | | | | 82,755 | |
Elisa Oyj | | | 381 | | | | 7,672 | |
France Telecom SA | | | 4,984 | | | | 65,531 | |
Frontier Communications Corp.(b) | | | 2,380 | | | | 9,115 | |
Iliad SA | | | 80 | | | | 11,584 | |
Inmarsat PLC | | | 1,202 | | | | 9,276 | |
Koninklijke KPN NV | | | 3,848 | | | | 36,795 | |
Nippon Telegraph & Telephone Corp. | | | 1,200 | | | | 55,957 | |
Portugal Telecom SGPS SA | | | 1,687 | | | | 7,388 | |
Singapore Telecommunications Ltd. | | | 21,000 | | | | 54,696 | |
Swisscom AG | | | 62 | | | | 24,979 | |
TDC A/S | | | 1,331 | | | | 9,250 | |
Telecom Corp. of New Zealand Ltd. | | | 5,176 | | | | 9,856 | |
Telecom Italia SpA (ordinary shares) | | | 28,057 | | | | 27,724 | |
Telecom Italia SpA (savings shares) | | | 16,898 | | | | 13,694 | |
Telefonica SA | | | 11,042 | | | | 145,351 | |
14
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
Telekom Austria AG | | | 893 | | | $ | 8,777 | |
Telenet Group Holding NV | | | 194 | | | | 8,489 | |
Telenor ASA | | | 1,945 | | | | 32,517 | |
TeliaSonera AB | | | 5,820 | | | | 37,182 | |
Telstra Corp., Ltd. | | | 11,707 | | | | 44,357 | |
Verizon Communications, Inc. | | | 6,765 | | | | 300,637 | |
Vivendi SA | | | 3,465 | | | | 64,383 | |
Windstream Corp.(b) | | | 1,395 | | | | 13,476 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,717,814 | |
| | | | | | | | |
WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES–0.4% | | | | | | | | |
Crown Castle International Corp.(a) | | | 620 | | | | 36,369 | |
KDDI Corp. | | | 7 | | | | 45,156 | |
MetroPCS Communications, Inc.(a) | | | 675 | | | | 4,084 | |
Millicom International Cellular SA | | | 313 | | | | 29,539 | |
NTT DoCoMo, Inc. | | | 41 | | | | 68,224 | |
Softbank Corp. | | | 2,400 | | | | 89,337 | |
Sprint Nextel Corp.(a) | | | 7,130 | | | | 23,244 | |
StarHub Ltd. | | | 4,000 | | | | 10,842 | |
Vodafone Group PLC | | | 133,955 | | | | 376,515 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 683,310 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,401,124 | |
| | | | | | | | |
UTILITIES–1.5% | | | | | | | | |
ELECTRIC UTILITIES–0.8% | | | | | | | | |
Acciona SA | | | 60 | | | | 3,587 | |
American Electric Power Co., Inc. | | | 1,125 | | | | 44,887 | |
Cheung Kong Infrastructure Holdings Ltd. | | | 2,000 | | | | 12,069 | |
Chubu Electric Power Co., Inc. | | | 1,700 | | | | 27,567 | |
Chugoku Electric Power Co., Inc. (The) | | | 900 | | | | 14,843 | |
CLP Holdings Ltd. | | | 5,000 | | | | 42,462 | |
Contact Energy Ltd.(a) | | | 971 | | | | 3,757 | |
Duke Energy Corp. | | | 3,175 | | | | 73,215 | |
E.ON AG | | | 4,841 | | | | 104,610 | |
Edison International | | | 765 | | | | 35,343 | |
EDP - Energias de Portugal SA | | | 5,130 | | | | 12,136 | |
Electricite de France SA | | | 1,042 | | | | 23,184 | |
Enel SpA | | | 17,694 | | | | 57,131 | |
Entergy Corp. | | | 425 | | | | 28,853 | |
Exelon Corp. | | | 1,997 | | | | 75,127 | |
FirstEnergy Corp. | | | 985 | | | | 48,452 | |
Fortum Oyj | | | 1,194 | | | | 22,675 | |
Iberdrola SA | | | 10,436 | | | | 49,271 | |
Kansai Electric Power Co., Inc. (The) | | | 2,000 | | | | 23,985 | |
Kyushu Electric Power Co., Inc. | | | 1,200 | | | | 14,236 | |
NextEra Energy, Inc. | | | 995 | | | | 68,466 | |
Northeast Utilities | | | 710 | | | | 27,555 | |
Pepco Holdings, Inc. | | | 540 | | | | 10,568 | |
Pinnacle West Capital Corp. | | | 235 | | | | 12,159 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Power Assets Holdings Ltd. | | | 3,500 | | | $ | 26,242 | |
PPL Corp. | | | 1,345 | | | | 37,404 | |
Progress Energy, Inc. | | | 430 | | | | 25,873 | |
Red Electrica Corp. SA | | | 291 | | | | 12,701 | |
Scottish & Southern Energy PLC | | | 2,523 | | | | 55,041 | |
Shikoku Electric Power Co., Inc. | | | 700 | | | | 14,880 | |
Southern Co. (The) | | | 2,060 | | | | 95,378 | |
SP AusNet | | | 12,753 | | | | 13,365 | |
Tohoku Electric Power Co., Inc.(a) | | | 1,400 | | | | 14,067 | |
Verbund AG | | | 183 | | | | 4,192 | |
Xcel Energy, Inc. | | | 1,120 | | | | 31,819 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,167,100 | |
| | | | | | | | |
GAS UTILITIES–0.1% | | | | | | | | |
AGL Resources, Inc. | | | 248 | | | | 9,610 | |
Enagas SA | | | 481 | | | | 8,776 | |
Gas Natural SDG SA | | | 933 | | | | 11,979 | |
Hong Kong & China Gas Co., Ltd. | | | 14,000 | | | | 29,740 | |
Oneok, Inc. | | | 470 | | | | 19,886 | |
Osaka Gas Co., Ltd. | | | 5,000 | | | | 20,949 | |
Snam SpA | | | 6,059 | | | | 27,145 | |
Toho Gas Co., Ltd. | | | 2,000 | | | | 12,413 | |
Tokyo Gas Co., Ltd. | | | 7,000 | | | | 35,777 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 176,275 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INDEPENDENT POWER PRODUCERS & ENERGY TRADERS–0.1% | | | | | | | | |
AES Corp. (The)(a) | | | 1,535 | | | | 19,694 | |
Electric Power Development Co., Ltd. | | | 500 | | | | 13,140 | |
Enel Green Power SpA | | | 8,772 | | | | 13,900 | |
NRG Energy, Inc.(a) | | | 540 | | | | 9,374 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 56,108 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MULTI-UTILITIES–0.5% | | | | | | | | |
AGL Energy Ltd. | | | 1,463 | | | | 22,233 | |
Ameren Corp. | | | 560 | | | | 18,782 | |
CenterPoint Energy, Inc. | | | 995 | | | | 20,567 | |
Centrica PLC | | | 13,908 | | | | 69,539 | |
CMS Energy Corp. | | | 620 | | | | 14,570 | |
Consolidated Edison, Inc. | | | 680 | | | | 42,289 | |
Dominion Resources, Inc./VA | | | 1,385 | | | | 74,790 | |
DTE Energy Co. | | | 420 | | | | 24,919 | |
GDF Suez | | | 3,330 | | | | 79,413 | |
Integrys Energy Group, Inc. | | | 200 | | | | 11,374 | |
National Grid PLC | | | 9,585 | | | | 101,582 | |
NiSource, Inc. | | | 655 | | | | 16,211 | |
PG&E Corp. | | | 975 | | | | 44,138 | |
Public Service Enterprise Group, Inc. | | | 1,205 | | | | 39,162 | |
RWE AG | | | 1,316 | | | | 53,817 | |
SCANA Corp. | | | 295 | | | | 14,113 | |
Sempra Energy | | | 560 | | | | 38,573 | |
TECO Energy, Inc. | | | 475 | | | | 8,579 | |
United Utilities Group PLC | | | 1,833 | | | | 19,417 | |
Veolia Environnement SA | | | 932 | | | | 11,802 | |
15
| | |
DYNAMIC ASSET ALLOCATION PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
Wisconsin Energy Corp. | | | 550 | | | $ | 21,764 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 747,634 | |
| | | | | | | | |
WATER UTILITIES–0.0% | | | | | | | | |
Severn Trent PLC | | | 639 | | | | 16,565 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,163,682 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Common Stocks (cost $53,162,484) | | | | | | | 55,125,335 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | Principal Amount (000) | | | | |
GOVERNMENTS–TREASURIES–27.0% | | | | | |
UNITED STATES–27.0% | | | | | | | | |
U.S. Treasury Bonds | | | | | | | | |
3.125%, 11/15/41–2/15/42 | | $ | 1,360 | | | | 1,461,367 | |
3.50%, 2/15/39 | | | 152 | | | | 175,893 | |
3.75%, 8/15/41 | | | 220 | | | | 265,306 | |
3.875%, 8/15/40 | | | 280 | | | | 344,706 | |
4.25%, 5/15/39 | | | 240 | | | | 313,463 | |
4.375%, 11/15/39–5/15/41 | | | 593 | | | | 790,811 | |
4.50%, 8/15/39 | | | 220 | | | | 298,512 | |
4.75%, 2/15/37–2/15/41 | | | 266 | | | | 373,662 | |
5.375%, 2/15/31 | | | 650 | | | | 947,172 | |
6.00%, 2/15/26 | | | 134 | | | | 196,436 | |
6.25%, 8/15/23–5/15/30 | | | 314 | | | | 480,013 | |
7.25%, 5/15/16 | | | 108 | | | | 135,439 | |
7.50%, 11/15/16 | | | 92 | | | | 118,996 | |
7.625%, 2/15/25 | | | 55 | | | | 90,028 | |
8.00%, 11/15/21 | | | 123 | | | | 193,091 | |
U.S. Treasury Notes | | | | | | | | |
0.125%, 9/30/13–12/31/13 | | | 980 | | | | 977,687 | |
0.25%, 11/30/13–2/15/15 | | | 4,395 | | | | 4,387,729 | |
0.375%, 8/31/12–11/15/14 | | | 325 | | | | 325,175 | |
0.50%, 10/15/13–10/15/14 | | | 883 | | | | 885,770 | |
0.625%, 1/31/13 | | | 320 | | | | 320,812 | |
0.75%, 3/31/13–6/15/14 | | | 1,574 | | | | 1,583,816 | |
0.875%, 11/30/16–4/30/17 | | | 2,315 | | | | 2,335,309 | |
1.00%, 1/15/14–10/31/16 | | | 1,655 | | | | 1,677,060 | |
1.125%, 12/15/12–6/15/13 | | | 809 | | | | 815,055 | |
1.25%, 2/15/14–4/30/19 | | | 2,470 | | | | 2,505,408 | |
1.375%, 11/30/15–2/28/19 | | | 902 | | | | 923,865 | |
1.75%, 7/31/15 | | | 660 | | | | 686,142 | |
1.875%, 10/31/17 | | | 1,100 | | | | 1,160,500 | |
2.00%, 11/30/13–2/15/22 | | | 2,749 | | | | 2,852,592 | |
2.125%, 12/31/15–8/15/21 | | | 825 | | | | 869,033 | |
2.25%, 1/31/15–11/30/17 | | | 739 | | | | 790,211 | |
2.375%, 8/31/14–7/31/17 | | | 2,504 | | | | 2,631,679 | |
2.50%, 3/31/15 | | | 148 | | | | 156,510 | |
2.625%, 1/31/18–11/15/20 | | | 1,505 | | | | 1,654,170 | |
| | | | | | | | |
2.75%, 5/31/17–2/15/19 | | $ | 1,330 | | | $ | 1,462,751 | |
3.00%, 2/28/17 | | | 889 | | | | 982,553 | |
3.125%, 10/31/16–5/15/21 | | | 1,111 | | | | 1,242,111 | |
3.25%, 7/31/16 | | | 232 | | | | 256,777 | |
3.375%, 11/15/19 | | | 380 | | | | 439,642 | |
3.625%, 2/15/21 | | | 295 | | | | 348,284 | |
3.75%, 11/15/18 | | | 615 | | | | 720,367 | |
4.00%, 11/15/12 | | | 57 | | | | 57,808 | |
4.375%, 8/15/12 | | | 110 | | | | 110,563 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Governments–Treasuries (cost $38,479,877) | | | | | | | 39,344,274 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | Shares | | | | |
INVESTMENT COMPANIES–4.2% | | | | | | | | |
FUNDS AND INVESTMENT TRUSTS–4.2% | | | | | | | | |
Vanguard MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (cost $5,990,959) | | | 151,220 | | | | 6,041,239 | |
| | | | | | | | |
SHORT–TERM INVESTMENTS–40.5% | | | | | | | | |
INVESTMENT COMPANIES–40.5% | | | | | | | | |
AllianceBernstein Fixed-Income Shares, Inc.–Government STIF Portfolio, 0.14%(c) (cost $58,912,503) | | | 58,912,503 | | | | 58,912,503 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Investments Before Security Lending Collateral for Securities Loaned–109.6% (cost $156,545,823) | | | | | | | 159,423,351 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INVESTMENTS OF CASH COLLATERAL FOR SECURITY LOANED–0.1% | | | | | | | | |
INVESTMENT COMPANIES–0.1% | | | | | | | | |
AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves–Class I, 0.20%(c) (cost $132,702) | | | 132,702 | | | | 132,702 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TOTAL INVESTMENTS–109.7% (cost $156,678,525) | | | | | | | 159,556,053 | |
Other assets less liabilities–(9.7)% | | | | | | | (14,089,887 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
NET ASSETS–100.0% | | | | | | $ | 145,466,166 | |
| | | | | | | | |
16
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
FUTURES CONTRACTS (see Note D)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Type | | Number of Contracts | | | Expiration Month | | | Original Value | | | Value at June 30, 2012 | | | Unrealized Appreciation/ (Depreciation) | |
Purchased Contracts | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
10YR JGB Mini Futures SGX XSES | | | 9 | | | | September 2012 | | | $ | 1,614,250 | | | $ | 1,617,940 | | | $ | 3,690 | |
ASX SPI 200 Index Futures | | | 7 | | | | September 2012 | | | | 725,118 | | | | 726,659 | | | | 1,541 | |
FTSE 100 Index Futures | | | 20 | | | | September 2012 | | | | 1,694,904 | | | | 1,729,970 | | | | 35,066 | |
German Euro Bobl Futures | | | 2 | | | | September 2012 | | | | 322,933 | | | | 318,627 | | | | (4,306 | ) |
German Euro Bund Futures | | | 2 | | | | September 2012 | | | | 366,441 | | | | 356,618 | | | | (9,823 | ) |
German Euro Buxl Futures | | | 1 | | | | September 2012 | | | | 166,136 | | | | 165,704 | | | | (432 | ) |
Hang Seng Index Futures | | | 2 | | | | July 2012 | | | | 243,465 | | | | 250,698 | | | | 7,233 | |
MSCI Emerging Market Mini Futures | | | 9 | | | | September 2012 | | | | 404,025 | | | | 425,115 | | | | 21,090 | |
Russell 2000 Mini Index Futures | | | 15 | | | | September 2012 | | | | 1,134,988 | | | | 1,193,100 | | | | 58,112 | |
S&P 500 E Mini Index Futures | | | 25 | | | | September 2012 | | | | 1,645,430 | | | | 1,695,500 | | | | 50,070 | |
S&P Mid Cap 400 E Mini Index Futures | | | 32 | | | | September 2012 | | | | 2,931,733 | | | | 3,006,400 | | | | 74,667 | |
TOPIX Index Futures | | | 16 | | | | September 2012 | | | | 1,422,043 | | | | 1,539,251 | | | | 117,208 | |
U.S. T–Note 10 Yr Futures | | | 7 | | | | September 2012 | | | | 935,230 | | | | 933,625 | | | | (1,605 | ) |
U.S. T–Note 5 Yr Futures | | | 2 | | | | September 2012 | | | | 247,503 | | | | 247,938 | | | | 435 | |
UK Long Gilt Bond Futures | | | 2 | | | | September 2012 | | | | 370,617 | | | | 373,089 | | | | 2,472 | |
Ultra Long U.S. T-Bond Futures | | | 2 | | | | September 2012 | | | | 338,691 | | | | 333,688 | | | | (5,003 | ) |
| | | | | |
Sold Contracts | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
EURO STOXX 50 Index Futures | | | 17 | | | | September 2012 | | | | 462,297 | | | | 485,129 | | | | (22,832 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | $ | 327,583 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
FORWARD CURRENCY EXCHANGE CONTRACTS (see Note D)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Counterparty & Description | | Contract Amount (000) | | | U.S. $ Value on Origination Date | | | U.S. $ Value at June 30, 2012 | | | Unrealized Appreciation/ (Depreciation) | |
Buy Contracts: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Bank of America NA: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Euro settling 9/14/12 | | | 1,195 | | | $ | 1,515,260 | | | $ | 1,513,316 | | | $ | (1,944 | ) |
Barclays Bank PLC Wholesale: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Japanese Yen settling 9/14/12 | | | 107,886 | | | | 1,361,295 | | | | 1,351,022 | | | | (10,273 | ) |
BNP Paribas SA: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Swiss Franc settling 9/14/12 | | | 918 | | | | 958,329 | | | | 968,970 | | | | 10,641 | |
Citibank N.A: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Australian Dollar settling 9/14/12 | | | 1,247 | | | | 1,226,623 | | | | 1,267,728 | | | | 41,105 | |
Japanese Yen settling 9/14/12 | | | 11,905 | | | | 149,109 | | | | 149,082 | | | | (27 | ) |
Credit Suisse London Branch (GFX): | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Great British Pound settling 9/14/12 | | | 1,388 | | | | 2,181,353 | | | | 2,173,399 | | | | (7,954 | ) |
Japanese Yen settling 9/14/12 | | | 218,406 | | | | 2,759,463 | | | | 2,735,027 | | | | (24,436 | ) |
Royal Bank of Canada: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Euro settling 9/14/12 | | | 788 | | | | 983,972 | | | | 997,903 | | | | 13,931 | |
Royal Bank of Scotland PLC: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Japanese Yen settling 9/14/12 | | | 98,236 | | | | 1,232,983 | | | | 1,230,177 | | | | (2,806 | ) |
17
| | |
DYNAMIC ASSET ALLOCATION PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Counterparty & Description | | Contract Amount (000) | | | U.S. $ Value on Origination Date | | | U.S. $ Value at June 30, 2012 | | | Unrealized Appreciation/ (Depreciation) | |
Buy Contracts: (continued) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Standard Chartered Bank: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Great British Pound settling 9/14/12 | | | 116 | | | $ | 180,382 | | | $ | 181,638 | | | $ | 1,256 | |
State Street Bank & Trust Co.: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Great British Pound settling 9/14/12 | | | 227 | | | | 366,269 | | | | 355,448 | | | | (10,821 | ) |
Japanese Yen settling 9/14/12 | | | 24,009 | | | | 302,670 | | | | 300,656 | | | | (2,014 | ) |
Swedish Krona settling 9/14/12 | | | 3,924 | | | | 555,093 | | | | 565,768 | | | | 10,675 | |
UBS AG: | | | | | �� | | | | | | | | | | | |
Euro settling 9/14/12 | | | 177 | | | | 229,625 | | | | 224,148 | | | | (5,477 | ) |
Great British Pound settling 9/14/12 | | | 858 | | | | 1,340,325 | | | | 1,343,499 | | | | 3,174 | |
| | | | |
Sale Contracts: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Credit Suisse London Branch (GFX): | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Australian Dollar settling 9/14/12 | | | 1,580 | | | | 1,573,064 | | | | 1,606,263 | | | | (33,199 | ) |
Euro settling 9/14/12 | | | 4,035 | | | | 5,022,768 | | | | 5,109,818 | | | | (87,050 | ) |
Great British Pound settling 9/14/12 | | | 2,987 | | | | 4,632,031 | | | | 4,677,194 | | | | (45,163 | ) |
Japanese Yen settling 9/14/12 | | | 326,884 | | | | 4,126,229 | | | | 4,093,462 | | | | 32,767 | |
Swedish Krona settling 9/14/12 | | | 4,197 | | | | 592,428 | | | | 605,129 | | | | (12,701 | ) |
Swiss Franc settling 9/14/12 | | | 1,533 | | | | 1,590,150 | | | | 1,618,117 | | | | (27,967 | ) |
Royal Bank of Canada: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Canadian Dollar settling 9/14/12 | | | 302 | | | | 292,449 | | | | 296,153 | | | | (3,704 | ) |
Standard Chartered Bank: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Japanese Yen settling 9/14/12 | | | 14,678 | | | | 185,750 | | | | 183,807 | | | | 1,943 | |
State Street Bank & Trust Co.: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Australian Dollar settling 9/14/12 | | | 142 | | | | 136,895 | | | | 144,360 | | | | (7,465 | ) |
Westpac Banking Corp: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Australian Dollar settling 9/14/12 | | | 1,105 | | | | 1,114,602 | | | | 1,123,367 | | | | (8,765 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | $ | (176,274 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
TOTAL RETURN SWAP CONTRACTS (see Note D)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Receive/Pay Total Return on Reference Index | | Index | | # of Shares or Units | | | Rate Paid/ Received by the Fund | | | Notional Amount (000) | | | Maturity Date | | | Counterparty | | Unrealized Appreciation/ (Depreciation) | |
Receive Total Return on Reference Index | | | | | | | | | | | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 9 | | | | 0.46 | % | | $ | 27 | | | | 7/16/12 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA | | $ | 1,087 | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 6 | | | | 0.47 | % | | | 18 | | | | 7/16/12 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA | | | 724 | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 5 | | | | 0.47 | % | | | 15 | | | | 7/16/12 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA | | | 604 | |
18
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Receive/Pay Total Return on Reference Index | | Index | | # of Shares or Units | | | Rate Paid by the Fund | | | Notional Amount (000) | | | Maturity Date | | | Counterparty | | Unrealized Appreciation/ (Depreciation) | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 16 | | | | 0.49 | % | | $ | 49 | | | | 8/15/12 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA | | $ | 1,931 | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 14 | | | | 0.49 | % | | | 42 | | | | 8/15/12 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA | | | 1,690 | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 29 | | | | 0.49 | % | | | 88 | | | | 8/15/12 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA | | | 3,500 | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 20 | | | | 0.49 | % | | | 61 | | | | 8/15/12 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA | | | 2,414 | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 7 | | | | 0.49 | % | | | 21 | | | | 9/17/12 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank,NA | | | 845 | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 11 | | | | 0.49 | % | | | 33 | | | | 9/17/12 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank,NA | | | 1,328 | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 13 | | | | 0.49 | % | | | 39 | | | | 10/15/12 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank,NA | | | 1,569 | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 29 | | | | 0.49 | % | | | 88 | | | | 10/15/12 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank,NA | | | 3,500 | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 10 | | | | 0.49 | % | | | 30 | | | | 10/15/12 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank,NA | | | 1,207 | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 16 | | | | 0.49 | % | | | 49 | | | | 10/15/12 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank,NA | | | 1,931 | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 15 | | | | 0.49 | % | | | 46 | | | | 10/15/12 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank,NA | | | 1,810 | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 16 | | | | 0.49 | % | | | 49 | | | | 10/15/12 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank,NA | | | 1,931 | |
19
| | |
DYNAMIC ASSET ALLOCATION PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Receive/Pay Total Return on Reference Index | | Index | | # of Shares or Units | | | Rate Paid by the Fund | | | Notional Amount (000) | | | Maturity Date | | | Counterparty | | Unrealized Appreciation/ (Depreciation) | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 35 | | | | 0.49 | % | | $ | 106 | | | | 11/15/12 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA | | $ | 4,224 | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 21 | | | | 0.49 | % | | | 64 | | | | 11/15/12 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank,NA | | | 2,535 | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 19 | | | | 0.49 | % | | | 58 | | | | 12/17/12 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank,NA | | | 2,293 | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 31 | | | | 0.49 | % | | | 94 | | | | 12/17/12 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank,NA | | | 3,741 | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 22 | | | | 0.49 | % | | | 67 | | | | 12/17/12 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank,NA | | | 2,655 | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 18 | | | | 0.49 | % | | | 55 | | | | 12/17/12 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank,NA | | | 2,172 | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 38 | | | | 0.49 | % | | | 115 | | | | 12/17/12 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank,NA | | | 4,586 | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 23 | | | | 0.49 | % | | | 70 | | | | 12/17/12 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank,NA | | | 2,776 | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 42 | | | | 0.56 | % | | | 127 | | | | 3/15/13 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank,NA | | | 5,066 | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 89 | | | | 0.56 | % | | | 270 | | | | 3/15/13 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank,NA | | | 10,735 | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 38 | | | | 0.56 | % | | | 115 | | | | 3/15/13 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank,NA | | | 4,584 | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 48 | | | | 0.56 | % | | | 146 | | | | 3/15/13 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank,NA | | | 5,790 | |
20
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Receive/Pay Total Return on Reference Index | | Index | | # of Shares or Units | | | Rate Paid by the Fund | | | Notional Amount (000) | | | Maturity Date | | | Counterparty | | Unrealized Appreciation/ (Depreciation) | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 21 | | | | 0.56 | % | | $ | 64 | | | | 3/15/13 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank,NA | | $ | 2,533 | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 32 | | | | 0.58 | % | | | 97 | | | | 4/15/13 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank,NA | | | 3,859 | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 70 | | | | 0.58 | % | | | 212 | | | | 4/15/13 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank,NA | | | 8,442 | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 69 | | | | 0.58 | % | | | 209 | | | | 4/15/13 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA | | | 8,322 | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 12 | | | | 0.58 | % | | | 36 | | | | 4/15/13 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank,NA | | | 1,447 | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 56 | | | | 0.58 | % | | | 170 | | | | 4/15/13 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank,NA | | | 6,754 | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 72 | | | | 0.58 | % | | | 218 | | | | 4/15/13 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank,NA | | | 8,683 | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 19 | | | | 0.47 | % | | | 58 | | | | 6/17/13 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank,NA | | | 2,294 | |
Receive | | Russell 2000 Total Return index | | | 30 | | | | 0.24 | % | | | 105 | | | | 3/15/13 | | | JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA | | | 3,817 | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 19 | | | | 0.24 | % | | | 58 | | | | 4/15/13 | | | Morgan Stanley Capital ServicesInc. | | | 2,298 | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 33 | | | | 0.44 | % | | | 100 | | | | 10/15/12 | | | UBS AG | | | 3,985 | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 233 | | | | 0.44 | % | | | 707 | | | | 5/15/13 | | | UBS AG | | | 28,133 | |
21
| | |
DYNAMIC ASSET ALLOCATION PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Receive/Pay Total Return on Reference Index | | Index | | # of Shares or Units | | | Rate Paid by the Fund | | | Notional Amount (000) | | | Maturity Date | | | Counterparty | | Unrealized Appreciation/ (Depreciation) | |
Receive | | FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Developed Real Estate index | | | 19 | | | | 0.47 | % | | $ | 58 | | | | 6/17/13 | | | UBS AG | | $ | 2,265 | |
Receive | | Russell 2000 Total Return index | | | 476 | | | | 0.24 | % | | | 1,672 | | | | 2/15/13 | | | UBS AG | | | 60,652 | |
Receive | | Russell 2000 Total Return index | | | 11 | | | | 0.24 | % | | | 39 | | | | 2/15/13 | | | UBS AG | | | 1,400 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | $ | 222,112 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
(a) | | Non-income producing security. |
(b) | | Represents entire or partial securities out on loan. See Note E for securities lending information. |
(c) | | Investment in affiliated money market mutual fund. The rate shown represents the 7-day yield as of period end. |
Glossary:
EPRA—European Public Real Estate Association
FDR—Fiduciary Depositary Receipt
FTSE—Financial Times Stock Exchange
NAREIT—National Association of Real Estate Investment Trust
REG—Registered Shares
REIT—Real Estate Investment Trust
See notes to financial statements.
22
| | |
DYNAMIC ASSET ALLOCATION PORTFOLIO |
STATEMENTOF ASSETS & LIABILITIES |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | |
ASSETS | | | | |
Investments in securities, at value | | | | |
Unaffiliated issuers (cost $97,633,320) | | $ | 100,510,848 | (a) |
Affiliated issuers (cost $59,045,205—including investment of cash collateral for securities loaned of $132,702) | | | 59,045,205 | |
Cash | | | 928,929 | (b) |
Foreign currencies, at value (cost $28,302) | | | 28,302 | |
Receivable for investment securities sold | | | 5,089,781 | |
Receivable for capital stock sold | | | 970,782 | |
Unrealized appreciation on total return swap contracts | | | 222,112 | |
Interest and dividends receivable | | | 213,572 | |
Receivable for variation margin on futures contracts | | | 211,495 | |
Unrealized appreciation of forward currency exchange contracts | | | 115,492 | |
| | | | |
Total assets | | | 167,336,518 | |
| | | | |
LIABILITIES | | | | |
Payable for investment securities purchased | | | 21,265,621 | |
Unrealized depreciation of forward currency exchange contracts | | | 291,766 | |
Payable for collateral received on securities loaned | | | 132,702 | |
Advisory fee payable | | | 41,752 | |
Distribution fee payable | | | 28,766 | |
Administrative fee payable | | | 14,817 | |
Payable for capital stock redeemed | | | 7,468 | |
Transfer Agent fee payable | | | 121 | |
Accrued expenses | | | 87,339 | |
| | | | |
Total liabilities | | | 21,870,352 | |
| | | | |
NET ASSETS | | $ | 145,466,166 | |
| | | | |
COMPOSITION OF NET ASSETS | | | | |
Capital stock, at par | | $ | 14,565 | |
Additional paid-in capital | | | 144,875,650 | |
Accumulated net investment loss | | | (168,145 | ) |
Accumulated net realized loss on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | (2,519,119 | ) |
Net unrealized appreciation on investments and foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities | | | 3,263,215 | |
| | | | |
| | $ | 145,466,166 | |
| | | | |
Net Asset Value Per Share—1 billion shares of capital stock authorized, $.001 par value
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class | | Net Assets | | | Shares Outstanding | | | Net Asset Value | |
A | | $ | 10,255 | | | | 1,024 | | | $ | 10.01 | |
B | | $ | 145,455,911 | | | | 14,564,447 | | | $ | 9.99 | |
(a) | | Includes securities on loan with a value of $132,177 (see Note E). |
(b) | | An amount of $928,929 has been segregated to collateralize margin requirements for open futures contracts outstanding at June 30, 2012. |
See notes to financial statements.
23
| | |
DYNAMIC ASSET ALLOCATION PORTFOLIO |
STATEMENTOF OPERATIONS | | |
Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | |
INVESTMENT INCOME | | | | |
Dividends | | | | |
Unaffiliated issuers (net of foreign taxes withheld of $51) | | $ | 158,585 | |
Affiliated issuers | | | 26,817 | |
Interest | | | 165,456 | |
Securities lending income | | | 2,018 | |
| | | | |
| | | 352,876 | |
| | | | |
EXPENSES | | | | |
Advisory fee (see Note B) | | | 339,862 | |
Distribution fee—Class B | | | 117,714 | |
Transfer agency—Class A | | | 108 | |
Transfer agency—Class B | | | 1,230 | |
Custodian | | | 129,351 | |
Administrative | | | 29,169 | |
Audit | | | 28,279 | |
Legal | | | 21,588 | |
Printing | | | 16,026 | |
Amortization of offering expenses | | | 15,135 | |
Directors’ fees | | | 1,963 | |
Miscellaneous | | | 2,994 | |
| | | | |
Total expenses | | | 703,419 | |
Less: expenses waived and reimbursed by the Adviser (see Note B) | | | (173,016 | ) |
| | | | |
Net expenses | | | 530,403 | |
| | | | |
Net investment loss | | | (177,527 | ) |
| | | | |
REALIZED AND UNREALIZED GAIN (LOSS) ON INVESTMENT AND FOREIGN CURRENCY TRANSACTIONS | | | | |
Net realized gain (loss) on: | | | | |
Investment transactions | | | (149,229 | ) |
Futures contracts | | | (1,378,103 | ) |
Swap contracts | | | 278,354 | |
Foreign currency transactions | | | (691,777 | ) |
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of: | | | | |
Investments | | | 2,773,553 | |
Futures contracts | | | 234,925 | |
Swap contracts | | | 126,179 | |
Foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities | | | (245,291 | ) |
| | | | |
Net gain on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | 948,611 | |
| | | | |
NET INCREASE IN NET ASSETS FROM OPERATIONS | | $ | 771,084 | |
| | | | |
See notes to financial statements.
24
| | |
| | |
DYNAMIC ASSET ALLOCATION PORTFOLIO |
STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN NET ASSETS | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | April 1, 2011(a) to December 31, 2011 | |
INCREASE (DECREASE) IN NET ASSETS FROM OPERATIONS | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income (loss) | | $ | (177,527 | ) | | $ | 166,149 | |
Net realized loss on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | (1,940,755 | ) | | | (744,166 | ) |
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of investments and foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities | | | 2,889,366 | | | | 373,849 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) in net assets from operations | | | 771,084 | | | | (204,168 | ) |
CAPITAL STOCK TRANSACTIONS | | | | | | | | |
Net increase | | | 83,265,903 | | | | 61,633,347 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total increase | | | 84,036,987 | | | | 61,429,179 | |
NET ASSETS | | | | | | | | |
Beginning of period | | | 61,429,179 | | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | |
End of period (including accumulated net investment loss of ($168,145) and undistributed net investment income of $9,382, respectively) | | $ | 145,466,166 | | | $ | 61,429,179 | |
| | | | | | | | |
(a) | | Commencement of operations. |
See notes to financial statements.
25
| | |
DYNAMIC ASSET ALLOCATION PORTFOLIO |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
NOTE A: Significant Accounting Policies
The AllianceBernstein Dynamic Asset Allocation Portfolio (the “Portfolio”) is a series of AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund, Inc. (the “Fund”). The Portfolio’s investment objective is to maximize total return consistent with the Adviser’s determination of reasonable risk. The Portfolio is diversified as defined under the Investment Company Act of 1940. The Fund was incorporated in the State of Maryland on November 17, 1987, as an open-end series investment company. The Fund offers thirteen separately managed pools of assets which have differing investment objectives and policies. The Portfolio commenced operations on April 1, 2011. The Portfolio offers Class A and Class B shares. Both classes of shares have identical voting, dividend, liquidating and other rights, except that Class B shares bear a distribution expense and have exclusive voting rights with respect to the Class B distribution plan.
The Portfolio offers and sells its shares only to separate accounts of certain life insurance companies for the purpose of funding variable annuity contracts and variable life insurance policies. Sales are made without a sales charge at the Portfolio’s net asset value per share.
The financial statements have been prepared in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“U.S. GAAP”) which require management to make certain estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities in the financial statements and amounts of income and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. The following is a summary of significant accounting policies followed by the Portfolio.
1. Security Valuation
Portfolio securities are valued at their current market value determined on the basis of market quotations or, if market quotations are not readily available or are deemed unreliable, at “fair value” as determined in accordance with procedures established by and under the general supervision of the Fund’s Board of Directors.
In general, the market value of securities which are readily available and deemed reliable are determined as follows: Securities listed on a national securities exchange (other than securities listed on the NASDAQ Stock Market, Inc. (“NASDAQ”)) or on a foreign securities exchange are valued at the last sale price at the close of the exchange or foreign securities exchange. If there has been no sale on such day, the securities are valued at the last traded price from the previous day. Securities listed on more than one exchange are valued by reference to the principal exchange on which the securities are traded; securities listed only on NASDAQ are valued in accordance with the NASDAQ Official Closing Price; listed or over the counter market (“OTC”) put or call options are valued at the mid level between the current bid and ask prices. If either a current bid or current ask price is unavailable, AllianceBernstein L.P. (the “Adviser”) will have discretion to determine the best valuation (e.g. last trade price in the case of listed options); open futures contracts are valued using the closing settlement price or, in the absence of such a price, the most recent quoted bid price. If there are no quotations available for the day of valuation, the last available closing settlement price is used; U.S. government securities and other debt instruments having 60 days or less remaining until maturity are valued at amortized cost if their original maturity was 60 days or less; or by amortizing their fair value as of the 61st day prior to maturity if their original term to maturity exceeded 60 days; fixed-income securities, including mortgage backed and asset backed securities, may be valued on the basis of prices provided by a pricing service or at a price obtained from one or more of the major broker/dealers. In cases where broker/dealer quotes are obtained, the Adviser may establish procedures whereby changes in market yields or spreads are used to adjust, on a daily basis, a recently obtained quoted price on a security. Swaps and other derivatives are valued daily, primarily using independent pricing services, independent pricing models using market inputs, as well as third party broker-dealers or counterparties. Investments in money market funds are valued at their net asset value each day.
Securities for which market quotations are not readily available (including restricted securities) or are deemed unreliable are valued at fair value. Factors considered in making this determination may include, but are not limited to, information obtained by contacting the issuer, analysts, analysis of the issuer’s financial statements or other available documents. In addition, the Portfolio may use fair value pricing for securities primarily traded in non-U.S. markets because most foreign markets close well before the Portfolio values its securities at 4:00 p.m., Eastern Time. The earlier close of these foreign markets gives rise to the possibility that significant events, including broad market moves, may have occurred in the interim and may materially affect the value of those securities.
2. Fair Value Measurements
In accordance with U.S. GAAP regarding fair value measurements, fair value is defined as the price that the Portfolio would receive to sell an asset or pay to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. The U.S. GAAP disclosure requirements establish a framework for measuring fair value, and a three-level hierarchy for
26
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
fair value measurements based upon the transparency of inputs to the valuation of an asset or liability. Inputs may be observable or unobservable and refer broadly to the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability. Observable inputs reflect the assumptions market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability based on market data obtained from sources independent of the Portfolio. Unobservable inputs reflect the Portfolio’s own assumptions about the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability based on the best information available in the circumstances. Each investment is assigned a level based upon the observability of the inputs which are significant to the overall valuation. The three-tier hierarchy of inputs is summarized below.
| • | | Level 1—quoted prices in active markets for identical investments |
| • | | Level 2—other significant observable inputs (including quoted prices for similar investments, interest rates, prepayment speeds, credit risk, etc.) |
| • | | Level 3—significant unobservable inputs (including the Portfolio’s own assumptions in determining the fair value of investments) |
The following table summarizes the valuation of the Portfolio’s investments by the above fair value hierarchy levels as of June 30, 2012:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Level 1 | | | Level 2 | | | Level 3 | | | Total | |
Investments in Securities: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Assets: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Common Stocks: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Financials | | $ | 4,445,851 | | | $ | 5,629,762 | | | $ | –0 | – | | $ | 10,075,613 | |
Information Technology | | | 5,848,311 | | | | 1,126,800 | | | | –0 | – | | | 6,975,111 | |
Consumer Staples | | | 3,402,446 | | | | 2,976,568 | | | | –0 | – | | | 6,379,014 | |
Industrials | | | 3,155,194 | | | | 3,145,148 | | | | –0 | – | | | 6,300,342 | |
Health Care | | | 3,562,959 | | | | 2,479,517 | | | | –0 | – | | | 6,042,476 | |
Consumer Discretionary | | | 3,322,279 | | | | 2,633,193 | | | | –0 | – | | | 5,955,472 | |
Energy | | | 3,203,881 | | | | 2,138,922 | | | | –0 | – | | | 5,342,803 | |
Materials | | | 1,070,896 | | | | 2,418,802 | | | | –0 | – | | | 3,489,698 | |
Telecommunication Services | | | 942,355 | | | | 1,458,769 | | | | –0 | – | | | 2,401,124 | |
Utilities | | | 1,063,495 | | | | 1,100,188 | | | | –0 | – | | | 2,163,683 | |
Governments—Treasuries | | | –0 | – | | | 39,344,274 | | | | –0 | – | | | 39,344,274 | |
Investment Companies | | | 6,041,239 | ^ | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 6,041,239 | |
Short-Term Investments | | | 58,912,503 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 58,912,503 | |
Investments of Cash Collateral for Security Loaned in Affiliated Money Market Fund | | | 132,702 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 132,702 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Investments in Securities | | | 95,104,111 | | | | 64,451,943 | + | | | –0 | – | | | 159,556,054 | |
Other Financial Instruments*: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Assets: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Futures Contracts | | | 371,584 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 371,584 | # |
Forward Currency Exchange Contracts | | | –0 | – | | | 115,492 | | | | –0 | – | | | 115,492 | |
Total Return Swap Contracts | | | –0 | – | | | 222,112 | | | | –0 | – | | | 222,112 | |
Liabilities: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Futures Contracts | | | (44,001 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | (44,001 | )# |
Forward Currency Exchange Contracts | | | –0 | – | | | (291,766 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | (291,766 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total | | $ | 95,431,694 | | | $ | 64,497,781 | | | $ | –0 | – | | $ | 159,929,475 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
^ | | An amount of $2,986,494 was transferred out of Level 2 into Level 1 due to increase in observable inputs. |
* | | Other financial instruments are derivative instruments, such as futures, forwards and swap contracts, which are valued at the unrealized appreciation/depreciation on the instrument. |
+ | | A significant portion of the Portfolio’s foreign equity investments are categorized as Level 2 investments since they are valued using fair value prices based on third party vendor modeling tools to the extent available, see Note A.1. |
# | | Only variation margin receivable/payable at period end is reported within the statement of assets and liabilities. This amount reflects cumulative appreciation/(depreciation) of futures contracts as reported in the portfolio of investments. |
27
| | |
DYNAMIC ASSET ALLOCATION PORTFOLIO |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
3. Currency Translation
Assets and liabilities denominated in foreign currencies and commitments under forward currency exchange contracts are translated into U.S. dollars at the mean of the quoted bid and ask prices of such currencies against the U.S. dollar. Purchases and sales of portfolio securities are translated into U.S. dollars at the rates of exchange prevailing when such securities were acquired or sold. Income and expenses are translated into U.S. dollars at rates of exchange prevailing when accrued.
Net realized gain or loss on foreign currency transactions represents foreign exchange gains and losses from sales and maturities of foreign fixed income investments, foreign currency exchange contracts, holding of foreign currencies, currency gains or losses realized between the trade and settlement dates on foreign investment transactions, and the difference between the amounts of dividends, interest and foreign withholding taxes recorded on the Portfolio’s books and the U.S. dollar equivalent amounts actually received or paid. Net unrealized currency gains and losses from valuing foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities at period end exchange rates are reflected as a component of net unrealized appreciation or depreciation of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities.
4. Taxes
It is the Portfolio’s policy to meet the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code applicable to regulated investment companies and to distribute all of its investment company taxable income and net realized gains, if any, to shareholders. Therefore, no provisions for federal income or excise taxes are required. The Portfolio may be subject to taxes imposed by countries in which it invests. Such taxes are generally based on income and/or capital gains earned or repatriated. Taxes are accrued and applied to net investment income, net realized gains and net unrealized appreciation/depreciation as such income and/or gains are earned.
In accordance with U.S. GAAP requirements regarding accounting for uncertainties in income taxes, management has analyzed the Portfolio’s tax positions taken or expected to be taken on federal and state income tax returns for all open tax years (all years since inception of the Portfolio) and has concluded that no provision for income tax is required in the Portfolio’s financial statements.
5. Investment Income and Investment Transactions
Dividend income is recorded on the ex-dividend date or as soon as the Portfolio is informed of the dividend. Interest income is accrued daily. Investment transactions are accounted for on the date the securities are purchased or sold. Investment gains or losses are determined on the identified cost basis. The Portfolio amortizes premiums and accretes discounts as adjustments to interest income.
6. Class Allocations
All income earned and expenses incurred by the Portfolio are borne on a pro-rata basis by each outstanding class of shares, based on the proportionate interest in the Portfolio represented by the net assets of such class, except for class specific expenses which are allocated to the respective class. Expenses of the Fund are charged to each Portfolio in proportion to net assets. Realized and unrealized gains and losses are allocated among the various share classes based on respective net assets.
7. Dividends and Distributions
Dividends and distributions to shareholders, if any, are recorded on the ex-dividend date. Income dividends and capital gains distributions are determined in accordance with federal tax regulations and may differ from those determined in accordance with U.S. GAAP. To the extent these differences are permanent, such amounts are reclassified within the capital accounts based on their federal tax basis treatment; temporary differences do not require such reclassification.
8. Offering Expenses
Offering expenses of $82,202 were deferred and amortized on a straight line basis over a one year period starting from April 1, 2011 (commencement of operations).
NOTE B: Advisory Fee and Other Transactions with Affiliates
Under the terms of the investment advisory agreement, the Portfolio pays the Adviser an advisory fee at an annual rate of .70% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets. The Adviser has agreed to waive its fees and bear certain expenses to the extent necessary to limit total operating expenses on an annual basis to .85% and 1.10% of daily average net assets for Class A and Class B shares, respectively (the “Expense Caps”). Under the agreement, fees waived and expenses borne by the Adviser are subject to repayment by the Fund until April 1, 2014. No repayment will be made that would cause the Portfolio’s total annualized operating expenses to exceed the net fee percentage set forth above or would exceed the amount of
28
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
offering expenses as recorded by the Portfolio on or before April 1, 2012. The Expense Caps extend through May 1, 2013 and then may be extended by the Adviser for additional one-year terms. For the six months ended June 30, 2012, the amount of such fees waived was $173,016, which is subject to repayment, not to exceed the amount of offering expenses.
Pursuant to the investment advisory agreement, the Portfolio may reimburse the Adviser for certain legal and accounting services provided to the Portfolio by the Adviser. For the six months ended June 30, 2012, such fee amounted to $29,169.
The Portfolio compensates AllianceBernstein Investor Services, Inc. (“ABIS”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Adviser, under a Transfer Agency Agreement for providing personnel and facilities to perform transfer agency services for the Portfolio. Such compensation retained by ABIS amounted to $692 for the six months ended June 30, 2012.
The Portfolio may invest in the AllianceBernstein Fixed-Income Shares, Inc.—Government STIF Portfolio (“Government STIF Portfolio”), an open-end management investment company managed by the Adviser. The Government STIF Portfolio is offered as a cash management option to mutual funds and other institutional accounts of the Adviser, and is not available for direct purchase by members of the public. The Government STIF Portfolio pays no investment management fees but does bear its own expenses. A summary of the Portfolio’s transactions in shares of the Government STIF Portfolio for the six months ended June 30, 2012 is as follows:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Market Value December 31, 2011 (000) | | | Purchases at Cost (000) | | | Sales Proceeds (000) | | | Market Value June 30, 2012 (000) | | | Dividend Income (000) | |
$ | 27,832 | | | $ | 73,137 | | | $ | 42,056 | | | $ | 58,913 | | | $ | 26 | |
Brokerage commissions paid on investment transactions for the six months ended June 30, 2012 amounted to $24,248, of which $0 and $0, respectively, was paid to Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. LLC and Sanford C. Bernstein Limited, affiliates of the Adviser.
NOTE C: Distribution Plan
The Portfolio has adopted a Distribution Plan (the “Plan”) for Class B shares pursuant to Rule 12b-1 under the Investment Company Act of 1940. Under the Plan, the Portfolio pays distribution and servicing fees to AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (the “Distributor”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Adviser, at an annual rate of up to .50% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The fees are accrued daily and paid monthly. The Board of Directors currently limits payments under the Plan to .25% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The Plan provides that the Distributor will use such payments in their entirety for distribution assistance and promotional activities.
The Portfolio is not obligated under the Plan to pay any distribution and servicing fees in excess of the amounts set forth above. The purpose of the payments to the Distributor under the Plan is to compensate the Distributor for its distribution services with respect to the sale of the Portfolio’s Class B shares. Since the Distributor’s compensation is not directly tied to its expenses, the amount of compensation received by it under the Plan during any year may be more or less than its actual expenses. For this reason, the Plan is characterized by the staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission as being of the “compensation” variety.
In the event that the Plan is terminated or not continued, no distribution or servicing fees (other than current amounts accrued but not yet paid) would be owed by the Portfolio to the Distributor.
The Plan also provides that the Adviser may use its own resources to finance the distribution of the Portfolio’s shares.
NOTE D: Investment Transactions
Purchases and sales of investment securities (excluding short-term investments) for the six months ended June 30, 2012 were as follows:
| | | | | | | | |
| | Purchases | | | Sales | |
Investment securities (excluding U.S. government securities) | | $ | 52,578,986 | | | $ | 14,200,190 | |
U.S. government securities | | | 21,934,408 | | | | –0 | – |
29
| | |
DYNAMIC ASSET ALLOCATION PORTFOLIO |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
The cost of investments for federal income tax purposes was substantially the same as the cost for financial reporting purposes. Accordingly, gross unrealized appreciation and unrealized depreciation (excluding futures, foreign currency and swap transactions) are as follows:
| | | | |
Gross unrealized appreciation | | $ | 3,273,150 | |
Gross unrealized depreciation | | | (395,622 | ) |
| | | | |
Net unrealized appreciation | | $ | 2,877,528 | |
| | | | |
1. Derivative Financial Instruments
The Portfolio may use derivatives in an effort to earn income and enhance returns, to replace more traditional direct investments, to obtain exposure to otherwise inaccessible markets (collectively, “investment purposes”), or to hedge or adjust the risk profile of its portfolio.
The principal types of derivatives utilized by the Portfolio, as well as the methods in which they may be used are:
The Portfolio may buy or sell futures contracts for investment purposes or for the purpose of hedging its portfolio against adverse effects of potential movements in the market. The Portfolio bears the market risk that arises from changes in the value of these instruments and the imperfect correlation between movements in the price of the futures contracts and movements in the price of the assets, reference rates or indices which they are designed to track. Among other things, the Portfolio may purchase or sell futures contracts for foreign currencies or options thereon for non-hedging purposes as a means of making direct investment in foreign currencies, as described below under “Currency Transactions”.
At the time the Portfolio enters into a futures contract, the Portfolio deposits and maintains as collateral an initial margin with the broker, as required by the exchange on which the transaction is effected. Pursuant to the contract, the Portfolio agrees to receive from or pay to the broker an amount of cash equal to the daily fluctuation in the value of the contract. Such receipts or payments are known as variation margin and are recorded by the Portfolio as unrealized gains or losses. Risks may arise from the potential inability of a counterparty to meet the terms of the contract. The credit/counterparty risk for exchange-traded futures contracts is generally less than privately negotiated futures contracts, since the clearinghouse, which is the issuer or counterparty to each exchange-traded future, provides a guarantee of performance. This guarantee is supported by a daily payment system (i.e., margin requirements). When the contract is closed, the Portfolio records a realized gain or loss equal to the difference between the value of the contract at the time it was opened and the time it was closed.
Use of long futures contracts subjects the Portfolio to risk of loss in excess of the amounts shown on the statement of assets and liabilities, up to the notional value of the futures contracts. Use of short futures contracts subjects the Portfolio to unlimited risk of loss. Under some circumstances, futures exchanges may establish daily limits on the amount that the price of a futures contract can vary from the previous day’s settlement price, which could effectively prevent liquidation of unfavorable positions.
During the six months ended June 30, 2012, the Portfolio held futures contracts for hedging and non-hedging purposes.
| • | | Forward Currency Exchange Contracts |
The Portfolio may enter into forward currency exchange contracts in order to hedge its exposure to changes in foreign currency exchange rates on its foreign portfolio holdings, to hedge certain firm purchase and sale commitments denominated in foreign currencies and for non-hedging purposes as a means of making direct investments in foreign currencies, as described below under “Currency Transactions”.
A forward currency exchange contract is a commitment to purchase or sell a foreign currency at a future date at a negotiated forward rate. The gain or loss arising from the difference between the original contract and the closing of such contract would be included in net realized gain or loss on foreign currency transactions. Fluctuations in the value of open forward currency exchange contracts are recorded for financial reporting purposes as unrealized appreciation and/or depreciation by the Portfolio. Risks may arise from the potential inability of a counterparty to
30
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
meet the terms of a contract and from unanticipated movements in the value of a foreign currency relative to the U.S. dollar. The face or contract amount, in U.S. dollars reflects the total exposure the Portfolio has in that particular currency contract.
During the six months ended June 30, 2012, the Portfolio held forward currency exchange contracts for hedging and non-hedging purposes.
For hedging and investment purposes, the Portfolio may purchase and write (sell) put and call options on U.S. and foreign securities, including government securities, and foreign currencies that are traded on U.S. and foreign securities exchanges and over-the-counter markets. Among other things, the Portfolio may use options transactions for non-hedging purposes as a means of making direct investments in foreign currencies, as described below under “Currency Transactions” and may use options strategies involving the purchase and/or writing of various combinations of call and/or put options, for hedging and investment purposes.
The risk associated with purchasing an option is that the Portfolio pays a premium whether or not the option is exercised. Additionally, the Portfolio bears the risk of loss of the premium and change in market value should the counterparty not perform under the contract. Put and call options purchased are accounted for in the same manner as portfolio securities. The cost of securities acquired through the exercise of call options is increased by premiums paid. The proceeds from securities sold through the exercise of put options are decreased by the premiums paid.
When the Portfolio writes an option, the premium received by the Portfolio is recorded as a liability and is subsequently adjusted to the current market value of the option written. Premiums received from written options which expire unexercised are recorded by the Portfolio on the expiration date as realized gains from options written. The difference between the premium received and the amount paid on effecting a closing purchase transaction, including brokerage commissions, is also treated as a realized gain, or if the premium received is less than the amount paid for the closing purchase transaction, as a realized loss. If a call option is exercised, the premium received is added to the proceeds from the sale of the underlying security or currency in determining whether the Portfolio has realized a gain or loss. If a put option is exercised, the premium received reduces the cost basis of the security or currency purchased by the Portfolio. In writing an option, the Portfolio bears the market risk of an unfavorable change in the price of the security or currency underlying the written option. Exercise of an option written by the Portfolio could result in the Portfolio selling or buying a security or currency at a price different from the current market value. For the six months ended June 30, 2012, the Portfolio had no transactions in written options.
During the six months ended June 30, 2012, the Portfolio held purchased options for hedging purposes.
The Portfolio may enter into swaps to hedge its exposure to interest rates, credit risk, equity markets and currencies. The Portfolio may also enter into swaps for non-hedging purposes as a means of gaining market exposures, making direct investments in foreign currencies, as described below under “Currency Transactions” or in order to take a “long” or “short” position with respect to an underlying referenced asset described below under “Total Return Swaps”. A swap is an agreement that obligates two parties to exchange a series of cash flows at specified intervals based upon or calculated by reference to changes in specified prices or rates for a specified amount of an underlying asset. The payment flows are usually netted against each other, with the difference being paid by one party to the other. In addition, collateral may be pledged or received by the Portfolio in accordance with the terms of the respective swap agreements to provide value and recourse to the Portfolio or its counterparties in the event of default, bankruptcy or insolvency by one of the parties to the swap agreement.
Risks may arise as a result of the failure of the counterparty to the swap contract to comply with the terms of the swap contract. The loss incurred by the failure of a counterparty is generally limited to the net interim payment to be received by the Portfolio, and/or the termination value at the end of the contract. Therefore, the Portfolio considers the creditworthiness of each counterparty to a swap contract in evaluating potential counterparty risk. This risk is mitigated by having a netting arrangement between the Portfolio and the counterparty and by the posting of collateral by the counterparty to the Portfolio to cover the Portfolio’s exposure to the counterparty. Additionally, risks may arise from unanticipated movements in interest rates or in the value of the underlying securities. The
31
| | |
DYNAMIC ASSET ALLOCATION PORTFOLIO |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Portfolio accrues for the interim payments on swap contracts on a daily basis, with the net amount recorded within unrealized appreciation/depreciation of swap contracts on the statement of assets and liabilities, where applicable. Once the interim payments are settled in cash, the net amount is recorded as realized gain/(loss) on swaps on the statement of operations, in addition to any realized gain/(loss) recorded upon the termination of swap contracts. Fluctuations in the value of swap contracts are recorded as a component of net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of swap contracts on the statement of operations.
Total Return Swaps:
The Portfolio may enter into total return swaps in order take a “long” or “short” position with respect to an underlying referenced asset. The Portfolio is subject to market price volatility of the underlying referenced asset. A total return swap involves commitments to pay interest in exchange for a market linked return based on a notional amount. To the extent that the total return of the security, group of securities or index underlying the transaction exceeds or falls short of the offsetting interest obligation, the Portfolio will receive a payment from or make a payment to the counterparty.
During the six months ended June 30, 2012, the Portfolio held total return swap contracts for non-hedging purposes.
Documentation governing the Portfolio’s OTC derivatives may contain provisions for early termination of such transaction in the event the net assets of the Portfolio decline below specific levels set forth in the documentation (“net asset contingent features”). If these levels are triggered, the Portfolio’s counterparty has the right to terminate such transaction and require the Portfolio to pay or receive a settlement amount in connection with the terminated transaction. As of June 30, 2012, the Portfolio had OTC derivatives with contingent features in net liability positions in the amount of $239,115. If a trigger event had occurred at June 30, 2012, for those derivatives in a net liability position, an amount of $239,115 would be required to be posted by the Portfolio.
At June 30, 2012, the Portfolio had entered into the following derivatives:
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Asset Derivatives | | | Liability Derivatives | |
Derivative Type | | Statement of Assets and Liabilities Location | | Fair Value | | | Statement of Assets and Liabilities Location | | Fair Value | |
Foreign exchange contracts | | Unrealized appreciation of forward currency exchange contracts | | $ | 115,492 | | | Unrealized depreciation of forward currency exchange contracts | | $ | 291,766 | |
Equity contracts | | Receivable/Payable for variation margin on futures contracts | | | 342,155 | * | | | | | | |
Interest rate contracts | | | | | | | | Receivable/Payable for variation margin on futures contracts | | | 14,572 | * |
Equity contracts | | Unrealized appreciation on total return swap agreements | | | 222,112 | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total | | | | $ | 679,759 | | | | | $ | 306,338 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
* | | Only variation margin receivable/payable at period end is reported within the statement of assets and liabilities. This amount reflects cumulative appreciation/(depreciation) of futures contracts as reported in the portfolio of investments. |
32
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
The effect of derivative instruments on the statement of operations for the six months ended June 30, 2012:
| | | | | | | | | | |
Derivative Type | | Location of Gain or (Loss) on Derivatives | | Realized Gain or (Loss) on Derivatives | | | Change in Unrealized Appreciation or (Depreciation) | |
Foreign exchange contracts | | Net realized gain (loss) on foreign currency transactions; Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities | | $ | (375,473 | ) | | $ | (257,557 | ) |
Equity contracts | | Net realized gain (loss) on futures contracts; Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of futures contracts | | | (1,443,967 | ) | | | 283,417 | |
Interest rate contracts | | Net realized gain (loss) on futures contracts; Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of futures contracts | | | 65,864 | | | | (48,492 | ) |
Equity contracts | | Net realized gain (loss) on investment transactions; Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of investments | | | (69,607 | ) | | | 63,044 | |
Equity contracts | | Net realized gain (loss) on swap contracts; Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of swap contracts | | | 278,354 | | | | 126,179 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Total | | | | $ | (1,544,829 | ) | | $ | 166,591 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
For the six months ended June 30, 2012, the average monthly principal amount of foreign currency exchange contracts was $21,932,742, the average monthly original value of futures contracts was $25,111,543 and the average monthly notional amount of total return swap contracts was $5,989,257. For three months of the period, the average monthly cost of purchased options contracts was $58,088.
2. Currency Transactions
The Portfolio may invest in non-U.S. Dollar securities on a currency hedged or unhedged basis. The Portfolio may seek investment opportunities by taking long or short positions in currencies through the use of currency-related derivatives, including forward currency exchange contracts, futures and options on futures, swaps, and other options. The Portfolio may enter into transactions for investment opportunities when it anticipates that a foreign currency will appreciate or depreciate in value but securities denominated in that currency are not held by the Portfolio and do not present attractive investment opportunities. Such transactions may also be used when the Adviser believes that it may be more efficient than a direct investment in a foreign currency-denominated security. The Portfolio may also conduct currency exchange contracts on a spot basis (i.e., for cash at the spot rate prevailing in the currency exchange market for buying or selling currencies).
NOTE E: Securities Lending
The Portfolio may enter into securities lending transactions. Under the Portfolio’s securities lending program, all securities loans will be collateralized continually by cash. The Portfolio will be compensated for the loan from a portion of the net return from the income earned on cash collateral after a rebate is paid to the borrower (in some cases, this rebate may be a “negative rebate” or fee paid by the borrower to the Portfolio in connection with the loan), and payments for fees of the securities lending agent and for certain other administrative expenses. It is the policy of the Portfolio to receive collateral consisting of cash in an amount exceeding the value of the securities loaned. The Portfolio will have the right to call a loan and obtain the securities loaned at any time on notice to the borrower within the normal and customary settlement time for the securities. While the securities are on loan, the borrower is obligated to pay the Portfolio amounts equal to any income or other distributions from the securities. The Portfolio will not have the right to vote any securities during the existence of a loan, but will have the right to regain ownership of loaned securities in order to exercise voting or other ownership rights.
33
| | |
DYNAMIC ASSET ALLOCATION PORTFOLIO |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
The lending agent has agreed to indemnify the Portfolio in the case of default of any securities borrower. Collateral received and securities loaned are marked to market daily to ensure that the securities loaned are secured by collateral. The lending agent will invest the cash collateral received in AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves, an eligible money market vehicle, in accordance with the investment restrictions of the Portfolio, and as approved by the Fund’s Board of Directors. The collateral received on securities loaned is recorded as an asset as well as a corresponding liability in the statement of assets and liabilities. When the Portfolio lends securities, its investment performance will continue to reflect changes in the value of the securities loaned. At June 30, 2012, the Portfolio had securities on loan with a value of $132,177 and had received cash collateral which has been invested into AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves of $132,702. The cash collateral will be adjusted on the next business day after period end to maintain the required collateral amount. The Portfolio earned securities lending income of $2,018 and $1,249 from the borrowers and AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves, respectively, for the six months ended June 30, 2012; these amounts are reflected in the statement of operations. A principal risk of lending portfolio securities is that the borrower will fail to return the loaned securities upon termination of the loan and that the collateral will not be sufficient to replace the loaned securities. A summary of the Portfolio’s transactions in shares of AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves for the six months ended June 30, 2012 is as follows:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Market Value December 31, 2011 (000) | | | Purchases at Cost (000) | | | Sales Proceeds (000) | | | Market Value June 30, 2012 (000) | | | Dividend Income (000) | |
$ | 1,949 | | | $ | 6,720 | | | $ | 8,536 | | | $ | 133 | | | $ | 1 | |
NOTE F: Capital Stock
Each class consists of 500,000,000 authorized shares. Transactions in capital shares for each class were as follows:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | SHARES | | | | | AMOUNT | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | April 1, 2011(a) to December 31, 2011 | | | | | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | April 1, 2011(a) to December 31, 2011 | |
Class A | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Shares sold | | | 25 | | | | 999,000 | | | | | $ | 244 | | | $ | 9,990,000 | |
Shares redeemed | | | (998,001 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | | | (10,218,296 | ) | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) | | | (997,976 | ) | | | 999,000 | | | | | $ | (10,218,052 | ) | | $ | 9,990,000 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class B | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Shares sold | | | 9,862,048 | | | | 5,407,777 | | | | | $ | 99,527,885 | | | $ | 52,617,421 | |
Shares redeemed | | | (604,678 | ) | | | (100,700 | ) | | | | | (6,043,930 | ) | | | (974,074 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net increase | | | 9,257,370 | | | | 5,307,077 | | | | | $ | 93,483,955 | | | $ | 51,643,347 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
(a) | | Commencement of operations. |
NOTE G: Risks Involved in Investing in the Portfolio
Interest Rate Risk and Credit Risk—Interest rate risk is the risk that changes in interest rates will affect the value of the Portfolio’s investments in fixed-income debt securities such as bonds or notes. Increases in interest rates may cause the value of the Portfolio’s investments to decline. Credit risk is the risk that the issuer or guarantor of a debt security, or the counterparty to a derivative contract, will be unable or unwilling to make timely principal and/or interest payments, or to otherwise honor its obligations. The degree of risk for a particular security may be reflected in its credit risk rating. Credit risk is greater for medium quality and lower-rated securities. Lower-rated debt securities and similar unrated securities (commonly known as “junk bonds”) have speculative elements or are predominantly speculative risks.
Foreign Securities Risk—Investing in securities of foreign companies or foreign governments involves special risks which include changes in foreign currency exchange rates and the possibility of future political and economic developments which could adversely affect the value of such securities. Moreover, securities of many foreign companies or foreign governments and their markets may be less liquid and their prices more volatile than those of comparable U.S. companies or of the U.S. government.
Currency Risk—This is the risk that changes in foreign currency exchange rates may negatively affect the value of the Portfolio’s investments or reduce the returns of the Portfolio. For example, the value of the Portfolio’s investments in foreign currency-denominated securities or currencies may decrease if the U.S. Dollar is strong (i.e., gaining value relative to other
34
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
currencies) and other currencies are weak (i.e., losing value relative to the U.S. Dollar). Currency markets are generally not as regulated as securities markets. Independent of the Portfolio’s investments denominated in foreign currencies, the Portfolio’s positions in various foreign currencies may cause the Portfolio to experience investment losses due to the changes in exchange rates and interest rates.
Derivatives Risk—The Portfolio may enter into derivative transactions such as forwards, options, futures and swaps. Derivatives may be illiquid, difficult to price, and leveraged so that small changes may produce disproportionate losses for the Portfolio, and subject to counterparty risk to a greater degree than more traditional investments. Derivatives may result in significant losses, including losses that are far greater than the value of the derivatives reflected in the statement of assets and liabilities.
Indemnification Risk—In the ordinary course of business, the Portfolio enters into contracts that contain a variety of indemnifications. The Portfolio’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown. However, the Portfolio has not had prior claims or losses pursuant to these indemnification provisions and expects the risk of loss thereunder to be remote. Therefore, the Portfolio has not accrued any liability in connection with these indemnification provisions.
NOTE H: Joint Credit Facility
A number of open-end mutual funds managed by the Adviser, including the Portfolio, participate in a $140 million revolving credit facility (the “Facility”) intended to provide short-term financing, if necessary, subject to certain restrictions in connection with abnormal redemption activity. Commitment fees related to the Facility are paid by the participating funds and are included in miscellaneous expenses in the statement of operations. The Portfolio did not utilize the Facility during the six months ended June 30, 2012.
NOTE I: Components of Accumulated Earnings/(Deficit)
As of December 31, 2011, the components of accumulated earnings/(deficit) on a tax basis were as follows:
| | | | |
Undistributed ordinary income | | $ | 290,543 | |
Accumulated capital and other losses | | | (175 | )(a) |
Unrealized appreciation/(depreciation) | | | (470,637 | )(b) |
| | | | |
Total accumulated earnings/(deficit) | | $ | (180,269 | )(c) |
| | | | |
(a) | | As of December 31, 2011, the cumulative deferred loss on straddles was $175. |
(b) | | The differences between book-basis and tax-basis unrealized appreciation/(depreciation) are attributable primarily to the tax deferral of losses on wash sales, the tax treatment of swaps, and the realization for tax purposes of gains/losses on certain derivative instruments. |
(c) | | The difference between book-basis and tax-basis components of accumulated earnings/(deficit) is attributable primarily to the amortization of offering costs. |
For tax purposes, net capital losses may be carried over to offset future capital gains, if any. Under the Regulated Investment Company Modernization Act of 2010, funds are permitted to carry forward capital losses incurred in taxable years beginning after December 22, 2010 for an indefinite period. These post-enactment capital losses must be utilized prior to the pre-enactment capital losses, which are subject to expiration. Post-enactment capital loss carryforwards will retain their character as either short-term or long-term capital losses rather than being considered short-term as under previous regulation. As of December 31, 2011, the Portfolio did not have any capital loss carryforwards.
NOTE J: Recent Accounting Pronouncement
In December 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued an Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) related to disclosures about offsetting assets and liabilities in financial statements. The amendments in this update require an entity to disclose both gross and net information for derivatives and other financial instruments that are either offset in the statement of assets and liabilities or subject to an enforceable master netting arrangement or similar agreement. The ASU is effective during interim or annual reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2013. At this time, management is evaluating the implication of this ASU and its impact on the financial statements has not been determined.
NOTE K: Subsequent Events
Management has evaluated subsequent events for possible recognition or disclosure in the financial statements through the date the financial statements are issued. Management has determined that there are no material events that would require disclosure in the Portfolio’s financial statements through this date.
35
| | |
| | |
DYNAMIC ASSET ALLOCATION PORTFOLIO |
FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Selected Data For A Share Of Capital Stock Outstanding Throughout Each Period
| | | | | | | | |
| | CLASS A | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | April 1, 2011(a) to December 31, 2011 | |
| | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | | | $9.75 | | | | $10.00 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
Income From Investment Operations | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income (loss) (b)(c) | | | (.01 | ) | | | .03 | |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | .27 | | | | (.28 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) in net asset value from operations | | | .26 | | | | (.25 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Net asset value, end of period | | | $10.01 | | | | $9.75 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Return | | | | | | | | |
Total investment return based on net asset value (d) | | | 2.67 | % | | | (2.50 | )% |
| | | | | | | | |
Ratios/Supplemental Data | | | | | | | | |
Net assets, end of period (000’s omitted) | | | $10 | | | | $9,742 | |
Ratio to average net assets of: | | | | | | | | |
Expenses, net of waivers/reimbursements (e) | | | .85 | % | | | .85 | % |
Expenses, before waivers/reimbursements (e) | | | 1.22 | % | | | 2.53 | % |
Net investment income (loss) (c)(e) | | | (.14 | )% | | | .36 | % |
Portfolio turnover rate | | | 25 | % | | | 68 | % |
See footnote summary on page 37.
36
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Selected Data For A Share Of Capital Stock Outstanding Throughout Each Period
| | | | | | | | |
| | CLASS B | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | April 1, 2011(a) to December 31, 2011 | |
| | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | | | $9.74 | | | | $10.00 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
Income From Investment Operations | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income (loss) (b)(c) | | | (.02 | ) | | | .06 | |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | .27 | | | | (.32 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) in net asset value from operations | | | .25 | | | | (.26 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Net asset value, end of period | | | $9.99 | | | | $9.74 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Return | | | | | | | | |
Total investment return based on net asset value (d) | | | 2.57 | % | | | (2.60 | )% |
| | | | | | | | |
Ratios/Supplemental Data | | | | | | | | |
Net assets, end of period (000’s omitted) | | | $145,456 | | | | $51,687 | |
Ratio to average net assets of: | | | | | | | | |
Expenses, net of waivers/reimbursements (e) | | | 1.10 | % | | | 1.10 | % |
Expenses, before waivers/reimbursements (e) | | | 1.46 | % | | | 2.45 | % |
Net investment income (loss) (c)(e) | | | (.37 | )% | | | 1.02 | % |
Portfolio turnover rate | | | 25 | % | | | 68 | % |
(a) | | Commencement of operations. |
(b) | | Based on average shares outstanding. |
(c) | | Net of fees waived and expenses reimbursed by the Adviser. |
(d) | | Total investment return is calculated assuming an initial investment made at the net asset value at the beginning of the period, reinvestment of all dividends and distributions at net asset value during the period, and redemption on the last day of the period. Total return does not reflect (i) insurance company’s separate account related expense charges and (ii) the deductions of taxes that a shareholder would pay on Portfolio distributions or the redemption of Portfolio shares. Total investment return calculated for a period of less than one year is not annualized. |
See notes to financial statements.
37
| | |
| | |
DYNAMIC ASSET ALLOCATION PORTFOLIO |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
THE FOLLOWING IS NOT PART OF THE SHAREHOLDER REPORT OR THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
SUMMARY OF SENIOR OFFICER’S EVALUATION OF INVESTMENT ADVISORY AGREEMENT1
The following is a summary of the evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement between AllianceBernstein L.P. (the “Adviser”) and the AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund, Inc. (the “Fund”), with respect to AllianceBernstein Dynamic Asset Allocation Portfolio (the “Portfolio”).2
The Portfolio’s investment objective is to maximize total return consistent with the Adviser’s determination of reasonable risk. The Portfolio is designed as a balanced fund, seeking exposure to a blend of asset classes. The Portfolio’s neutral asset allocation will be a blend of 60% equity and 40% fixed-income exposure. Within these larger allocation bands, the Portfolio will have the ability to invest in a wide variety of securities, including U.S., non-U.S. and emerging market equity and fixed-income securities, commodities, real estate-related securities and inflation securities.
The Portfolio will have the ability to invest without limit in derivative instruments, such as futures, forwards, options and swaps. The Portfolio may use derivatives and physical securities in different combinations to achieve exposure in the most efficient way.
Through the use of derivatives, the Portfolio will be able to respond to market volatility by altering its risk profile and deviate from its target asset allocation without necessarily altering its physical securities asset mix. When the Adviser determines the equity volatility is low and the equity markets present reasonable return opportunities, the Adviser may increase the Portfolio’s equity exposure by entering into equity index futures or swap agreements. This equity exposure is expected to not exceed 80%. Conversely, during periods of severe equity market volatility, when the Adviser determines that the risks in the equity markets are disproportional to the potential returns offered, the Adviser expects to use derivatives to reduce the Portfolio’s overall equity exposure. In this extreme risk-averse exposure, the Portfolio could reduce its equity exposure to 0% and increase its fixed-income exposure to 100%.
The evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement was prepared by Philip L. Kirstein, the Senior Officer of the Fund, for the Directors of the Fund, as required by the September 1, 2004 Assurance of Discontinuance (“AoD”) between the Adviser and the New York State Attorney General (the “NYAG”). The Senior Officer’s evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement is not meant to diminish the responsibility or authority of the Board of Directors of the Fund to perform its duties pursuant to Section 15 of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “40 Act”) and applicable state law. The purpose of the summary is to provide shareholders with a synopsis of the independent evaluation of the reasonableness of the advisory fees proposed to be paid by the Portfolio which was provided to the Directors in connection with their review of the proposed approval of the continuance of the Investment Advisory Agreement. The Senior Officer’s evaluation considered the following factors:
| 1. | Advisory fees charged to institutional and other clients of the Adviser for like services; |
| 2. | Advisory fees charged by other mutual fund companies for like services; |
| 3. | Costs to the Adviser and its affiliates of supplying services pursuant to the advisory agreement, excluding any intra-corporate profit; |
| 4. | Profit margins of the Adviser and its affiliates from supplying such services; |
| 5. | Possible economies of scale as the Portfolio grows larger; and |
| 6. | Nature and quality of the Adviser’s services including the performance of the Portfolio. |
These factors, with the exception of the first factor, are generally referred to as the “Gartenberg factors,” which were articulated by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in 1982. The first factor is an additional factor required to be considered by the AoD. The Supreme Court recently held the Gartenberg decision was correct in its basic formulation of what Section 36(b) of the 40 Act requires: to face liability under Section 36(b), “an investment adviser must charge a fee that is so disproportionately large that it bears no reasonable relationship to the services rendered and could not have been the
1 | | It should be noted that the Senior Officer’s fee evaluation was completed on January 21, 2011 and discussed with the Board of Directors on February 1-3. 2011. |
2 | | Future references to the Fund and the Portfolio do not include “AllianceBernstein.” References in the fee summary pertaining to performance and expense ratios refer to the Class A shares of the Portfolio. |
38
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
product of arms length bargaining.” Jones v. Harris Associates L.P., (No. 08-586), 130 U.S. 1418 (1210). In the Jones decision, the Court stated the Gartenberg approach fully incorporates the correct understanding of fiduciary duty within the context of Section 36(b) and noted with approval that “Gartenberg insists that all relevant circumstances be taken into account” and “uses the range of fees that might result from arms-length bargaining as the benchmark for reviewing challenged fees.”
PORTFOLIO ADVISORY FEES, EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENTS & RATIOS
The Adviser proposes that the Portfolio pay the advisory fee set forth in the table below for receiving the services to be provided pursuant to the Investment Advisory Agreement:
| | |
Portfolio | | Advisory Fee |
Dynamic Asset Allocation Portfolio | | 0.70% of Average Daily Net Assets |
As shown above, the advisory fee schedule of the Portfolio has no breakpoint. The Portfolio would fall in the Specialty Category, which has a fee beginning at 0.75% but is subject to breakpoints.3
In addition to paying the advisory fee, the Investment Advisory Agreement provides for the Adviser to be reimbursed for providing administrative and accounting services.
The Adviser proposed to set expense caps set forth below for an initial period. The Expense Limitation Undertaking will terminate three years after the Portfolio commences operations. During the period between the initial period and the termination of the agreements, the Adviser may be able to recoup all or a portion of the Portfolio’s operating expenses,4 which will be paid initially by the Adviser. If at any time, after the expiration of the initial period, the Portfolio’s expenses fall below the expense cap, the Adviser will be able to recoup offering costs previously paid by it to the extent that the reimbursement does not cause the expense ratios of the Portfolio’s share classes to exceed the expense caps. The Adviser’s ability to recoup offering expenses will terminate with the agreement, three years following the commencement of operations. After the initial period, the Adviser or the Portfolio may terminate the agreement on sixty days’ notice.
| | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Expense Cap Pursuant to Expense Limitation Undertaking | | Estimated Gross Expense Ratio | | Fiscal Year End |
Dynamic Asset Allocation Portfolio | | Class A 0.85% Class B 1.10% | | 1.15% 1.40% | | December 31 |
I. ADVISORY FEES CHARGED TO INSTITUTIONAL AND OTHER CLIENTS
The advisory fees charged to investment companies which the Adviser manages and sponsors are normally higher than those charged to similar sized institutional accounts, including pension plans and sub-advised investment companies. The fee differential reflects, among other things, different services provided to such clients, and different liabilities assumed. Services to be provided by the Adviser to the Portfolio that are not provided to non-investment company clients and sub-advised investment companies include providing office space and personnel to serve as Fund Officers, who among other responsibilities make the certifications required under the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002, and coordinating with and monitoring the Portfolio’s third party service providers such as Fund counsel, auditors, custodians, transfer agents and pricing services. The accounting, administrative, legal and compliance requirements for the Portfolio will be more costly than those for institutional accounts due to the greater complexities and time required for investment companies, although as previously noted, the Adviser is reimbursed for providing such services. Servicing the Portfolio’s investors will be more time consuming and labor intensive compared to institutional clients since the Adviser needs to communicate with a more extensive network of financial intermediaries and shareholders. The Adviser also believes that it incurs substantial entrepreneurial risk when offering a new mutual fund since establishing a new mutual fund requires a large upfront investment, and it may take a long time for the fund to achieve profitability since the fund must be priced to scale from inception in order to be competitive and assets are acquired one account at a time. In addition, managing the cash flow of an investment company may be more difficult than managing that of a stable pool of assets, such as an institutional account with little cash movement in either
3 | | The NYAG related fee schedule, implemented in January 2004 in connection with the Adviser’s settlement with the NYAG in December 2003, is based on a master schedule that contemplate eight categories of funds with almost all funds in each category having the same advisory fee schedule. The advisory fee schedule for the Specialty Category is as follows: 0.75% on the first $2.5 billion, 0.65% on the next $2.5 billion, and 0.60% on the balance. |
4 | | Offering expenses consist principally of the legal, accounting and federal and states securities registration fees paid by the Portfolio. |
39
| | |
DYNAMIC ASSET ALLOCATION PORTFOLIO |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
direction, particularly, if a fund is in net redemption and the Adviser is frequently forced to sell securities to raise cash for redemptions. However, managing a fund with positive cash flow may be easier at times than managing a stable pool of assets. Finally, in recent years, investment advisers have been sued by institutional clients and have suffered reputational damage both by the attendant publicity and outcomes other than complete victories. Accordingly, the legal and reputational risks associated with institutional accounts are greater than previously thought, although arguably still not equal to those related to the mutual fund industry.
Notwithstanding the Adviser’s view that managing an investment company is not comparable to managing other institutional accounts because the services provided are different, the Supreme Court has indicated consideration should be given to the advisory fees charged to institutional accounts with similar investment styles as the Portfolio.5 The Adviser is in the process of launching a new service for institutional clients that will provide for a similar investment style as the anticipated Portfolio. The advisory fee schedule contemplated for the institutional account is set forth in the table below.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Initial Estimated Net Assets ($MIL) | | | AllianceBernstein (“AB”) Institutional (“Inst.”) Fee Schedule | | Effective AB Inst. Adv. Fee (%) | | | Portfolio Adv. Fee (%) | |
Dynamic Asset Allocation Portfolio | | $ | 100.0 | | �� | Dynamic Asset Allocation Strategy 0.50% on first $500 million 0.40% on the balance Minimum: $ million | | | 0.500 | | | | 0.700 | |
The Adviser manages other investment companies that have a somewhat similar investment strategy as the Portfolio. The Portfolio’s neutral asset allocation is the same as another series of the Fund, Balanced Wealth Strategy Portfolio, and the retail mutual fund, The AllianceBernstein Portfolios—Balanced Wealth Strategy (“TAP—Balanced Wealth Strategy”). The advisory fee schedules of Balanced Wealth Strategy Portfolio and TAP—Balanced Wealth Strategy are set forth in the table below:6
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | ABMF/AVPS Fund | | Fee Schedule | | ABMF/AVPS Effective Fee (%) | | | Portfolio Advisory Fee (%) | |
Dynamic Asset Allocation Portfolio | | TAP—Balanced Wealth Strategy | | 0.55% on first $2.5 billion 0.45% on next $2.5 billion 0.40% on the balance | | | 0.550 | | | | 0.700 | |
| | | | |
| | AVPS—Balanced Wealth Strategy Portfolio | | 0.55% on first $2.5 billion 0.45% on next $2.5 billion 0.40% on the balance | | | 0.550 | | | | 0.700 | |
The Adviser manages the Sanford C. Bernstein Fund, Inc. Overlay Portfolios (the “Overlay Portfolios”). The Overlay Portfolios are designed to reduce portfolio volatility, reduce the probability of large losses and maintain returns of Private Client portfolios over time. Unlike the Portfolio, the Overlay Portfolios are not designed as stand-alone investments and are used in conjunction with globally diversified Private Client portfolios.7 The advisory fee schedule of the Overlay Portfolios is set
5 | | It should be noted that the Supreme Court stated that “courts may give such comparisons the weight that they merit in light of the similarities and differences between the services that the clients in question require, but the courts must be wary of inapt comparisons.” Among the significant differences the Supreme Court noted that may exist between services provided to mutual funds and institutional accounts are “higher marketing costs.” Jones v. Harris at 1428. |
6 | | Both funds were affected by Adviser’s settlement with the NYAG. |
7 | | Overlay A Portfolio and Tax-Aware Overlay A Portfolio are intended for use in Private Client accounts that have a higher equity weighting (e.g. 80% equity and 20% fixed-income). The other Overlay Portfolios are intended for use in Private Client accounts that have a higher fixed income weighting (e.g. 70% fixed-income and 30% equity). The Overlay Portfolios will gain exposure to various asset classes through direct investments in equity and debt securities as well as derivatives. |
40
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
forth in the table below. Also shown are what would have been the effective advisory fees of the Portfolio had the advisory fee schedules of the Overlay Portfolios been applicable to the Portfolio based on the initial estimate of the Portfolio’s net assets at $100 million:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Overlay Portfolio | | Advisory Fee Based on % of Average Daily Net Assets8 | | | Overlay Portfolios Effective Fee (%) | | | Portfolio Advisory Fee (%) | |
Dynamic Asset Allocation Portfolio | | Overlay A Portfolio Tax-Aware Overlay A Portfolio | | | 0.90 | % | | | 0.900 | | | | 0.700 | |
| | | | |
| | Overlay B Portfolio Tax-Aware Overlay B Portfolio Tax-Aware Overlay C Portfolio Tax-Aware Overlay N Portfolio | | | 0.65 | % | | | 0.650 | | | | 0.700 | |
The Adviser also manages AllianceBernstein Volatility Management Pooling Portfolio (“Volatility Portfolio”). Unlike the Portfolio, Volatility Portfolio is not designed as a stand-alone portfolio. Volatility Portfolio is utilized in conjunction with other asset class-pure Pooling Portfolios to reduce the overall portfolio volatility and mitigate the effects of extreme market environments without sacrificing long-term returns for the AllianceBernstein Blended Style Series, Inc.—Retirement Strategies (“Retirement Strategies”). The Adviser is not directly paid an advisory fee by Volatility Portfolio.9 The Adviser is directly compensated by the Retirement Strategies for managing its portfolios invested in Volatility Portfolio as well as other Pooling Portfolios.
The Adviser recently agreed to provide a sub-advisory service with a similar investment strategy to an investment company managed by another fund family. The fee schedule contemplated for the sub-advised fund is set forth in the table below.
| | | | |
Portfolio | | Sub-advised Fund | | Sub-advised Fund Fee Schedule |
Dynamic Asset Allocation Portfolio | | Client # 1 | | AB Sub-Advisory Fee Schedule: 0.40% on first $100 million 0.35% on next $100 million 0.30% on the balance |
It is fair to note that the services the Adviser provides pursuant to sub-advisory agreements are generally confined to the services related to the investment process; in other words, they are not as comprehensive as the services provided to the Portfolio by the Adviser.
While it appears that the sub-advisory relationship will be paying a lower fee than the investment companies managed by the Adviser, it is difficult to evaluate the relevance of such fee due to the differences in terms of the services provided, risks involved and other competitive factors between the investment companies and the sub-advisory relationship. There could be various business reasons why an investment adviser would be willing to provide a sub-advised relationship investment related services at a different fee level than an investment company it is sponsoring where the investment adviser is provided all the services, not just investment services, generally required by a registered investment company.
II. MANAGEMENT FEES CHARGED BY OTHER MUTUAL FUND COMPANIES FOR LIKE SERVICES.
Lipper, Inc. (“Lipper”), an analytical service that is not affiliated with the Adviser, compared the fees charged to the Portfolio with fees charged to other investment companies for similar services by other investment advisers.10 Lipper’s analysis
8 | | The advisory fees of each Overlay Portfolio are based on the percentage of each Portfolio’s average daily net assets, not an aggregate of the assets in the Portfolios shown. |
9 | | Although Volatility Portfolio does not directly pay the Adviser an advisory fee for providing investment advisory services, Volatility Portfolio does reimburse the Adviser the cost for providing administrative and accounting services. |
10 | | In considering this section, it should be noted that the Supreme Court cautioned against accepting mutual fund fee comparisons without careful scrutiny since “these comparisons are problematic because these fees, like those challenged, may not be the product of the negotiations conducted at arms length.” Jones v. Harris at 1429. |
41
| | |
DYNAMIC ASSET ALLOCATION PORTFOLIO |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
included the Portfolio’s ranking with respect to the contractual management fee relative to the median of the Portfolio’s Lipper Expense Group (“EG”)11 at the approximate current asset level of the subject Portfolio.12
Lipper describes an EG as a representative sample of comparable funds. Lipper’s standard methodology for screening funds to be included in an EG entails the consideration of several fund criteria, including fund type, investment classification/objective, load type and similar 12b-1/non-12b-1 service fees, asset (size) comparability, and expense components and attributes. An EG will typically consist of seven to twenty funds.
The Portfolio’s original EG had an insufficient number of peers. Consequently, Lipper expanded the Portfolio’s EG to include peers with or without a 12b-1/non-12b-1 service fee. Because Lipper had expanded the EG of the Portfolio, under Lipper’s standard guidelines, the Portfolio’s Lipper Expense Universe (“EU”)13 was also expanded to include the universes of those peers with or without a 12b-1/non-12b-1 service fee.
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Contractual Management Fee14 | | | Lipper Exp. Group Median | | | Rank | |
Dynamic Asset Allocation Portfolio | | | 0.700 | | | | 0.695 | | | | 5/8 | |
Set forth below is a comparison of the Portfolio’s anticipated total expense ratio excluding 12b-1/non-12b-1 service fee, and the medians of the Portfolio’s EG and EU. The Portfolio’s total expense ratio, excluding 12b-1/non-12b-1 service fee, rankings are also shown.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Exp. Ratio ex-12b-1 Fee (%)15 | | | Lipper Exp. Group Median (%) | | | Lipper Group Rank | | | Lipper Exp. Universe Median (%) | | | Lipper Universe Rank | |
Dynamic Asset Allocation Portfolio | | | 0.850 | | | | 0.796 | | | | 6/8 | | | | 0.790 | | | | 9/12 | |
Based on this analysis, the Portfolio has a more favorable ranking on a management fee basis than it does on a total expense ratio basis.
III. COSTS TO THE ADVISER AND ITS AFFILIATES OF SUPPLYING SERVICES PURSUANT TO THE ADVISORY FEE ARRANGEMENT, EXCLUDING ANY INTRA-CORPORATE PROFIT.
The Adviser will utilize two profitability reporting systems, which operate independently but are aligned with each other, to estimate the Adviser’s profitability in connection with investment advisory services to be provided to the Portfolio. The Senior Officer has retained a consultant to provide independent advice regarding the alignment of the two profitability systems as well as the methodologies and allocations utilized by both profitability systems. See Section IV for additional discussion.
IV. PROFIT MARGINS OF THE ADVISER AND ITS AFFILIATES FOR SUPPLYING SUCH SERVICES.
The Portfolio has not yet commenced operations. Therefore, there is no historic profitability data with respect to the Adviser’s investment services to the Portfolio.
11 | | It should be noted that Lipper does not consider average account size when constructing EGs. Funds with relatively small average account sizes tend to have higher transfer agent expense ratios than comparable sized funds that have relatively large average account sizes. Note that there are limitations on Lipper expense category data because different funds categorize expenses differently. |
12 | | The contractual management fee is calculated by Lipper using the Portfolio’s contractual management fee rate at a hypothetical asset level. The hypothetical asset level is based on the combined net assets of all classes of the Portfolio, rounded up to the next $25 million. Lipper’s total expense ratio information is based on the most recent annual report except as otherwise noted. A ranking of “1” means that the Portfolio has the lowest effective fee rate in the Lipper peer group. |
13 | | Except for asset (size) comparability, Lipper uses the same criteria for selecting an EG peer when selecting an EU peer. Unlike the EG, the EU allows for the same adviser to be represented by more than just one fund. Due to a limited number of comparable peers available, at the request of the Senior Officer and the Adviser, Lipper allowed for the inclusion of a second peer managed by the same investment adviser in the Portfolio’s EG. |
14 | | The contractual management fee does not reflect any expense reimbursements made by the Portfolio to the Adviser for certain clerical, legal, accounting, administrative, and other services. |
15 | | The total expense ratio excluding 12b-1/non 12b-1 service fee shown are for the Portfolio’s Class A shares. |
42
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
In addition to the Adviser’s direct profits from managing the Portfolio, certain of the Adviser’s affiliates will have business relationships with the Portfolio and may earn a profit from providing other services to the Portfolio. The courts have referred to this type of business opportunity as “fall-out benefits” to the Adviser and indicated that they should be factored into the evaluation of the total relationship between the Portfolios and the Adviser. Neither case law nor common business practice precludes the Adviser’s affiliates from earning a reasonable profit on this type of relationship. These affiliates will provide transfer agent and distribution related services to the Portfolio and receive transfer agent fees, Rule 12b-1 payments and brokerage commissions.
The Portfolio has adopted a distribution plan for Class B shares pursuant to Rule 12b-1 under the 40 Act. Under the distribution plan, the Portfolio pays distribution and servicing fees to its principal underwriter and distributor, AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (“ABI”), an affiliate of the Adviser, at an annual rate of up to 0.50% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The current annual rate that the Portfolio pays to ABI for 12b-1 fees it 0.25%.
The Adviser may compensate ABI for payments made by ABI to brokers for registration fees and services related to printing, distribution and advertising in connection with Class B shares.
Financial intermediaries, such as insurers, will market and sell shares of the Portfolio and will normally receive compensation from ABI, the Advisers and/or the Portfolio for selling shares of the Portfolio. These financial intermediaries will receive compensation in any or all of the following forms: 12b-1 fees, defrayal of costs for educational seminars and training, additional distribution support, recordkeeping and/or administrative services. Payments related to providing contract-holder recordkeeping and/or administrative services will generally not exceed 0.35% of the average daily net assets of the Portfolio attributable to the relevant intermediary over the year.
The transfer agent of the Portfolio will be AllianceBernstein Investor Services, Inc. (“ABIS”).16 During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009, ABIS was paid a fee of $18,000 by the existing Portfolios of the Fund.17
The Portfolio may effect in the future brokerage transactions through the Adviser’s affiliate, Sanford C. Bernstein & Co., LLC (“SCB & Co.”) and pay commissions for such transactions. The Adviser has represented that SCB’s profitability from any future business conducted with the Portfolio would be comparable to the profitability of SCB’s dealings with other comparable third party clients. In the ordinary course of business, SCB receives and pays liquidity rebates from electronic communications networks (“ECNs”) derived from trading for its clients. These credits and charges are not being passed onto any SCB client. The Adviser also receives certain soft dollar benefits from brokers that execute agency trades for its clients. These soft dollar benefits reduce the Adviser’s cost of doing business and increase its profitability.
V. POSSIBLE ECONOMIES OF SCALE
The Adviser has indicated that economies of scale are being shared with shareholders through fee structures,18 subsidies and enhancement to services. Based on some of the professional literature that has considered economies of scale in the mutual fund industry, it is thought that to the extent economies of scale exist, they may more often exist across a fund family as opposed to a specific fund. This is because the costs incurred by the Adviser, such as investment research or technology for trading or compliance systems, can be spread across a greater asset base as the fund family increases in size. It is also possible that as the level of services required to operate a successful investment company has increased over time, and advisory firms have made such investments in their business to provide services, there may be a sharing of economies of scale without a reduction in advisory fees.
An independent consultant, retained by the Senior Officer, provided the Board of Directors an update of the Deli19 study on advisory fees and various fund characteristics.20 The independent consultant first reiterated the results of his previous two
16 | | It should be noted that the insurance companies, linked to the variable products, provide additional shareholder services, including record keeping, administration and customer service for contract holders. |
17 | | ABIS receives an annual fee of $18,000 from the Fund, which is allocated equally among the Fund’s Portfolios. |
18 | | Fee structures include fee reductions, pricing at scale and breakpoints in advisory fee schedules. |
19 | | The Deli study was originally published in 2002 based on 1997 data. |
20 | | As mentioned previously, the Supreme Court cautioned against accepting mutual fund fee comparisons without careful scrutiny since the fees may not be the product of negotiations conducted at arms length. See Jones V. Harris at 1429. |
43
| | |
DYNAMIC ASSET ALLOCATION PORTFOLIO |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
dimensional comparison analysis (fund size and family size) with the Board of Directors.21 The independent consultant then discussed the results of the regression model that was utilized to study the effects of various factors on advisory fees. The regression model output indicated that the bulk of the variation in fees predicted were explained by various factors, but substantially by fund assets under management (“AUM”), family AUM, index fund indicator and investment style. The independent consultant also compared the advisory fees of the AllianceBernstein Mutual Funds to similar funds managed by 19 other large asset managers, regardless of fund size and the large asset manager’s proportion of mutual fund assets to non-mutual fund assets.
VI. NATURE AND QUALITY OF THE ADVISER’S SERVICES, INCLUDING THE PERFORMANCE OF THE PORTFOLIO
With assets under management of approximately $486 billion as of December 31, 2010, the Adviser has the investment experience to manage and provide non-investment services (described in Section I) to the Portfolio.
Since the Portfolio has not yet commenced operations, the Portfolio has no performance history.
CONCLUSION:
Based on the factors discussed above the Senior Officer’s conclusion is that the proposed advisory fee for the Portfolio is reasonable and within the range of what would have been negotiated at arm’s-length in light of all the surrounding circumstances. However, the Senior Officer recommended that the Directors discuss with the Adviser the proposed advisory fee schedule of the Portfolio, which lack potential for sharing economies of scale through breakpoints. This conclusion in respect of the Portfolio is based on an evaluation of all of these factors and no single factor was dispositive.
Dated: March 4, 2011
21 | | The two dimensional analysis showed patterns of lower advisory fees for funds with larger asset sizes and funds from larger family sizes compared to funds with smaller asset sizes and funds from smaller family sizes, which according to the independent consultant is indicative of a sharing of economies of scale and scope. However, in less liquid and active markets, such is not the case, as the empirical analysis showed potential for diseconomies of scale in those markets. The empirical analysis also showed diminishing economies of scale and scope as funds surpassed a certain high level of assets. |
44
AllianceBernstein
Variable Products Series Fund, Inc.
| | |
![LOGO](https://capedge.com/proxy/N-CSRS/0001193125-12-366259/g374692g16n16.jpg) | | AllianceBernstein Growth Portfolio |
Semi-Annual Report
![LOGO](https://capedge.com/proxy/N-CSRS/0001193125-12-366259/g374692g81g54.jpg)
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT
Investment Products Offered
| Ø | | Are Not Bank Guaranteed |
AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (ABI) is the distributor of the AllianceBernstein family of mutual funds. ABI is a member of FINRA and is an affiliate of AllianceBernstein L.P., the manager of the funds.
You may obtain a description of the Fund’s proxy voting policies and procedures, and information regarding how the Fund voted proxies relating to portfolio securities during the most recent 12-month period ended June 30, without charge. Simply visit AllianceBernstein’s website at www.alliancebernstein.com or go to the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (the “Commission”) website at www.sec.gov, or call AllianceBernstein at (800) 227-4618.
The Fund files its complete schedule of portfolio holdings with the Commission for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year on Form N-Q. The Fund’s Forms N-Q are available on the Commission’s website at www.sec.gov. The Fund’s Forms N-Q may also be reviewed and copied at the Commission’s Public Reference Room in Washington, DC; information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling (800) SEC-0330.
AllianceBernstein® and the AB Logo are registered trademarks and service marks used by permission of the owner, AllianceBernstein L.P.
| | |
| | |
GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
FUND EXPENSES (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
As a shareholder of the Fund, you incur two types of costs: (1) transaction costs, including sales charges (loads) on purchase payments, contingent deferred sales charges on redemptions and (2) ongoing costs, including management fees; distribution (12b-1) fees; and other Fund expenses. This example is intended to help you understand your ongoing costs (in dollars) of investing in the Fund and to compare these costs with the ongoing costs of investing in other mutual funds.
The Example is based on an investment of $1,000 invested at the beginning of the period and held for the entire period as indicated below.
Actual Expenses
The table below provides information about actual account values and actual expenses. You may use the information in this line, together with the amount you invested, to estimate the expenses that you paid over the period. Simply divide your account value by $1,000 (for example, an $8,600 account value divided by $1,000 = 8.6), then multiply the result by the number in the first line under the heading entitled “Expenses Paid During Period” to estimate the expenses you paid on your account during this period. The estimate of expenses does not include fees or other expenses of any variable insurance product. If such expenses were included, the estimate of expenses you paid during the period would be higher and your ending account value would be lower.
Hypothetical Example for Comparison Purposes
The table below provides information about hypothetical account values and hypothetical expenses based on the Fund’s actual expense ratio and an assumed annual rate of return of 5% before expenses, which is not the Fund’s actual return. The hypothetical account values and expenses may not be used to estimate the actual ending account balance or expenses you paid for the period. You may use this information to compare the ongoing costs of investing in the Fund and other funds by comparing this 5% hypothetical example with the 5% hypothetical examples that appear in the shareholder reports of other funds. The estimate of expenses does not include fees or other expenses of any variable insurance product. If such expenses were included, the estimate of expenses you paid during the period would be higher and your ending account value would be lower.
Please note that the expenses shown in the table are meant to highlight your ongoing costs only and do not reflect any transactional costs, such as sales charges (loads), or contingent deferred sales charges on redemptions. Therefore, the second line of each class’ table is useful in comparing ongoing costs only, and will not help you determine the relative total costs of owning different funds. In addition, if these transactional costs were included, your costs would have been higher.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Beginning Account Value January 1, 2012 | | | Ending Account Value June 30, 2012 | | | Expenses Paid During Period* | | | Annualized Expense Ratio* | |
Class A | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Actual | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,085.80 | | | $ | 5.55 | | | | 1.07 | % |
Hypothetical (5% return before expenses) | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,019.54 | | | $ | 5.37 | | | | 1.07 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class B | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Actual | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,084.30 | | | $ | 6.84 | | | | 1.32 | % |
Hypothetical (5% return before expenses) | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,018.30 | | | $ | 6.62 | | | | 1.32 | % |
*Expenses are equal to each classes’ annualized expense ratios, multiplied by the average account value over the period, multiplied by 182/366 (to reflect the one-half year period).
1
| | |
GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
TEN LARGEST HOLDINGS* | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
COMPANY | | U.S. $ VALUE | | | PERCENT OF NET ASSETS | |
Apple, Inc. | | $ | 6,978,800 | | | | 9.1 | % |
Google, Inc.–Class A | | | 2,570,870 | | | | 3.4 | |
Philip Morris International, Inc. | | | 2,369,109 | | | | 3.1 | |
Oracle Corp. | | | 2,249,478 | | | | 2.9 | |
QUALCOMM, Inc. | | | 2,125,862 | | | | 2.8 | |
Schlumberger Ltd. | | | 1,691,230 | | | | 2.2 | |
Emerson Electric Co. | | | 1,600,489 | | | | 2.1 | |
Altria Group, Inc. | | | 1,571,334 | | | | 2.1 | |
Intuit, Inc. | | | 1,540,726 | | | | 2.0 | |
Danaher Corp. | | | 1,519,174 | | | | 2.0 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | $ | 24,217,072 | | | | 31.7 | % |
SECTOR DIVERSIFICATION**
June 30, 2012 (unaudited)
| | | | | | | | |
SECTOR | | U.S. $ VALUE | | | PERCENT OF TOTAL INVESTMENTS | |
Information Technology | | $ | 24,695,345 | | | | 32.0 | % |
Health Care | | | 11,448,424 | | | | 14.8 | |
Consumer Discretionary | | | 10,507,508 | | | | 13.6 | |
Industrials | | | 8,703,261 | | | | 11.3 | |
Energy | | | 8,186,020 | | | | 10.6 | |
Consumer Staples | | | 7,207,270 | | | | 9.3 | |
Financials | | | 3,225,235 | | | | 4.2 | |
Short-Term Investments | | | 3,288,704 | | | | 4.2 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Investments | | $ | 77,261,767 | | | | 100.0 | % |
** | | The Portfolio’s sector breakdown is expressed as a percentage of total investments (excluding security lending collateral) and may vary over time. |
Please note: The sector classifications presented herein are based on the Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS) which was developed by Morgan Stanley Capital International and Standard & Poor’s. The components are divided into sector, industry group, and industry sub-indices as classified by the GICS for each of the market capitalization indices in the broad market. These sector classifications are broadly defined. The “Portfolio of Investments” section of the report reflects more specific industry information and is consistent with the investment restrictions discussed in the Fund’s prospectus.
2
| | |
GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMMON STOCKS–96.8% | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY–32.3% | | | | | | | | |
COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT–3.6% | | | | | | | | |
Cisco Systems, Inc. | | | 37,570 | | | $ | 645,077 | |
QUALCOMM, Inc. | | | 38,180 | | | | 2,125,862 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,770,939 | �� |
| | | | | | | | |
COMPUTERS & PERIPHERALS–9.1% | | | | | | | | |
Apple, Inc.(a) | | | 11,950 | | | | 6,978,800 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INTERNET SOFTWARE & SERVICES–4.2% | | | | | | | | |
Facebook, Inc.(a) (b) | | | 18,858 | | | | 586,861 | |
Google, Inc.–Class A(a) | | | 4,432 | | | | 2,570,870 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 3,157,731 | |
| | | | | | | | |
IT SERVICES–2.8% | | | | | | | | |
Cognizant Technology Solutions Corp.–Class A(a) | | | 19,800 | | | | 1,188,000 | |
Visa, Inc.–Class A | | | 7,860 | | | | 971,732 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,159,732 | |
| | | | | | | | |
SEMICONDUCTORS & SEMICONDUCTOR EQUIPMENT–4.3% | | | | | | | | |
ARM Holdings PLC (Sponsored ADR) | | | 13,110 | | | | 311,887 | |
Broadcom Corp.–Class A(a) | | | 22,760 | | | | 769,288 | |
Lam Research Corp.(a) | | | 9,670 | | | | 364,946 | |
LSI Corp.(a) | | | 49,860 | | | | 317,608 | |
Marvell Technology Group Ltd. | | | 43,750 | | | | 493,500 | |
Xilinx, Inc. | | | 30,380 | | | | 1,019,857 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 3,277,086 | |
| | | | | | | | |
SOFTWARE–8.3% | | | | | | | | |
Informatica Corp.(a) | | | 16,470 | | | | 697,669 | |
Intuit, Inc. | | | 25,960 | | | | 1,540,726 | |
Oracle Corp. | | | 75,740 | | | | 2,249,478 | |
Red Hat, Inc.(a) | | | 14,050 | | | | 793,544 | |
TIBCO Software, Inc.(a) | | | 35,750 | | | | 1,069,640 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 6,351,057 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 24,695,345 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HEALTH CARE–15.0% | | | | | | | | |
BIOTECHNOLOGY–3.0% | | | | | | | | |
Biogen Idec, Inc.(a) | | | 6,750 | | | | 974,565 | |
Gilead Sciences, Inc.(a) | | | 21,420 | | | | 1,098,417 | |
Synageva BioPharma Corp.(a) (b) | | | 6,010 | | | | 243,766 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,316,748 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HEALTH CARE EQUIPMENT & SUPPLIES–5.0% | | | | | | | | |
Covidien PLC | | | 14,120 | | | | 755,420 | |
HeartWare International, Inc.(a) (b) | | | 7,970 | | | | 707,736 | |
IDEXX Laboratories, Inc.(a) | | | 5,630 | | | | 541,212 | |
Stryker Corp. | | | 21,800 | | | | 1,201,180 | |
Volcano Corp.(a) | | | 20,750 | | | | 594,487 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 3,800,035 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS & SERVICES–4.3% | | | | | | | | |
Humana, Inc. | | | 4,790 | | | $ | 370,938 | |
McKesson Corp. | | | 13,960 | | | | 1,308,750 | |
Mednax, Inc.(a) | | | 6,800 | | | | 466,072 | |
UnitedHealth Group, Inc. | | | 19,080 | | | | 1,116,180 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 3,261,940 | |
| | | | | | | | |
PHARMACEUTICALS–2.7% | | | | | | | | |
Allergan, Inc./United States | | | 11,400 | | | | 1,055,298 | |
Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc.(a) | | | 13,710 | | | | 1,014,403 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,069,701 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 11,448,424 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER DISCRETIONARY–13.8% | | | | | | | | |
AUTOMOBILES–0.7% | | | | | | | | |
Harley-Davidson, Inc. | | | 11,470 | | | | 524,523 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HOTELS, RESTAURANTS & LEISURE–3.6% | | | | | | | | |
Las Vegas Sands Corp. | | | 6,790 | | | | 295,297 | |
Marriott Vacations Worldwide Corp.(a) | | | 11,580 | | | | 358,748 | |
McDonald’s Corp. | | | 14,305 | | | | 1,266,422 | |
Starbucks Corp. | | | 7,220 | | | | 384,971 | |
Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide, Inc. | | | 8,980 | | | | 476,299 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,781,737 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INTERNET & CATALOG RETAIL–2.9% | | | | | | | | |
Amazon.com, Inc.(a) | | | 4,800 | | | | 1,096,080 | |
HSN, Inc. | | | 7,470 | | | | 301,415 | |
priceline.com, Inc.(a) | | | 1,235 | | | | 820,682 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,218,177 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MEDIA–1.6% | | | | | | | | |
CBS Corp.–Class B | | | 19,380 | | | | 635,276 | |
Walt Disney Co. (The) | | | 11,380 | | | | 551,930 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,187,206 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MULTILINE RETAIL–0.5% | | | | | | | | |
Family Dollar Stores, Inc. | | | 5,370 | | | | 356,998 | |
| | | | | | | | |
SPECIALTY RETAIL–2.0% | | | | | | | | |
Bed Bath & Beyond, Inc.(a) | | | 7,020 | | | | 433,836 | |
GNC Holdings, Inc. | | | 10,230 | | | | 401,016 | |
Home Depot, Inc. (The) | | | 12,480 | | | | 661,315 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,496,167 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TEXTILES, APPAREL & LUXURY GOODS–2.5% | | | | | | | | |
Coach, Inc. | | | 15,345 | | | | 897,375 | |
NIKE, Inc.–Class B | | | 2,870 | | | | 251,929 | |
PVH Corp. | | | 6,528 | | | | 507,813 | |
VF Corp. | | | 2,140 | | | | 285,583 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,942,700 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 10,507,508 | |
| | | | | | | | |
3
| | |
GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
INDUSTRIALS–11.4% | | | | | | | | |
AEROSPACE & DEFENSE–2.9% | | | | | | | | |
Boeing Co. (The) | | | 18,200 | | | $ | 1,352,260 | |
Precision Castparts Corp. | | | 5,040 | | | | 829,030 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,181,290 | |
| | | | | | | | |
AIR FREIGHT & LOGISTICS–1.0% | | | | | | | | |
FedEx Corp. | | | 8,670 | | | | 794,259 | |
| | | | | | | | |
ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT–2.8% | | | | | | | | |
AMETEK, Inc. | | | 11,260 | | | | 561,986 | |
Emerson Electric Co. | | | 34,360 | | | | 1,600,489 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,162,475 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INDUSTRIAL CONGLOMERATES–2.0% | | | | | | | | |
Danaher Corp. | | | 29,170 | | | | 1,519,174 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MACHINERY–2.7% | | | | | | | | |
Dover Corp. | | | 14,940 | | | | 800,933 | |
Gardner Denver, Inc. | | | 5,150 | | | | 272,486 | |
Joy Global, Inc. | | | 9,800 | | | | 555,954 | |
Parker Hannifin Corp. | | | 5,420 | | | | 416,690 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,046,063 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 8,703,261 | |
| | | | | | | | |
ENERGY–10.7% | | | | | | | | |
ENERGY EQUIPMENT & SERVICES–5.1% | | | | | | | | |
Halliburton Co. | | | 20,640 | | | | 585,970 | |
National Oilwell Varco, Inc. | | | 15,185 | | | | 978,521 | |
Schlumberger Ltd. | | | 26,055 | | | | 1,691,230 | |
Technip SA | | | 6,145 | | | | 640,407 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 3,896,128 | |
| | | | | | | | |
OIL, GAS & CONSUMABLE FUELS–5.6% | | | | | | | | |
Anadarko Petroleum Corp. | | | 8,260 | | | | 546,812 | |
Concho Resources, Inc.(a) | | | 7,340 | | | | 624,781 | |
EOG Resources, Inc. | | | 10,375 | | | | 934,891 | |
Noble Energy, Inc. | | | 11,105 | | | | 941,926 | |
Occidental Petroleum Corp. | | | 7,080 | | | | 607,252 | |
Pioneer Natural Resources Co. | | | 7,190 | | | | 634,230 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 4,289,892 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 8,186,020 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER STAPLES–9.4% | | | | | | | | |
BEVERAGES–1.5% | | | | | | | | |
Coca-Cola Enterprises, Inc. | | | 12,190 | | | | 341,808 | |
PepsiCo, Inc. | | | 11,960 | | | | 845,093 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,186,901 | |
| | | | | | | | |
FOOD & STAPLES RETAILING–1.5% | | | | | | | | |
CVS Caremark Corp. | | | 24,030 | | | | 1,122,922 | |
| | | | | | | | |
FOOD PRODUCTS–1.2% | | | | | | | | |
Kraft Foods, Inc.–Class A | | | 24,780 | | | | 957,004 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TOBACCO–5.2% | | | | | | | | |
Altria Group, Inc. | | | 45,480 | | | | 1,571,334 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
Philip Morris International, Inc. | | | 27,150 | | | $ | 2,369,109 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 3,940,443 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 7,207,270 | |
| | | | | | | | |
FINANCIALS–4.2% | | | | | | | | |
CAPITAL MARKETS–1.5% | | | | | | | | |
Affiliated Managers Group, Inc.(a) | | | 5,230 | | | | 572,423 | |
Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (The) | | | 5,720 | | | | 548,319 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,120,742 | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMMERCIAL BANKS–0.8% | | | | | | | | |
Wells Fargo & Co. | | | 19,500 | | | | 652,080 | |
| | | | | | | | |
DIVERSIFIED FINANCIAL SERVICES–1.5% | | | | | | | | |
IntercontinentalExchange, Inc.(a) | | | 6,220 | | | | 845,796 | |
JPMorgan Chase & Co. | | | 8,240 | | | | 294,415 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,140,211 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INSURANCE–0.4% | | | | | | | | |
MetLife, Inc. | | | 10,120 | | | | 312,202 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 3,225,235 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Common Stocks (cost $63,559,797) | | | | | | | 73,973,063 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | Principal Amount (000) | | | | |
SHORT-TERM INVESTMENTS–4.3% | | | | | | | | |
TIME DEPOSIT–4.3% | | | | | | | | |
State Street Time Deposit 0.01%, 7/02/12 (cost $3,288,704) | | $ | 3,289 | | | | 3,288,704 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Investments Before Security Lending Collateral for Securities Loaned–101.1% (cost $66,848,501) | | | | | | | 77,261,767 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | Shares | | | | |
INVESTMENTS OF CASH COLLATERAL FOR SECURITY LOANED–2.0% | | | | | | | | |
INVESTMENT COMPANIES–2.0% | | | | | | | | |
AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves–Class I, 0.20%(c) (cost $1,551,716) | | | 1,551,716 | | | | 1,551,716 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TOTAL INVESTMENTS–103.1% (cost $68,400,217) | | | | | | | 78,813,483 | |
Other assets less liabilities–(3.1)% | | | | | | | (2,370,491 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
NET ASSETS–100.0% | | | | | | $ | 76,442,992 | |
| | | | | | | | |
4
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
(a) | | Non-income producing security. |
(b) | | Represents entire or partial securities out on loan. See Note E for securities lending information. |
(c) | | Investment in affiliated money market mutual fund. The rate shown represents the 7-day yield as of period end. |
Glossary:
ADR—American Depositary Receipt
See notes to financial statements.
5
| | |
GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
STATEMENT OF ASSETS & LIABILITIES |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | |
ASSETS | | | | |
Investments in securities, at value | | | | |
Unaffiliated issuers (cost $66,848,501) | | $ | 77,261,767 | (a) |
Affiliated issuers (cost $1,551,716—including investment of cash collateral for securities loaned of $1,551,716) | | | 1,551,716 | |
Foreign currencies, at value (cost $15,918) | | | 15,873 | |
Receivable for investment securities sold | | | 402,554 | |
Dividends and interest receivable | | | 86,249 | |
Receivable for capital stock sold | | | 474 | |
| | | | |
Total assets | | | 79,318,633 | |
| | | | |
LIABILITIES | | | | |
Payable for collateral received on securities loaned | | | 1,551,716 | |
Payable for investment securities purchased | | | 1,123,010 | |
Payable for capital stock redeemed | | | 63,643 | |
Advisory fee payable | | | 47,806 | |
Administrative fee payable | | | 17,958 | |
Distribution fee payable | | | 10,301 | |
Transfer Agent fee payable | | | 157 | |
Accrued expenses | | | 61,050 | |
| | | | |
Total liabilities | | | 2,875,641 | |
| | | | |
NET ASSETS | | $ | 76,442,992 | |
| | | | |
COMPOSITION OF NET ASSETS | | | | |
Capital stock, at par | | $ | 3,520 | |
Additional paid-in capital | | | 77,774,273 | |
Undistributed net investment income | | | 28,485 | |
Accumulated net realized loss on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | (11,776,501 | ) |
Net unrealized appreciation on investments and foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities | | | 10,413,215 | |
| | | | |
| | $ | 76,442,992 | |
| | | | |
Net Asset Value Per Share—1 billion shares of capital stock authorized, $.001 par value
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class | | Net Assets | | | Shares Outstanding | | | Net Asset Value | |
A | | $ | 27,014,436 | | | | 1,219,661 | | | $ | 22.15 | |
B | | $ | 49,428,556 | | | | 2,300,807 | | | $ | 21.48 | |
(a) | | Includes securities on loan with a value of $1,538,363 (see Note E). |
See notes to financial statements.
6
| | |
GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
STATEMENTOF OPERATIONS | | |
Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | |
INVESTMENT INCOME | | | | |
Dividends | | | | |
Unaffiliated issuers (net of foreign taxes withheld of $4,209) | | $ | 494,896 | |
Affiliated issuers | | | 948 | |
Interest | | | 57 | |
Securities lending income | | | 10,668 | |
| | | | |
| | | 506,569 | |
| | | | |
EXPENSES | | | | |
Advisory fee (see Note B) | | | 307,640 | |
Distribution fee—Class B | | | 65,516 | |
Transfer agency—Class A | | | 718 | |
Transfer agency—Class B | | | 1,279 | |
Custodian | | | 46,889 | |
Administrative | | | 28,729 | |
Audit | | | 18,509 | |
Printing | | | 16,534 | |
Legal | | | 15,480 | |
Directors’ fees | | | 1,946 | |
Miscellaneous | | | 2,196 | |
| | | | |
Total expenses | | | 505,436 | |
| | | | |
Net investment income | | | 1,133 | |
| | | | |
REALIZED AND UNREALIZED GAIN (LOSS) ON INVESTMENT AND FOREIGN CURRENCY TRANSACTIONS | | | | |
Net realized gain (loss) on: | | | | |
Investment transactions | | | 5,716,277 | |
Foreign currency transactions | | | (3,632 | ) |
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of: | | | | |
Investments | | | 1,292,995 | |
Foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities | | | 392 | |
| | | | |
Net gain on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | 7,006,032 | |
| | | | |
NET INCREASE IN NET ASSETS FROM OPERATIONS | | $ | 7,007,165 | |
| | | | |
See notes to financial statements.
7
| | |
| | |
GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
STATEMENTOF CHANGESIN NET ASSETS | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | |
INCREASE (DECREASE) IN NET ASSETS FROM OPERATIONS | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income | | $ | 1,133 | | | $ | 9,993 | |
Net realized gain on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | 5,712,645 | | | | 12,800,737 | |
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities | | | 1,293,387 | | | | (11,500,462 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Net increase in net assets from operations | | | 7,007,165 | | | | 1,310,268 | |
CAPITAL STOCK TRANSACTIONS | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (12,511,052 | ) | | | (17,886,322 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Total decrease | | | (5,503,887 | ) | | | (16,576,054 | ) |
NET ASSETS | | | | | | | | |
Beginning of period | | | 81,946,879 | | | | 98,522,933 | |
| | | | | | | | |
End of period (including undistributed net investment income of $28,485 and $27,352, respectively) | | $ | 76,442,992 | | | $ | 81,946,879 | |
| | | | | | | | |
See notes to financial statements.
8
| | |
GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
NOTE A: Significant Accounting Policies
The AllianceBernstein Growth Portfolio (the “Portfolio”) is a series of AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund, Inc. (the “Fund”). The Portfolio’s investment objective is long-term growth of capital. The Portfolio is diversified as defined under the Investment Company Act of 1940. The Fund was incorporated in the State of Maryland on November 17, 1987, as an open-end series investment company. The Fund offers thirteen separately managed pools of assets which have differing investment objectives and policies. The Portfolio offers Class A and Class B shares. Both classes of shares have identical voting, dividend, liquidating and other rights, except that Class B shares bear a distribution expense and have exclusive voting rights with respect to the Class B distribution plan.
The Portfolio offers and sells its shares only to separate accounts of certain life insurance companies for the purpose of funding variable annuity contracts and variable life insurance policies. Sales are made without a sales charge at the Portfolio’s net asset value per share.
The financial statements have been prepared in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“U.S. GAAP”) which require management to make certain estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities in the financial statements and amounts of income and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. The following is a summary of significant accounting policies followed by the Portfolio.
1. Security Valuation
Portfolio securities are valued at their current market value determined on the basis of market quotations or, if market quotations are not readily available or are deemed unreliable, at “fair value” as determined in accordance with procedures established by and under the general supervision of the Fund’s Board of Directors.
In general, the market value of securities which are readily available and deemed reliable are determined as follows: Securities listed on a national securities exchange (other than securities listed on the NASDAQ Stock Market, Inc. (“NASDAQ”)) or on a foreign securities exchange are valued at the last sale price at the close of the exchange or foreign securities exchange. If there has been no sale on such day, the securities are valued at the last traded price from the previous day. Securities listed on more than one exchange are valued by reference to the principal exchange on which the securities are traded; securities listed only on NASDAQ are valued in accordance with the NASDAQ Official Closing Price; listed or over the counter market (“OTC”) put or call options are valued at the mid level between the current bid and ask prices. If either a current bid or current ask price is unavailable, AllianceBernstein L.P. (the “Adviser”) will have discretion to determine the best valuation (e.g. last trade price in the case of listed options); open futures contracts are valued using the closing settlement price or, in the absence of such a price, the most recent quoted bid price. If there are no quotations available for the day of valuation, the last available closing settlement price is used; U.S. government securities and other debt instruments having 60 days or less remaining until maturity are valued at amortized cost if their original maturity was 60 days or less; or by amortizing their fair value as of the 61st day prior to maturity if their original term to maturity exceeded 60 days; fixed-income securities, including mortgage backed and asset backed securities, may be valued on the basis of prices provided by a pricing service or at a price obtained from one or more of the major broker/dealers. In cases where broker/dealer quotes are obtained, the Adviser may establish procedures whereby changes in market yields or spreads are used to adjust, on a daily basis, a recently obtained quoted price on a security. Swaps and other derivatives are valued daily, primarily using independent pricing services, independent pricing models using market inputs, as well as third party broker-dealers or counterparties.
Securities for which market quotations are not readily available (including restricted securities) or are deemed unreliable are valued at fair value. Factors considered in making this determination may include, but are not limited to, information obtained by contacting the issuer, analysts, analysis of the issuer’s financial statements or other available documents. In addition, the Portfolio may use fair value pricing for securities primarily traded in non-U.S. markets because most foreign markets close well before the Portfolio values its securities at 4:00 p.m., Eastern Time. The earlier close of these foreign markets gives rise to the possibility that significant events, including broad market moves, may have occurred in the interim and may materially affect the value of those securities. To account for this, the Portfolio may frequently value many of its foreign equity securities using fair value prices based on third party vendor modeling tools to the extent available.
2. Fair Value Measurements
In accordance with U.S. GAAP regarding fair value measurements, fair value is defined as the price that the Portfolio would receive to sell an asset or pay to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement
9
| | |
GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
date. The U.S. GAAP disclosure requirements establish a framework for measuring fair value, and a three-level hierarchy for fair value measurements based upon the transparency of inputs to the valuation of an asset or liability. Inputs may be observable or unobservable and refer broadly to the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability. Observable inputs reflect the assumptions market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability based on market data obtained from sources independent of the Portfolio. Unobservable inputs reflect the Portfolio’s own assumptions about the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability based on the best information available in the circumstances. Each investment is assigned a level based upon the observability of the inputs which are significant to the overall valuation. The three-tier hierarchy of inputs is summarized below.
| • | | Level 1—quoted prices in active markets for identical investments |
| • | | Level 2—other significant observable inputs (including quoted prices for similar investments, interest rates, prepayment speeds, credit risk, etc.) |
| • | | Level 3—significant unobservable inputs (including the Portfolio’s own assumptions in determining the fair value of investments) |
The following table summarizes the valuation of the Portfolio’s investments by the above fair value hierarchy levels as of June 30, 2012:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Level 1 | | | Level 2 | | | Level 3 | | | Total | |
Investments in Securities: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Assets: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Common Stocks: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Information Technology | | $ | 24,695,345 | | | $ | –0 | – | | $ | –0 | – | | $ | 24,695,345 | |
Health Care | | | 11,448,424 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 11,448,424 | |
Consumer Discretionary | | | 10,507,508 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 10,507,508 | |
Industrials | | | 8,703,261 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 8,703,261 | |
Energy | | | 7,545,613 | | | | 640,407 | | | | –0 | – | | | 8,186,020 | |
Consumer Staples | | | 7,207,270 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 7,207,270 | |
Financials | | | 3,225,235 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 3,225,235 | |
Short-Term Investments | | | –0 | – | | | 3,288,704 | | | | –0 | – | | | 3,288,704 | |
Investments of Cash Collateral for Security Loaned in Affiliated Money Market Fund | | | 1,551,716 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 1,551,716 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Investments in Securities | | | 74,884,372 | | | | 3,929,111 | | | | –0 | – | | | 78,813,483 | |
Other Financial Instruments* | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total | | $ | 74,884,372 | | | $ | 3,929,111 | | | $ | –0 | – | | $ | 78,813,483 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
* | | Other financial instruments are derivative instruments, such as futures, forwards and swap contracts, which are valued at the unrealized appreciation/depreciation on the instrument. |
3. Currency Translation
Assets and liabilities denominated in foreign currencies and commitments under forward currency exchange contracts are translated into U.S. dollars at the mean of the quoted bid and ask prices of such currencies against the U.S. dollar. Purchases and sales of portfolio securities are translated into U.S. dollars at the rates of exchange prevailing when such securities were acquired or sold. Income and expenses are translated into U.S. dollars at rates of exchange prevailing when accrued.
Net realized gain or loss on foreign currency transactions represents foreign exchange gains and losses from sales and maturities of foreign fixed income investments, foreign currency exchange contracts, holding of foreign currencies, currency gains or losses realized between the trade and settlement dates on foreign investment transactions, and the difference between the amounts of dividends, interest and foreign withholding taxes recorded on the Portfolio’s books and the U.S. dollar equivalent amounts actually received or paid. Net unrealized currency gains and losses from valuing foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities at period end exchange rates are reflected as a component of net unrealized appreciation or depreciation of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities.
4. Taxes
It is the Portfolio’s policy to meet the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code applicable to regulated investment companies and to distribute all of its investment company taxable income and net realized gains, if any, to shareholders. Therefore,
10
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
no provisions for federal income or excise taxes are required. The Portfolio may be subject to taxes imposed by countries in which it invests. Such taxes are generally based on income and/or capital gains earned or repatriated. Taxes are accrued and applied to net investment income, net realized gains and net unrealized appreciation/depreciation as such income and/or gains are earned.
In accordance with U.S. GAAP requirements regarding accounting for uncertainties in income taxes, management has analyzed the Portfolio’s tax positions taken or expected to be taken on federal and state income tax returns for all open tax years (the current and the prior three tax years) and has concluded that no provision for income tax is required in the Portfolio’s financial statements.
5. Investment Income and Investment Transactions
Dividend income is recorded on the ex-dividend date or as soon as the Portfolio is informed of the dividend. Interest income is accrued daily. Investment transactions are accounted for on the date the securities are purchased or sold. Investment gains or losses are determined on the identified cost basis. The Portfolio amortizes premiums and accretes discounts as adjustments to interest income.
6. Class Allocations
All income earned and expenses incurred by the Portfolio are borne on a pro-rata basis by each outstanding class of shares, based on the proportionate interest in the Portfolio represented by the net assets of such class, except for class specific expenses which are allocated to the respective class. Expenses of the Fund are charged to each Portfolio in proportion to net assets. Realized and unrealized gains and losses are allocated among the various share classes based on respective net assets.
7. Dividends and Distributions
Dividends and distributions to shareholders, if any, are recorded on the ex-dividend date. Income dividends and capital gains distributions are determined in accordance with federal tax regulations and may differ from those determined in accordance with U.S. GAAP. To the extent these differences are permanent, such amounts are reclassified within the capital accounts based on their federal tax basis treatment; temporary differences do not require such reclassification.
NOTE B: Advisory Fee and Other Transactions with Affiliates
Under the terms of the investment advisory agreement, the Portfolio pays the Adviser an advisory fee at an annual rate of .75% of the first $2.5 billion, .65% of the next $2.5 billion and .60% in excess of $5 billion, of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets. The fee is accrued daily and paid monthly.
Pursuant to the investment advisory agreement, the Portfolio may reimburse the Adviser for certain legal and accounting services provided to the Portfolio by the Adviser. For the six months ended June 30, 2012, such fee amounted to $28,729.
Brokerage commissions paid on investment transactions for the six months ended June 30, 2012 amounted to $44,745, of which $145 and $90, respectively, was paid to Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. LLC and Sanford C. Bernstein Limited, affiliates of the Adviser.
The Portfolio compensates AllianceBernstein Investor Services, Inc. (“ABIS”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Adviser, under a Transfer Agency Agreement for providing personnel and facilities to perform transfer agency services for the Portfolio. Such compensation retained by ABIS amounted to $692 for the six months ended June 30, 2012.
NOTE C: Distribution Plan
The Portfolio has adopted a Distribution Plan (the “Plan”) for Class B shares pursuant to Rule 12b-1 under the Investment Company Act of 1940. Under the Plan, the Portfolio pays distribution and servicing fees to AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (the “Distributor”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Adviser, at an annual rate of up to .50% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The fees are accrued daily and paid monthly. The Board of Directors currently limits payments under the Plan to .25% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The Plan provides that the Distributor will use such payments in their entirety for distribution assistance and promotional activities.
The Portfolio is not obligated under the Plan to pay any distribution and servicing fees in excess of the amounts set forth above. The purpose of the payments to the Distributor under the Plan is to compensate the Distributor for its distribution services with respect to the sale of the Portfolio’s Class B shares. Since the Distributor’s compensation is not directly tied to its expenses, the amount of compensation received by it under the Plan during any year may be more or less than its actual expenses. For this reason, the Plan is characterized by the staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission as being of the “compensation” variety.
11
| | |
GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
In the event that the Plan is terminated or not continued, no distribution or servicing fees (other than current amounts accrued but not yet paid) would be owed by the Portfolio to the Distributor.
The Plan also provides that the Adviser may use its own resources to finance the distribution of the Portfolio’s shares.
NOTE D: Investment Transactions
Purchases and sales of investment securities (excluding short-term investments) for the six months ended June 30, 2012 were as follows:
| | | | | | | | |
| | Purchases | | | Sales | |
Investment securities (excluding U.S. government securities) | | $ | 36,357,032 | | | $ | 50,637,567 | |
U.S. government securities | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
The cost of investments for federal income tax purposes was substantially the same as the cost for financial reporting purposes. Accordingly, gross unrealized appreciation and unrealized depreciation are as follows:
| | | | |
Gross unrealized appreciation | | $ | 12,716,121 | |
Gross unrealized depreciation | | | (2,302,855 | ) |
| | | | |
Net unrealized appreciation | | $ | 10,413,266 | |
| | | | |
1. Derivative Financial Instruments
The Portfolio may use derivatives in an effort to earn income and enhance returns, to replace more traditional direct investments, to obtain exposure to otherwise inaccessible markets (collectively, “investment purposes”), or to hedge or adjust the risk profile of its portfolio.
The Portfolio did not engage in derivatives transactions for the six months ended June 30, 2012.
2. Currency Transactions
The Portfolio may invest in non-U.S. Dollar securities on a currency hedged or unhedged basis. The Portfolio may seek investment opportunities by taking long or short positions in currencies through the use of currency-related derivatives, including forward currency exchange contracts, futures and options on futures, swaps, and other options. The Portfolio may enter into transactions for investment opportunities when it anticipates that a foreign currency will appreciate or depreciate in value but securities denominated in that currency are not held by the Portfolio and do not present attractive investment opportunities. Such transactions may also be used when the Adviser believes that it may be more efficient than a direct investment in a foreign currency-denominated security. The Portfolio may also conduct currency exchange contracts on a spot basis (i.e., for cash at the spot rate prevailing in the currency exchange market for buying or selling currencies).
NOTE E: Securities Lending
The Portfolio may enter into securities lending transactions. Under the Portfolio’s securities lending program, all securities loans will be collateralized continually by cash. The Portfolio will be compensated for the loan from a portion of the net return from the income earned on cash collateral after a rebate is paid to the borrower (in some cases, this rebate may be a “negative rebate” or fee paid by the borrower to the Portfolio in connection with the loan), and payments for fees of the securities lending agent and for certain other administrative expenses. It is the policy of the Portfolio to receive collateral consisting of cash in an amount exceeding the value of the securities loaned. The Portfolio will have the right to call a loan and obtain the securities loaned at any time on notice to the borrower within the normal and customary settlement time for the securities. While the securities are on loan, the borrower is obligated to pay the Portfolio amounts equal to any income or other distributions from the securities. The Portfolio will not have the right to vote any securities during the existence of a loan, but will have the right to regain ownership of loaned securities in order to exercise voting or other ownership rights. The lending agent has agreed to indemnify the Portfolio in the case of default of any securities borrower. Collateral received and securities loaned are marked to market daily to ensure that the securities loaned are secured by collateral. The lending agent will invest the cash collateral received in AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves, an eligible money market vehicle, in accordance with the investment restrictions of the Portfolio, and as approved by the Fund’s Board of Directors. The collateral received on securities loaned is recorded as an asset as well as a corresponding liability in the statement of assets and liabilities. When the Portfolio lends securities, its investment performance will continue to reflect changes in the value of the securities loaned. At June 30, 2012, the Portfolio had securities on loan with a value of $1,538,363 and had received cash collateral which has been invested into AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves of $1,551,716. The cash collateral will be
12
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
adjusted on the next business day after period end to maintain the required collateral amount. The Portfolio earned securities lending income of $10,668 and $948 from the borrowers and AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves, respectively, for the six months ended June 30, 2012; these amounts are reflected in the statement of operations. A principal risk of lending portfolio securities is that the borrower will fail to return the loaned securities upon termination of the loan and that the collateral will not be sufficient to replace the loaned securities. A summary of the Portfolio’s transactions in shares of AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves for the six months ended June 30, 2012 is as follows:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Market Value December 31, 2011 (000) | | Purchases at Cost (000) | | | Sales Proceeds (000) | | | Market Value June 30, 2012 (000) | | | Dividend Income (000) | |
$257 | | $ | 7,750 | | | $ | 6,455 | | | $ | 1,552 | | | $ | 1 | |
NOTE F: Capital Stock
Each class consists of 500,000,000 authorized shares. Transactions in capital shares for each class were as follows:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | SHARES | | | | | AMOUNT | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | | | | | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | |
Class A | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Shares sold | | | 4,249 | | | | 24,930 | | | | | $ | 95,629 | | | $ | 521,620 | |
Shares redeemed | | | (295,871 | ) | | | (359,545 | ) | | | | | (6,554,503 | ) | | | (7,440,420 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (291,622 | ) | | | (334,615 | ) | | | | $ | (6,458,874 | ) | | $ | (6,918,800 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class B | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Shares sold | | | 29,640 | | | | 79,531 | | | | | $ | 646,269 | | | $ | 1,614,288 | |
Shares redeemed | | | (308,608 | ) | | | (625,551 | ) | | | | | (6,698,447 | ) | | | (12,581,810 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (278,968 | ) | | | (546,020 | ) | | | | $ | (6,052,178 | ) | | $ | (10,967,522 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
NOTE G: Risks Involved in Investing in the Portfolio
Foreign Securities Risk—Investing in securities of foreign companies or foreign governments involves special risks which include changes in foreign currency exchange rates and the possibility of future political and economic developments which could adversely affect the value of such securities. Moreover, securities of many foreign companies or foreign governments and their markets may be less liquid and their prices more volatile than those of comparable U.S. companies or of the U.S. government.
Currency Risk—This is the risk that changes in foreign currency exchange rates may negatively affect the value of the Portfolio’s investments or reduce the returns of the Portfolio. For example, the value of the Portfolio’s investments in foreign currency-denominated securities or currencies may decrease if the U.S. Dollar is strong (i.e., gaining value relative to other currencies) and other currencies are weak (i.e., losing value relative to the U.S. Dollar). Currency markets are generally not as regulated as securities markets. Independent of the Portfolio’s investments denominated in foreign currencies, the Portfolio’s positions in various foreign currencies may cause the Portfolio to experience investment losses due to the changes in exchange rates and interest rates.
Derivatives Risk—The Portfolio may enter into derivative transactions such as forwards, options, futures and swaps. Derivatives may be illiquid, difficult to price, and leveraged so that small changes may produce disproportionate losses for the Portfolio, and subject to counterparty risk to a greater degree than more traditional investments. Derivatives may result in significant losses, including losses that are far greater than the value of the derivatives reflected in the statement of assets and liabilities.
Indemnification Risk—In the ordinary course of business, the Portfolio enters into contracts that contain a variety of indemnifications. The Portfolio’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown. However, the Portfolio has not had prior claims or losses pursuant to these indemnification provisions and expects the risk of loss thereunder to be remote. Therefore, the Portfolio has not accrued any liability in connection with these indemnification provisions.
NOTE H: Joint Credit Facility
A number of open-end mutual funds managed by the Adviser, including the Portfolio, participate in a $140 million revolving credit facility (the “Facility”) intended to provide short-term financing, if necessary, subject to certain restrictions in
13
| | |
GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
connection with abnormal redemption activity. Commitment fees related to the Facility are paid by the participating funds and are included in miscellaneous expenses in the statement of operations. The Portfolio did not utilize the Facility during the six months ended June 30, 2012.
NOTE I: Distributions to Shareholders
The tax character of distributions to be paid for the year ending December 31, 2012 will be determined at the end of the current fiscal year. The tax character of distributions paid during the fiscal years ended December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010 were as follows:
| | | | | | | | |
| | 2011 | | | 2010 | |
Distributions paid from: | | | | | | | | |
Ordinary income | | $ | –0 | – | | $ | 131,899 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total taxable distributions | | | –0 | – | | | 131,899 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total distributions paid | | $ | –0 | – | | $ | 131,899 | |
| | | | | | | | |
As of December 31, 2011, the components of accumulated earnings/(deficit) on a tax basis were as follows:
| | | | |
Undistributed ordinary income | | $ | 27,352 | |
Accumulated capital and other losses | | | (17,074,682 | )(a) |
Unrealized appreciation/(depreciation) | | | 8,705,365 | (b) |
| | | | |
Total accumulated earnings/(deficit) | | $ | (8,341,965 | ) |
| | | | |
(a) | | On December 31, 2011, the Portfolio had a net capital loss carryforward of $17,074,682. During the fiscal year, the Portfolio utilized $12,686,957 of capital loss carryforwards to offset current year net realized gains. The Portfolio also had $2,228,515 of capital loss carryforwards expire during the fiscal year. |
(b) | | The difference between book-basis and tax-basis unrealized appreciation/(depreciation) is attributable primarily to the tax deferral of losses on wash sales. |
For tax purposes, net capital losses may be carried over to offset future capital gains, if any. Under the Regulated Investment Company Modernization Act of 2010, funds are permitted to carry forward capital losses incurred in taxable years beginning after December 22, 2010 for an indefinite period. These post-enactment capital losses must be utilized prior to the pre-enactment capital losses, which are subject to expiration. Post-enactment capital loss carryforwards will retain their character as either short-term or long-term capital losses rather than being considered short-term as under previous regulation.
As of December 31, 2011, the Portfolio had a net capital loss carryforward of $17,074,682 which will expire as follows:
| | | | |
SHORT-TERM AMOUNT | | LONG-TERM AMOUNT | | EXPIRATION |
$ 4,526,627 | | n/a | | 2016 |
12,548,055 | | n/a | | 2017 |
NOTE J: Recent Accounting Pronouncement
In December 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued an Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) related to disclosures about offsetting assets and liabilities in financial statements. The amendments in this update require an entity to disclose both gross and net information for derivatives and other financial instruments that are either offset in the statement of assets and liabilities or subject to an enforceable master netting arrangement or similar agreement. The ASU is effective during interim or annual reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2013. At this time, management is evaluating the implication of this ASU and its impact on the financial statements has not been determined.
NOTE K: Subsequent Events
Management has evaluated subsequent events for possible recognition or disclosure in the financial statements through the date the financial statements are issued. Management has determined that there are no material events that would require disclosure in the Portfolio’s financial statements through this date.
14
| | |
| | |
GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Selected Data For A Share Of Capital Stock Outstanding Throughout Each Period
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | CLASS A | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, | |
| | | 2011 | | | 2010 | | | 2009 | | | 2008 | | | 2007 | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | | | $20.40 | | | | $20.15 | | | | $17.56 | | | | $13.19 | | | | $22.91 | | | | $20.27 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Income From Investment Operations | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income (loss) (a) | | | .02 | | | | .03 | | | | .03 | | | | .04 | | | | (.04 | ) | | | (.05 | ) |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | 1.73 | | | | .22 | | | | 2.61 | | | | 4.33 | | | | (9.68 | ) | | | 2.69 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) in net asset value from operations | | | 1.75 | | | | .25 | | | | 2.64 | | | | 4.37 | | | | (9.72 | ) | | | 2.64 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Less: Dividends | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Dividends from net investment income | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | (.05 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net asset value, end of period | | | $22.15 | | | | $20.40 | | | | $20.15 | | | | $17.56 | | | | $13.19 | | | | $22.91 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Return | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total investment return based on net asset value (b) | | | 8.58 | %* | | | 1.24 | %* | | | 15.06 | %* | | | 33.13 | %* | | | (42.43 | )%* | | | 13.02 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Ratios/Supplemental Data | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net assets, end of period (000’s omitted) | | | $27,014 | | | | $30,833 | | | | $37,198 | | | | $37,948 | | | | $33,992 | | | | $75,834 | |
Ratio to average net assets of: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Expenses | | | 1.07 | %(c) | | | 1.00 | % | | | 1.00 | %(d) | | | 1.06 | % | | | .94 | % | | | .90 | % |
Net investment income (loss) | | | .16 | %(c) | | | .17 | % | | | .15 | %(d) | | | .28 | % | | | (.22 | )% | | | (.23 | )% |
Portfolio turnover rate | | | 45 | % | | | 97 | % | | | 121 | % | | | 197 | % | | | 103 | % | | | 60 | % |
See footnote summary on page 16.
15
| | |
GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Selected Data For A Share Of Capital Stock Outstanding Throughout Each Period
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | CLASS B | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, | |
| | | 2011 | | | 2010 | | | 2009 | | | 2008 | | | 2007 | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | | | $19.81 | | | | $19.62 | | | | $17.10 | | | | $12.88 | | | | $22.42 | | | | $19.90 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Income From Investment Operations | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income (loss) (a) | | | (.01 | ) | | | (.02 | ) | | | (.02 | ) | | | .01 | | | | (.08 | ) | | | (.10 | ) |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | 1.68 | | | | .21 | | | | 2.55 | | | | 4.21 | | | | (9.46 | ) | | | 2.62 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) in net asset value from operations | | | 1.67 | | | | .19 | | | | 2.53 | | | | 4.22 | | | | (9.54 | ) | | | 2.52 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Less: Dividends | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Dividends from net investment income | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | (.01 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net asset value, end of period | | | $21.48 | | | | $19.81 | | | | $19.62 | | | | $17.10 | | | | $12.88 | | | | $22.42 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Return | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total investment return based on net asset value (b) | | | 8.43 | %* | | | .97 | %* | | | 14.80 | %* | | | 32.76 | %* | | | (42.55 | )%* | | | 12.66 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Ratios/Supplemental Data | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net assets, end of period (000’s omitted) | | | $49,429 | | | | $51,114 | | | | $61,325 | | | | $63,368 | | | | $53,248 | | | | $121,521 | |
Ratio to average net assets of: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Expenses | | | 1.32 | %(c) | | | 1.25 | % | | | 1.25 | %(d) | | | 1.31 | % | | | 1.19 | % | | | 1.15 | % |
Net investment income (loss) | | | (.09 | )%(c) | | | (.08 | )% | | | (.10 | )%(d) | | | .04 | % | | | (.47 | )% | | | (.49 | )% |
Portfolio turnover rate | | | 45 | % | | | 97 | % | | | 121 | % | | | 197 | % | | | 103 | % | | | 60 | % |
(a) | | Based on average shares outstanding. |
(b) | | Total investment return is calculated assuming an initial investment made at the net asset value at the beginning of the period, reinvestment of all dividends and distributions at net asset value during the period, and redemption on the last day of the period. Total return does not reflect (i) insurance company’s separate account related expense charges and (ii) the deductions of taxes that a shareholder would pay on Portfolio distributions or the redemption of Portfolio shares. Total investment return calculated for a period of less than one year is not annualized. |
(d) | | The ratio includes expenses attributable to costs of proxy solicitation. |
* | | Includes the impact of proceeds received and credited to the Portfolio resulting from class action settlements, which enhanced the Portfolio’s performance for the six months ended June 30, 2012 and years ended December 31, 2011, December 31, 2010, December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008 by 0.17%, 0.07%, 0.22%, 0.41% and 0.03%, respectively. |
16
| | |
| | |
GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
CONTINUANCE DISCLOSURE | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
INFORMATION REGARDING THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE PORTFOLIO’S ADVISORY AGREEMENT
The disinterested directors (the “directors”) of AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund, Inc. (the “Fund”) unanimously approved the continuance of the Fund’s Advisory Agreement with the Adviser in respect of AllianceBernstein Growth Portfolio (the “Portfolio”) at a meeting held on May 1-3, 2012.
Prior to approval of the continuance of the Advisory Agreement, the directors had requested from the Adviser, and received and evaluated, extensive materials. They reviewed the proposed continuance of the Advisory Agreement with the Adviser and with experienced counsel who are independent of the Adviser, who advised on the relevant legal standards. The directors also reviewed an independent evaluation prepared by the Fund’s Senior Officer (who is also the Fund’s Independent Compliance Officer) of the reasonableness of the advisory fee in the Advisory Agreement, in which the Senior Officer concluded that the contractual fee for the Portfolio was reasonable. The directors also discussed the proposed continuance in private sessions with counsel and the Fund’s Senior Officer.
The directors considered their knowledge of the nature and quality of the services provided by the Adviser to the Portfolio gained from their experience as directors or trustees of most of the registered investment companies advised by the Adviser, their overall confidence in the Adviser’s integrity and competence they have gained from that experience, the Adviser’s initiative in identifying and raising potential issues with the directors and its responsiveness, frankness and attention to concerns raised by the directors in the past, including the Adviser’s willingness to consider and implement organizational and operational changes designed to improve investment results and the services provided to the AllianceBernstein Funds. The directors noted that they have four regular meetings each year, at each of which they receive presentations from the Adviser on the investment results of the Portfolio and review extensive materials and information presented by the Adviser.
The directors also considered all other factors they believed relevant, including the specific matters discussed below. In their deliberations, the directors did not identify any particular information that was all-important or controlling, and different directors may have attributed different weights to the various factors. The directors determined that the selection of the Adviser to manage the Portfolio and the overall arrangements between the Portfolio and the Adviser, as provided in the Advisory Agreement, including the advisory fee, were fair and reasonable in light of the services performed, expenses incurred and such other matters as the directors considered relevant in the exercise of their business judgment. The material factors and conclusions that formed the basis for the directors’ determinations included the following:
Nature, Extent and Quality of Services Provided
The directors considered the scope and quality of services provided by the Adviser under the Advisory Agreement, including the quality of the investment research capabilities of the Adviser and the other resources it has dedicated to performing services for the Portfolio. They also noted the professional experience and qualifications of the Portfolio’s portfolio management team and other senior personnel of the Adviser. The directors also considered that the Advisory Agreement provides that the Portfolio will reimburse the Adviser for the cost to it of providing certain clerical, accounting, administrative and other services provided at the Portfolio’s request by employees of the Adviser or its affiliates. Requests for these reimbursements are approved by the directors on a quarterly basis and, to the extent requested and paid, result in a higher rate of total compensation from the Portfolio to the Adviser than the fee rate stated in the Portfolio’s Advisory Agreement. The directors noted that the methodology used to determine the reimbursement amounts had been reviewed by an independent consultant retained by the Fund’s Senior Officer. The quality of administrative and other services, including the Adviser’s role in coordinating the activities of the Portfolio’s other service providers, also were considered. The directors concluded that, overall, they were satisfied with the nature, extent and quality of services provided to the Portfolio under the Advisory Agreement.
Costs of Services Provided and Profitability
The directors reviewed a schedule of the revenues, expenses and related notes indicating the profitability of the Portfolio to the Adviser for calendar years 2010 and 2011 that had been prepared with an expense allocation methodology arrived at in consultation with an independent consultant retained by the Fund’s Senior Officer. The directors reviewed the assumptions and methods of allocation used by the Adviser in preparing fund-specific profitability data and noted that there are a number of potentially acceptable allocation methodologies for information of this type. The directors noted that the profitability information reflected all revenues and expenses of the Adviser’s relationship with the Portfolio, including those relating to its subsidiaries which provide transfer agency, distribution and brokerage services to the Portfolio. The directors recognized that it is difficult to make comparisons of profitability of the Advisory Agreement with fund advisory contracts for unaffiliated funds because comparative information is not generally publicly available and is affected by numerous factors. The directors focused on the profitability of the Adviser’s relationship with the Portfolio before taxes and distribution expenses. The directors concluded that they were satisfied that the Adviser’s level of profitability from its relationship with the Portfolio was not unreasonable.
17
| | |
GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
CONTINUANCE DISCLOSURE | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Fall-Out Benefits
The directors considered the other benefits to the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationships with the Portfolio, including but not limited to benefits relating to soft dollar arrangements (whereby the Adviser receives brokerage and research services from brokers that execute transactions for certain clients, including the Portfolio); 12b-1 fees and sales charges received by the Fund’s principal underwriter (which is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Adviser) in respect of the Portfolio’s Class B shares; transfer agency fees paid by the Portfolio to a wholly owned subsidiary of the Adviser; and brokerage commissions paid by the Portfolio to brokers affiliated with the Adviser. The directors recognized that the Adviser’s profitability would be somewhat lower without these benefits. The directors also understood that the Adviser also might derive reputational and other benefits from its association with the Portfolio.
Investment Results
In addition to the information reviewed by the directors in connection with the meeting, the directors receive detailed performance information for the Portfolio at each regular Board meeting during the year. The directors noted that the Portfolio is a clone of another fund managed by the Adviser (the “Corresponding Fund”) and is managed to track the investment performance of its Corresponding Fund, although investment results may differ between the Portfolio and its Corresponding Fund due to differences in their expense ratios and other factors. At the May 2012 meeting, the directors reviewed information prepared by Lipper showing the performance of the Class A Shares of the Portfolio as compared with that of a group of similar funds selected by Lipper (the “Performance Group”) and as compared with that of a broader array of funds selected by Lipper (the “Performance Universe”), and information prepared by the Adviser showing performance of the Class A Shares as compared with the Russell 1000 Growth Index (the “Index”) (the Fund’s benchmark since May 1, 2009), in each case for the 1-, 3-, 5- and 10-year periods ended February 29, 2012 and (in the case of comparisons with the Index) the since inception period (September 1994 inception). The directors noted that the Portfolio was in the 3rd quintile of the Performance Group and the Performance Universe for the 1-year period, in the 4th quintile of the Performance Group and 3rd quintile of the Performance Universe for the 3- and 10-year periods, and in the 4th quintile of the Performance Group and 5th quintile of the Performance Universe for the 5-year period. The Portfolio outperformed the Index in the 10-year and the since inception periods and underperformed the Index in all other periods. The directors also reviewed performance information for periods ended March 31, 2012 (for which the data was not limited to Class A Shares), and noted that in the 3-month period the Portfolio had underperformed the Lipper VA Large Cap Growth Funds Average and outperformed the Index. The directors also noted that at their February 2009 meetings they had approved a broadening of the number of stocks in the Portfolio’s portfolio and a new benchmark, the Russell 1000 Growth Index. As a result, the directors gave less weight to the Portfolio’s performance prior to 2009. Based on their review, the directors concluded that the Portfolio’s performance was acceptable.
Advisory Fees and Other Expenses
The directors considered the advisory fee rate paid by the Portfolio to the Adviser and information prepared by Lipper concerning advisory fee rates paid by other funds in the same Lipper category as the Portfolio at a common asset level. The directors recognized that it is difficult to make comparisons of advisory fees because there are variations in the services that are included in the fees paid by other funds.
The directors also considered the fees the Adviser charges non-fund clients pursuing a substantially similar investment style. For this purpose, they reviewed the relevant fee information from the Adviser’s Form ADV and the evaluation from the Fund’s Senior Officer. The directors noted that the institutional fee schedule started at a higher fee rate than the Portfolio’s starting fee rate, but had more breakpoints starting at lower asset levels. As a result, the application of the institutional fee schedule to the level of assets of the Portfolio would result in a lower fee rate than that being paid by the Portfolio. The directors noted that the Adviser may, in some cases, agree to fee rates with large institutional clients that are lower than those reviewed by the directors and that they had previously discussed with the Adviser its policies in respect of such arrangements. The directors noted that the advisory fee schedule for the Portfolio is the same as that for its Corresponding Fund.
The Adviser reviewed with the directors the significantly greater scope of the services it provides to the Portfolio relative to institutional clients. The Adviser also noted that because mutual funds are constantly issuing and redeeming shares, they are more difficult to manage than an institutional account, where the assets tend to be relatively stable. In light of the substantial differences in services rendered by the Adviser to institutional clients as compared to funds such as the Portfolio, the directors considered these fee comparisons inapt and did not place significant weight on them in their deliberations.
18
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
The directors also considered the total expense ratio of the Class A shares of the Portfolio in comparison to the fees and expenses of funds within two comparison groups created by Lipper: an Expense Group and an Expense Universe. Lipper described an Expense Group as a representative sample of funds similar to the Portfolio and an Expense Universe as a broader group, consisting of all funds in the investment classification/objective with a similar load type as the Portfolio. The Class A expense ratio of the Portfolio was based on the Portfolio’s latest fiscal year. The directors noted that it was likely that the expense ratios of some of the other funds in the Portfolio’s Lipper category were lowered by waivers or reimbursements by those funds’ investment advisers, which in some cases might be voluntary or temporary. The directors view the expense ratio information as relevant to their evaluation of the Adviser’s services because the Adviser is responsible for coordinating services provided to the Portfolio by others.
The directors noted that, at the Portfolio’s current size, its contractual effective advisory fee rate of 75 basis points was the same as the Expense Group median. The directors noted that the administrative expense reimbursement was 7 basis points in the Portfolio’s latest fiscal year, and that as a result the rate of total compensation received by the Adviser from the Portfolio pursuant to the Advisory Agreement was higher than the Expense Group median. The directors concluded that the Portfolio’s total expense ratio was acceptable, although they noted that it was higher than the Expense Group and the Expense Universe medians, and they asked the Adviser to consider measures to reduce it.
Economies of Scale
The directors noted that the advisory fee schedule for the Portfolio contains breakpoints that reduce the fee rates on assets above specified levels. The directors took into consideration prior presentations by an independent consultant on economies of scale in the mutual fund industry and for the AllianceBernstein Funds, and by the Adviser concerning certain of its views on economies of scale. The directors also had requested and received from the Adviser certain updates on economies of scale at the May 2012 meetings. The directors believe that economies of scale may be realized (if at all) by the Adviser across a variety of products and services, and not only in respect of a single fund. The directors noted that there is no established methodology for establishing breakpoints that give effect to the fund-specific services provided by a fund’s adviser and to the economies of scale that an adviser may realize in its overall mutual fund business or those components of it which directly or indirectly affect a fund’s operations. The directors observed that in the mutual fund industry as a whole, as well as among funds similar to the Portfolio, there is no uniformity or pattern in the fees and asset levels at which breakpoints (if any) apply. The directors also noted that the advisory agreements for many funds do not have breakpoints at all. Having taken these factors into account, the directors concluded that the Portfolio’s shareholders would benefit from a sharing of economies of scale in the event the Portfolio’s net assets exceed a breakpoint in the future.
19
| | |
| | |
GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
THE FOLLOWING IS NOT PART OF THE SHAREHOLDER REPORT OR THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
SUMMARY OF SENIOR OFFICER’S EVALUATION OF INVESTMENT ADVISORY AGREEMENT1
The following is a summary of the evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement between AllianceBernstein L.P. (the “Adviser”) and the AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund (the “Fund”), in respect of AllianceBernstein Growth Portfolio (the “Portfolio”)2. The evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement was prepared by Philip L. Kirstein, the Senior Officer of the Fund, for the Directors of the Fund, as required by a September 2004 agreement between the Adviser and the New York State Attorney General (the “NYAG”). The Senior Officer’s evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement is not meant to diminish the responsibility or authority of the Board of Directors of the Fund to perform its duties pursuant to Section 15 of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “40 Act”) and applicable state law. The purpose of the summary is to provide shareholders with a synopsis of the independent evaluation of the reasonableness of the advisory fees proposed to be paid by the Portfolio which was provided to the Directors in connection with their review of the proposed approval of the continuance of the Investment Advisory Agreement. The Senior Officer’s evaluation considered the following factors:
| 1. | Advisory fees charged to institutional and other clients of the Adviser for like services; |
| 2. | Advisory fees charged by other mutual fund companies for like services; |
| 3. | Costs to the Adviser and its affiliates of supplying services pursuant to the advisory agreement, excluding any intra-corporate profit; |
| 4. | Profit margins of the Adviser and its affiliates from supplying such services; |
| 5. | Possible economies of scale as the Portfolio grows larger; and |
| 6. | Nature and quality of the Adviser’s services including the performance of the Portfolio. |
These factors, with the exception of the first factor, are generally referred to as the “Gartenberg factors,” which were articulated by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in 1982. Gartenberg v. Merrill Lynch Asset Management, Inc., 694 F. 2d 923 (2d Cir. 1982). The first factor is an additional factor required to be considered by the AoD. On March 30, 2010, the Supreme Court held the Gartenberg decision was correct in its basic formulation of what §36(b) requires: to face liability under §36(b), “an investment adviser must charge a fee that is so disproportionately large that it bears no reasonable relationship to the services rendered and could not have been the product of arm’s length bargaining.” Jones v. Harris Associates L.P., 130 S. Ct. 1418 (2010). In the Jones decision, the Court stated the Gartenberg approach fully incorporates the correct understanding of fiduciary duty within the context of section 36(b) and noted with approval that “Gartenberg insists that all relevant circumstances be taken into account” and “uses the range of fees that might result from arm’s-length bargaining as the benchmark for reviewing challenged fees.”3
PORTFOLIO ADVISORY FEES, NET ASSETS & EXPENSE RATIOS
The Adviser proposed that the Portfolio pay the advisory fee set forth in the table below for receiving the services to be provided pursuant to the Investment Advisory Agreement. The fee schedule below, implemented in January 2004 in consideration of the Adviser’s settlement with the NYAG in December 2003, is based on a master schedule that contemplates eight categories of funds with almost all funds in each category having the same advisory fee schedule.
| | | | | | | | |
Category | | Advisory Fee Based on % of Average Daily Net Assets | | Net Assets 3/31/12 ($MIL) | | | Portfolio |
Growth | | 75 bp on 1st $2.5 billion 65 bp on next $2.5 billion 60 bp on the balance | | $ | 86.0 | | | Growth Portfolio |
1 | | The information in the fee summary was completed on April 19, 2012 and discussed with the Board of Directors on May 1-3, 2012. |
2 | | Future references to the Fund and the Portfolio do not include “AllianceBernstein.” References in the fee summary pertaining to performance and expense ratio rankings refer to the Class A shares of the Portfolio. |
3 | | Jones v. Harris at 1427. |
20
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
The Adviser is reimbursed as specified in the Investment Advisory Agreement for certain clerical, legal, accounting, administrative and other services provided to the Portfolio. During the Portfolio’s most recently completed fiscal year, the Adviser received $60,677 (0.07% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets) for such services.
Set forth below are the Portfolio’s total expense ratios for the most recently completed fiscal year:
| | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Total Expense Ratio | | | Fiscal Year | |
Growth Portfolio | | | Class A 1.00 | % | | | December 31 | |
| | | Class B 1.25 | % | | | | |
I. ADVISORY FEES CHARGED TO INSTITUTIONAL AND OTHER CLIENTS
The advisory fees charged to investment companies which the Adviser manages and sponsors are normally higher than those charged to similar sized institutional accounts, including pension plans and sub-advised investment companies. The fee differential reflects, among other things, different services provided to such clients, and different liabilities assumed. Services provided by the Adviser to the Portfolio that are not provided to non-investment company clients and sub-advised investment companies include providing office space and personnel to serve as Fund Officers, who among other responsibilities make the certifications required under the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002, and coordinating with and monitoring the Portfolio’s third party service providers such as Fund counsel, auditors, custodians, transfer agents and pricing services. The accounting, administrative, legal and compliance requirements for the Portfolio are more costly than those for institutional assets due to the greater complexities and time required for investment companies, although as previously noted, the Adviser is reimbursed for providing such services. Also, retail mutual funds managed by the Adviser are widely held. Servicing the Portfolio’s investors is more time consuming and labor intensive compared to institutional clients since the Adviser needs to communicate with a more extensive network of financial intermediaries and shareholders. The Adviser also believes that it incurs substantial entrepreneurial risk when offering a new mutual fund, since establishing a new mutual fund requires a large upfront investment, and it may take a long time for the fund to achieve profitability since the fund must be priced to scale from inception in order to be competitive and assets are acquired one account at a time. In addition, managing the cash flow of an investment company may be more difficult than managing that of a stable pool of assets, such as an institutional account with little cash movement in either direction, particularly, if a fund is in net redemption and the Adviser is frequently forced to sell securities to raise cash for redemptions. However, managing a fund with positive cash flow may be easier at times than managing a stable pool of assets. In recent years, investment advisers have been sued by institutional clients and have suffered reputational damage both by the attendant publicity and outcomes other than complete victories. Accordingly, the legal and reputational risks associated with institutional accounts are greater than previously thought, although still not equal to those related to the mutual fund industry.
Notwithstanding the Adviser’s view that managing an investment company is not comparable to managing other institutional accounts because the services provided are different, the Supreme Court has indicated consideration should be given to the advisory fees charged to institutional accounts that have a substantially similar investment style as the Portfolio.4 In addition to the AllianceBernstein institutional fee schedule, set forth below is what would have been the effective advisory fee of the Portfolio had the AllianceBernstein institutional fee schedule been applicable to the Portfolio versus the Portfolio’s advisory fee based on March 31, 2012 net assets:5
4 | | The Supreme Court stated that “courts may give such comparisons the weight that they merit in light of the similarities and differences between the services that the clients in question require, but the courts must be wary of inapt comparisons.” Among the significant differences the Supreme Court noted that may exist between services provided to mutual funds and institutional accounts are “higher marketing costs.” Jones v. Harris at 1428. |
5 | | The Adviser has indicated that with respect to institutional accounts with assets greater than $300 million, it will negotiate a fee schedule. Discounts that are negotiated vary based upon each client relationship. |
21
| | |
GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Net Assets 3/31/12 ($MIL) | | AllianceBernstein Institutional Fee Schedule | | Effective AB Inst. Adv. Fee | | | Portfolio Advisory Fee | |
Growth Portfolio | | $86.0 | | U.S. Research Growth Schedule
80 bp on 1st $25m 50 bp on next $25m 40 bp on next $50m 30 bp on next $100m 25 bp on the balance Minimum account size $25m | | | 0.545 | % | | | 0.750 | % |
The Adviser also manages AllianceBernstein Growth Fund, Inc. (“Growth Fund, Inc.”), a retail mutual fund, which has a substantially similar investment style as the Portfolio. Set forth below is the fee schedule of Growth Fund, Inc. and what would have been the effective advisory fee of the Portfolio had the fee schedule of the retail mutual fund been applicable to the Portfolio:6
| | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | AllianceBernstein Mutual Fund | | Fee Schedule | | ABMF Effective Fee | | Portfolio Advisory Fee | |
Growth Portfolio | | Growth Fund, Inc. | | 0.75% on first $2.5 billion 0.65% on next $2.5 billion 0.60% on the balance | | 0.750% | | | 0.750 | % |
The AllianceBernstein Investment Trust Management mutual funds (“ITM”), which are offered to investors in Japan, have an “all-in” fee to compensate the Adviser for investment advisory as well as fund accounting and administrative related services. The fee schedule of the ITM mutual fund that has a somewhat similar investment style as the Portfolio is as follows:
| | | | |
Portfolio | | ITM Mutual Fund | | Fee (%) |
Growth Portfolio | | AllianceBernstein U.S. Growth Stock Fund A, B- Hedged/Unhedged | | 0.750 |
The Adviser represented that it does not sub-advise any registered investment company with a substantially similar investment style as the Portfolio.
II. MANAGEMENT FEES CHARGED BY OTHER MUTUAL FUND COMPANIES FOR LIKE SERVICES.
Lipper, Inc. (“Lipper”), an analytical service that is not affiliated with the Adviser, compared the fees charged to the Portfolio with fees charged to other investment companies for similar services offered by other investment advisers.7 Lipper’s analysis included the comparison of the Portfolio’s contractual management fee, estimated at the approximate current asset level of the Portfolio, to the median of the Portfolio’s Lipper Expense Group (“EG”) and the Portfolio’s contractual management fee ranking.8
Lipper describes an EG as a representative sample of comparable funds. Lipper’s standard methodology for screening funds to be included in an EG entails the consideration of several fund criteria, including fund type, investment classification/objective, load type and similar 12b-1/non-12b-1 service fees, asset (size) comparability, expense components and attributes. An EG will typically consist of seven to twenty funds.
6 | | The retail mutual fund was also affected by the settlement between the Adviser and the NYAG. As a result, the Portfolio has the same breakpoints in its advisory fee schedule as the retail mutual fund. |
7 | | The Supreme Court cautioned against accepting mutual fund fee comparisons without careful scrutiny since “these comparisons are problematic because these fees, like those challenged, may not be the product of the negotiations conducted at arm’s-length.” Jones v. Harris at 1429. |
8 | | The contractual management fee is calculated by Lipper using the Portfolio’s contractual management fee rate at a hypothetical asset level. The hypothetical asset level is based on the combined net assets of all classes of the Portfolio, rounded up to the next $25 million. Lipper’s total expense ratio information is based on the most recent annual report except as otherwise noted. A ranking of “1” would mean that the Portfolio had the lowest effective fee rate in the Lipper peer group. |
22
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Contractual Management Fee9 | | | Lipper Exp. Group Median (%) | | | Rank | |
Growth Portfolio | | | 0.750 | | | | 0.750 | | | | 4/14 | |
Lipper also analyzed the Portfolio’s most recently completed fiscal year total expense ratio in comparison to the Portfolio’s EG and Lipper Expense Universe (“EU”). The EU10 is a broader group compared to the EG, consisting of all funds that have the same investment classification/objective and load type as the subject Portfolio.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Expense Ratio (%)11 | | | Lipper Exp. Group Median (%) | | | Lipper Group Rank | | | Lipper Exp. Universe Median (%) | | | Lipper Universe Rank | |
Growth Portfolio | | | 1.001 | | | | 0.868 | | | | 13/14 | | | | 0.792 | | | | 76/80 | |
Based on this analysis, the Portfolio has a more favorable ranking on a management fee basis than it does on a total expense ratio basis.
III. COSTS TO THE ADVISER AND ITS AFFILIATES OF SUPPLYING SERVICES PURSUANT TO THE ADVISORY FEE ARRANGEMENT, EXCLUDING ANY INTRA-CORPORATE PROFIT.
The Adviser utilizes two profitability reporting systems, which operate independently but are aligned with each other, to estimate the Adviser’s profitability in connection with investment advisory services provided to the Portfolio. The Senior Officer has retained a consultant to provide independent advice regarding the alignment of the two profitability systems as well as the methodologies and allocations utilized by both profitability systems.
IV. PROFIT MARGINS OF THE ADVISER AND ITS AFFILIATES FOR SUPPLYING SUCH SERVICES.
The Portfolio’s profitability information, prepared by the Adviser for the Board of Directors, was reviewed by the Senior Officer and the consultant. The Adviser’s profitability from providing investment advisory services to the Portfolio decreased during calendar year 2011, relative to 2010.
In addition to the Adviser’s direct profits from managing the Portfolio, certain of the Adviser’s affiliates have business relationships with the Portfolio and may earn a profit from providing other services to the Portfolio. The courts have referred to this type of business opportunity as “fall-out benefits” to the Adviser and indicated that such benefits should be factored into the evaluation of the total relationship between the Portfolio and the Adviser. Neither case law nor common business practice precludes the Adviser’s affiliates from earning a reasonable profit on this type of relationship provided the affiliates’ charges and services are competitive. These affiliates provide transfer agent, distribution and brokerage related services to the Portfolio and receive transfer agent fees, Rule 12b-1 payments, and brokerage commissions. In addition, the Adviser benefits from soft dollar arrangements which offset expenses the Adviser would otherwise incur.
The Portfolio has adopted a distribution plan for Class B shares pursuant to Rule 12b-1 under the 40 Act. Under the distribution plan, the Portfolio pays distribution and servicing fees to its principal underwriter, AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (“ABI”), at an annual rate of up to 0.50% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The current annual rate that the Portfolio pays to ABI for 12b-1 fees is 0.25%. During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011, AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (“ABI”), the Portfolio’s distributor and an affiliate of the Adviser, received $142,665 in Rule 12b-1 fees.
During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011, the Adviser incurred distribution expenses in the amount of $544,097 in connection with activities primarily intended to result in the sale of the Portfolio’s Class B shares. This amount includes the 12b-1 fees paid by the Portfolio to the Adviser.
Financial intermediaries, such as insurers, market and sell shares of the Portfolio and typically receive compensation from ABI, the Advisers and/or the Portfolio for selling shares of the Portfolio. These financial intermediaries receive compensa-
9 | | The contractual management fee does not reflect any expense reimbursements made by the Portfolio to the Adviser for certain clerical, legal, accounting, administrative and other services. |
10 | | Except for asset (size) comparability, Lipper uses the same criteria for selecting an EG when selecting an EU. Unlike the EG, the EU allows for the same adviser to be represented by more than just one fund. |
11 | | Most recently completed fiscal year end Class A total expense ratio. |
23
| | |
GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
tion in any or all of the following forms: 12b-1 fees, defrayal of costs for educational seminars and training, additional distribution support, recordkeeping and/or administrative services. Payments related to providing contract-holder recordkeeping and/or administrative services will generally not exceed 0.35% of the average daily net assets of the Portfolio attributable to the relevant intermediary over the year. With respect to the Fund, which includes the Portfolio and other Portfolios of the Fund not discussed in this summary, ABI paid approximately $500,000 in 2011.
The transfer agent of the Portfolio is AllianceBernstein Investor Services, Inc. (“ABIS”). During the most recently completed fiscal year, ABIS received a fee of $1,311 from the Portfolio.12
The Portfolio effected brokerage transactions through the Adviser’s affiliate, Sanford C. Bernstein & Co., LLC (“SCB & Co.”) and/or its U.K. affiliate, Sanford C. Bernstein Limited (“SCB Ltd.”), collectively “SCB,” and paid commissions during the Portfolio’s most recently completed fiscal year. The Adviser represented that SCB’s profitability from business conducted with the Portfolio is comparable to the profitability of SCB’s dealings with other similar third party clients. In the ordinary course of business, SCB receives and pays liquidity rebates from electronic communications networks (“ECNs”) derived from trading for its clients, including the Portfolio. These credits and charges are not being passed onto any SCB client. The Adviser also receives certain soft dollar benefits from brokers that execute agency trades for the Portfolio and other clients. These soft dollar benefits reduce the Adviser’s cost of doing business and increase its profitability.
V. POSSIBLE ECONOMIES OF SCALE
The Adviser has indicated that economies of scale are being shared with shareholders through fee structures,13 subsidies and enhancement to services. Based on some of the professional literature that has considered economies of scale in the mutual fund industry, it is thought that to the extent economies of scale exist, they may more often exist across a fund family as opposed to a specific fund. This is because the costs incurred by the Adviser, such as investment research or technology for trading or compliance systems can be spread across a greater asset base as the fund family increases in size. It is also possible that as the level of services required to operate a successful investment company has increased over time, and advisory firms make such investments in their business to provide services, there may be a sharing of economies of scale without a reduction in advisory fees.
An independent consultant, retained by the Senior Officer, provided the Board of Directors information on the Adviser’s firm-wide average costs from 2005 through 2011 and potential economies of scale. The independent consultant noted that from 2005 through 2007 the Adviser experienced significant growth in assets under management (“AUM”). During this period, operating expenses increased, in part to keep up with growth, and in part reflecting market returns. However, from 2008 through the first quarter of 2009, AUM rapidly and significantly decreased. Some operating expenses, including base compensation and office space, adjusted more slowly during this period, resulting in an increase in average costs. Since 2009, AUM has moved within a range of $400 to $500 million ending 2011 with an average of $411 million in the fourth quarter. The independent consultant noted that changes in operating expenses reflect changes in business composition and business practices in response to changes in financial markets. Finally, the independent consultant concluded that the increase in average cost and the decline in net operating margin across the company since 2008 are inconsistent with the view that there are currently “economies of scale” to be shared with clients through lower fees.
In February 2008, the independent consultant provided the Board of Directors an update of the Deli14 study on advisory fees and various fund characteristics.15 The independent consultant first reiterated the results of his previous two dimensional comparison analysis (fund size and family size) with the Board of Directors.16 The independent consultant then discussed the
12 | | The Fund, which includes the Portfolio and other Portfolios of the Fund paid ABIS a flat fee of $18,000 in 2011. |
13 | | Fee structures include fee reductions, pricing at scale and breakpoints in advisory fee schedules. |
14 | | The Deli study, originally published in 2002 based on 1997 data and updated for the February 2008 Presentation, may be of diminished value due to the age of the data used in the presentation and the changes experienced in the industry over the last four years. |
15 | | As mentioned previously, the Supreme Court cautioned against accepting mutual fund fee comparisons without careful scrutiny since the fees may not be the product of negotiations conducted at arm’s length. See Jones V. Harris at 1429. |
16 | | The two dimensional analysis showed patterns of lower advisory fees for funds with larger asset sizes and funds from larger family sizes compared to funds with smaller asset sizes and funds from smaller family sizes, which according to the independent consultant is indicative of a sharing of economies of scale and scope. However, in less liquid and active markets, such is not the case, as the empirical analysis showed potential for diseconomies of scale in those markets. The empirical analysis also showed diminishing economies of scale and scope as funds surpassed a certain high level of assets. |
24
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
results of the regression model that was utilized to study the effects of various factors on advisory fees. The regression model output indicated that the bulk of the variation in fees predicted were explained by various factors, but substantially by fund AUM, family AUM, index fund indicator and investment style. The independent consultant also compared the advisory fees of the AllianceBernstein Mutual Funds to similar funds managed by 19 other large asset managers, regardless of the fund size and each Adviser’s proportion of mutual fund assets to non-mutual fund assets.
VI. NATURE AND QUALITY OF THE ADVISER’S SERVICES, INCLUDING THE PERFORMANCE OF THE PORTFOLIO
With assets under management of approximately $419 billion as of March 31, 2012, the Adviser has the investment experience to manage and provide non-investment services (described in Section I) to the Portfolio.
The information prepared by Lipper shows the 1, 3, 5 and 10 year performance returns and rankings of the Portfolio17 relative to its Lipper Performance Group (“PG”) and Lipper Performance Universe (“PU”)18 for the periods ended February 29, 2012.19
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Fund | | | PG Median | | | PU Median | | | PG Rank | | | PU Rank | |
Growth Portfolio | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
1 year | | | 5.38 | | | | 5.51 | | | | 5.03 | | | | 8/14 | | | | 45/96 | |
3 year | | | 24.84 | | | | 26.02 | | | | 25.31 | | | | 10/14 | | | | 52/91 | |
5 year | | | 2.36 | | | | 3.21 | | | | 3.63 | | | | 9/12 | | | | 74/83 | |
10 year | | | 4.46 | | | | 5.20 | | | | 3.97 | | | | 7/11 | | | | 26/64 | |
Set forth below are the 1, 3, 5, 10 year and since inception performance returns of the Portfolio (in bold)20 versus its benchmarks21 Portfolio and benchmark volatility and reward-to-variability ratio (“Sharpe Ratio”) information is also shown.22
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Periods Ending February 29, 2012 Annualized Performance | |
| | 1
Year (%) | | | 3 Year (%) | | | 5 Year (%) | | | 10 Year (%) | | | Since Inception (%) | | | Annualized | | | Risk Period (Year) | |
| | | | | | | Volatility (%) | | | Sharpe (%) | | |
Growth Portfolio | | | 5.38 | | | | 24.84 | | | | 2.36 | | | | 4.46 | | | | 7.63 | | | | 17.23 | | | | 0.23 | | | | 10 | |
Russell 1000 Growth Index | | | 7.62 | | | | 27.51 | | | | 4.54 | | | | 4.30 | | | | 7.51 | | | | 16.34 | | | | 0.22 | | | | 10 | |
Inception Date: September 15, 1994 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CONCLUSION:
Based on the factors discussed above the Senior Officer’s conclusion is that the proposed advisory fee for the Portfolio is reasonable and within the range of what would have been negotiated at arm’s-length in light of all the surrounding circumstances. This conclusion in respect of the Portfolio is based on an evaluation of all of these factors and no single factor was dispositive.
Dated: May 25, 2012
17 | | The performance rankings are for the Class A shares of the Portfolio. The Portfolio’s performance returns shown were provided by Lipper. |
18 | | The Portfolio’s PG is identical to the Portfolio’s respective EG. The Portfolio’s PU is not identical to the Portfolio’s EU as the criteria for including/excluding a fund from a PU is somewhat different from that of an EU. |
19 | | The current Lipper investment classification/objective dictates the PG and PU throughout the life of the fund even if a fund had a different investment classification/objective at a different point in time. |
20 | | The performance returns and risk measures shown in the table are for the Class A shares of the Portfolio. |
21 | | The Adviser provided Portfolio and benchmark performance return information for periods through February 29, 2012. |
22 | | Portfolio and benchmark volatility and Sharpe Ratio information was obtained through Lipper LANA, a database maintained by Lipper. Volatility is a statistical measure of the tendency of a market price or yield to vary over time. A Sharpe Ratio is a risk adjusted measure of return that divides a portfolio’s return in excess of the riskless return by the portfolio’s standard deviation. A portfolio with a greater volatility would be viewed as more risky than a portfolio with equivalent performance but lower volatility; for that reason, a greater return would be demanded for the more risky portfolio. A portfolio with a higher Sharpe Ratio would be viewed as better performing than a portfolio with a lower Sharpe Ratio. |
25
AllianceBernstein
Variable Products Series Fund, Inc.
| | |
![LOGO](https://capedge.com/proxy/N-CSRS/0001193125-12-366259/g374710g16n16.jpg) | | AllianceBernstein Growth & Income Portfolio |
Semi-Annual Report
![LOGO](https://capedge.com/proxy/N-CSRS/0001193125-12-366259/g374710g81g54.jpg)
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT
Investment Products Offered
| Ø | | Are Not Bank Guaranteed |
AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (ABI) is the distributor of the AllianceBernstein family of mutual funds. ABI is a member of FINRA and is an affiliate of AllianceBernstein L.P., the manager of the funds.
You may obtain a description of the Fund’s proxy voting policies and procedures, and information regarding how the Fund voted proxies relating to portfolio securities during the most recent 12-month period ended June 30, without charge. Simply visit AllianceBernstein’s website at www.alliancebernstein.com or go to the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (the “Commission”) website at www.sec.gov, or call AllianceBernstein at (800) 227-4618.
The Fund files its complete schedule of portfolio holdings with the Commission for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year on Form N-Q. The Fund’s Forms N-Q are available on the Commission’s website at www.sec.gov. The Fund’s Forms N-Q may also be reviewed and copied at the Commission’s Public Reference Room in Washington, DC; information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling (800) SEC-0330.
AllianceBernstein® and the AB Logo are registered trademarks and service marks used by permission of the owner, AllianceBernstein L.P.
| | |
| | |
GROWTH & INCOME PORTFOLIO | | |
FUND EXPENSES (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
As a shareholder of the Fund, you incur two types of costs: (1) transaction costs, including sales charges (loads) on purchase payments, contingent deferred sales charges on redemptions and (2) ongoing costs, including management fees; distribution (12b-1) fees; and other Fund expenses. This example is intended to help you understand your ongoing costs (in dollars) of investing in the Fund and to compare these costs with the ongoing costs of investing in other mutual funds.
The Example is based on an investment of $1,000 invested at the beginning of the period and held for the entire period as indicated below.
Actual Expenses
The table below provides information about actual account values and actual expenses. You may use the information in this line, together with the amount you invested, to estimate the expenses that you paid over the period. Simply divide your account value by $1,000 (for example, an $8,600 account value divided by $1,000 = 8.6), then multiply the result by the number in the first line under the heading entitled “Expenses Paid During Period” to estimate the expenses you paid on your account during this period. The estimate of expenses does not include fees or other expenses of any variable insurance product. If such expenses were included, the estimate of expenses you paid during the period would be higher and your ending account value would be lower.
Hypothetical Example for Comparison Purposes
The table below provides information about hypothetical account values and hypothetical expenses based on the Fund’s actual expense ratio and an assumed annual rate of return of 5% before expenses, which is not the Fund’s actual return. The hypothetical account values and expenses may not be used to estimate the actual ending account balance or expenses you paid for the period. You may use this information to compare the ongoing costs of investing in the Fund and other funds by comparing this 5% hypothetical example with the 5% hypothetical examples that appear in the shareholder reports of other funds. The estimate of expenses does not include fees or other expenses of any variable insurance product. If such expenses were included, the estimate of expenses you paid during the period would be higher and your ending account value would be lower.
Please note that the expenses shown in the table are meant to highlight your ongoing costs only and do not reflect any transactional costs, such as sales charges (loads), or contingent deferred sales charges on redemptions. Therefore, the second line of each class’ table is useful in comparing ongoing costs only, and will not help you determine the relative total costs of owning different funds. In addition, if these transactional costs were included, your costs would have been higher.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Beginning Account Value January 1, 2012 | | | Ending Account Value June 30, 2012 | | | Expenses Paid During Period* | | | Annualized Expense Ratio* | |
Class A | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Actual | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,090.90 | | | $ | 3.12 | | | | 0.60 | % |
Hypothetical (5% return before expenses) | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,021.88 | | | $ | 3.02 | | | | 0.60 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class B | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Actual | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,089.60 | | | $ | 4.42 | | | | 0.85 | % |
Hypothetical (5% return before expenses) | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,020.64 | | | $ | 4.27 | | | | 0.85 | % |
* | | Expenses are equal to each classes’ annualized expense ratios, multiplied by the average account value over the period, multiplied by 182/366 (to reflect the one-half year period). |
1
| | |
GROWTH & INCOME PORTFOLIO |
TEN LARGEST HOLDINGS* | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
COMPANY | | U.S. $ VALUE | | | PERCENT OF NET ASSETS | |
Liberty Interactive Corp. | | $ | 31,848,459 | | | | 3.6 | % |
UnitedHealth Group, Inc. | | | 28,572,570 | | | | 3.3 | |
Wells Fargo & Co. | | | 28,185,573 | | | | 3.2 | |
Exxon Mobil Corp. | | | 25,548,635 | | | | 2.9 | |
General Electric Co. | | | 25,449,183 | | | | 2.9 | |
JPMorgan Chase & Co. | | | 23,666,123 | | | | 2.7 | |
Raytheon Co. | | | 23,558,417 | | | | 2.7 | |
CVS Caremark Corp. | | | 23,046,161 | | | | 2.6 | |
Chevron Corp. | | | 22,276,325 | | | | 2.5 | |
Microsoft Corp. | | | 21,400,458 | | | | 2.4 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | $ | 253,551,904 | | | | 28.8 | % |
SECTOR DIVERSIFICATION**
June 30, 2012 (unaudited)
| | | | | | | | |
SECTOR | | U.S. $ VALUE | | | PERCENT OF TOTAL INVESTMENTS | |
Financials | | $ | 157,317,486 | | | | 17.9 | % |
Health Care | | | 144,851,913 | | | | 16.5 | |
Industrials | | | 139,326,901 | | | | 15.9 | |
Information Technology | | | 132,258,561 | | | | 15.0 | |
Energy | | | 117,461,897 | | | | 13.4 | |
Consumer Discretionary | | | 84,630,189 | | | | 9.6 | |
Consumer Staples | | | 48,181,278 | | | | 5.5 | |
Materials | | | 29,339,653 | | | | 3.3 | |
Telecommunication Services | | | 17,140,154 | | | | 1.9 | |
Utilities | | | 7,112,492 | | | | 0.8 | |
Short-Term Investments | | | 1,382,716 | | | | 0.2 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Investments | | $ | 879,003,240 | | | | 100.0 | % |
** | | The Portfolio’s sector breakdown is expressed as a percentage of total investments (excluding security lending collateral) and may vary over time. |
Please note: The sector classifications presented herein are based on the Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS) which was developed by Morgan Stanley Capital International and Standard & Poor’s. The components are divided into sector, industry group, and industry sub-indices as classified by the GICS for each of the market capitalization indices in the broad market. These sector classifications are broadly defined. The “Portfolio of Investments” section of the report reflects more specific industry information and is consistent with the investment restrictions discussed in the Fund’s prospectus.
2
| | |
GROWTH & INCOME PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMMON STOCKS–99.6% | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
FINANCIALS–17.9% | | | | | | | | |
CAPITAL MARKETS–3.7% | | | | | | | | |
BlackRock, Inc.–Class A | | | 118,940 | | | $ | 20,198,391 | |
Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (The) | | | 125,890 | | | | 12,067,815 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 32,266,206 | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMMERCIAL BANKS–4.8% | | | | | | | | |
Fifth Third Bancorp | | | 645,440 | | | | 8,648,896 | |
PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. | | | 85,530 | | | | 5,226,738 | |
Wells Fargo & Co. | | | 842,870 | | | | 28,185,573 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 42,061,207 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER FINANCE–1.0% | | | | | | | | |
Capital One Financial Corp. | | | 158,240 | | | | 8,649,399 | |
| | | | | | | | |
DIVERSIFIED FINANCIAL SERVICES–2.7% | | | | | | | | |
JPMorgan Chase & Co. | | | 662,360 | | | | 23,666,123 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INSURANCE–5.7% | | | | | | | | |
ACE Ltd. | | | 231,140 | | | | 17,134,408 | |
Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. | | | 711,550 | | | | 12,544,626 | |
MetLife, Inc. | | | 420,262 | | | | 12,965,083 | |
Travelers Cos., Inc. (The) | | | 125,790 | | | | 8,030,434 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 50,674,551 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 157,317,486 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HEALTH CARE–16.4% | | | | | | | | |
BIOTECHNOLOGY–2.4% | | | | | | | | |
Amgen, Inc. | | | 225,932 | | | | 16,502,073 | |
Gilead Sciences, Inc.(a) | | | 97,770 | | | | 5,013,646 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 21,515,719 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HEALTH CARE EQUIPMENT & SUPPLIES–2.3% | | | | | |
St Jude Medical, Inc. | | | 378,459 | | | | 15,104,299 | |
Zimmer Holdings, Inc. | | | 79,970 | | | | 5,146,869 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 20,251,168 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS & SERVICES–6.2% | | | | | |
AmerisourceBergen Corp.–Class A | | | 176,270 | | | | 6,936,225 | |
Cardinal Health, Inc. | | | 127,540 | | | | 5,356,680 | |
McKesson Corp. | | | 144,830 | | | | 13,577,812 | |
UnitedHealth Group, Inc. | | | 488,420 | | | | 28,572,570 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 54,443,287 | |
| | | | | | | | |
PHARMACEUTICALS–5.5% | | | | | | | | |
Abbott Laboratories | | | 106,900 | | | | 6,891,843 | |
Forest Laboratories, Inc.(a) | | | 199,400 | | | | 6,977,006 | |
Johnson & Johnson | | | 83,290 | | | | 5,627,072 | |
Merck & Co., Inc. | | | 371,239 | | | | 15,499,228 | |
Pfizer, Inc. | | | 593,330 | | | | 13,646,590 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 48,641,739 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 144,851,913 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
INDUSTRIALS – 15.8% | | | | | | | | |
AEROSPACE & DEFENSE–2.7% | | | | | | | | |
Raytheon Co. | | | 416,300 | | | $ | 23,558,417 | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMMERCIAL SERVICES & SUPPLIES–0.8% | | | | | | | | |
Copart, Inc.(a) | | | 300,960 | | | | 7,129,742 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSTRUCTION & ENGINEERING–1.5% | | | | | | | | |
Foster Wheeler AG(a) | | | 290,589 | | | | 5,035,907 | |
URS Corp. | | | 226,171 | | | | 7,888,845 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 12,924,752 | |
| | | | | | | | |
ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT–1.4% | | | | | | | | |
AMETEK, Inc. | | | 96,070 | | | | 4,794,854 | |
Hubbell, Inc.–Class B | | | 94,100 | | | | 7,334,154 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 12,129,008 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INDUSTRIAL CONGLOMERATES–2.9% | | | | | | | | |
General Electric Co. | | | 1,221,170 | | | | 25,449,183 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MACHINERY–4.6% | | | | | | | | |
Actuant Corp.–Class A | | | 241,510 | | | | 6,559,412 | |
Dover Corp. | | | 229,610 | | | | 12,309,392 | |
Eaton Corp. | | | 156,110 | | | | 6,186,639 | |
Gardner Denver, Inc. | | | 206,731 | | | | 10,938,137 | |
Parker Hannifin Corp. | | | 66,110 | | | | 5,082,537 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 41,076,117 | |
| | | | | | | | |
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES–1.3% | | | | | | | | |
Towers Watson & Co. | | | 198,880 | | | | 11,912,912 | |
| | | | | | | | |
ROAD & RAIL–0.6% | | | | | | | | |
Norfolk Southern Corp. | | | 71,712 | | | | 5,146,770 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 139,326,901 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY–15.0% | | | | | | | | |
COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT–0.8% | | | | | | | | |
Cisco Systems, Inc. | | | 422,330 | | | | 7,251,406 | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMPUTERS & PERIPHERALS–2.2% | | | | | | | | |
Apple, Inc.(a) | | | 32,300 | | | | 18,863,200 | |
| | | | | | | | |
IT SERVICES–0.9% | | | | | | | | |
Amdocs Ltd.(a) | | | 268,390 | | | | 7,976,551 | |
| | | | | | | | |
SEMICONDUCTORS & SEMICONDUCTOR EQUIPMENT–3.7% | | | | | | | | |
Lam Research Corp.(a) (b) | | | 272,180 | | | | 10,272,073 | |
Marvell Technology Group Ltd. | | | 1,434,928 | | | | 16,185,988 | |
Xilinx, Inc. | | | 192,880 | | | | 6,474,982 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 32,933,043 | |
| | | | | | | | |
SOFTWARE–7.4% | | | | | | | | |
Activision Blizzard, Inc. | | | 529,403 | | | | 6,347,542 | |
Adobe Systems, Inc.(a) | | | 197,480 | | | | 6,392,427 | |
3
| | |
GROWTH & INCOME PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
CA, Inc. | | | 191,500 | | | $ | 5,187,735 | |
Cadence Design Systems, Inc.(a) | | | 471,910 | | | | 5,186,291 | |
Microsoft Corp. | | | 699,590 | | | | 21,400,458 | |
Oracle Corp. | | | 697,640 | | | | 20,719,908 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 65,234,361 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 132,258,561 | |
| | | | | | | | |
ENERGY–13.3% | | | | | | | | |
ENERGY EQUIPMENT & SERVICES–4.8% | | | | | | | | |
Diamond Offshore Drilling, Inc. | | | 319,240 | | | | 18,876,661 | |
Helmerich & Payne, Inc. | | | 60,740 | | | | 2,640,975 | |
National Oilwell Varco, Inc. | | | 325,637 | | | | 20,984,049 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 42,501,685 | |
| | | | | | | | |
OIL, GAS & CONSUMABLE FUELS–8.5% | | | | | | | | |
Chevron Corp. | | | 211,150 | | | | 22,276,325 | |
Devon Energy Corp. | | | 117,780 | | | | 6,830,062 | |
Exxon Mobil Corp. | | | 298,570 | | | | 25,548,635 | |
Occidental Petroleum Corp. | | | 236,740 | | | | 20,305,190 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 74,960,212 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 117,461,897 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER DISCRETIONARY–9.6% | | | | | | | | |
AUTOMOBILES–0.3% | | | | | | | | |
Harley-Davidson, Inc. | | | 67,850 | | | | 3,102,780 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INTERNET & CATALOG RETAIL–3.6% | | | | | | | | |
Liberty Interactive Corp.(a) | | | 1,790,245 | | | | 31,848,459 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MEDIA–5.0% | | | | | | | | |
Comcast Corp.–Class A | | | 500,180 | | | | 15,990,754 | |
Liberty Media Corp.–Liberty Capital(a) | | | 36,318 | | | | 3,192,715 | |
Scripps Networks Interactive, Inc.–Class A | | | 180,210 | | | | 10,246,741 | |
Viacom, Inc.–Class B | | | 303,190 | | | | 14,255,994 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 43,686,204 | |
| | | | | | | | |
SPECIALTY RETAIL–0.7% | | | | | | | | |
Bed Bath & Beyond, Inc.(a) | | | 96,970 | | | | 5,992,746 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 84,630,189 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER STAPLES–5.5% | | | | | | | | |
BEVERAGES – 0.8% | | | | | | | | |
Molson Coors Brewing Co.–Class B | | | 167,890 | | | | 6,985,903 | |
| | | | | | | | |
FOOD & STAPLES RETAILING–2.6% | | | | | | | | |
CVS Caremark Corp. | | | 493,177 | | | | 23,046,161 | |
| | | | | | | | |
FOOD PRODUCTS–0.8% | | | | | | | | |
Smithfield Foods, Inc.(a) | | | 313,100 | | | | 6,772,353 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TOBACCO–1.3% | | | | | | | | |
Lorillard, Inc. | | | 86,221 | | | | 11,376,861 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 48,181,278 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MATERIALS–3.3% | | | | | | | | |
CHEMICALS–1.1% | | | | | | | | |
CF Industries Holdings, Inc. | | | 48,850 | | | | 9,464,199 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
METALS & MINING–0.8% | | | | | | | | |
Newmont Mining Corp. | | | 145,780 | | | $ | 7,071,788 | |
| | | | | | | | |
PAPER & FOREST PRODUCTS–1.4% | | | | | | | | |
Domtar Corp. | | | 166,910 | | | | 12,803,666 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 29,339,653 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES–2.0% | | | | | | | | |
DIVERSIFIED TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES–2.0% | | | | | | | | |
AT&T, Inc. | | | 338,250 | | | | 12,061,995 | |
Verizon Communications, Inc. | | | 114,270 | | | | 5,078,159 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 17,140,154 | |
| | | | | | | | |
UTILITIES–0.8% | | | | | | | | |
MULTI-UTILITIES–0.8% | | | | | | | | |
Ameren Corp. | | | 212,060 | | | | 7,112,492 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Common Stocks (cost $774,799,742) | | | | | | | 877,620,524 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | Principal Amount (000) | | | | |
SHORT-TERM INVESTMENTS–0.1% | | | | | | | | |
TIME DEPOSIT–0.1% | | | | | | | | |
State Street Time Deposit 0.01%, 7/02/12 (cost $1,382,716) | | $ | 1,383 | | | | 1,382,716 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Investments Before Security Lending Collateral for Securities Loaned–99.7% (cost $776,182,458) | | | | | | | 879,003,240 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | Shares | | | | |
INVESTMENTS OF CASH COLLATERAL FOR SECURITY LOANED–0.4% | | | | | | | | |
INVESTMENT COMPANIES–0.4% | | | | | | | | |
AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves–Class I, 0.20%(c) (cost $3,219,592) | | | 3,219,592 | | | | 3,219,592 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TOTAL INVESTMENTS–100.1% (cost $779,402,050) | | | | | | | 882,222,832 | |
Other assets less liabilities–(0.1)% | | | | | | | (919,469 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
NET ASSETS–100.0% | | | | | | $ | 881,303,363 | |
| | | | | | | | |
(a) | | Non-income producing security. |
(b) | | Represents entire or partial securities out on loan. See Note E for securities lending information. |
(c) | | Investment in affiliated money market mutual fund. The rate shown represents the 7-day yield as of period end. |
See notes to financial statements.
4
| | |
GROWTH & INCOME PORTFOLIO |
STATEMENTOF ASSETS & LIABILITIES |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | |
ASSETS | | | | |
Investments in securities, at value | | | | |
Unaffiliated issuers (cost $776,182,458) | | $ | 879,003,240 | (a) |
Affiliated issuers (cost $3,219,592—including investment of cash collateral for securities loaned of $3,219,592) | | | 3,219,592 | |
Receivable for investment securities sold | | | 24,458,144 | |
Dividends and interest receivable | | | 1,209,120 | |
Receivable for capital stock sold | | | 75,777 | |
| | | | |
Total assets | | | 907,965,873 | |
| | | | |
LIABILITIES | | | | |
Payable for investment securities purchased | | | 22,013,144 | |
Payable for collateral received on securities loaned | | | 3,219,592 | |
Payable for capital stock redeemed | | | 637,271 | |
Advisory fee payable | | | 399,465 | |
Distribution fee payable | | | 153,917 | |
Administrative fee payable | | | 15,863 | |
Transfer Agent fee payable | | | 166 | |
Accrued expenses | | | 223,092 | |
| | | | |
Total liabilities | | | 26,662,510 | |
| | | | |
NET ASSETS | | $ | 881,303,363 | |
| | | | |
COMPOSITION OF NET ASSETS | | | | |
Capital stock, at par | | $ | 45,199 | |
Additional paid-in capital | | | 1,013,006,518 | |
Undistributed net investment income | | | 17,722,898 | |
Accumulated net realized loss on investment transactions | | | (252,292,034 | ) |
Net unrealized appreciation on investments | | | 102,820,782 | |
| | | | |
| | $ | 881,303,363 | |
| | | | |
Net Asset Value Per Share—1 billion shares of capital stock authorized, $.001 par value
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | Shares | | | Net Asset | |
Class | | Net Assets | | | Outstanding | | | Value | |
A | | $ | 134,021,226 | | | | 6,805,101 | | | $ | 19.69 | |
B | | $ | 747,282,137 | | | | 38,393,820 | | | $ | 19.46 | |
(a) | | Includes securities on loan with a value of $3,261,944 (see Note E). |
See notes to financial statements.
5
| | |
GROWTH & INCOME PORTFOLIO |
STATEMENTOF OPERATIONS | | |
Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | |
INVESTMENT INCOME | | | | |
Dividends | | | | |
Unaffiliated issuers | | $ | 9,030,689 | |
Affiliated issuers | | | 9,976 | |
Interest | | | 1,805 | |
Securities lending income | | | 9,128 | |
| | | | |
| | | 9,051,598 | |
| | | | |
EXPENSES | | | | |
Advisory fee (see Note B) | | | 2,507,073 | |
Distribution fee—Class B | | | 963,053 | |
Transfer agency—Class A | | | 674 | |
Transfer agency—Class B | | | 3,685 | |
Custodian | | | 87,679 | |
Printing | | | 51,569 | |
Administrative | | | 26,620 | |
Legal | | | 23,421 | |
Audit | | | 18,669 | |
Directors’ fees | | | 1,913 | |
Miscellaneous | | | 14,202 | |
| | | | |
Total expenses | | | 3,698,558 | |
| | | | |
Net investment income | | | 5,353,040 | |
| | | | |
REALIZED AND UNREALIZED GAIN ON INVESTMENT TRANSACTIONS | | | | |
Net realized gain on investment transactions | | | 54,091,374 | |
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of investments | | | 19,627,112 | |
| | | | |
Net gain on investment transactions | | | 73,718,486 | |
| | | | |
NET INCREASE IN NET ASSETS FROM OPERATIONS | | $ | 79,071,526 | |
| | | | |
See notes to financial statements.
6
| | |
|
GROWTH & INCOME PORTFOLIO | | |
STATEMENTOF CHANGESIN NET ASSETS | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | |
INCREASE (DECREASE) IN NET ASSETS FROM OPERATIONS | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income | | $ | 5,353,040 | | | $ | 12,525,033 | |
Net realized gain on investment transactions | | | 54,091,374 | | | | 93,888,095 | |
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of investments | | | 19,627,112 | | | | (47,469,481 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Net increase in net assets from operations | | | 79,071,526 | | | | 58,943,647 | |
DIVIDENDS TO SHAREHOLDERS FROM | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income | | | | | | | | |
Class A | | | –0 | – | | | (2,574,136 | ) |
Class B | | | –0 | – | | | (8,523,506 | ) |
CAPITAL STOCK TRANSACTIONS | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (72,013,069 | ) | | | (180,836,431 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Total increase (decrease) | | | 7,058,457 | | | | (132,990,426 | ) |
NET ASSETS | | | | | | | | |
Beginning of period | | | 874,244,906 | | | | 1,007,235,332 | |
| | | | | | | | |
End of period (including undistributed net investment income of $17,722,898 and of $12,369,858, respectively) | | $ | 881,303,363 | | | $ | 874,244,906 | |
| | | | | | | | |
See notes to financial statements.
7
| | |
GROWTH & INCOME PORTFOLIO | | |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
NOTE A: Significant Accounting Policies
The AllianceBernstein Growth & Income Portfolio (the “Portfolio”) is a series of AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund, Inc. (the “Fund”). The Portfolio’s investment objective is long-term growth of capital. The Portfolio is diversified as defined under the Investment Company Act of 1940. The Fund was incorporated in the State of Maryland on November 17, 1987, as an open-end series investment company. The Fund offers thirteen separately managed pools of assets which have differing investment objectives and policies. The Portfolio offers Class A and Class B shares. Both classes of shares have identical voting, dividend, liquidating and other rights, except that Class B shares bear a distribution expense and have exclusive voting rights with respect to the Class B distribution plan.
The Portfolio offers and sells its shares only to separate accounts of certain life insurance companies for the purpose of funding variable annuity contracts and variable life insurance policies. Sales are made without a sales charge at the Portfolio’s net asset value per share.
The financial statements have been prepared in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“U.S. GAAP”) which require management to make certain estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities in the financial statements and amounts of income and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. The following is a summary of significant accounting policies followed by the Portfolio.
1. Security Valuation
Portfolio securities are valued at their current market value determined on the basis of market quotations or, if market quotations are not readily available or are deemed unreliable, at “fair value” as determined in accordance with procedures established by and under the general supervision of the Fund’s Board of Directors.
In general, the market value of securities which are readily available and deemed reliable are determined as follows: Securities listed on a national securities exchange (other than securities listed on the NASDAQ Stock Market, Inc. (“NASDAQ”)) or on a foreign securities exchange are valued at the last sale price at the close of the exchange or foreign securities exchange. If there has been no sale on such day, the securities are valued at the last traded price from the previous day. Securities listed on more than one exchange are valued by reference to the principal exchange on which the securities are traded; securities listed only on NASDAQ are valued in accordance with the NASDAQ Official Closing Price; listed or over the counter market (“OTC”) put or call options are valued at the mid level between the current bid and ask prices. If either a current bid or current ask price is unavailable, AllianceBernstein L.P. (the “Adviser”) will have discretion to determine the best valuation (e.g. last trade price in the case of listed options); open futures contracts are valued using the closing settlement price or, in the absence of such a price, the most recent quoted bid price. If there are no quotations available for the day of valuation, the last available closing settlement price is used; U.S. government securities and other debt instruments having 60 days or less remaining until maturity are valued at amortized cost if their original maturity was 60 days or less; or by amortizing their fair value as of the 61st day prior to maturity if their original term to maturity exceeded 60 days; fixed-income securities, including mortgage backed and asset backed securities, may be valued on the basis of prices provided by a pricing service or at a price obtained from one or more of the major broker/dealers. In cases where broker/dealer quotes are obtained, the Adviser may establish procedures whereby changes in market yields or spreads are used to adjust, on a daily basis, a recently obtained quoted price on a security. Swaps and other derivatives are valued daily, primarily using independent pricing services, independent pricing models using market inputs, as well as third party broker-dealers or counterparties.
Securities for which market quotations are not readily available (including restricted securities) or are deemed unreliable are valued at fair value. Factors considered in making this determination may include, but are not limited to, information obtained by contacting the issuer, analysts, analysis of the issuer’s financial statements or other available documents. In addition, the Portfolio may use fair value pricing for securities primarily traded in non-U.S. markets because most foreign markets close well before the Portfolio values its securities at 4:00 p.m., Eastern Time. The earlier close of these foreign markets gives rise to the possibility that significant events, including broad market moves, may have occurred in the interim and may materially affect the value of those securities. To account for this, the Portfolio may frequently value many of its foreign equity securities using fair value prices based on third party vendor modeling tools to the extent available.
2. Fair Value Measurements
In accordance with U.S. GAAP regarding fair value measurements, fair value is defined as the price that the Portfolio would receive to sell an asset or pay to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement
8
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
date. The U.S. GAAP disclosure requirements establish a framework for measuring fair value, and a three-level hierarchy for fair value measurements based upon the transparency of inputs to the valuation of an asset or liability. Inputs may be observable or unobservable and refer broadly to the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability. Observable inputs reflect the assumptions market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability based on market data obtained from sources independent of the Portfolio. Unobservable inputs reflect the Portfolio’s own assumptions about the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability based on the best information available in the circumstances. Each investment is assigned a level based upon the observability of the inputs which are significant to the overall valuation. The three-tier hierarchy of inputs is summarized below.
| • | | Level 1—quoted prices in active markets for identical investments |
| • | | Level 2—other significant observable inputs (including quoted prices for similar investments, interest rates, prepayment speeds, credit risk, etc.) |
| • | | Level 3—significant unobservable inputs (including the Portfolio’s own assumptions in determining the fair value of investments) |
The following table summarizes the valuation of the Portfolio’s investments by the above fair value hierarchy levels as of June 30, 2012:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Level 1 | | | Level 2 | | | Level 3 | | | Total | |
Investments in Securities: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Assets: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Common Stocks* | | $ | 877,620,524 | | | $ | –0 | – | | $ | –0 | – | | $ | 877,620,524 | |
Short-Term Investments | | | –0 | – | | | 1,382,716 | | | | –0 | – | | | 1,382,716 | |
Investments of Cash Collateral for Security Loaned in Affiliated Money Market Fund | | | 3,219,592 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 3,219,592 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Investments in Securities | | | 880,840,116 | | | | 1,382,716 | | | | –0 | – | | | 882,222,832 | |
Other Financial Instruments** | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total | | $ | 880,840,116 | | | $ | 1,382,716 | | | $ | –0 | – | | $ | 882,222,832 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
* | | See Portfolio of Investments for sector classifications. |
** | | Other financial instruments are derivative instruments, such as futures, forwards and swap contracts, which are valued at the unrealized appreciation/depreciation on the instrument. |
3. Currency Translation
Assets and liabilities denominated in foreign currencies and commitments under forward currency exchange contracts are translated into U.S. dollars at the mean of the quoted bid and ask prices of such currencies against the U.S. dollar. Purchases and sales of portfolio securities are translated into U.S. dollars at the rates of exchange prevailing when such securities were acquired or sold. Income and expenses are translated into U.S. dollars at rates of exchange prevailing when accrued.
Net realized gain or loss on foreign currency transactions represents foreign exchange gains and losses from sales and maturities of foreign fixed income investments, foreign currency exchange contracts, holding of foreign currencies, currency gains or losses realized between the trade and settlement dates on foreign investment transactions, and the difference between the amounts of dividends, interest and foreign withholding taxes recorded on the Portfolio’s books and the U.S. dollar equivalent amounts actually received or paid. Net unrealized currency gains and losses from valuing foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities at period end exchange rates are reflected as a component of net unrealized appreciation or depreciation of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities.
4. Taxes
It is the Portfolio’s policy to meet the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code applicable to regulated investment companies and to distribute all of its investment company taxable income and net realized gains, if any, to shareholders. Therefore, no provisions for federal income or excise taxes are required. The Portfolio may be subject to taxes imposed by countries in which it invests. Such taxes are generally based on income and/or capital gains earned or repatriated. Taxes are accrued and applied to net investment income, net realized gains and net unrealized appreciation/depreciation as such income and/or gains are earned.
9
| | |
GROWTH & INCOME PORTFOLIO | | |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
In accordance with U.S. GAAP requirements regarding accounting for uncertainties in income taxes, management has analyzed the Portfolio’s tax positions taken or expected to be taken on federal and state income tax returns for all open tax years (the current and the prior three tax years) and has concluded that no provision for income tax is required in the Portfolio’s financial statements.
5. Investment Income and Investment Transactions
Dividend income is recorded on the ex-dividend date or as soon as the Portfolio is informed of the dividend. Interest income is accrued daily. Investment transactions are accounted for on the date the securities are purchased or sold. Investment gains or losses are determined on the identified cost basis. The Portfolio amortizes premiums and accretes discounts as adjustments to interest income.
6. Class Allocations
All income earned and expenses incurred by the Portfolio are borne on a pro-rata basis by each outstanding class of shares, based on the proportionate interest in the Portfolio represented by the net assets of such class, except for class specific expenses which are allocated to the respective class. Expenses of the Fund are charged to each Portfolio in proportion to net assets. Realized and unrealized gains and losses are allocated among the various share classes based on respective net assets.
7. Dividends and Distributions
Dividends and distributions to shareholders, if any, are recorded on the ex-dividend date. Income dividends and capital gains distributions are determined in accordance with federal tax regulations and may differ from those determined in accordance with U.S. GAAP. To the extent these differences are permanent, such amounts are reclassified within the capital accounts based on their federal tax basis treatment; temporary differences do not require such reclassification.
NOTE B: Advisory Fee and Other Transactions with Affiliates
Under the terms of the investment advisory agreement, the Portfolio pays the Adviser an advisory fee at an annual rate of .55% of the first $2.5 billion, .45% of the next $2.5 billion and .40% in excess of $5 billion, of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets. The fee is accrued daily and paid monthly.
Pursuant to the investment advisory agreement, the Portfolio may reimburse the Adviser for certain legal and accounting services provided to the Portfolio by the Adviser. For the six months ended June 30, 2012, such fee amounted to $26,620.
Brokerage commissions paid on investment transactions for the six months ended June 30, 2012 amounted to $625,797, of which $1,028 and $0, respectively, was paid to Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. LLC and Sanford C. Bernstein Limited, affiliates of the Adviser.
The Portfolio compensates AllianceBernstein Investor Services, Inc. (“ABIS”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Adviser, under a Transfer Agency Agreement for providing personnel and facilities to perform transfer agency services for the Portfolio. Such compensation retained by ABIS amounted to $692 for the six months ended June 30, 2012.
NOTE C: Distribution Plan
The Portfolio has adopted a Distribution Plan (the “Plan”) for Class B shares pursuant to Rule 12b-1 under the Investment Company Act of 1940. Under the Plan, the Portfolio pays distribution and servicing fees to AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (the “Distributor”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Adviser, at an annual rate of up to .50% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The fees are accrued daily and paid monthly. The Board of Directors currently limits payments under the Plan to .25% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The Plan provides that the Distributor will use such payments in their entirety for distribution assistance and promotional activities.
The Portfolio is not obligated under the Plan to pay any distribution and servicing fees in excess of the amounts set forth above. The purpose of the payments to the Distributor under the Plan is to compensate the Distributor for its distribution services with respect to the sale of the Portfolio’s Class B shares. Since the Distributor’s compensation is not directly tied to its expenses, the amount of compensation received by it under the Plan during any year may be more or less than its actual expenses. For this reason, the Plan is characterized by the staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission as being of the “compensation” variety.
In the event that the Plan is terminated or not continued, no distribution or servicing fees (other than current amounts accrued but not yet paid) would be owed by the Portfolio to the Distributor.
The Plan also provides that the Adviser may use its own resources to finance the distribution of the Portfolio’s shares.
10
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
NOTE D: Investment Transactions
Purchases and sales of investment securities (excluding short-term investments) for the six months ended June 30, 2012 were as follows:
| | | | | | | | |
| | Purchases | | | Sales | |
Investment securities (excluding U.S. government securities) | | $ | 362,792,997 | | | $ | 405,361,085 | |
U.S. government securities | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
The cost of investments for federal income tax purposes was substantially the same as the cost for financial reporting purposes. Accordingly, gross unrealized appreciation and unrealized depreciation are as follows:
| | | | |
Gross unrealized appreciation | | $ | 124,878,142 | |
Gross unrealized depreciation | | | (22,057,360 | ) |
| | | | |
Net unrealized appreciation | | $ | 102,820,782 | |
| | | | |
1. Derivative Financial Instruments
The Portfolio may use derivatives in an effort to earn income and enhance returns, to replace more traditional direct investments, to obtain exposure to otherwise inaccessible markets (collectively, “investment purposes”), or to hedge or adjust the risk profile of its portfolio.
The Portfolio did not engage in derivatives transactions for the six months ended June 30, 2012.
2. Currency Transactions
The Portfolio may invest in non-U.S. Dollar securities on a currency hedged or unhedged basis. The Portfolio may seek investment opportunities by taking long or short positions in currencies through the use of currency-related derivatives, including forward currency exchange contracts, futures and options on futures, swaps, and other options. The Portfolio may enter into transactions for investment opportunities when it anticipates that a foreign currency will appreciate or depreciate in value but securities denominated in that currency are not held by the Portfolio and do not present attractive investment opportunities. Such transactions may also be used when the Adviser believes that it may be more efficient than a direct investment in a foreign currency-denominated security. The Portfolio may also conduct currency exchange contracts on a spot basis (i.e., for cash at the spot rate prevailing in the currency exchange market for buying or selling currencies).
NOTE E: Securities Lending
The Portfolio may enter into securities lending transactions. Under the Portfolio’s securities lending program, all securities loans will be collateralized continually by cash. The Portfolio will be compensated for the loan from a portion of the net return from the income earned on cash collateral after a rebate is paid to the borrower (in some cases, this rebate may be a “negative rebate” or fee paid by the borrower to the Portfolio in connection with the loan), and payments for fees of the securities lending agent and for certain other administrative expenses. It is the policy of the Portfolio to receive collateral consisting of cash in an amount exceeding the value of the securities loaned. The Portfolio will have the right to call a loan and obtain the securities loaned at any time on notice to the borrower within the normal and customary settlement time for the securities. While the securities are on loan, the borrower is obligated to pay the Portfolio amounts equal to any income or other distributions from the securities. The Portfolio will not have the right to vote any securities during the existence of a loan, but will have the right to regain ownership of loaned securities in order to exercise voting or other ownership rights. The lending agent has agreed to indemnify the Portfolio in the case of default of any securities borrower. Collateral received and securities loaned are marked to market daily to ensure that the securities loaned are secured by collateral. The lending agent will invest the cash collateral received in AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves, an eligible money market vehicle, in accordance with the investment restrictions of the Portfolio, and as approved by the Fund’s Board of Directors. The collateral received on securities loaned is recorded as an asset as well as a corresponding liability in the statement of assets and liabilities. When the Portfolio lends securities, its investment performance will continue to reflect changes in the value of the securities loaned. At June 30, 2012, the Portfolio had securities on loan with a value of $3,261,944 and had received cash collateral which has been invested into AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves of $3,219,592. The cash collateral will be adjusted on the next business day after period end to maintain the required collateral amount. The Portfolio earned securities lending income of $9,128 and $9,976 from the borrowers and AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves, respectively, for the six months ended June 30, 2012; these amounts are reflected in the statement of operations. A principal risk of lending portfolio securities is that the borrower will fail to return the loaned securities upon termination of the loan and that the collateral will
11
| | |
GROWTH & INCOME PORTFOLIO | | |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
not be sufficient to replace the loaned securities. A summary of the Portfolio’s transactions in shares of AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves for the six months ended June 30, 2012 is as follows:
| | | | | | | | |
Market Value December 31, 2011 (000) | | Purchases at Cost (000) | | Sales Proceeds (000) | | Market Value June 30, 2012 (000) | | Dividend Income (000) |
$1,441 | | $68,692 | | $66,913 | | $3,220 | | $10 |
NOTE F: Capital Stock
Each class consists of 500,000,000 authorized shares. Transactions in capital shares for each class were as follows:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Shares | | | | | Amount | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | | | | | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | |
Class A | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Shares sold | | | 379,006 | | | | 506,364 | | | | | $ | 7,317,438 | | | $ | 9,029,709 | |
Shares issued in reinvestment of dividends | | | –0 | – | | | 136,486 | | | | | | –0 | – | | | 2,574,137 | |
Shares redeemed | | | (1,258,578 | ) | | | (4,680,769 | ) | | | | | (24,603,186 | ) | | | (83,787,159 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (879,572 | ) | | | (4,037,919 | ) | | | | $ | (17,285,748 | ) | | $ | (72,183,313 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class B | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Shares sold | | | 1,962,433 | | | | 2,297,038 | | | | | $ | 37,056,891 | | | $ | 40,404,439 | |
Shares issued in reinvestment of dividends | | | –0 | – | | | 456,046 | | | | | | –0 | – | | | 8,523,506 | |
Shares redeemed | | | (4,741,858 | ) | | | (8,934,188 | ) | | | | | (91,784,212 | ) | | | (157,581,063 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (2,779,425 | ) | | | (6,181,104 | ) | | | | $ | (54,727,321 | ) | | $ | (108,653,118 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
NOTE G: Risks Involved in Investing in the Portfolio
Foreign Securities Risk—Investing in securities of foreign companies or foreign governments involves special risks which include changes in foreign currency exchange rates and the possibility of future political and economic developments which could adversely affect the value of such securities. Moreover, securities of many foreign companies or foreign governments and their markets may be less liquid and their prices more volatile than those of comparable U.S. companies or of the U.S. government.
Currency Risk—This is the risk that changes in foreign currency exchange rates may negatively affect the value of the Portfolio’s investments or reduce the returns of the Portfolio. For example, the value of the Portfolio’s investments in foreign currency-denominated securities or currencies may decrease if the U.S. Dollar is strong (i.e., gaining value relative to other currencies) and other currencies are weak (i.e., losing value relative to the U.S. Dollar). Currency markets are generally not as regulated as securities markets. Independent of the Portfolio’s investments denominated in foreign currencies, the Portfolio’s positions in various foreign currencies may cause the Portfolio to experience investment losses due to the changes in exchange rates and interest rates.
Derivatives Risk—The Portfolio may enter into derivative transactions such as forwards, options, futures and swaps. Derivatives may be illiquid, difficult to price, and leveraged so that small changes may produce disproportionate losses for the Portfolio, and subject to counterparty risk to a greater degree than more traditional investments. Derivatives may result in significant losses, including losses that are far greater than the value of the derivatives reflected in the statement of assets and liabilities.
Indemnification Risk—In the ordinary course of business, the Portfolio enters into contracts that contain a variety of indemnifications. The Portfolio’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown. However, the Portfolio has not had prior claims or losses pursuant to these indemnification provisions and expects the risk of loss thereunder to be remote. Therefore, the Portfolio has not accrued any liability in connection with these indemnification provisions.
NOTE H: Joint Credit Facility
A number of open-end mutual funds managed by the Adviser, including the Portfolio, participate in a $140 million revolving credit facility (the “Facility”) intended to provide short-term financing, if necessary, subject to certain restrictions in connection with abnormal redemption activity. Commitment fees related to the Facility are paid by the participating funds and
12
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
are included in miscellaneous expenses in the statement of operations. The Portfolio did not utilize the Facility during the six months ended June 30, 2012.
NOTE I: Distributions to Shareholders
The tax character of distributions to be paid for the year ending December 31, 2012 will be determined at the end of the current fiscal year. The tax character of distributions paid during the fiscal years ended December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010 were as follows:
| | | | | | | | |
| | 2011 | | | 2010 | |
Distributions paid from: | | | | | | | | |
Ordinary income | | $ | 11,097,642 | | | $ | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | |
Total taxable distributions | | | 11,097,642 | | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | |
Total distributions paid | | $ | 11,097,642 | | | $ | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | |
As of December 31, 2011, the components of accumulated earnings/(deficit) on a tax basis were as follows:
| | | | |
Undistributed ordinary income | | $ | 12,369,858 | |
Accumulated capital and other losses | | | (301,998,950 | )(a) |
Unrealized appreciation/(depreciation) | | | 78,809,212 | (b) |
| | | | |
Total accumulated earnings/(deficit) | | $ | (210,819,880 | ) |
| | | | |
(a) | | On December 31, 2011, the Portfolio had a net capital loss carryforward of $298,366,259. During the fiscal year, the Portfolio utilized $96,602,234 of capital loss carryforwards to offset current year net realized gains. At December 31, 2011, the Portfolio had a post-October short-term capital loss deferral of $3,632,691, which is deemed to arise on January 1, 2012. |
(b) | | The difference between book-basis and tax-basis unrealized appreciation/(depreciation) is attributable primarily to the tax deferral of losses on wash sales. |
For tax purposes, net capital losses may be carried over to offset future capital gains, if any. Under the Regulated Investment Company Modernization Act of 2010, funds are permitted to carry forward capital losses incurred in taxable years beginning after December 22, 2010 for an indefinite period. These post-enactment capital losses must be utilized prior to the pre-enactment capital losses, which are subject to expiration. Post-enactment capital loss carryforwards will retain their character as either short-term or long-term capital losses rather than being considered short-term as under previous regulation.
As of December 31, 2011, the Portfolio had a net capital loss carryforward of $298,366,259 which will expire as follows:
| | | | |
SHORT-TERM AMOUNT | | LONG-TERM AMOUNT | | EXPIRATION |
$ 60,797,075 | | n/a | | 2016 |
237,569,184 | | n/a | | 2017 |
NOTE J: Recent Accounting Pronouncement
In December 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued an Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) related to disclosures about offsetting assets and liabilities in financial statements. The amendments in this update require an entity to disclose both gross and net information for derivatives and other financial instruments that are either offset in the statement of assets and liabilities or subject to an enforceable master netting arrangement or similar agreement. The ASU is effective during interim or annual reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2013. At this time, management is evaluating the implication of this ASU and its impact on the financial statements has not been determined.
NOTE K: Subsequent Events
Management has evaluated subsequent events for possible recognition or disclosure in the financial statements through the date the financial statements are issued. Management has determined that there are no material events that would require disclosure in the Portfolio’s financial statements through this date.
13
| | |
| | |
GROWTH & INCOME PORTFOLIO | | |
FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Selected Data For A Share Of Capital Stock Outstanding Throughout Each Period
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | CLASS A | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, | |
| | | 2011 | | | 2010 | | | 2009 | | | 2008 | | | 2007 | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | | | $18.05 | | | | $17.19 | | | | $15.20 | | | | $13.10 | | | | $26.82 | | | | $27.19 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Income From Investment Operations | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income (a) | | | .13 | | | | .27 | | | | .20 | | | | .21 | | | | .30 | | | | .39 | |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investment transactions | | | 1.51 | | | | .83 | | | | 1.79 | | | | 2.47 | | | | (9.77 | ) | | | .97 | |
Contributions from Adviser | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | .00 | (b) | | | .06 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) in net asset value from operations | | | 1.64 | | | | 1.10 | | | | 1.99 | | | | 2.68 | | | | (9.47 | ) | | | 1.42 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Less: Dividends and Distributions | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Dividends from net investment income | | | –0 | – | | | (.24 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | (.58 | ) | | | (.45 | ) | | | (.41 | ) |
Distributions from net realized gain on investment transactions | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | (3.80 | ) | | | (1.38 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total dividends and distributions | | | –0 | – | | | (.24 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | (.58 | ) | | | (4.25 | ) | | | (1.79 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net asset value, end of period | | | $19.69 | | | | $18.05 | | | | $17.19 | | | | $15.20 | | | | $13.10 | | | | $26.82 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Return | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total investment return based on net asset value (c) | | | 9.09 | %* | | | 6.32 | %* | | | 13.09 | %* | | | 20.82 | %* | | | (40.60 | )%* | | | 5.12 | %** |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Ratios/Supplemental Data | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net assets, end of period (000’s omitted) | | | $134,021 | | | | $138,731 | | | | $201,521 | | | | $215,085 | | | | $211,920 | | | | $456,159 | |
Ratio to average net assets of: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Expenses | | | .60 | %(d) | | | .60 | % | | | .63 | %(e) | | | .63 | % | | | .62 | % | | | .59 | % |
Net investment income | | | 1.38 | %(d) | | | 1.52 | % | | | 1.30 | %(e) | | | 1.58 | % | | | 1.61 | % | | | 1.43 | % |
Portfolio turnover rate | | | 40 | % | | | 76 | % | | | 66 | % | | | 125 | % | | | 184 | % | | | 74 | % |
See footnote summary on page 15.
14
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Selected Data For A Share Of Capital Stock Outstanding Throughout Each Period
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | CLASS B | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, | |
| | | 2011 | | | 2010 | | | 2009 | | | 2008 | | | 2007 | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | | | $17.86 | | | | $17.01 | | | | $15.08 | | | | $12.97 | | | | $26.55 | | | | $26.93 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Income From Investment Operations | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income (a) | | | .11 | | | | .23 | | | | .16 | | | | .18 | | | | .25 | | | | .32 | |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investment transactions | | | 1.49 | | | | .81 | | | | 1.77 | | | | 2.42 | | | | (9.66 | ) | | | .96 | |
Contributions from Adviser | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | .00 | (b) | | | .06 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) in net asset value from operations | | | 1.60 | | | | 1.04 | | | | 1.93 | | | | 2.60 | | | | (9.41 | ) | | | 1.34 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Less: Dividends and Distributions | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Dividends from net investment income | | | –0 | – | | | (.19 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | (.49 | ) | | | (.37 | ) | | | (.34 | ) |
Distributions from net realized gain on investment transactions | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | (3.80 | ) | | | (1.38 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total dividends and distributions | | | –0 | – | | | (.19 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | (.49 | ) | | | (4.17 | ) | | | (1.72 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net asset value, end of period | | | $19.46 | | | | $17.86 | | | | $17.01 | | | | $15.08 | | | | $12.97 | | | | $26.55 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Return | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total investment return based on net asset value (c) | | | 8.96 | %* | | | 6.07 | %* | | | 12.80 | %* | | | 20.35 | %* | | | (40.69 | )%* | | | 4.86 | %** |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Ratios/Supplemental Data | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net assets, end of period (000’s omitted) | | | $747,282 | | | | $735,514 | | | | $805,714 | | | | $837,533 | | | | $819,994 | | | | $1,758,210 | |
Ratio to average net assets of: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Expenses | | | .85 | %(d) | | | .85 | % | | | .88 | %(e) | | | .88 | % | | | .87 | % | | | .84 | % |
Net investment income | | | 1.14 | %(d) | | | 1.28 | % | | | 1.05 | %(e) | | | 1.33 | % | | | 1.36 | % | | | 1.18 | % |
Portfolio turnover rate | | | 40 | % | | | 76 | % | | | 66 | % | | | 125 | % | | | 184 | % | | | 74 | % |
(a) | | Based on average shares outstanding. |
(b) | | Amount is less than $.005. |
(c) | | Total investment return is calculated assuming an initial investment made at the net asset value at the beginning of the period, reinvestment of all dividends and distributions at net asset value during the period, and redemption on the last day of the period. Total return does not reflect (i) insurance company’s separate account related expense charges and (ii) the deductions of taxes that a shareholder would pay on Portfolio distributions or the redemption of Portfolio shares. Total investment return calculated for a period of less than one year is not annualized. |
(e) | | The ratio includes expenses attributable to costs of proxy solicitation. |
* | | Includes the impact of proceeds received and credited to the Portfolio resulting from class action settlements, which enhanced the Portfolio’s performance for the six months ended June 30, 2012 and years ended December 31, 2011, December 31, 2010, December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008 by 0.04%, 0.13%, 0.27%, 0.54% and 0.46%, respectively. |
** | | Includes the impact of proceeds received and credited to the Portfolio in connection with an error made by the Adviser in processing a class action settlement claim, which enhanced the performance of each share class for the year ended December 31, 2007 by 0.19%. |
See notes to financial statements.
15
| | |
| | |
GROWTHAND INCOME PORTFOLIO | | |
CONTINUANCE DISCLOSURE | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
INFORMATION REGARDING THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE PORTFOLIO’S ADVISORY AGREEMENT
The disinterested directors (the “directors”) of AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund, Inc. (the “Fund”) unanimously approved the continuance of the Fund’s Advisory Agreement with the Adviser in respect of AllianceBernstein Growth and Income Portfolio (the “Portfolio”) at a meeting held on May 1-3, 2012.
Prior to approval of the continuance of the Advisory Agreement, the directors had requested from the Adviser, and received and evaluated, extensive materials. They reviewed the proposed continuance of the Advisory Agreement with the Adviser and with experienced counsel who are independent of the Adviser, who advised on the relevant legal standards. The directors also reviewed an independent evaluation prepared by the Fund’s Senior Officer (who is also the Fund’s Independent Compliance Officer) of the reasonableness of the advisory fee in the Advisory Agreement, in which the Senior Officer concluded that the contractual fee for the Portfolio was reasonable. The directors also discussed the proposed continuance in private sessions with counsel and the Fund’s Senior Officer.
The directors considered their knowledge of the nature and quality of the services provided by the Adviser to the Portfolio gained from their experience as directors or trustees of most of the registered investment companies advised by the Adviser, their overall confidence in the Adviser’s integrity and competence they have gained from that experience, the Adviser’s initiative in identifying and raising potential issues with the directors and its responsiveness, frankness and attention to concerns raised by the directors in the past, including the Adviser’s willingness to consider and implement organizational and operational changes designed to improve investment results and the services provided to the AllianceBernstein Funds. The directors noted that they have four regular meetings each year, at each of which they receive presentations from the Adviser on the investment results of the Portfolio and review extensive materials and information presented by the Adviser.
The directors also considered all other factors they believed relevant, including the specific matters discussed below. In their deliberations, the directors did not identify any particular information that was all-important or controlling, and different directors may have attributed different weights to the various factors. The directors determined that the selection of the Adviser to manage the Portfolio and the overall arrangements between the Portfolio and the Adviser, as provided in the Advisory Agreement, including the advisory fee, were fair and reasonable in light of the services performed, expenses incurred and such other matters as the directors considered relevant in the exercise of their business judgment. The material factors and conclusions that formed the basis for the directors’ determinations included the following:
Nature, Extent and Quality of Services Provided
The directors considered the scope and quality of services provided by the Adviser under the Advisory Agreement, including the quality of the investment research capabilities of the Adviser and the other resources it has dedicated to performing services for the Portfolio. They also noted the professional experience and qualifications of the Portfolio’s portfolio management team and other senior personnel of the Adviser. The directors also considered that the Advisory Agreement provides that the Portfolio will reimburse the Adviser for the cost to it of providing certain clerical, accounting, administrative and other services provided at the Portfolio’s request by employees of the Adviser or its affiliates. Requests for these reimbursements are approved by the directors on a quarterly basis and, to the extent requested and paid, result in a higher rate of total compensation from the Portfolio to the Adviser than the fee rate stated in the Portfolio’s Advisory Agreement. The directors noted that the methodology used to determine the reimbursement amounts had been reviewed by an independent consultant retained by the Fund’s Senior Officer. The quality of administrative and other services, including the Adviser’s role in coordinating the activities of the Portfolio’s other service providers, also were considered. The directors concluded that, overall, they were satisfied with the nature, extent and quality of services provided to the Portfolio under the Advisory Agreement.
Costs of Services Provided and Profitability
The directors reviewed a schedule of the revenues, expenses and related notes indicating the profitability of the Portfolio to the Adviser for calendar years 2010 and 2011 that had been prepared with an expense allocation methodology arrived at in consultation with an independent consultant retained by the Fund’s Senior Officer. The directors reviewed the assumptions and methods of allocation used by the Adviser in preparing fund-specific profitability data and noted that there are a number of potentially acceptable allocation methodologies for information of this type. The directors noted that the profitability information reflected all revenues and expenses of the Adviser’s relationship with the Portfolio, including those relating to its subsidiaries which provide transfer agency, distribution and brokerage services to the Portfolio. The directors recognized that it is difficult to make comparisons of profitability of the Advisory Agreement with fund advisory contracts for unaffiliated funds because comparative information is not generally publicly available and is affected by numerous factors. The directors focused on the profitability of the Adviser’s relationship with the Portfolio before taxes and distribution expenses. The direc-
16
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
tors concluded that they were satisfied that the Adviser’s level of profitability from its relationship with the Portfolio was not unreasonable.
Fall-Out Benefits
The directors considered the other benefits to the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationships with the Portfolio, including but not limited to benefits relating to soft dollar arrangements (whereby the Adviser receives brokerage and research services from brokers that execute transactions for certain clients, including the Portfolio); 12b-1 fees and sales charges received by the Fund’s principal underwriter (which is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Adviser) in respect of the Portfolio’s Class B shares; transfer agency fees paid by the Portfolio to a wholly owned subsidiary of the Adviser; and brokerage commissions paid by the Portfolio to brokers affiliated with the Adviser. The directors recognized that the Adviser’s profitability would be somewhat lower without these benefits. The directors also understood that the Adviser also might derive reputational and other benefits from its association with the Portfolio.
Investment Results
In addition to the information reviewed by the directors in connection with the meeting, the directors receive detailed performance information for the Portfolio at each regular Board meeting during the year. The directors noted that the Portfolio is a clone of another fund managed by the Adviser (the “Corresponding Fund”) and is managed to track the investment performance of its Corresponding Fund, although investment results may differ between the Portfolio and its Corresponding Fund due to differences in their expense ratios and other factors. At the May 2012 meeting, the directors reviewed information prepared by Lipper showing the performance of the Class A Shares of the Portfolio as compared with that of a group of similar funds selected by Lipper (the “Performance Group”) and as compared with that of a broader array of funds selected by Lipper (the “Performance Universe”), and information prepared by the Adviser showing performance of the Class A Shares as compared with the Russell 1000 Value Index (the “Index”), in each case for the 1-, 3-, 5- and 10-year periods ended February 29, 2012 and (in the case of comparisons with the Index) the since inception period (January 1991 inception). The directors noted that the Portfolio was in the 1st quintile of the Performance Group and the Performance Universe for the 1-year period, in the 2nd quintile of the Performance Group and 3rd quintile of the Performance Universe for the 3-year period, in the 3rd quintile of the Performance Group and the Performance Universe for the 5-year period, and in the 4th quintile of the Performance Group and the Performance Universe for the 10-year period. The Portfolio outperformed the Index in the 1- and 5-year periods and lagged the Index in all other periods. The directors also reviewed performance information for periods ended March 31, 2012 (for which the data was limited to Class A Shares), and noted that in the 3-month period the Portfolio had outperformed the Lipper VA Large Cap Value Funds Average and the Index. Based on their review, the directors concluded that the Portfolio’s performance was satisfactory.
Advisory Fees and Other Expenses
The directors considered the advisory fee rate paid by the Portfolio to the Adviser and information prepared by Lipper concerning advisory fee rates paid by other funds in the same Lipper category as the Portfolio at a common asset level. The directors recognized that it is difficult to make comparisons of advisory fees because there are variations in the services that are included in the fees paid by other funds.
The directors also considered the fees the Adviser charges non-fund clients pursuing a substantially similar investment style. For this purpose, they reviewed the relevant fee information from the Adviser’s Form ADV and the evaluation from the Fund’s Senior Officer. The directors noted that the institutional fee schedule started at a higher fee rate than the Portfolio’s starting fee rate, but had more breakpoints starting at lower asset levels. As a result, the application of the institutional fee schedule to the level of assets of the Portfolio would result in a lower fee rate than that being paid by the Portfolio. The directors noted that the Adviser may, in some cases, agree to fee rates with large institutional clients that are lower than those reviewed by the directors and that they had previously discussed with the Adviser its policies in respect of such arrangements. The directors noted that the advisory fee schedule for the Portfolio is the same as that for its Corresponding Fund.
The Adviser reviewed with the directors the significantly greater scope of the services it provides to the Portfolio relative to institutional clients. The Adviser also noted that because mutual funds are constantly issuing and redeeming shares, they are more difficult to manage than an institutional account, where the assets tend to be relatively stable. In light of the substantial differences in services rendered by the Adviser to institutional clients as compared to funds such as the Portfolio, the directors considered these fee comparisons inapt and did not place significant weight on them in their deliberations.
17
| | |
GROWTHAND INCOME PORTFOLIO | | |
CONTINUANCE DISCLOSURE | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
The directors also considered the total expense ratio of the Class A shares of the Portfolio in comparison to the fees and expenses of funds within two comparison groups created by Lipper: an Expense Group and an Expense Universe. Lipper described an Expense Group as a representative sample of funds similar to the Portfolio and an Expense Universe as a broader group, consisting of all funds in the investment classification/objective with a similar load type as the Portfolio. The Class A expense ratio of the Portfolio was based on the Portfolio’s latest fiscal year. The directors noted that it was likely that the expense ratios of some of the other funds in the Portfolio’s Lipper category were lowered by waivers or reimbursements by those funds’ investment advisers, which in some cases might be voluntary or temporary. The directors view the expense ratio information as relevant to their evaluation of the Adviser’s services because the Adviser is responsible for coordinating services provided to the Portfolio by others.
The directors noted that, at the Portfolio’s current size, its contractual effective advisory fee rate of 55 basis points, plus the 1 basis point impact of the administrative expense reimbursement in the latest fiscal year, was lower than the Expense Group median. The directors also noted that the Portfolio’s total expense ratio was lower than the Expense Group and the Expense Universe medians. The directors concluded that the Portfolio’s expense ratio was satisfactory.
Economies of Scale
The directors noted that the advisory fee schedule for the Portfolio contains breakpoints that reduce the fee rates on assets above specified levels. The directors took into consideration prior presentations by an independent consultant on economies of scale in the mutual fund industry and for the AllianceBernstein Funds, and by the Adviser concerning certain of its views on economies of scale. The directors also had requested and received from the Adviser certain updates on economies of scale at the May 2012 meetings. The directors believe that economies of scale may be realized (if at all) by the Adviser across a variety of products and services, and not only in respect of a single fund. The directors noted that there is no established methodology for establishing breakpoints that give effect to the fund-specific services provided by a fund’s adviser and to the economies of scale that an adviser may realize in its overall mutual fund business or those components of it which directly or indirectly affect a fund’s operations. The directors observed that in the mutual fund industry as a whole, as well as among funds similar to the Portfolio, there is no uniformity or pattern in the fees and asset levels at which breakpoints (if any) apply. The directors also noted that the advisory agreements for many funds do not have breakpoints at all. Having taken these factors into account, the directors concluded that the Portfolio’s shareholders would benefit from a sharing of economies of scale in the event the Portfolio’s net assets exceed a breakpoint in the future.
18
| | |
| | |
GROWTH & INCOME PORTFOLIO | | |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
THE FOLLOWING IS NOT PART OF THE SHAREHOLDER REPORT OR THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
SUMMARY OF SENIOR OFFICER’S EVALUATION OF INVESTMENT ADVISORY AGREEMENT1
The following is a summary of the evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement between AllianceBernstein L.P. (the “Adviser”) and the AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund (the “Fund”), in respect of AllianceBernstein Growth & Income Portfolio (the “Portfolio”).2 The evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement was prepared by Philip L. Kirstein, the Senior Officer of the Fund, for the Directors of the Fund, as required by a September 2004 agreement between the Adviser and the New York State Attorney General (the “NYAG”). The Senior Officer’s evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement is not meant to diminish the responsibility or authority of the Board of Directors of the Fund to perform its duties pursuant to Section 15 of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “40 Act”) and applicable state law. The purpose of the summary is to provide shareholders with a synopsis of the independent evaluation of the reasonableness of the advisory fees proposed to be paid by the Portfolio which was provided to the Directors in connection with their review of the proposed approval of the continuance of the Investment Advisory Agreement. The Senior Officer’s evaluation considered the following factors:
| 1. | Advisory fees charged to institutional and other clients of the Adviser for like services; |
| 2. | Advisory fees charged by other mutual fund companies for like services; |
| 3. | Costs to the Adviser and its affiliates of supplying services pursuant to the advisory agreement, excluding any intra-corporate profit; |
| 4. | Profit margins of the Adviser and its affiliates from supplying such services; |
| 5. | Possible economies of scale as the Portfolio grows larger; and |
| 6. | Nature and quality of the Adviser’s services including the performance of the Portfolio. |
These factors, with the exception of the first factor, are generally referred to as the “Gartenberg factors,” which were articulated by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in 1982. Gartenberg v. Merrill Lynch Asset Management, Inc., 694 F. 2d 923 (2d Cir. 1982). The first factor is an additional factor required to be considered by the AoD. On March 30, 2010, the Supreme Court held the Gartenberg decision was correct in its basic formulation of what §36(b) requires: to face liability under §36(b), “an investment adviser must charge a fee that is so disproportionately large that it bears no reasonable relationship to the services rendered and could not have been the product of arm’s length bargaining.” Jones v. Harris Associates L.P., 130 S. Ct. 1418 (2010). In the Jones decision, the Court stated the Gartenberg approach fully incorporates the correct understanding of fiduciary duty within the context of section 36(b) and noted with approval that “Gartenberg insists that all relevant circumstances be taken into account” and “uses the range of fees that might result from arm’s-length bargaining as the benchmark for reviewing challenged fees.”3
PORTFOLIO ADVISORY FEES, NET ASSETS & EXPENSE RATIOS
The Adviser proposed that the Portfolio pay the advisory fee set forth in the table below for receiving the services to be provided pursuant to the Investment Advisory Agreement. The fee schedule below, implemented in January 2004 in consideration of the Adviser’s settlement with the NYAG in December 2003, is based on a master schedule that contemplates eight categories of funds with almost all funds in each category having the same advisory fee schedule.
| | | | | | | | |
Category | | Advisory Fee Based on % of Average Daily Net Assets | | Net Assets 3/31/12 ($MIL) | | | Portfolio |
Value | | 55 bp on first $2.5 billion 45 bp on next $2.5 billion 40 bp on the balance | | $ | 948.2 | | | Growth & Income Portfolio |
The Adviser is reimbursed as specified in the Investment Advisory Agreement for certain clerical, legal, accounting, administrative and other services provided to the Portfolio. During the Portfolio’s most recently completed fiscal year, the Adviser received $60,194 (0.01% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets) for such services.
1 | | The information in the fee summary was completed on April 19, 2012 and discussed with the Board of Directors on May 1-3, 2012. |
2 | | Future references to the Fund and the Portfolio do not include “AllianceBernstein.” References in the fee summary pertaining to performance and expense ratio rankings refer to the Class A shares of the Portfolio. |
3 | | Jones v. Harris at 1427. |
19
| | |
GROWTH & INCOME PORTFOLIO | | |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Set forth below are the Portfolio’s total expense ratios for the most recently completed fiscal year:
| | | | |
Portfolio | | Total Expense Ratio | | Fiscal Year |
Growth & Income Portfolio | | Class A 0.60% | | December 31 |
| | Class B 0.85% | | |
I. ADVISORY FEES CHARGED TO INSTITUTIONAL AND OTHER CLIENTS
The advisory fees charged to investment companies which the Adviser manages and sponsors are normally higher than those charged to similar sized institutional accounts, including pension plans and sub-advised investment companies. The fee differential reflects, among other things, different services provided to such clients, and different liabilities assumed. Services provided by the Adviser to the Portfolio that are not provided to non-investment company clients and sub-advised investment companies include providing office space and personnel to serve as Fund Officers, who among other responsibilities make the certifications required under the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002, and coordinating with and monitoring the Portfolio’s third party service providers such as Fund counsel, auditors, custodians, transfer agents and pricing services. The accounting, administrative, legal and compliance requirements for the Portfolio are more costly than those for institutional assets due to the greater complexities and time required for investment companies, although as previously noted, the Adviser is reimbursed for providing such services. Also, retail mutual funds managed by the Adviser are widely held. Servicing the Portfolio’s investors is more time consuming and labor intensive compared to institutional clients since the Adviser needs to communicate with a more extensive network of financial intermediaries and shareholders. The Adviser also believes that it incurs substantial entrepreneurial risk when offering a new mutual fund, since establishing a new mutual fund requires a large upfront investment, and it may take a long time for the fund to achieve profitability since the fund must be priced to scale from inception in order to be competitive and assets are acquired one account at a time. In addition, managing the cash flow of an investment company may be more difficult than managing that of a stable pool of assets, such as an institutional account with little cash movement in either direction, particularly, if a fund is in net redemption and the Adviser is frequently forced to sell securities to raise cash for redemptions. However, managing a fund with positive cash flow may be easier at times than managing a stable pool of assets. In recent years, investment advisers have been sued by institutional clients and have suffered reputational damage both by the attendant publicity and outcomes other than complete victories. Accordingly, the legal and reputational risks associated with institutional accounts are greater than previously thought, although still not equal to those related to the mutual fund industry.
Notwithstanding the Adviser’s view that managing an investment company is not comparable to managing other institutional accounts because the services provided are different, the Supreme Court has indicated consideration should be given to the advisory fees charged to institutional accounts that have a substantially similar investment style as the Portfolio.4 In addition to the AllianceBernstein institutional fee schedule, set forth below is what would have been the effective advisory fee of the Portfolio had the AllianceBernstein institutional fee schedule been applicable to the Portfolio versus the Portfolio’s advisory fee based on March 31, 2012 net assets:5
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Net Assets 3/31/12 ($MIL) | | AllianceBernstein Institutional Fee Schedule | | Effective AB Inst. Adv. Fee | | | Portfolio Advisory Fee | |
Growth & Income Portfolio | | $948.2 | | Relative Value Schedule 65 bp on first $25m 50 bp on next $25m 40 bp on next $50m 30 bp on next $100m 25 bp on the balance Minimum account size $25m | | | 0.280 | % | | | 0.550 | % |
The Adviser also manages AllianceBernstein Growth & Income Fund, Inc. (“Growth & Income Fund, Inc.”), a retail mutual fund, which has a substantially similar investment style as the Portfolio. Set forth below is the fee schedule of Growth &
4 | | The Supreme Court stated that “courts may give such comparisons the weight that they merit in light of the similarities and differences between the services that the clients in question require, but the courts must be wary of inapt comparisons.” Among the significant differences the Supreme Court noted that may exist between services provided to mutual funds and institutional accounts are “higher marketing costs.” Jones v. Harris at 1428. |
5 | | The Adviser has indicated that with respect to institutional accounts with assets greater than $300 million, it will negotiate a fee schedule. Discounts that are negotiated vary based upon each client relationship. |
20
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Income Fund, Inc. and what would have been the effective advisory fee of the Portfolio had the fee schedule of the retail mutual fund been applicable to the Portfolio:6
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | AllianceBernstein Mutual Fund | | Fee Schedule | | ABMF Effective Fee | | | Portfolio Advisory Fee | |
Growth & Income Portfolio | | Growth & Income Fund, Inc. | | 0.55% on first $2.5 billion 0.45% on next $2.5 billion 0.40% on the balance | | | 0.550% | | | | 0.550% | |
The Adviser represented that it does not sub-advise any registered investment company with a substantially similar investment style as the Portfolio.
II. MANAGEMENT FEES CHARGED BY OTHER MUTUAL FUND COMPANIES FOR LIKE SERVICES.
Lipper, Inc. (“Lipper”), an analytical service that is not affiliated with the Adviser, compared the fees charged to the Portfolio with fees charged to other investment companies for similar services offered by other investment advisers.7 Lipper’s analysis included the comparison of the Portfolio’s contractual management fee, estimated at the approximate current asset level of the Portfolio, to the median of the Portfolio’s Lipper Expense Group (“EG”) and the Portfolio’s contractual management fee ranking.8
Lipper describes an EG as a representative sample of comparable funds. Lipper’s standard methodology for screening funds to be included in an EG entails the consideration of several fund criteria, including fund type, investment classification/objective, load type and similar 12b-1/non-12b-1 service fees, asset (size) comparability, expense components and attributes. An EG will typically consist of seven to twenty funds.
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Contractual Management Fee9 | | | Lipper Exp. Group Median (%) | | | Rank | |
Growth & Income Portfolio | | | 0.550 | | | | 0.702 | | | | 3/15 | |
Lipper also analyzed the Portfolio’s most recently completed fiscal year total expense ratio in comparison to the Portfolio’s EG and Lipper Expense Universe (“EU”). The EU10 is a broader group compared to the EG, consisting of all funds that have the same investment classification/objective and load type as the subject Portfolio.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Expense Ratio (%)11 | | | Lipper Exp. Group Median (%) | | | Lipper Group Rank | | | Lipper Exp. Universe Median (%) | | | Lipper Universe Rank | |
Growth & Income Portfolio | | | 0.602 | | | | 0.728 | | | | 2/15 | | | | 0.750 | | | | 3/36 | |
Based on this analysis, the Portfolio has a more favorable ranking on a total expense ratio basis than on a management fee basis.
III. COSTS TO THE ADVISER AND ITS AFFILIATES OF SUPPLYING SERVICES PURSUANT TO THE ADVISORY FEE ARRANGEMENT, EXCLUDING ANY INTRA-CORPORATE PROFIT.
The Adviser utilizes two profitability reporting systems, which operate independently but are aligned with each other, to estimate the Adviser’s profitability in connection with investment advisory services provided to the Portfolio. The Senior
6 | | The retail mutual fund was also affected by the settlement between the Adviser and the NYAG. As a result, the Portfolio has the same breakpoints in its advisory fee schedule as the retail mutual fund. |
7 | | The Supreme Court cautioned against accepting mutual fund fee comparisons without careful scrutiny since “these comparisons are problematic because these fees, like those challenged, may not be the product of the negotiations conducted at arm’s-length.” Jones v. Harris at 1429. |
8 | | The contractual management fee is calculated by Lipper using the Portfolio’s contractual management fee rate at a hypothetical asset level. The hypothetical asset level is based on the combined net assets of all classes of the Portfolio, rounded up to the next $25 million. Lipper’s total expense ratio information is based on the most recent annual report except as otherwise noted. A ranking of “1” would mean that the Portfolio had the lowest effective fee rate in the Lipper peer group. |
9 | | The contractual management fee does not reflect any expense reimbursements made by the Portfolio to the Adviser for certain clerical, legal, accounting, administrative and other services. |
10 | | Except for asset (size) comparability, Lipper uses the same criteria for selecting an EG when selecting an EU. Unlike the EG, the EU allows for the same adviser to be represented by more than just one fund. |
11 | | Most recently completed fiscal year end Class A total expense ratio. |
21
| | |
GROWTH & INCOME PORTFOLIO | | |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Officer has retained a consultant to provide independent advice regarding the alignment of the two profitability systems as well as the methodologies and allocations utilized by both profitability systems.
IV. PROFIT MARGINS OF THE ADVISER AND ITS AFFILIATES FOR SUPPLYING SUCH SERVICES.
The Portfolio’s profitability information, prepared by the Adviser for the Board of Directors, was reviewed by the Senior Officer and the consultant. The Adviser’s profitability from providing investment advisory services to the Portfolio decreased during calendar year 2011, relative to 2010.
In addition to the Adviser’s direct profits from managing the Portfolio, certain of the Adviser’s affiliates have business relationships with the Portfolio and may earn a profit from providing other services to the Portfolio. The courts have referred to this type of business opportunity as “fall-out benefits” to the Adviser and indicated that such benefits should be factored into the evaluation of the total relationship between the Portfolio and the Adviser. Neither case law nor common business practice precludes the Adviser’s affiliates from earning a reasonable profit on this type of relationship provided the affiliates’ charges and services are competitive. These affiliates provide transfer agent, distribution and brokerage related services to the Portfolio and receive transfer agent fees, Rule 12b-1 payments, and brokerage commissions. In addition, the Adviser benefits from soft dollar arrangements which offset expenses the Adviser would otherwise incur.
The Portfolio has adopted a distribution plan for Class B shares pursuant to Rule 12b-1 under the 40 Act. Under the distribution plan, the Portfolio pays distribution and servicing fees to its principal underwriter, AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (“ABI”), at an annual rate of up to 0.50% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The current annual rate that the Portfolio pays to ABI for 12b-1 fees is 0.25%. During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011, AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (“ABI”), the Portfolio’s distributor and an affiliate of the Adviser, received $1,943,217 in Rule 12b-1 fees.
During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011, the Adviser incurred distribution expenses in the amount of $4,634,478 in connection with activities primarily intended to result in the sale of the Portfolio’s Class B shares. This amount includes the 12b-1 fees paid by the Portfolio to the Adviser.
Financial intermediaries, such as insurers, market and sell shares of the Portfolio and typically receive compensation from ABI, the Advisers and/or the Portfolio for selling shares of the Portfolio. These financial intermediaries receive compensation in any or all of the following forms: 12b-1 fees, defrayal of costs for educational seminars and training, additional distribution support, recordkeeping and/or administrative services. Payments related to providing contract-holder recordkeeping and/or administrative services will generally not exceed 0.35% of the average daily net assets of the Portfolio attributable to the relevant intermediary over the year. With respect to the Fund, which includes the Portfolio and other Portfolios of the Fund not discussed in this summary, ABI paid approximately $500,000 in 2011.
The transfer agent of the Portfolio is AllianceBernstein Investor Services, Inc. (“ABIS”). During the most recently completed fiscal year, ABIS received a fee of $1,311 from the Portfolio.12
The Portfolio did not effect brokerage transactions through the Adviser’s affiliate, Sanford C. Bernstein & Co., LLC (“SCB & Co.”) nor its U.K. affiliate, Sanford C. Bernstein Limited (“SCB Ltd.”), collectively “SCB,” and pay commissions during the Portfolio’s most recently completed fiscal year. The Adviser represented that SCB’s profitability from business conducted in the future with the Portfolio would be comparable to the profitability of SCB’s dealings with other similar third party clients. In the ordinary course of business, SCB receives and pays liquidity rebates from electronic communications networks (“ECNs”) derived from trading for its clients, including the Portfolio. These credits and charges are not being passed onto any SCB client. The Adviser also receives certain soft dollar benefits from brokers that execute agency trades for the Portfolio and other clients. These soft dollar benefits reduce the Adviser’s cost of doing business and increase its profitability.
V. POSSIBLE ECONOMIES OF SCALE
The Adviser has indicated that economies of scale are being shared with shareholders through fee structures,13 subsidies and enhancement to services. Based on some of the professional literature that has considered economies of scale in the mutual fund industry, it is thought that to the extent economies of scale exist, they may more often exist across a fund family as
12 | | The Fund, which includes the Portfolio and other Portfolios of the Fund paid ABIS a flat fee of $18,000 in 2011. |
13 | | Fee structures include fee reductions, pricing at scale and breakpoints in advisory fee schedules. |
22
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
opposed to a specific fund. This is because the costs incurred by the Adviser, such as investment research or technology for trading or compliance systems can be spread across a greater asset base as the fund family increases in size. It is also possible that as the level of services required to operate a successful investment company has increased over time, and advisory firms make such investments in their business to provide services, there may be a sharing of economies of scale without a reduction in advisory fees.
An independent consultant, retained by the Senior Officer, provided the Board of Directors information on the Adviser’s firm-wide average costs from 2005 through 2011 and potential economies of scale. The independent consultant noted that from 2005 through 2007 the Adviser experienced significant growth in assets under management (“AUM”). During this period, operating expenses increased, in part to keep up with growth, and in part reflecting market returns. However, from 2008 through the first quarter of 2009, AUM rapidly and significantly decreased. Some operating expenses, including base compensation and office space, adjusted more slowly during this period, resulting in an increase in average costs. Since 2009, AUM has moved within a range of $400 to $500 million ending 2011 with an average of $411 million in the fourth quarter. The independent consultant noted that changes in operating expenses reflect changes in business composition and business practices in response to changes in financial markets. Finally, the independent consultant concluded that the increase in average cost and the decline in net operating margin across the company since 2008 are inconsistent with the view that there are currently “economies of scale” to be shared with clients through lower fees.
In February 2008, the independent consultant provided the Board of Directors an update of the Deli14 study on advisory fees and various fund characteristics.15 The independent consultant first reiterated the results of his previous two dimensional comparison analysis (fund size and family size) with the Board of Directors.16 The independent consultant then discussed the results of the regression model that was utilized to study the effects of various factors on advisory fees. The regression model output indicated that the bulk of the variation in fees predicted were explained by various factors, but substantially by fund AUM, family AUM, index fund indicator and investment style. The independent consultant also compared the advisory fees of the AllianceBernstein Mutual Funds to similar funds managed by 19 other large asset managers, regardless of the fund size and each Adviser’s proportion of mutual fund assets to non-mutual fund assets.
VI. NATURE AND QUALITY OF THE ADVISER’S SERVICES, INCLUDING THE PERFORMANCE OF THE PORTFOLIO
With assets under management of approximately $419 billion as of March 31, 2012, the Adviser has the investment experience to manage and provide non-investment services (described in Section I) to the Portfolio.
The information prepared by Lipper shows the 1, 3, 5 and 10 year performance returns and rankings of the Portfolio17 relative to its Lipper Performance Group (“PG”) and Lipper Performance Universe (“PU”)18 for the periods ended February 29, 2012.19
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Fund | | | PG Median | | | PU Median | | | PG Rank | | | PU Rank | |
Growth & Income Portfolio | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
1 year | | | 9.76 | | | | 0.31 | | | | 1.53 | | | | 1/15 | | | | 1/46 | |
3 year | | | 23.56 | | | | 23.33 | | | | 23.25 | | | | 5/14 | | | | 18/43 | |
5 year | | | 0.03 | | | | 0.03 | | | | –0.04 | | | | 6/11 | | | | 18/36 | |
10 year | | | 3.92 | | | | 4.08 | | | | 4.39 | | | | 7/10 | | | | 18/24 | |
14 | | The Deli study, originally published in 2002 based on 1997 data and updated for the February 2008 Presentation, may be of diminished value due to the age of the data used in the presentation and the changes experienced in the industry over the last four years. |
15 | | The Supreme Court cautioned against accepting mutual fund fee comparisons without careful scrutiny since the fees may not be the product of negotiations conducted at arm’s length. See Jones V. Harris at 1429. |
16 | | The two dimensional analysis showed patterns of lower advisory fees for funds with larger asset sizes and funds from larger family sizes compared to funds with smaller asset sizes and funds from smaller family sizes, which according to the independent consultant is indicative of a sharing of economies of scale and scope. However, in less liquid and active markets, such is not the case, as the empirical analysis showed potential for diseconomies of scale in those markets. The empirical analysis also showed diminishing economies of scale and scope as funds surpassed a certain high level of assets. |
17 | | The performance rankings are for the Class A shares of the Portfolio. The Portfolio’s performance returns shown were provided by Lipper. |
18 | | The Portfolio’s PG is identical to the Portfolio’s EG. The Portfolio’s PU is not identical to the Portfolio’s EU as the criteria for including/excluding a fund from a PU is somewhat different from that of an EU. |
19 | | The current Lipper investment classification/objective dictates the PG and PU throughout the life of the fund even if a fund had a different investment classification/objective at a different point in time. |
23
| | |
GROWTH & INCOME PORTFOLIO | | |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Set forth below are the 1, 3, 5, 10 year and since inception performance returns of the Portfolio (in bold)20 versus its benchmarks.21 Portfolio and benchmark volatility and reward-to-variability ratio (“Sharpe Ratio”) information is also shown.22
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Periods Ending February 29, 2012 Annualized Performance | |
| | 1 Year (%) | | | 3 Year (%) | | | 5 Year (%) | | | 10 Year (%) | | | Since Inception (%) | | | Annualized | | | Risk Period (Year) | |
| | | | | | | Volatility (%) | | | Sharpe (%) | | |
Growth & Income Portfolio | | | 9.76 | | | | 23.56 | | | | 0.03 | | | | 3.92 | | | | 8.74 | | | | 16.55 | | | | 0.20 | | | | 10 | |
Russell 1000 Value Index | | | 2.18 | | | | 25.01 | | | – | 1.08 | | | | 4.75 | | | | 10.14 | | | | 16.67 | | | | 0.25 | | | | 10 | |
Inception Date: February 25, 1994 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CONCLUSION:
Based on the factors discussed above the Senior Officer’s conclusion is that the proposed advisory fee for the Portfolio is reasonable and within the range of what would have been negotiated at arm’s-length in light of all the surrounding circumstances. This conclusion in respect of the Portfolio is based on an evaluation of all of these factors and no single factor was dispositive.
Dated: May 25, 2012
20 | | The performance returns and risk measures shown in the table are for the Class A shares of the Portfolio. |
21 | | The Adviser provided Portfolio and benchmark performance return information for periods through February 29, 2012. |
22 | | Portfolio and benchmark volatility and Sharpe Ratio information was obtained through Lipper LANA, a database maintained by Lipper. Volatility is a statistical measure of the tendency of a market price or yield to vary over time. A Sharpe Ratio is a risk adjusted measure of return that divides a portfolio’s return in excess of the riskless return by the portfolio’s standard deviation. A portfolio with a greater volatility would be viewed as more risky than a portfolio with equivalent performance but lower volatility; for that reason, a greater return would be demanded for the more risky portfolio. A portfolio with a higher Sharpe Ratio would be viewed as better performing than a portfolio with a lower Sharpe Ratio. |
24
AllianceBernstein
Variable Products Series Fund, Inc.
| | |
![LOGO](https://capedge.com/proxy/N-CSRS/0001193125-12-366259/g374696g16n16.jpg) | | AllianceBernstein Global Thematic Growth Portfolio |
Semi-Annual Report
![LOGO](https://capedge.com/proxy/N-CSRS/0001193125-12-366259/g374696g81g54.jpg)
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT
Investment Products Offered
| Ø | | Are Not Bank Guaranteed |
AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (ABI) is the distributor of the AllianceBernstein family of mutual funds. ABI is a member of FINRA and is an affiliate of AllianceBernstein L.P., the manager of the funds.
You may obtain a description of the Fund’s proxy voting policies and procedures, and information regarding how the Fund voted proxies relating to portfolio securities during the most recent 12-month period ended June 30, without charge. Simply visit AllianceBernstein’s website at www.alliancebernstein.com or go to the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (the “Commission”) website at www.sec.gov, or call AllianceBernstein at (800) 227-4618.
The Fund files its complete schedule of portfolio holdings with the Commission for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year on Form N-Q. The Fund’s Forms N-Q are available on the Commission’s website at www.sec.gov. The Fund’s Forms N-Q may also be reviewed and copied at the Commission’s Public Reference Room in Washington, DC; information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling (800) SEC-0330.
AllianceBernstein® and the AB Logo are registered trademarks and service marks used by permission of the owner, AllianceBernstein L.P.
| | |
| | |
GLOBAL THEMATIC GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
FUND EXPENSES (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
As a shareholder of the Fund, you incur two types of costs: (1) transaction costs, including sales charges (loads) on purchase payments, contingent deferred sales charges on redemptions and (2) ongoing costs, including management fees; distribution (12b-1) fees; and other Fund expenses. This example is intended to help you understand your ongoing costs (in dollars) of investing in the Fund and to compare these costs with the ongoing costs of investing in other mutual funds.
The Example is based on an investment of $1,000 invested at the beginning of the period and held for the entire period as indicated below.
Actual Expenses
The first line of each class’ table below provides information about actual account values and actual expenses. You may use the information in this line, together with the amount you invested, to estimate the expenses that you paid over the period. Simply divide your account value by $1,000 (for example, an $8,600 account value divided by $1,000 = 8.6), then multiply the result by the number in the first line under the heading entitled “Expenses Paid During Period” to estimate the expenses you paid on your account during this period. The estimate of expenses does not include fees or other expenses of any variable insurance product. If such expenses were included, the estimate of expenses you paid during the period would be higher and your ending account value would be lower.
Hypothetical Example for Comparison Purposes
The second line of each class’ table below provides information about hypothetical account values and hypothetical expenses based on the Fund’s actual expense ratio and an assumed annual rate of return of 5% before expenses, which is not the Fund’s actual return. The hypothetical account values and expenses may not be used to estimate the actual ending account balance or expenses you paid for the period. You may use this information to compare the ongoing costs of investing in the Fund and other funds by comparing this 5% hypothetical example with the 5% hypothetical examples that appear in the shareholder reports of other funds. The estimate of expenses does not include fees or other expenses of any variable insurance product. If such expenses were included, the estimate of expenses you paid during the period would be higher and your ending account value would be lower.
Please note that the expenses shown in the table are meant to highlight your ongoing costs only and do not reflect any transactional costs, such as sales charges (loads), or contingent deferred sales charges on redemptions. Therefore, the second line of each class’ table is useful in comparing ongoing costs only, and will not help you determine the relative total costs of owning different funds. In addition, if these transactional costs were included, your costs would have been higher.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Beginning Account Value January 1, 2012 | | | Ending Account Value June 30, 2012 | | | Expenses Paid During Period* | | | Annualized Expense Ratio* | |
Class A | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Actual | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,032.30 | | | $ | 5.00 | | | | 0.99 | % |
Hypothetical (5% return before expenses) | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,019.94 | | | $ | 4.97 | | | | 0.99 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class B | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Actual | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,031.00 | | | $ | 6.26 | | | | 1.24 | % |
Hypothetical (5% return before expenses) | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,018.70 | | | $ | 6.22 | | | | 1.24 | % |
* | | Expenses are equal to each classes’ annualized expense ratios, multiplied by the average account value over the period, multiplied by 182/366 (to reflect the one-half year period). |
1
| | |
GLOBAL THEMATIC GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
TEN LARGEST HOLDINGS* | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
COMPANY | | U.S. $ VALUE | | | PERCENT OF NET ASSETS | |
Illumina, Inc. | | $ | 5,005,331 | | | | 3.8 | % |
NVIDIA Corp. | | | 3,668,215 | | | | 2.8 | |
Green Dot Corp. | | | 3,584,413 | | | | 2.7 | |
Fusion-io, Inc. | | | 3,559,384 | | | | 2.7 | |
Amazon.com, Inc. | | | 3,432,100 | | | | 2.6 | |
Red Hat, Inc. | | | 3,037,720 | | | | 2.3 | |
Silicon Graphics International Corp. | | | 2,845,967 | | | | 2.2 | |
Goldcorp, Inc. | | | 2,688,484 | | | | 2.0 | |
Hang Lung Properties Ltd. | | | 2,623,614 | | | | 2.0 | |
Burberry Group PLC | | | 2,580,321 | | | | 1.9 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | $ | 33,025,549 | | | | 25.0 | % |
SECTOR DIVERSIFICATION**
June 30, 2012 (unaudited)
| | | | | | | | |
SECTOR | | U.S. $ VALUE | | | PERCENT OF TOTAL INVESTMENTS | |
Information Technology | | $ | 39,395,446 | | | | 29.9 | % |
Financials | | | 21,952,043 | | | | 16.7 | |
Consumer Discretionary | | | 19,002,519 | | | | 14.4 | |
Energy | | | 14,534,652 | | | | 11.1 | |
Health Care | | | 10,870,976 | | | | 8.3 | |
Materials | | | 10,740,063 | | | | 8.2 | |
Industrials | | | 9,710,837 | | | | 7.4 | |
Telecommunication Services | | | 2,508,156 | | | | 1.9 | |
Consumer Staples | | | 2,394,417 | | | | 1.8 | |
Options Purchased—Calls | | | 20,000 | | | | 0.0 | |
Short-Term Investments | | | 458,128 | | | | 0.3 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Investments | | $ | 131,587,237 | | | | 100.0 | % |
** | | The Portfolio’s sector breakdown is expressed as a percentage of total investments (excluding security lending collateral) and may vary over time. The Portfolio also enters into derivative transactions, which may be used for hedging or investment purposes (see “Portfolio of Investments” section of the report for additional details). |
Please note: The sector classifications presented herein are based on the Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS) which was developed by Morgan Stanley Capital International and Standard & Poor’s. The components are divided into sector, industry group, and industry sub-indices as classified by the GICS for each of the market capitalization indices in the broad market. These sector classifications are broadly defined. The “Portfolio of Investments” section of the report reflects more specific industry information and is consistent with the investment restrictions discussed in the Fund’s prospectus.
2
| | |
GLOBAL THEMATIC GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
COUNTRY DIVERSIFICATION* | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
COUNTRY | | U.S.$ VALUE | | | PERCENT OF TOTAL INVESTMENTS | |
United States | | $ | 80,966,995 | | | | 61.5 | % |
China | | | 11,318,002 | | | | 8.6 | |
Hong Kong | | | 10,003,564 | | | | 7.6 | |
Canada | | | 6,083,958 | | | | 4.6 | |
United Kingdom | | | 3,978,629 | | | | 3.0 | |
Japan | | | 3,310,187 | | | | 2.5 | |
Luxembourg | | | 2,184,157 | | | | 1.7 | |
Indonesia | | | 1,996,866 | | | | 1.5 | |
South Korea | | | 1,915,747 | | | | 1.5 | |
Mexico | | | 1,745,499 | | | | 1.3 | |
Italy | | | 1,696,757 | | | | 1.3 | |
Belgium | | | 1,431,900 | | | | 1.1 | |
Israel | | | 1,393,686 | | | | 1.1 | |
Other | | | 3,103,162 | | | | 2.4 | |
Short-Term Investments | | | 458,128 | | | | 0.3 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Investments | | $ | 131,587,237 | | | | 100.0 | % |
* | | All data are as of June 30, 2012. The Portfolio’s country breakdown is expressed as a percentage of total investments (excluding security lending collateral) and may vary over time. “Other” country weightings represent 0.9% or less in the following countries: Australia, Mongolia and Philippines. |
3
| | |
GLOBAL THEMATIC GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMMON STOCKS–99.1% | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY–29.8% | | | | | | | | |
COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT–1.9% | | | | | | | | |
QUALCOMM, Inc. | | | 45,490 | | | $ | 2,532,883 | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMPUTERS & PERIPHERALS–7.0% | | | | | | | | |
Apple, Inc.(a) | | | 3,700 | | | | 2,160,800 | |
Fusion-io, Inc.(a)(b) | | | 170,387 | | | | 3,559,384 | |
Silicon Graphics International Corp.(a)(b) | | | 443,297 | | | | 2,845,967 | |
Stratasys, Inc.(a)(b) | | | 14,330 | | | | 710,052 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 9,276,203 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INTERNET SOFTWARE & SERVICES–9.4% | | | | | | | | |
Ancestry.com, Inc.(a)(b) | | | 11,740 | | | | 323,202 | |
Baidu, Inc. (Sponsored ADR)(a) | | | 16,035 | | | | 1,843,704 | |
Cornerstone OnDemand, Inc.(a)(b) | | | 59,169 | | | | 1,408,814 | |
Equinix, Inc.(a) | | | 8,370 | | | | 1,470,191 | |
Facebook, Inc.(a)(b) | | | 49,522 | | | | 1,541,125 | |
LinkedIn Corp.(a) | | | 15,986 | | | | 1,698,832 | |
Rackspace Hosting, Inc.(a) | | | 55,082 | | | | 2,420,303 | |
Yelp, Inc.(a)(b) | | | 75,925 | | | | 1,725,775 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 12,431,946 | |
| | | | | | | | |
SEMICONDUCTORS & SEMICONDUCTOR EQUIPMENT–3.9% | | | | | | | | |
NVIDIA Corp.(a) | | | 265,428 | | | | 3,668,215 | |
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. | | | 1,345 | | | | 1,424,337 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 5,092,552 | |
| | | | | | | | |
SOFTWARE–7.6% | | | | | | | | |
Intuit, Inc. | | | 28,640 | | | | 1,699,784 | |
NetSuite, Inc.(a) | | | 13,730 | | | | 751,992 | |
Red Hat, Inc.(a) | | | 53,784 | | | | 3,037,720 | |
Salesforce.com, Inc.(a) | | | 17,790 | | | | 2,459,646 | |
ServiceNow, Inc. | | | 23,927 | | | | 588,604 | |
Splunk, Inc.(a)(b) | | | 54,239 | | | | 1,524,116 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 10,061,862 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 39,395,446 | |
| | | | | | | | |
FINANCIALS–16.6% | | | | | | | | |
CAPITAL MARKETS–3.3% | | | | | | | | |
Blackstone Group LP | | | 159,310 | | | | 2,082,182 | |
CITIC Securities Co., Ltd.(a)(b) | | | 1,063,300 | | | | 2,261,287 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 4,343,469 | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMMERCIAL BANKS–2.6% | | | | | |
BOC Hong Kong Holdings Ltd. | | | 679,000 | | | | 2,094,699 | |
Standard Chartered PLC | | | 64,370 | | | | 1,398,308 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 3,493,007 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER FINANCE–2.7% | | | | | | | | |
Green Dot Corp.(a)(b) | | | 162,044 | | | $ | 3,584,413 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INSURANCE–1.9% | | | | | | | | |
AIA Group Ltd. | | | 711,400 | | | | 2,457,216 | |
| | | | | | | | |
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUSTS (REITs)–1.1% | | | | | | | | |
Weyerhaeuser Co. | | | 64,577 | | | | 1,443,942 | |
| | | | | | | | |
REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT & DEVELOPMENT–5.0% | | | | | | | | |
Ciputra Development Tbk PT | | | 17,665,500 | | | | 1,234,209 | |
Guangzhou R&F Properties Co., Ltd.(b) | | | 1,067,200 | | | | 1,429,460 | |
Hang Lung Properties Ltd. | | | 767,000 | | | | 2,623,614 | |
Sun Hung Kai Properties Ltd. | | | 113,000 | | | | 1,342,713 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 6,629,996 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 21,952,043 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER DISCRETIONARY–14.4% | | | | | | | | |
AUTOMOBILES–1.0% | | | | | | | | |
Tesla Motors, Inc.(a)(b) | | | 41,012 | | | | 1,283,265 | |
| | | | | | | | |
DIVERSIFIED CONSUMER SERVICES–1.0% | | | | | | | | |
New Oriental Education & Technology Group (ADR)(a) | | | 56,417 | | | | 1,382,217 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HOTELS, RESTAURANTS & LEISURE–2.8% | | | | | | | | |
Bloomberry Resorts Corp.(a) | | | 3,334,000 | | | | 752,494 | |
Ctrip.com International Ltd. (ADR)(a)(b) | | | 84,550 | | | | 1,417,058 | |
Galaxy Entertainment Group Ltd.(a)(b) | | | 591,000 | | | | 1,485,322 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 3,654,874 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HOUSEHOLD DURABLES–1.5% | | | | | | | | |
iRobot Corp.(a)(b) | | | 29,640 | | | | 656,526 | |
Rinnai Corp. | | | 20,100 | | | | 1,386,929 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,043,455 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INTERNET & CATALOG RETAIL–2.6% | | | | | | | | |
Amazon.com, Inc.(a) | | | 15,030 | | | | 3,432,100 | |
| | | | | | | | |
SPECIALTY RETAIL–3.5% | | | | | | | | |
L’Occitane International SA | | | 787,000 | | | | 2,184,157 | |
Zhongsheng Group Holdings Ltd.(b) | | | 1,998,000 | | | | 2,442,130 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 4,626,287 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TEXTILES, APPAREL & LUXURY GOODS–2.0% | | | | | | | | |
Burberry Group PLC | | | 123,930 | | | | 2,580,321 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 19,002,519 | |
| | | | | | | | |
4
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
ENERGY–11.0% | | | | | | | | |
ENERGY EQUIPMENT & SERVICES–5.1% | | | | | | | | |
Halliburton Co. | | | 59,050 | | | $ | 1,676,429 | |
National Oilwell Varco, Inc. | | | 24,770 | | | | 1,596,179 | |
Saipem SpA | | | 38,100 | | | | 1,696,757 | |
Schlumberger Ltd. | | | 27,630 | | | | 1,793,463 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 6,762,828 | |
| | | | | | | | |
OIL, GAS & CONSUMABLE FUELS–5.9% | | | | | | | | |
Cameco Corp.(b) | | | 78,753 | | | | 1,730,385 | |
Denbury Resources, Inc.(a) | | | 136,080 | | | | 2,056,169 | |
Kinder Morgan, Inc./Delaware | | | 47,206 | | | | 1,520,977 | |
Occidental Petroleum Corp. | | | 15,300 | | | | 1,312,281 | |
Santos Ltd. | | | 104,600 | | | | 1,152,012 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 7,771,824 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 14,534,652 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HEALTH CARE–8.2% | | | | | | | | |
BIOTECHNOLOGY–2.2% | | | | | | | | |
Cepheid, Inc.(a) | | | 33,437 | | | | 1,496,306 | |
Genomic Health, Inc.(a) | | | 28,294 | | | | 945,020 | |
Seegene, Inc.(a) | | | 10,740 | | | | 491,410 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,932,736 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HEALTH CARE EQUIPMENT & SUPPLIES–1.0% | | | | | | | | |
Given Imaging Ltd.(a) | | | 88,208 | | | | 1,393,686 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HEALTH CARE TECHNOLOGY–1.2% | | | | | | | | |
athenahealth, Inc.(a)(b) | | | 19,442 | | | | 1,539,223 | |
| | | | | | | | |
LIFE SCIENCES TOOLS & SERVICES–3.8% | | | | | | | | |
Illumina, Inc.(a)(b) | | | 123,925 | | | | 5,005,331 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 10,870,976 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MATERIALS–8.0% | | | | | | | | |
CHEMICALS–1.0% | | | | | | | | |
Monsanto Co. | | | 16,620 | | | | 1,375,804 | |
| | | | | | | | |
METALS & MINING–7.0% | | | | | | | | |
Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold, Inc. | | | 69,860 | | | | 2,380,130 | |
Goldcorp, Inc. | | | 71,410 | | | | 2,688,484 | |
Ivanhoe Mines Ltd./CA(a)(b) | | | 154,674 | | | | 1,525,319 | |
Mongolian Mining Corp.(a) | | | 2,107,500 | | | | 1,198,656 | |
Umicore SA | | | 30,970 | | | | 1,431,900 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 9,224,489 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 10,600,293 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INDUSTRIALS–7.4% | | | | | | | | |
ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT–3.7% | | | | | | | | |
A123 Systems, Inc.(a) | | | 1,218,595 | | | | 1,535,430 | |
Babcock & Wilcox Co. (The)(a) | | | 61,105 | | | | 1,497,072 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Polypore International, Inc.(a)(b) | | | 45,423 | | | $ | 1,834,635 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 4,867,137 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MACHINERY–3.7% | | | | | | | | |
Cummins, Inc. | | | 16,510 | | | | 1,599,984 | |
FANUC Corp. | | | 11,700 | | | | 1,923,258 | |
Proto Labs, Inc.(a)(b) | | | 45,913 | | | | 1,320,458 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 4,843,700 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 9,710,837 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES–1.9% | | | | | | | | |
WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES–1.9% | | | | | | | | |
America Movil SAB de CV (ADR) | | | 66,980 | | | | 1,745,499 | |
Tower Bersama Infrastructure Tbk PT(a) | | | 2,177,000 | | | | 762,657 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,508,156 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER STAPLES–1.8% | | | | | | | | |
BEVERAGES–1.4% | | | | | | | | |
Heckmann Corp.(a)(b) | | | 548,009 | | | | 1,852,271 | |
| | | | | | | | |
FOOD PRODUCTS–0.4% | | | | | | | | |
Besunyen Holdings Co., Ltd. | | | 5,698,000 | | | | 542,146 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,394,417 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Common Stocks (cost $137,228,366) | | | | | | | 130,969,339 | |
| | | | | | | | |
RIGHTS–0.1% | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
MATERIALS–0.1% | | | | | | | | |
METALS & MINING–0.1% | | | | | | | | |
Ivanhoe Mines Ltd./CA(a)(b) (cost $0) | | | 154,674 | | | | 139,770 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | Contracts | | | | |
OPTIONS PURCHASED–CALLS–0.0% | | | | | | | | |
OPTIONS ON FUNDS AND INVESTMENT TRUSTS–0.0% | | | | | | | | |
Market Vectors JR Gold Miners Expiration: Jan 2013, Exercise Price: $ 44.63(a)(c) (cost $1,626,045) | | | 2,000 | | | | 20,000 | |
| | | | | | | | |
5
| | |
GLOBAL THEMATIC GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Principal Amount (000) | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
SHORT-TERM INVESTMENTS–0.4% | | | | | | | | |
TIME DEPOSIT–0.4% | | | | | | | | |
State Street Time Deposit 0.01%, 7/02/12 (cost $458,128) | | $ | 458 | | | $ | 458,128 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Investments Before Security Lending Collateral for Securities Loaned–99.6% (cost $139,312,539) | | | | | | | 131,587,237 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
INVESTMENTS OF CASH COLLATERAL FOR SECURITY LOANED–27.6% | | | | | | | | |
INVESTMENT COMPANIES–27.6% | | | | | | | | |
AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves–Class I, 0.20%(d) (cost $36,475,994) | | | 36,475,994 | | | $ | 36,475,994 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TOTAL INVESTMENTS–127.2% (cost $175,788,533) | | | | | | | 168,063,231 | |
Other assets less liabilities–(27.2)% | | | | | | | (35,902,626 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
NET ASSETS–100.0% | | | | | | $ | 132,160,605 | |
| | | | | | | | |
FORWARD CURRENCY EXCHANGE CONTRACTS (see Note D)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Counterparty & Description | | Contract Amount (000) | | | U.S. $ Value on Origination Date | | | U.S. $ Value at June 30, 2012 | | | Unrealized Appreciation/ (Depreciation) | |
Buy Contracts | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Citibank NA: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Japanese Yen settling 9/14/12 | | | 473,693 | | | $ | 6,050,724 | | | $ | 5,931,903 | | | $ | (118,821 | ) |
Goldman Sachs International: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Great British Pound settling 9/14/12 | | | 7,174 | | | | 11,158,153 | | | | 11,233,406 | | | | 75,253 | |
Royal Bank of Canada: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Canadian Dollar settling 9/14/12 | | | 4,248 | | | | 4,113,648 | | | | 4,165,751 | | | | 52,103 | |
Euro settling 9/14/12 | | | 5,953 | | | | 7,433,481 | | | | 7,538,722 | | | | 105,241 | |
Westpac Banking Corp.: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Australian Dollar settling 9/14/12 | | | 3,715 | | | | 3,650,062 | | | | 3,776,752 | | | | 126,690 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | $ | 240,466 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
(a) | | Non-income producing security. |
(b) | | Represents entire or partial securities out on loan. See Note E for securities lending information. |
(c) | | One contract relates to 100 shares. |
(d) | | Investment in affiliated money market mutual fund. The rate shown represents the 7-day yield as of period end. |
Glossary:
ADR—American Depositary Receipt
See notes to financial statements.
6
| | |
GLOBAL THEMATIC GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
STATEMENTOF ASSETS & LIABILITIES |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | |
ASSETS | | | | |
Investments in securities, at value | | | | |
Unaffiliated issuers (cost $139,312,539) | | $ | 131,587,237 | (a) |
Affiliated issuers (cost $36,475,994—including investment of cash collateral for securities loaned of $36,475,994) | | | 36,475,994 | |
Foreign currencies, at value (cost $241,086) | | | 243,424 | |
Receivable for investment securities sold and foreign currency transactions | | | 2,036,829 | |
Unrealized appreciation of forward currency exchange contracts | | | 359,287 | |
Dividends and interest receivable | | | 214,366 | |
Receivable for capital stock sold | | | 99,281 | |
| | | | |
Total assets | | | 171,016,418 | |
| | | | |
LIABILITIES | | | | |
Payable for collateral received on securities loaned | | | 36,475,994 | |
Payable for investment securities purchased and foreign currency transactions | | | 1,955,400 | |
Unrealized depreciation of forward currency exchange contracts | | | 118,821 | |
Advisory fee payable | | | 81,642 | |
Payable for capital stock redeemed | | | 64,507 | |
Distribution fee payable | | | 18,933 | |
Administrative fee payable | | | 16,546 | |
Transfer Agent fee payable | | | 170 | |
Accrued expenses | | | 123,800 | |
| | | | |
Total liabilities | | | 38,855,813 | |
| | | | |
NET ASSETS | | $ | 132,160,605 | |
| | | | |
COMPOSITION OF NET ASSETS | | | | |
Capital stock, at par | | $ | 8,768 | |
Additional paid-in capital | | | 206,781,002 | |
Distributions in excess of net investment income | | | (589,363 | ) |
Accumulated net realized loss on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | (66,558,600 | ) |
Net unrealized depreciation on investments and foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities | | | (7,481,202 | ) |
| | | | |
| | $ | 132,160,605 | |
| | | | |
Net Asset Value Per Share—1 billion shares of capital stock authorized, $.001 par value
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class | | Net Assets | | | Shares Outstanding | | | Net Asset Value | |
A | | $ | 40,215,306 | | | | 2,619,198 | | | $ | 15.35 | |
B | | $ | 91,945,299 | | | | 6,149,111 | | | $ | 14.95 | |
(a) | | Includes securities on loan with a value of $36,243,715 (see Note E). |
See notes to financial statements.
7
| | |
GLOBAL THEMATIC GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
STATEMENTOF OPERATIONS | | |
Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | |
INVESTMENT INCOME | | | | |
Dividends | | | | |
Unaffiliated issuers (net of foreign taxes withheld of $35,766) | | $ | 737,873 | |
Affiliated issuers | | | 30,655 | |
Interest | | | 49 | |
Securities lending income | | | 473,192 | |
| | | | |
| | | 1,241,769 | |
| | | | |
EXPENSES | | | | |
Advisory fee (see Note B) | | | 547,857 | |
Distribution fee—Class B | | | 127,178 | |
Transfer agency—Class A | | | 861 | |
Transfer agency—Class B | | | 1,975 | |
Custodian | | | 66,756 | |
Audit | | | 35,085 | |
Administrative | | | 27,334 | |
Printing | | | 18,824 | |
Legal | | | 15,372 | |
Directors’ fees | | | 1,963 | |
Miscellaneous | | | 6,686 | |
| | | | |
Total expenses | | | 849,891 | |
| | | | |
Net investment income | | | 391,878 | |
| | | | |
REALIZED AND UNREALIZED GAIN (LOSS) ON INVESTMENT AND FOREIGN CURRENCY TRANSACTIONS | | | | |
Net realized loss on: | | | | |
Investment transactions | | | (6,935,651 | )(a) |
Foreign currency transactions | | | (858,664 | ) |
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of: | | | | |
Investments | | | 11,381,115 | (b) |
Foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities | | | 567,135 | |
| | | | |
Net gain on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | 4,153,935 | |
| | | | |
NET INCREASE IN NET ASSETS FROM OPERATIONS | | $ | 4,545,813 | |
| | | | |
(a) | | Net of foreign capital gains taxes of $85,823. |
(b) | | Net of decrease in accrued foreign capital gains taxes of $27,316. |
See notes to financial statements.
8
| | |
|
GLOBAL THEMATIC GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
STATEMENTOF CHANGESIN NET ASSETS | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | |
INCREASE (DECREASE) IN NET ASSETS FROM OPERATIONS | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income (loss) | | $ | 391,878 | | | $ | (124,157 | ) |
Net realized gain (loss) on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | (7,794,315 | ) | | | 13,521,716 | |
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of investments and foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities | | | 11,948,250 | | | | (59,060,629 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) in net assets from operations | | | 4,545,813 | | | | (45,663,070 | ) |
DIVIDENDS TO SHAREHOLDERS FROM | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income | | | | | | | | |
Class A | | | –0 | – | | | (340,972 | ) |
Class B | | | –0 | – | | | (451,814 | ) |
CAPITAL STOCK TRANSACTIONS | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (13,563,073 | ) | | | (20,317,543 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Total decrease | | | (9,017,260 | ) | | | (66,773,399 | ) |
NET ASSETS | | | | | | | | |
Beginning of period | | | 141,177,865 | | | | 207,951,264 | |
| | | | | | | | |
End of period (including distribution in excess of net investment income of ($589,363) and ($981,241), respectively) | | $ | 132,160,605 | | | $ | 141,177,865 | |
| | | | | | | | |
See notes to financial statements.
9
| | |
GLOBAL THEMATIC GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
NOTE A: Significant Accounting Policies
The AllianceBernstein Global Thematic Growth Portfolio (the “Portfolio”), formerly AllianceBernstein Global Technology Portfolio, is a series of AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund, Inc. (the “Fund”). The Portfolio’s investment objective is long-term growth of capital. The Portfolio is diversified as defined under the Investment Company Act of 1940. The Fund was incorporated in the State of Maryland on November 17, 1987, as an open-end series investment company. The Fund offers thirteen separately managed pools of assets which have differing investment objectives and policies. The Portfolio offers Class A and Class B shares. Both classes of shares have identical voting, dividend, liquidating and other rights, except that Class B shares bear a distribution expense and have exclusive voting rights with respect to the Class B distribution plan.
The Portfolio offers and sells its shares only to separate accounts of certain life insurance companies for the purpose of funding variable annuity contracts and variable life insurance policies. Sales are made without a sales charge at the Portfolio’s net asset value per share.
The financial statements have been prepared in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“U.S. GAAP”) which require management to make certain estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities in the financial statements and amounts of income and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. The following is a summary of significant accounting policies followed by the Portfolio.
1. Security Valuation
Portfolio securities are valued at their current market value determined on the basis of market quotations or, if market quotations are not readily available or are deemed unreliable, at “fair value” as determined in accordance with procedures established by and under the general supervision of the Fund’s Board of Directors.
In general, the market value of securities which are readily available and deemed reliable are determined as follows: Securities listed on a national securities exchange (other than securities listed on the NASDAQ Stock Market, Inc. (“NASDAQ”)) or on a foreign securities exchange are valued at the last sale price at the close of the exchange or foreign securities exchange. If there has been no sale on such day, the securities are valued at the last traded price from the previous day. Securities listed on more than one exchange are valued by reference to the principal exchange on which the securities are traded; securities listed only on NASDAQ are valued in accordance with the NASDAQ Official Closing Price; listed or over the counter market (“OTC”) put or call options are valued at the mid level between the current bid and ask prices. If either a current bid or current ask price is unavailable, AllianceBernstein L.P. (the “Adviser”) will have discretion to determine the best valuation (e.g. last trade price in the case of listed options); open futures contracts are valued using the closing settlement price or, in the absence of such a price, the most recent quoted bid price. If there are no quotations available for the day of valuation, the last available closing settlement price is used; U.S. government securities and other debt instruments having 60 days or less remaining until maturity are valued at amortized cost if their original maturity was 60 days or less; or by amortizing their fair value as of the 61st day prior to maturity if their original term to maturity exceeded 60 days; fixed-income securities, including mortgage backed and asset backed securities, may be valued on the basis of prices provided by a pricing service or at a price obtained from one or more of the major broker/dealers. In cases where broker/dealer quotes are obtained, the Adviser may establish procedures whereby changes in market yields or spreads are used to adjust, on a daily basis, a recently obtained quoted price on a security. Swaps and other derivatives are valued daily, primarily using independent pricing services, independent pricing models using market inputs, as well as third party broker-dealers or counterparties.
Securities for which market quotations are not readily available (including restricted securities) or are deemed unreliable are valued at fair value. Factors considered in making this determination may include, but are not limited to, information obtained by contacting the issuer, analysts, analysis of the issuer’s financial statements or other available documents. In addition, the Portfolio may use fair value pricing for securities primarily traded in non-U.S. markets because most foreign markets close well before the Portfolio values its securities at 4:00 p.m., Eastern Time. The earlier close of foreign markets gives rise to the possibility that significant events, including broad market moves, may have occurred between the close of the foreign markets and the time at which the Portfolio values its securities which may materially affect the value of securities trading in such markets. To account for this, the Portfolio may frequently value many of its foreign equity securities using fair value prices based on third party vendor modeling tools to the extent available.
10
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
2. Fair Value Measurements
In accordance with U.S. GAAP regarding fair value measurements, fair value is defined as the price that the Portfolio would receive to sell an asset or pay to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. The U.S. GAAP disclosure requirements establish a framework for measuring fair value, and a three-level hierarchy for fair value measurements based upon the transparency of inputs to the valuation of an asset or liability. Inputs may be observable or unobservable and refer broadly to the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability. Observable inputs reflect the assumptions market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability based on market data obtained from sources independent of the Portfolio. Unobservable inputs reflect the Portfolio’s own assumptions about the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability based on the best information available in the circumstances. Each investment is assigned a level based upon the observability of the inputs which are significant to the overall valuation. The three-tier hierarchy of inputs is summarized below.
| • | | Level 1—quoted prices in active markets for identical investments |
| • | | Level 2—other significant observable inputs (including quoted prices for similar investments, interest rates, prepayment speeds, credit risk, etc.) |
| • | | Level 3—significant unobservable inputs (including the Portfolio’s own assumptions in determining the fair value of investments) |
The following table summarizes the valuation of the Portfolio’s investments by the above fair value hierarchy levels as of June 30, 2012:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Level 1 | | | Level 2 | | | Level 3 | | | Total | |
Investments in Securities: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Assets: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Common Stocks^: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Information Technology | | $ | 37,971,109 | | | $ | 1,424,337 | | | $ | –0 | – | | $ | 39,395,446 | |
Financials | | | 7,110,537 | | | | 14,841,506 | | | | –0 | – | | | 21,952,043 | |
Consumer Discretionary | | | 8,923,660 | | | | 10,078,859 | | | | –0 | – | | | 19,002,519 | |
Energy | | | 11,685,883 | | | | 2,848,769 | | | | –0 | – | | | 14,534,652 | |
Health Care | | | 10,379,566 | | | | 491,410 | | | | –0 | – | | | 10,870,976 | |
Materials | | | 7,969,737 | | | | 2,630,556 | | | | –0 | – | | | 10,600,293 | |
Industrials | | | 7,787,579 | | | | 1,923,258 | | | | –0 | – | | | 9,710,837 | |
Telecommunication Services | | | 1,745,499 | | | | 762,657 | | | | –0 | – | | | 2,508,156 | |
Consumer Staples | | | 1,852,271 | | | | 542,146 | | | | –0 | – | | | 2,394,417 | |
Rights | | | 139,770 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 139,770 | |
Options Purchased—Calls | | | –0 | – | | | 20,000 | | | | –0 | – | | | 20,000 | |
Short-Term Investments | | | –0 | – | | | 458,128 | | | | –0 | – | | | 458,128 | |
Investments of Cash Collateral for Security Loaned in Affiliated Money Market Fund | | | 36,475,994 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 36,475,994 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Investments in Securities | | | 132,041,605 | | | | 36,021,626 | + | | | –0 | – | | | 168,063,231 | |
Other Financial Instruments*: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Assets: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Forward Currency Exchange Contracts | | | –0 | – | | | 359,287 | | | | –0 | – | | | 359,287 | |
Liabilities: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Forward Currency Exchange Contracts | | | –0 | – | | | (118,821 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | (118,821 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total | | $ | 132,041,605 | | | $ | 36,262,092 | | | $ | –0 | – | | $ | 168,303,697 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
^ | | An amount of $2,097,693 was transferred from Level 1 into Level 2 due to insufficient observable inputs. |
* | | Other financial instruments are derivative instruments, such as futures, forwards and swap contracts, which are valued at the unrealized appreciation/depreciation on the instrument. |
+ | | A significant portion of the Portfolio’s foreign equity investments are categorized as Level 2 investments since they are valued using fair value prices based on third party vendor modeling tools to the extent available, see Note A.1. |
11
| | |
GLOBAL THEMATIC GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
3. Currency Translation
Assets and liabilities denominated in foreign currencies and commitments under forward currency exchange contracts are translated into U.S. dollars at the mean of the quoted bid and ask prices of such currencies against the U.S. dollar. Purchases and sales of portfolio securities are translated into U.S. dollars at the rates of exchange prevailing when such securities were acquired or sold. Income and expenses are translated into U.S. dollars at rates of exchange prevailing when accrued.
Net realized gain or loss on foreign currency transactions represents foreign exchange gains and losses from sales and maturities of foreign fixed income investments, foreign currency exchange contracts, holding of foreign currencies, currency gains or losses realized between the trade and settlement dates on foreign investment transactions, and the difference between the amounts of dividends, interest and foreign withholding taxes recorded on the Portfolio’s books and the U.S. dollar equivalent amounts actually received or paid. Net unrealized currency gains and losses from valuing foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities at period end exchange rates are reflected as a component of net unrealized appreciation or depreciation of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities.
4. Taxes
It is the Portfolio’s policy to meet the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code applicable to regulated investment companies and to distribute all of its investment company taxable income and net realized gains, if any, to shareholders. Therefore, no provisions for federal income or excise taxes are required. The Portfolio may be subject to taxes imposed by countries in which it invests. Such taxes are generally based on income and/or capital gains earned or repatriated. Taxes are accrued and applied to net investment income, net realized gains and net unrealized appreciation/depreciation as such income and/or gains are earned.
In accordance with U.S. GAAP requirements regarding accounting for uncertainties in income taxes, management has analyzed the Portfolio’s tax positions taken or expected to be taken on federal and state income tax returns for all open tax years (the current and the prior three tax years) and has concluded that no provision for income tax is required in the Portfolio’s financial statements.
5. Investment Income and Investment Transactions
Dividend income is recorded on the ex-dividend date or as soon as the Portfolio is informed of the dividend. Interest income is accrued daily. Investment transactions are accounted for on the date the securities are purchased or sold. Investment gains or losses are determined on the identified cost basis. The Portfolio amortizes premiums and accretes discounts as adjustments to interest income.
6. Class Allocations
All income earned and expenses incurred by the Portfolio are borne on a pro-rata basis by each outstanding class of shares, based on the proportionate interest in the Portfolio represented by the net assets of such class, except for class specific expenses which are allocated to the respective class. Expenses of the Fund are charged to each Portfolio in proportion to net assets. Realized and unrealized gains and losses are allocated among the various share classes based on respective net assets.
7. Dividends and Distributions
Dividends and distributions to shareholders, if any, are recorded on the ex-dividend date. Income dividends and capital gains distributions are determined in accordance with federal tax regulations and may differ from those determined in accordance with U.S. GAAP. To the extent these differences are permanent, such amounts are reclassified within the capital accounts based on their federal tax basis treatment; temporary differences do not require such reclassification.
NOTE B: Advisory Fee and Other Transactions with Affiliates
Under the terms of the investment advisory agreement, the Portfolio pays the Adviser an advisory fee at an annual rate of .75% of the first $2.5 billion, .65% of the next $2.5 billion and .60% in excess of $5 billion, of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets. The fee is accrued daily and paid monthly.
Pursuant to the investment advisory agreement, the Portfolio may reimburse the Adviser for certain legal and accounting services provided to the Portfolio by the Adviser. For the six months ended June 30, 2012, such fee amounted to $27,334.
Brokerage commissions paid on investment transactions for the six months ended June 30, 2012 amounted to $257,600, of which $0 and $4,377, respectively, was paid to Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. LLC and Sanford C. Bernstein Limited, affiliates of the Adviser.
12
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
The Portfolio compensates AllianceBernstein Investor Services, Inc. (“ABIS”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Adviser, under a Transfer Agency Agreement for providing personnel and facilities to perform transfer agency services for the Portfolio. Such compensation retained by ABIS amounted to $692 for the six months ended June 30, 2012.
NOTE C: Distribution Plan
The Portfolio has adopted a Distribution Plan (the “Plan”) for Class B shares pursuant to Rule 12b-1 under the Investment Company Act of 1940. Under the Plan, the Portfolio pays distribution and servicing fees to AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (the “Distributor”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Adviser, at an annual rate of up to .50% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The fees are accrued daily and paid monthly. The Board of Directors currently limits payments under the Plan to .25% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The Plan provides that the Distributor will use such payments in their entirety for distribution assistance and promotional activities.
The Portfolio is not obligated under the Plan to pay any distribution and servicing fees in excess of the amounts set forth above. The purpose of the payments to the Distributor under the Plan is to compensate the Distributor for its distribution services with respect to the sale of the Portfolio’s Class B shares. Since the Distributor’s compensation is not directly tied to its expenses, the amount of compensation received by it under the Plan during any year may be more or less than its actual expenses. For this reason, the Plan is characterized by the staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission as being of the “compensation” variety.
In the event that the Plan is terminated or not continued, no distribution or servicing fees (other than current amounts accrued but not yet paid) would be owed by the Portfolio to the Distributor.
The Plan also provides that the Adviser may use its own resources to finance the distribution of the Portfolio’s shares.
NOTE D: Investment Transactions
Purchases and sales of investment securities (excluding short-term investments) for the six months ended June 30, 2012 were as follows:
| | | | | | | | |
| | Purchases | | | Sales | |
Investment securities (excluding U.S. government securities) | | $ | 126,890,197 | | | $ | 140,525,615 | |
U.S. government securities | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
The cost of investments for federal income tax purposes was substantially the same as the cost for financial reporting purposes. Accordingly, gross unrealized appreciation and unrealized depreciation (excluding foreign currency transactions) are as follows:
| | | | |
Gross unrealized appreciation | | $ | 9,667,222 | |
Gross unrealized depreciation | | | (17,392,524 | ) |
| | | | |
Net unrealized depreciation | | $ | (7,725,302 | ) |
| | | | |
1. Derivative Financial Instruments
The Portfolio may use derivatives in an effort to earn income and enhance returns, to replace more traditional direct investments, to obtain exposure to otherwise inaccessible markets (collectively, “investment purposes”), or to hedge or adjust the risk profile of its portfolio.
The principal types of derivatives utilized by the Portfolio, as well as the methods in which they may be used are:
| • | | Forward Currency Exchange Contracts |
The Portfolio may enter into forward currency exchange contracts in order to hedge its exposure to changes in foreign currency exchange rates on its foreign portfolio holdings, to hedge certain firm purchase and sale commitments denominated in foreign currencies and for non-hedging purposes as a means of making direct investments in foreign currencies, as described below under “Currency Transactions”.
A forward currency exchange contract is a commitment to purchase or sell a foreign currency at a future date at a negotiated forward rate. The gain or loss arising from the difference between the original contract and the closing of such contract would be included in net realized gain or loss on foreign currency transactions. Fluctuations in the value of open forward currency exchange contracts are recorded for financial reporting purposes as unrealized
13
| | |
GLOBAL THEMATIC GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
appreciation and/or depreciation by the Portfolio. Risks may arise from the potential inability of a counterparty to meet the terms of a contract and from unanticipated movements in the value of a foreign currency relative to the U.S. dollar. The face or contract amount, in U.S. dollars reflects the total exposure the Portfolio has in that particular currency contract.
During the six months ended June 30, 2012, the Portfolio held forward currency exchange contracts for hedging and non-hedging purposes.
For hedging and investment purposes, the Portfolio may purchase and write (sell) put and call options on U.S. and foreign securities, including government securities, and foreign currencies that are traded on U.S. and foreign securities exchanges and over-the-counter markets. Among other things, the Portfolio may use options transactions for non-hedging purposes as a means of making direct investments in foreign currencies, as described below under “Currency Transactions” and may use options strategies involving the purchase and/or writing of various combinations of call and/or put options, for hedging and investment purposes.
The risk associated with purchasing an option is that the Portfolio pays a premium whether or not the option is exercised. Additionally, the Portfolio bears the risk of loss of the premium and change in market value should the counterparty not perform under the contract. Put and call options purchased are accounted for in the same manner as portfolio securities. The cost of securities acquired through the exercise of call options is increased by premiums paid. The proceeds from securities sold through the exercise of put options are decreased by the premiums paid.
When the Portfolio writes an option, the premium received by the Portfolio is recorded as a liability and is subsequently adjusted to the current market value of the option written. Premiums received from written options which expire unexercised are recorded by the Portfolio on the expiration date as realized gains from options written. The difference between the premium received and the amount paid on effecting a closing purchase transaction, including brokerage commissions, is also treated as a realized gain, or if the premium received is less than the amount paid for the closing purchase transaction, as a realized loss. If a call option is exercised, the premium received is added to the proceeds from the sale of the underlying security or currency in determining whether the Portfolio has realized a gain or loss. If a put option is exercised, the premium received reduces the cost basis of the security or currency purchased by the Portfolio. In writing an option, the Portfolio bears the market risk of an unfavorable change in the price of the security or currency underlying the written option. Exercise of an option written by the Portfolio could result in the Portfolio selling or buying a security or currency at a price different from the current market value. For the six months ended June 30, 2012, the Portfolio had no transactions in written options.
During the six months ended June 30, 2012, the Portfolio held purchased options for non-hedging purposes.
Documentation governing the Portfolio’s OTC derivatives may contain provisions for early termination of such transaction in the event the net assets of the Portfolio decline below specific levels set forth in the documentation (“net asset contingent features”). If these levels are triggered, the Portfolio’s counterparty has the right to terminate such transaction and require the Portfolio to pay or receive a settlement amount in connection with the terminated transaction. As of June 30, 2012, the Portfolio had OTC derivatives with contingent features in net liability positions in the amount of $118,821. If a trigger event had occurred at June 30, 2012, for those derivatives in a net liability position, an amount of $118,821 would be required to be posted by the Portfolio.
At June 30, 2012, the Portfolio had entered into the following derivatives:
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Asset Derivatives | | | Liability Derivatives | |
Derivative Type | | Statement of Assets and Liabilities Location | | Fair Value | | | Statement of Assets and Liabilities Location | | Fair Value | |
Foreign exchange contracts | | Unrealized appreciation of forward currency exchange contracts | | $ | 359,287 | | | Unrealized depreciation of forward currency exchange contracts | | $ | 118,821 | |
Equity contracts | | Investments in securities, at value | | | 20,000 | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total | | | | $ | 379,287 | | | | | $ | 118,821 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
14
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
The effect of derivative instruments on the statement of operations for the six months ended June 30, 2012:
| | | | | | | | | | |
Derivative Type | | Location of Gain or (Loss) on Derivatives | | Realized Gain or (Loss) on Derivatives | | | Change in Unrealized Appreciation or (Depreciation) | |
Foreign exchange contracts | | Net realized gain (loss) on foreign currency transactions; Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities | | $ | (841,276 | ) | | $ | 562,079 | |
Equity contracts | | Net realized gain (loss) on investment transactions; Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of investments | | | (1,121,132 | ) | | | 946,812 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Total | | | | $ | (1,962,408 | ) | | $ | 1,508,891 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
For the six months ended June 30, 2012, the average monthly principal amount of foreign currency exchange contracts was $35,804,496 and the average monthly cost of purchased options contracts was $1,786,207.
2. Currency Transactions
The Portfolio may invest in non-U.S. Dollar securities on a currency hedged or unhedged basis. The Portfolio may seek investment opportunities by taking long or short positions in currencies through the use of currency-related derivatives, including forward currency exchange contracts, futures and options on futures, swaps, and other options. The Portfolio may enter into transactions for investment opportunities when it anticipates that a foreign currency will appreciate or depreciate in value but securities denominated in that currency are not held by the Portfolio and do not present attractive investment opportunities. Such transactions may also be used when the Adviser believes that it may be more efficient than a direct investment in a foreign currency-denominated security. The Portfolio may also conduct currency exchange contracts on a spot basis (i.e., for cash at the spot rate prevailing in the currency exchange market for buying or selling currencies).
NOTE E: Securities Lending
The Portfolio may enter into securities lending transactions. Under the Portfolio’s securities lending program, all securities loans will be collateralized continually by cash. The Portfolio will be compensated for the loan from a portion of the net return from the income earned on cash collateral after a rebate is paid to the borrower (in some cases, this rebate may be a “negative rebate” or fee paid by the borrower to the Portfolio in connection with the loan), and payments for fees of the securities lending agent and for certain other administrative expenses. It is the policy of the Portfolio to receive collateral consisting of cash in an amount exceeding the value of the securities loaned. The Portfolio will have the right to call a loan and obtain the securities loaned at any time on notice to the borrower within the normal and customary settlement time for the securities. While the securities are on loan, the borrower is obligated to pay the Portfolio amounts equal to any income or other distributions from the securities. The Portfolio will not have the right to vote any securities during the existence of a loan, but will have the right to regain ownership of loaned securities in order to exercise voting or other ownership rights. The lending agent has agreed to indemnify the Portfolio in the case of default of any securities borrower. Collateral received and securities loaned are marked to market daily to ensure that the securities loaned are secured by collateral. The lending agent will invest the cash collateral received in AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves, an eligible money market vehicle, in accordance with the investment restrictions of the Portfolio, and as approved by the Fund’s Board of Directors. The collateral received on securities loaned is recorded as an asset as well as a corresponding liability in the statement of assets and liabilities. When the Portfolio lends securities, its investment performance will continue to reflect changes in the value of the securities loaned. At June 30, 2012, the Portfolio had securities on loan with a value of $36,243,715 and had received cash collateral which has been invested into AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves of $36,475,994. The cash collateral will be adjusted on the next business day after period end to maintain the required collateral amount. The Portfolio earned securities lending income of $473,192 and $30,655 from the borrowers and AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves, respectively, for the six months ended June 30, 2012; these amounts are reflected in the statement of operations. A principal risk of lending portfolio securities is that the borrower will fail to return the loaned securities upon termination of the loan and that the
15
| | |
GLOBAL THEMATIC GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
collateral will not be sufficient to replace the loaned securities. A summary of the Portfolio’s transactions in shares of AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves for the six months ended June 30, 2012 is as follows:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Market Value December 31, 2011 (000) | | Purchases at Cost (000) | | | Sales Proceeds (000) | | | Market Value June 30, 2012 (000) | | | Dividend Income (000) | |
$18,391 | | $ | 77,557 | | | $ | 59,472 | | | $ | 36,476 | | | $ | 31 | |
NOTE F: Capital Stock
Each class consists of 500,000,000 authorized shares. Transactions in capital shares for each class were as follows:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | SHARES | | | | | AMOUNT | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | | | | | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | |
Class A | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Shares sold | | | 166,977 | | | | 221,658 | | | | | $ | 2,811,917 | | | $ | 4,110,058 | |
Shares issued in reinvestment of dividends | | | –0 | – | | | 17,100 | | | | | | –0 | – | | | 340,972 | |
Shares redeemed | | | (377,864 | ) | | | (813,664 | ) | | | | | (6,217,150 | ) | | | (14,568,319 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (210,887 | ) | | | (574,906 | ) | | | | $ | (3,405,233 | ) | | $ | (10,117,289 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class B | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Shares sold | | | 530,424 | | | | 1,166,143 | | | | | $ | 8,612,425 | | | $ | 21,089,035 | |
Shares issued in reinvestment of dividends | | | –0 | – | | | 23,194 | | | | | | –0 | – | | | 451,814 | |
Shares redeemed | | | (1,213,211 | ) | | | (1,815,049 | ) | | | | | (18,770,265 | ) | | | (31,741,103 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (682,787 | ) | | | (625,712 | ) | | | | $ | (10,157,840 | ) | | $ | (10,200,254 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
NOTE G: Risks Involved in Investing in the Portfolio
Foreign Securities Risk—Investing in securities of foreign companies or foreign governments involves special risks which include changes in foreign currency exchange rates and the possibility of future political and economic developments which could adversely affect the value of such securities. Moreover, securities of many foreign companies or foreign governments and their markets may be less liquid and their prices more volatile than those of comparable U.S. companies or of the U.S. government.
Currency Risk—This is the risk that changes in foreign currency exchange rates may negatively affect the value of the Portfolio’s investments or reduce the returns of the Portfolio. For example, the value of the Portfolio’s investments in foreign currency-denominated securities or currencies may decrease if the U.S. Dollar is strong (i.e., gaining value relative to other currencies) and other currencies are weak (i.e., losing value relative to the U.S. Dollar). Currency markets are generally not as regulated as securities markets. Independent of the Portfolio’s investments denominated in foreign currencies, the Portfolio’s positions in various foreign currencies may cause the Portfolio to experience investment losses due to the changes in exchange rates and interest rates.
Derivatives Risk—The Portfolio may enter into derivative transactions such as forwards, options, futures and swaps. Derivatives may be illiquid, difficult to price, and leveraged so that small changes may produce disproportionate losses for the Portfolio, and subject to counterparty risk to a greater degree than more traditional investments. Derivatives may result in significant losses, including losses that are far greater than the value of the derivatives reflected in the statement of assets and liabilities.
Indemnification Risk—In the ordinary course of business, the Portfolio enters into contracts that contain a variety of indemnifications. The Portfolio’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown. However, the Portfolio has not had prior claims or losses pursuant to these indemnification provisions and expects the risk of loss thereunder to be remote. Therefore, the Portfolio has not accrued any liability in connection with these indemnification provisions.
NOTE H: Joint Credit Facility
A number of open-end mutual funds managed by the Adviser, including the Portfolio, participate in a $140 million revolving credit facility (the “Facility”) intended to provide short-term financing, if necessary, subject to certain restrictions in connection with abnormal redemption activity. Commitment fees related to the Facility are paid by the participating funds and are included in miscellaneous expenses in the statement of operations. The Portfolio did not utilize the Facility during the six months ended June 30, 2012.
16
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
NOTE I: Distributions to Shareholders
The tax character of distributions to be paid for the year ending December 31, 2012 will be determined at the end of the current fiscal year. The tax character of distributions paid during the fiscal years ended December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010 were as follows:
| | | | | | | | |
| | 2011 | | | 2010 | |
Distributions paid from: | | | | | | | | |
Ordinary income | | $ | 792,786 | | | $ | 3,957,099 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total taxable distributions | | $ | 792,786 | | | $ | 3,957,099 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total distributions paid | | $ | 792,786 | | | $ | 3,957,099 | |
| | | | | | | | |
As of December 31, 2011, the components of accumulated earnings/(deficit) on a tax basis were as follows:
| | | | |
Accumulated capital and other losses | | $ | (51,870,113 | )(a) |
Unrealized appreciation/(depreciation) | | | (27,304,865 | )(b) |
| | | | |
Total accumulated earnings/(deficit) | | $ | (79,174,978 | ) |
| | | | |
(a) | | On December 31, 2011, the Portfolio had a net capital loss carryforward of $47,113,959. During the fiscal year, the Portfolio utilized $22,869,672 of capital loss carryforwards to offset current year net realized gains. At December 31, 2011, the Portfolio had a post-October short-term capital loss deferral of $3,453,673 and a qualified late-year loss deferral of $1,302,481. These losses are deemed to arise on January 1, 2012. |
(b) | | The differences between book-basis and tax-basis unrealized appreciation/(depreciation) are attributable primarily to the tax deferral of losses on wash sales and the realization for tax purposes of gains/losses on certain derivative instruments. |
For tax purposes, net capital losses may be carried over to offset future capital gains, if any. Under the Regulated Investment Company Modernization Act of 2010, funds are permitted to carry forward capital losses incurred in taxable years beginning after December 22, 2010 for an indefinite period. These post-enactment capital losses must be utilized prior to the pre-enactment capital losses, which are subject to expiration. Post-enactment capital loss carryforwards will retain their character as either short-term or long-term capital losses rather than being considered short-term as under previous regulation.
As of December 31, 2011, the Portfolio had a net capital loss carryforward of $47,113,959 which will expire as follows:
| | | | | | | | | | |
SHORT-TERM AMOUNT | | | LONG-TERM AMOUNT | | | EXPIRATION | |
| $28,313,399 | | | | n/a | | | | 2016 | |
| 18,800,560 | | | | n/a | | | | 2017 | |
NOTE J: Recent Accounting Pronouncement
In December 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued an Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) related to disclosures about offsetting assets and liabilities in financial statements. The amendments in this update require an entity to disclose both gross and net information for derivatives and other financial instruments that are either offset in the statement of assets and liabilities or subject to an enforceable master netting arrangement or similar agreement. The ASU is effective during interim or annual reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2013. At this time, management is evaluating the implication of this ASU and its impact on the financial statements has not been determined.
NOTE K: Subsequent Events
Management has evaluated subsequent events for possible recognition or disclosure in the financial statements through the date the financial statements are issued. Management has determined that there are no material events that would require disclosure in the Portfolio’s financial statements through this date.
17
| | |
|
GLOBAL THEMATIC GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Selected Data For A Share Of Capital Stock Outstanding Throughout Each Period
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | CLASS A | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, | |
| | | 2011 | | | 2010 | | | 2009 | | | 2008 | | | 2007 | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | | | $14.87 | | | | $19.47 | | | | $16.73 | | | | $10.90 | | | | $20.71 | | | | $17.23 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Income From Investment Operations | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income (loss) (a) | | | .06 | | | | .02 | | | | .12 | | | | .07 | | | | .00 | (b) | | | (.03 | ) |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | .42 | | | | (4.52 | ) | | | 2.98 | | | | 5.76 | | | | (9.81 | ) | | | 3.51 | |
Contributions from Adviser | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | .00 | (b) | | | .00 | (b) | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) in net asset value from operations | | | .48 | | | | (4.50 | ) | | | 3.10 | | | | 5.83 | | | | (9.81 | ) | | | 3.48 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Less: Dividends | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Dividends from net investment income | | | –0 | – | | | (.10 | ) | | | (.36 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net asset value, end of period | | | $15.35 | | | | $14.87 | | | | $19.47 | | | | $16.73 | | | | $10.90 | | | | $20.71 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Return | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total investment return based on net asset value (c) | | | 3.23 | %* | | | (23.23 | )%* | | | 18.93 | %* | | | 53.49 | %*† | | | (47.37 | )%* | | | 20.20 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Ratios/Supplemental Data | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net assets, end of period (000’s omitted) | | | $40,216 | | | | $42,094 | | | | $66,302 | | | | $65,358 | | | | $39,933 | | | | $93,919 | |
Ratio to average net assets of: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Expenses | | | .99 | %(d) | | | .94 | % | | | .99 | %(e) | | | 1.00 | % | | | .93 | % | | | .93 | % |
Net investment income (loss) | | | .71 | %(d) | | | .10 | % | | | .69 | %(e) | | | .52 | % | | | .00 | %(f) | | | (.15 | )% |
Portfolio turnover rate | | | 88 | % | | | 163 | % | | | 117 | % | | | 215 | % | | | 141 | % | | | 132 | % |
See footnote summary on page 19.
18
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Selected Data For A Share Of Capital Stock Outstanding Throughout Each Period
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | CLASS B | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, | |
| | | 2011 | | | 2010 | | | 2009 | | | 2008 | | | 2007 | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | | | $14.50 | | | | $18.99 | | | | $16.34 | | | | $10.67 | | | | $20.31 | | | | $16.94 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Income From Investment Operations | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income (loss) (a) | | | .04 | | | | (.03 | ) | | | .07 | | | | .04 | | | | (.04 | ) | | | (.07 | ) |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | .41 | | | | (4.40 | ) | | | 2.90 | | | | 5.63 | | | | (9.60 | ) | | | 3.44 | |
Contributions from Adviser | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | .00 | (b) | | | .00 | (b) | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) in net asset value from operations | | | .45 | | | | (4.43 | ) | | | 2.97 | | | | 5.67 | | | | (9.64 | ) | | | 3.37 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Less: Dividends | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Dividends from net investment income | | | –0 | – | | | (.06 | ) | | | (.32 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net asset value, end of period | | | $14.95 | | | | $14.50 | | | | $18.99 | | | | $16.34 | | | | $10.67 | | | | $20.31 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Return | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total investment return based on net asset value (c) | | | 3.10 | %* | | | (23.41 | )%* | | | 18.58 | %* | | | 53.14 | %*† | | | (47.46 | )%* | | | 19.89 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Ratios/Supplemental Data | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net assets, end of period (000’s omitted) | | | $91,945 | | | | $99,084 | | | | $141,649 | | | | $141,536 | | | | $84,880 | | | | $191,474 | |
Ratio to average net assets of: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Expenses | | | 1.24 | %(d) | | | 1.19 | % | | | 1.24 | %(e) | | | 1.25 | % | | | 1.18 | % | | | 1.17 | % |
Net investment income (loss) | | | .46 | %(d) | | | (.14 | )% | | | .44 | %(e) | | | .27 | % | | | (.24 | )% | | | (.40 | )% |
Portfolio turnover rate | | | 88 | % | | | 163 | % | | | 117 | % | | | 215 | % | | | 141 | % | | | 132 | % |
(a) | | Based on average shares outstanding. |
(b) | | Amount is less than $.005. |
(c) | | Total investment return is calculated assuming an initial investment made at the net asset value at the beginning of the period, reinvestment of all dividends and distributions at net asset value during the period, and redemption on the last day of the period. Total return does not reflect (i) insurance company’s separate account related expense charges and (ii) the deductions of taxes that a shareholder would pay on Portfolio distributions or the redemption of Portfolio shares. Total investment return calculated for a period of less than one year is not annualized. |
(e) | | The ratio includes expenses attributable to costs of proxy solicitation. |
(f) | | Amount is less than .005%. |
* | | Includes the impact of proceeds received and credited to the Portfolio resulting from class action settlements, which enhanced the Portfolio’s performance for the six months ended June 30, 2012 and years ended December 31, 2011, December 31, 2010, December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008 by 0.05%, 0.04%, 0.04%, 0.15% and 0.03%, respectively. |
† | | Includes the impact of reimbursements from the Adviser, which enhanced the Portfolio’s performance for the year ended December 31, 2009 by 0.01%. |
See notes to financial statements.
19
| | |
| | |
GLOBAL THEMATIC GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
(FORMERLY NAMED ALLIANCEBERNSTEIN GLOBAL TECHNOLOGY PORTFOLIO) |
CONTINUANCE DISCLOSURE | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
INFORMATION REGARDING THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE PORTFOLIO’S ADVISORY AGREEMENT
The disinterested directors (the “directors”) of AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund, Inc. (the “Fund”) unanimously approved the continuance of the Fund’s Advisory Agreement with the Adviser in respect of AllianceBernstein Global Thematic Growth Portfolio (formerly named AllianceBernstein Global Technology Portfolio) (the “Portfolio”) at a meeting held on May 1-3, 2012.
Prior to approval of the continuance of the Advisory Agreement, the directors had requested from the Adviser, and received and evaluated, extensive materials. They reviewed the proposed continuance of the Advisory Agreement with the Adviser and with experienced counsel who are independent of the Adviser, who advised on the relevant legal standards. The directors also reviewed an independent evaluation prepared by the Fund’s Senior Officer (who is also the Fund’s Independent Compliance Officer) of the reasonableness of the advisory fee in the Advisory Agreement, in which the Senior Officer concluded that the contractual fee for the Portfolio was reasonable. The directors also discussed the proposed continuance in private sessions with counsel and the Fund’s Senior Officer.
The directors considered their knowledge of the nature and quality of the services provided by the Adviser to the Portfolio gained from their experience as directors or trustees of most of the registered investment companies advised by the Adviser, their overall confidence in the Adviser’s integrity and competence they have gained from that experience, the Adviser’s initiative in identifying and raising potential issues with the directors and its responsiveness, frankness and attention to concerns raised by the directors in the past, including the Adviser’s willingness to consider and implement organizational and operational changes designed to improve investment results and the services provided to the AllianceBernstein Funds. The directors noted that they have four regular meetings each year, at each of which they receive presentations from the Adviser on the investment results of the Portfolio and review extensive materials and information presented by the Adviser.
The directors also considered all other factors they believed relevant, including the specific matters discussed below. In their deliberations, the directors did not identify any particular information that was all-important or controlling, and different directors may have attributed different weights to the various factors. The directors determined that the selection of the Adviser to manage the Portfolio and the overall arrangements between the Portfolio and the Adviser, as provided in the Advisory Agreement, including the advisory fee, were fair and reasonable in light of the services performed, expenses incurred and such other matters as the directors considered relevant in the exercise of their business judgment. The material factors and conclusions that formed the basis for the directors’ determinations included the following:
Nature, Extent and Quality of Services Provided
The directors considered the scope and quality of services provided by the Adviser under the Advisory Agreement, including the quality of the investment research capabilities of the Adviser and the other resources it has dedicated to performing services for the Portfolio. They also noted the professional experience and qualifications of the Portfolio’s portfolio management team and other senior personnel of the Adviser. The directors also considered that the Advisory Agreement provides that the Portfolio will reimburse the Adviser for the cost to it of providing certain clerical, accounting, administrative and other services provided at the Portfolio’s request by employees of the Adviser or its affiliates. Requests for these reimbursements are approved by the directors on a quarterly basis and, to the extent requested and paid, result in a higher rate of total compensation from the Portfolio to the Adviser than the fee rate stated in the Portfolio’s Advisory Agreement. The directors noted that the methodology used to determine the reimbursement amounts had been reviewed by an independent consultant retained by the Fund’s Senior Officer. The quality of administrative and other services, including the Adviser’s role in coordinating the activities of the Portfolio’s other service providers, also were considered. The directors concluded that, overall, they were satisfied with the nature, extent and quality of services provided to the Portfolio under the Advisory Agreement.
Costs of Services Provided and Profitability
The directors reviewed a schedule of the revenues, expenses and related notes indicating the profitability of the Portfolio to the Adviser for calendar years 2010 and 2011 that had been prepared with an expense allocation methodology arrived at in consultation with an independent consultant retained by the Fund’s Senior Officer. The directors reviewed the assumptions and methods of allocation used by the Adviser in preparing fund-specific profitability data and noted that there are a number of potentially acceptable allocation methodologies for information of this type. The directors noted that the profitability information reflected all revenues and expenses of the Adviser’s relationship with the Portfolio, including those relating to its subsidiaries which provide transfer agency, distribution and brokerage services to the Portfolio. The directors recognized that it is difficult to make comparisons of profitability of the Advisory Agreement with fund advisory contracts for unaffiliated funds because comparative information is not generally publicly available and is affected by numerous factors. The directors
20
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
focused on the profitability of the Adviser’s relationship with the Portfolio before taxes and distribution expenses. The directors concluded that they were satisfied that the Adviser’s level of profitability from its relationship with the Portfolio was not unreasonable.
Fall-Out Benefits
The directors considered the other benefits to the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationships with the Portfolio, including but not limited to benefits relating to soft dollar arrangements (whereby the Adviser receives brokerage and research services from brokers that execute transactions for certain clients, including the Portfolio); 12b-1 fees and sales charges received by the Fund’s principal underwriter (which is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Adviser) in respect of the Portfolio’s Class B shares; transfer agency fees paid by the Portfolio to a wholly owned subsidiary of the Adviser; and brokerage commissions paid by the Portfolio to brokers affiliated with the Adviser. The directors recognized that the Adviser’s profitability would be somewhat lower without these benefits. The directors also understood that the Adviser also might derive reputational and other benefits from its association with the Portfolio.
Investment Results
In addition to the information reviewed by the directors in connection with the meeting, the directors receive detailed performance information for the Portfolio at each regular Board meeting during the year. The directors noted that the Portfolio is a clone of another fund managed by the Adviser (the “Corresponding Fund”) and is managed to track the investment performance of its Corresponding Fund, although investment results may differ between the Portfolio and its Corresponding Fund due to differences in their expense ratios and other factors. At the May 2012 meeting, the directors reviewed information prepared by Lipper showing the performance of the Class A Shares of the Portfolio as compared with that of a group of similar funds selected by Lipper (the “Performance Group”) and as compared with that of a broader array of funds selected by Lipper (the “Performance Universe”), and information prepared by the Adviser showing performance of the Class A Shares as compared with the Morgan Stanley Capital International (MSCI) All Country (AC) World Index (the “MSCI AC World Index”) and the MSCI World Index (Net) (the “MSCI World Index”), in each case for the 1-, 3-, 5- and 10-year periods ended February 29, 2012 and (in the case of comparisons with the MSCI World Index) the since inception period (January 1996 inception). The directors noted that the Portfolio was 3rd out of 3 of the Performance Group and in the 5th quintile of the Performance Universe for the 1-, 3- and 10-year periods, and 2nd out of 3 of the Performance Group and in the 3rd quintile of the Performance Universe for the 5-year period. The directors noted the small number of other funds in the Performance Group. The Portfolio outperformed the indices in the 5-year period and lagged the indices in all other periods. The directors noted that all reference points showed negative results in the 1-year period. The directors also reviewed performance information for periods ended March 31, 2012 (for which the data was not limited to Class A Shares), and noted that in the 3-month period the Portfolio had outperformed the Lipper VA Global Growth Funds Average and the indices. The directors also noted that at the February 2009 meetings, they had approved modifications to the Portfolio’s investment strategy and policies, including a new benchmark, the MSCI AC World Index, and a name change to AllianceBernstein Global Thematic Growth Portfolio from AllianceBernstein Global Technology Portfolio effective May 1, 2009. As a result, the directors gave less weight to the Portfolio’s investment performance prior to May 2009. Based on their review and their discussion with the Adviser of the reasons for the Portfolio’s recent performance, the directors retained confidence in the Adviser’s ability to manage the Portfolio.
Advisory Fees and Other Expenses
The directors considered the advisory fee rate paid by the Portfolio to the Adviser and information prepared by Lipper concerning advisory fee rates paid by other funds in the same Lipper category as the Portfolio at a common asset level. The directors recognized that it is difficult to make comparisons of advisory fees because there are variations in the services that are included in the fees paid by other funds.
The directors also considered the fees the Adviser charges non-fund clients pursuing a substantially similar investment style. For this purpose, they reviewed the relevant fee information from the Adviser’s Form ADV and the evaluation from the Fund’s Senior Officer. The directors noted that the institutional fee schedule started at a higher fee rate than the Portfolio’s starting fee rate, but had more breakpoints starting at lower asset levels. As a result, the application of the institutional fee schedule to the level of assets of the Portfolio would result in a lower fee rate than that being paid by the Portfolio. The directors noted that the Adviser may, in some cases, agree to fee rates with large institutional clients that are lower than those reviewed by the directors and that they had previously discussed with the Adviser its policies in respect of such arrangements. The directors noted that the advisory fee schedule for the Portfolio is the same as that for its Corresponding Fund
21
| | |
GLOBAL THEMATIC GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
CONTINUANCE DISCLOSURE | | |
(FORMERLY NAMED ALLIANCEBERNSTEIN GLOBAL TECHNOLOGY PORTFOLIO) |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
except that the Portfolio’s fee rate is a monthly fee based on average daily net assets whereas the Corresponding Fund’s fee rate is a quarterly fee based on net asset value at the end of each quarter.
The Adviser reviewed with the directors the significantly greater scope of the services it provides to the Portfolio relative to institutional clients. The Adviser also noted that because mutual funds are constantly issuing and redeeming shares, they are more difficult to manage than an institutional account, where the assets tend to be relatively stable. In light of the substantial differences in services rendered by the Adviser to institutional clients as compared to funds such as the Portfolio, the directors considered these fee comparisons inapt and did not place significant weight on them in their deliberations.
The directors also considered the total expense ratio of the Class A shares of the Portfolio in comparison to the fees and expenses of funds within two comparison groups created by Lipper: an Expense Group and an Expense Universe. Lipper described an Expense Group as a representative sample of funds similar to the Portfolio and an Expense Universe as a broader group, consisting of all funds in the investment classification/objective with a similar load type as the Portfolio. The directors noted that because of the small number of funds in the Portfolio’s Lipper category, Lipper had expanded the Portfolio’s Expense Group to include peers that had a similar (but not the same) Lipper investment objective/classification. The Portfolio’s Expense Universe had also been expanded by Lipper pursuant to Lipper’s standard guidelines. The Class A expense ratio of the Portfolio was based on the Portfolio’s latest fiscal year. The directors noted that it was likely that the expense ratios of some of the other funds in the Portfolio’s Lipper category were lowered by waivers or reimbursements by those funds’ investment advisers, which in some cases might be voluntary or temporary. The directors view the expense ratio information as relevant to their evaluation of the Adviser’s services because the Adviser is responsible for coordinating services provided to the Portfolio by others.
The directors noted that, at the Portfolio’s current size, its contractual effective advisory fee rate of 75 basis points, plus the 3 basis point impact of the administrative expense reimbursement in the latest fiscal year, was essentially the same as the Expense Group median. The directors also noted that the Portfolio’s total expense ratio was lower than the Expense Group median and higher than the Expense Universe median. The directors concluded that the Portfolio’s expense ratio was satisfactory.
Economies of Scale
The directors noted that the advisory fee schedule for the Portfolio contains breakpoints that reduce the fee rates on assets above specified levels. The directors took into consideration prior presentations by an independent consultant on economies of scale in the mutual fund industry and for the AllianceBernstein Funds, and by the Adviser concerning certain of its views on economies of scale. The directors also had requested and received from the Adviser certain updates on economies of scale at the May 2012 meetings. The directors believe that economies of scale may be realized (if at all) by the Adviser across a variety of products and services, and not only in respect of a single fund. The directors noted that there is no established methodology for establishing breakpoints that give effect to the fund-specific services provided by a fund’s adviser and to the economies of scale that an adviser may realize in its overall mutual fund business or those components of it which directly or indirectly affect a fund’s operations. The directors observed that in the mutual fund industry as a whole, as well as among funds similar to the Portfolio, there is no uniformity or pattern in the fees and asset levels at which breakpoints (if any) apply. The directors also noted that the advisory agreements for many funds do not have breakpoints at all. Having taken these factors into account, the directors concluded that the Portfolio’s shareholders would benefit from a sharing of economies of scale in the event the Portfolio’s net assets exceed a breakpoint in the future.
22
| | |
|
GLOBAL THEMATIC GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
THE FOLLOWING IS NOT PART OF THE SHAREHOLDER REPORT OR THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
SUMMARY OF SENIOR OFFICER’S EVALUATION OF INVESTMENT ADVISORY AGREEMENT1
The following is a summary of the evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement between AllianceBernstein L.P. (the “Adviser”) and the AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund (the “Fund”), in respect of AllianceBernstein Global Thematic Growth Portfolio (the “Portfolio”).2,3 The evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement was prepared by Philip L. Kirstein, the Senior Officer of the Fund, for the Directors of the Fund, as required by a September 2004 agreement between the Adviser and the New York State Attorney General (the “NYAG”). The Senior Officer’s evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement is not meant to diminish the responsibility or authority of the Board of Directors of the Fund to perform its duties pursuant to Section 15 of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “40 Act”) and applicable state law. The purpose of the summary is to provide shareholders with a synopsis of the independent evaluation of the reasonableness of the advisory fees proposed to be paid by the Portfolio which was provided to the Directors in connection with their review of the proposed approval of the continuance of the Investment Advisory Agreement. The Senior Officer’s evaluation considered the following factors:
| 1. | Advisory fees charged to institutional and other clients of the Adviser for like services; |
| 2. | Advisory fees charged by other mutual fund companies for like services; |
| 3. | Costs to the Adviser and its affiliates of supplying services pursuant to the advisory agreement, excluding any intra-corporate profit; |
| 4. | Profit margins of the Adviser and its affiliates from supplying such services; |
| 5. | Possible economies of scale as the Portfolio grows larger; and |
| 6. | Nature and quality of the Adviser’s services including the performance of the Portfolio. |
These factors, with the exception of the first factor, are generally referred to as the “Gartenberg factors,” which were articulated by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in 1982. Gartenberg v. Merrill Lynch Asset Management, Inc., 694 F. 2d 923 (2d Cir. 1982). The first factor is an additional factor required to be considered by the AoD. On March 30, 2010, the Supreme Court held the Gartenberg decision was correct in its basic formulation of what §36(b) requires: to face liability under §36(b), “an investment adviser must charge a fee that is so disproportionately large that it bears no reasonable relationship to the services rendered and could not have been the product of arm’s length bargaining.” Jones v. Harris Associates L.P., 130 S. Ct. 1418 (2010). In the Jones decision, the Court stated the Gartenberg approach fully incorporates the correct understanding of fiduciary duty within the context of section 36(b) and noted with approval that “Gartenberg insists that all relevant circumstances be taken into account” and “uses the range of fees that might result from arm’s-length bargaining as the benchmark for reviewing challenged fees.”4
PORTFOLIO ADVISORY FEES, NET ASSETS & EXPENSE RATIOS
The Adviser proposed that the Portfolio pay the advisory fee set forth in the table below for receiving the services to be provided pursuant to the Investment Advisory Agreement. The fee schedule below, implemented in January 2004 in consideration of the Adviser’s settlement with the NYAG in December 2003, is based on a master schedule that contemplates eight categories of funds with almost all funds in each category having the same advisory fee schedule.
1 | | The information in the fee summary was completed on April 19, 2012 and discussed with the Board of Directors on May 1-3, 2012. |
2 | | Future references to the Fund and the Portfolio do not include “AllianceBernstein.” References in the fee summary pertaining to performance and expense ratio rankings refer to the Class A shares of the Portfolio. |
3 | | Prior to May 1, 2009, the Portfolio was known as AllianceBernstein Global Technology Portfolio. In addition, the Portfolio’s non-fundamental policy was changed on May 1, 2009 to allow the Portfolio to pursue a broader mandate across multiple sectors worldwide. |
4 | | Jones v. Harris at 1427. |
23
| | |
GLOBAL THEMATIC GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Category | | Advisory Fee Based on % of Average Daily Net Assets | | Net Assets 03/31/12 ($MIL) | | | Portfolio |
Specialty | | 75 bp on 1st $2.5 billion
65 bp on next $2.5 billion
60 bp on the balance | | $ | 157.2 | | | Global Thematic Growth Portfolio |
The Adviser is reimbursed as specified in the Investment Advisory Agreement for certain clerical, legal, accounting, administrative and other services provided to the Portfolio. During the Portfolio’s most recently completed fiscal year, the Adviser received $61,179 (0.03% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets) for such services.
Set forth below are the Portfolio’s total expense ratios for the most recently completed fiscal year:
| | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Total Expense Ratio | | Fiscal Year | |
Global Thematic Growth Portfolio | | Class A 0.94% | | | December 31 | |
| | Class B 1.19% | | | | |
I. ADVISORY FEES CHARGED TO INSTITUTIONAL AND OTHER CLIENTS
The advisory fees charged to investment companies which the Adviser manages and sponsors are normally higher than those charged to similar sized institutional accounts, including pension plans and sub-advised investment companies. The fee differential reflects, among other things, different services provided to such clients, and different liabilities assumed. Services provided by the Adviser to the Portfolio that are not provided to non-investment company clients and sub-advised investment companies include providing office space and personnel to serve as Fund Officers, who among other responsibilities make the certifications required under the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002, and coordinating with and monitoring the Portfolio’s third party service providers such as Fund counsel, auditors, custodians, transfer agents and pricing services. The accounting, administrative, legal and compliance requirements for the Portfolio are more costly than those for institutional assets due to the greater complexities and time required for investment companies, although as previously noted, the Adviser is reimbursed for providing such services. Also, retail mutual funds managed by the Adviser are widely held. Servicing the Portfolio’s investors is more time consuming and labor intensive compared to institutional clients since the Adviser needs to communicate with a more extensive network of financial intermediaries and shareholders. The Adviser also believes that it incurs substantial entrepreneurial risk when offering a new mutual fund, since establishing a new mutual fund requires a large upfront investment, and it may take a long time for the fund to achieve profitability since the fund must be priced to scale from inception in order to be competitive and assets are acquired one account at a time. In addition, managing the cash flow of an investment company may be more difficult than managing that of a stable pool of assets, such as an institutional account with little cash movement in either direction, particularly, if a fund is in net redemption and the Adviser is frequently forced to sell securities to raise cash for redemptions. However, managing a fund with positive cash flow may be easier at times than managing a stable pool of assets. In recent years, investment advisers have been sued by institutional clients and have suffered reputational damage both by the attendant publicity and outcomes other than complete victories. Accordingly, the legal and reputational risks associated with institutional accounts are greater than previously thought, although still not equal to those related to the mutual fund industry.
Notwithstanding the Adviser’s view that managing an investment company is not comparable to managing other institutional accounts because the services provided are different, the Supreme Court has indicated consideration should be given to the advisory fees charged to institutional accounts that have a substantially similar investment style as the Portfolio.5 In addition to the AllianceBernstein institutional fee schedule, set forth below is what would have been the effective advisory fee of the Portfolio had the AllianceBernstein institutional fee schedule been applicable to the Portfolio versus the Portfolio’s advisory fee based on March 31, 2012 net assets:6
5 | | The Supreme Court stated that “courts may give such comparisons the weight that they merit in light of the similarities and differences between the services that the clients in question require, but the courts must be wary of inapt comparisons.” Among the significant differences the Supreme Court noted that may exist between services provided to mutual funds and institutional accounts are “higher marketing costs.” Jones v. Harris at 1428. |
6 | | The Adviser has indicated that with respect to institutional accounts with assets greater than $300 million, it will negotiate a fee schedule. Discounts that are negotiated vary based upon each client relationship. |
24
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Net Assets 3/31/12 ($MIL) | | AllianceBernstein Institutional Fee Schedule | | Effective AB Inst. Adv. Fee | | | Portfolio Advisory Fee | |
Global Thematic Growth Portfolio | | $157.2 | | Global Thematic Research Schedule 80 bp on 1st $25m 60 bp on next $25m 50 bp on next $50m 40 bp on the balance Minimum account size $25m | | | 0.527 | % | | | 0.750 | % |
The Adviser also manages AllianceBernstein Global Thematic Growth Fund, Inc. (“Global Thematic Growth Fund, Inc.), a retail mutual fund, which has a substantially similar investment style as the Portfolio. Set forth below is the fee schedule of Global Thematic Growth Fund, Inc. and what would have been the effective advisory fee of the Portfolio had the fee schedule of the retail mutual fund been applicable to the Portfolio:7
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | AllianceBernstein Mutual Fund | | Fee Schedule | | ABMF Effective Fee | | | Portfolio Advisory Fee | |
Global Thematic Growth Portfolio8 | | Global Thematic Growth Fund, Inc. | | 0.75% on first $2.5 billion 0.65% on next $2.5 billion 0.60% on the balance | | | 0.750% | | | | 0.750% | |
The Adviser also manages and sponsors retail mutual funds, which are organized in jurisdictions outside the United States, generally Luxembourg and Japan, and sold to non-United States resident investors. The Adviser charges the fees set forth for Thematic Research Growth Portfolio, which is a Luxembourg fund that has a somewhat similar investment style as the Portfolio.
| | |
Fund | | Fee9 |
Thematic Research Growth Portfolio | | |
Class A | | 1.70% |
Class I (Institutional) | | 0.90% |
The Adviser represented that it does not sub-advise any registered investment company with a substantially similar investment style as the Portfolio.
II. MANAGEMENT FEES CHARGED BY OTHER MUTUAL FUND COMPANIES FOR LIKE SERVICES.
Lipper, Inc. (“Lipper”), an analytical service that is not affiliated with the Adviser, compared the fees charged to the Portfolio with fees charged to other investment companies for similar services offered by other investment advisers.10 Lipper’s
7 | | The retail mutual fund was also affected by the settlement between the Adviser and the NYAG. As a result, the Portfolio has the same breakpoints in its advisory fee schedule as the retail mutual fund. |
8 | | The advisory fees of AllianceBernstein Global Thematic Growth Fund, Inc. are based on the mutual fund’s net assets at the end of each quarter and are paid to the Adviser quarterly, in contrast to the Portfolio, whose advisory fees are based on the Portfolio’s average daily net assets and are paid on a monthly basis. |
9 | | Class A shares of the fund are charged an “all-in” fee, which includes investment advisory services and distribution related services, unlike Class I shares, whose fee is for only investment advisory services. |
10 | | The Supreme Court cautioned against accepting mutual fund fee comparisons without careful scrutiny since “these comparisons are problematic because these fees, like those challenged, may not be the product of the negotiations conducted at arm’s-length.” Jones v. Harris at 1429. |
25
| | |
GLOBAL THEMATIC GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
analysis included the comparison of the Portfolio’s contractual management fee, estimated at the approximate current asset level of the Portfolio, to the median of the Portfolio’s Lipper Expense Group (“EG”) and the Portfolio’s contractual management fee ranking.11
Lipper describes an EG as a representative sample of comparable funds. Lipper’s standard methodology for screening funds to be included in an EG entails the consideration of several fund criteria, including fund type, investment classification/objective, load type and similar 12b-1/non-12b-1 service fees, asset (size) comparability, expense components and attributes. An EG will typically consist of seven to twenty funds. The Portfolio’s original EG had an insufficient number of peers. Consequently, Lipper expanded the Portfolio’s EG to include peers that have similar but not the same Lipper investment classification/objective as the Portfolio.12
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Contractual Management Fee13 | | | Lipper Exp. Group Median (%) | | | Rank | |
Global Thematic Growth Portfolio | | | 0.750 | | | | 0.797 | | | | 4/10 | |
Because Lipper had expanded the Portfolio’s EG, under Lipper’s standard guidelines, the Lipper Expense Universe (“EU”) was also expanded to include the universes of those peers that had a similar but not the same Lipper investment classification/objective.14 A “normal” EU will include funds that have the same investment classification/objective as the subject Portfolio.15
Set forth below is a comparison of the Portfolio’s total expense ratio and the medians of the Portfolio’s EG and EU. The Portfolio’s total expense ratio ranking is also shown in the table below.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Expense Ratio (%)16 | | | Lipper Exp. Group Median (%) | | | Lipper Group Rank | | | Lipper Exp. Universe Median (%) | | | Lipper Universe Rank | |
Global Thematic Growth Portfolio | | | 0.937 | | | | 0.948 | | | | 5/10 | | | | 0.898 | | | | 19/30 | |
Based on this analysis, the Portfolio has a more favorable ranking on a management fee basis than it does on a total expense ratio basis.
III. COSTS TO THE ADVISER AND ITS AFFILIATES OF SUPPLYING SERVICES PURSUANT TO THE ADVISORY FEE ARRANGEMENT, EXCLUDING ANY INTRA-CORPORATE PROFIT.
The Adviser utilizes two profitability reporting systems, which operate independently but are aligned with each other, to estimate the Adviser’s profitability in connection with investment advisory services provided to the Portfolio. The Senior Officer has retained a consultant to provide independent advice regarding the alignment of the two profitability systems as well as the methodologies and allocations utilized by both profitability systems.
IV. PROFIT MARGINS OF THE ADVISER AND ITS AFFILIATES FOR SUPPLYING SUCH SERVICES.
The Portfolio’s profitability information, prepared by the Adviser for the Board of Directors, was reviewed by the Senior Officer and the consultant. The Adviser’s profitability from providing investment advisory services to the Portfolio decreased during calendar year 2011, relative to 2010.
11 | | The contractual management fee is calculated by Lipper using the Portfolio’s contractual management fee rate at a hypothetical asset level. The hypothetical asset level is based on the combined net assets of all classes of the Portfolio, rounded up to the next $25 million. Lipper’s total expense ratio information is based on the most recent annual report except as otherwise noted. A ranking of “1” would mean that the Portfolio had the lowest effective fee rate in the Lipper peer group. |
12 | | The Portfolio’s EG includes the Portfolio, two other variable insurance product (“VIP”) Global Growth funds (“GLGE”) and seven VIP Global Core funds (“GLCE”). |
13 | | The contractual management fee does not reflect any expense reimbursements made by the Portfolio to the Adviser for certain clerical, legal, accounting, administrative and other services. |
14 | | Except for asset (size) comparability, Lipper uses the same criteria for selecting an EG peer when selecting an EU peer. Unlike the EG, the EU allows for the same adviser to be represented by more than just one fund. |
15 | | The Portfolio’s EU includes the Portfolio, EG and all other VIP GLGE and GLCE funds, excluding outliers. |
16 | | Most recently completed fiscal year end Class A total expense ratio. |
26
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
In addition to the Adviser’s direct profits from managing the Portfolio, certain of the Adviser’s affiliates have business relationships with the Portfolio and may earn a profit from providing other services to the Portfolio. The courts have referred to this type of business opportunity as “fall-out benefits” to the Adviser and indicated that such benefits should be factored into the evaluation of the total relationship between the Portfolio and the Adviser. Neither case law nor common business practice precludes the Adviser’s affiliates from earning a reasonable profit on this type of relationship provided the affiliates’ charges and services are competitive. These affiliates provide transfer agent, distribution and brokerage related services to the Portfolio and receive transfer agent fees, Rule 12b-1 payments, and brokerage commissions. In addition, the Adviser benefits from soft dollar arrangements which offset expenses the Adviser would otherwise incur.
The Portfolio has adopted a distribution plan for Class B shares pursuant to Rule 12b-1 under the 40 Act. Under the distribution plan, the Portfolio pays distribution and servicing fees to its principal underwriter, AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (“ABI”), at an annual rate of up to 0.50% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The current annual rate that the Portfolio pays to ABI for 12b-1 fees is 0.25%. During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011, AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (“ABI”), the Portfolio’s distributor and an affiliate of the Adviser, received $321,442 in Rule 12b-1 fees.
During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011, the Adviser incurred distribution expenses in the amount of $1,011,881 in connection with activities primarily intended to result in the sale of the Portfolio’s Class B shares. This amount includes the 12b-1 fees paid by the Portfolio to the Adviser.
Financial intermediaries, such as insurers, market and sell shares of the Portfolio and typically receive compensation from ABI, the Advisers and/or the Portfolio for selling shares of the Portfolio. These financial intermediaries receive compensation in any or all of the following forms: 12b-1 fees, defrayal of costs for educational seminars and training, additional distribution support, recordkeeping and/or administrative services. Payments related to providing contract-holder recordkeeping and/or administrative services will generally not exceed 0.35% of the average daily net assets of the Portfolio attributable to the relevant intermediary over the year. With respect to the Fund, which includes the Portfolio and other Portfolios of the Fund not discussed in this summary, ABI paid approximately $500,000 in 2011.
The transfer agent of the Portfolio is AllianceBernstein Investor Services, Inc. (“ABIS”). During the most recently completed fiscal year, ABIS received a fee of $1,310 from the Portfolio.17
The Portfolio effected brokerage transactions through the Adviser’s affiliate, Sanford C. Bernstein & Co., LLC (“SCB & Co.”) and/or its U.K. affiliate, Sanford C. Bernstein Limited (“SCB Ltd.”), collectively “SCB,” and paid commissions during the Portfolio’s most recently completed fiscal year. The Adviser represented that SCB’s profitability from business conducted with the Portfolio is comparable to the profitability of SCB’s dealings with other similar third party clients. In the ordinary course of business, SCB receives and pays liquidity rebates from electronic communications networks (“ECNs”) derived from trading for its clients, including the Portfolio. These credits and charges are not being passed onto any SCB client. The Adviser also receives certain soft dollar benefits from brokers that execute agency trades for the Portfolio and other clients. These soft dollar benefits reduce the Adviser’s cost of doing business and increase its profitability.
V. POSSIBLE ECONOMIES OF SCALE
The Adviser has indicated that economies of scale are being shared with shareholders through fee structures,18 subsidies and enhancement to services. Based on some of the professional literature that has considered economies of scale in the mutual fund industry, it is thought that to the extent economies of scale exist, they may more often exist across a fund family as opposed to a specific fund. This is because the costs incurred by the Adviser, such as investment research or technology for trading or compliance systems can be spread across a greater asset base as the fund family increases in size. It is also possible that as the level of services required to operate a successful investment company has increased over time, and advisory firms make such investments in their business to provide services, there may be a sharing of economies of scale without a reduction in advisory fees.
An independent consultant, retained by the Senior Officer, provided the Board of Directors information on the Adviser’s firm-wide average costs from 2005 through 2011 and potential economies of scale. The independent consultant noted that from 2005 through 2007 the Adviser experienced significant growth in assets under management (“AUM”). During this
17 | | The Fund, which includes the Portfolio and other Portfolios of the Fund paid ABIS a flat fee of $18,000 in 2011. |
18 | | Fee structures include fee reductions, pricing at scale and breakpoints in advisory fee schedules. |
27
| | |
GLOBAL THEMATIC GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
period, operating expenses increased, in part to keep up with growth, and in part reflecting market returns. However, from 2008 through the first quarter of 2009, AUM rapidly and significantly decreased. Some operating expenses, including base compensation and office space, adjusted more slowly during this period, resulting in an increase in average costs. Since 2009, AUM has moved within a range of $400 to $500 million ending 2011 with an average of $411 million in the fourth quarter. The independent consultant noted that changes in operating expenses reflect changes in business composition and business practices in response to changes in financial markets. Finally, the independent consultant concluded that the increase in average cost and the decline in net operating margin across the company since 2008 are inconsistent with the view that there are currently “economies of scale” to be shared with clients through lower fees.
In February 2008, the independent consultant provided the Board of Directors an update of the Deli19 study on advisory fees and various fund characteristics.20 The independent consultant first reiterated the results of his previous two dimensional comparison analysis (fund size and family size) with the Board of Directors.21 The independent consultant then discussed the results of the regression model that was utilized to study the effects of various factors on advisory fees. The regression model output indicated that the bulk of the variation in fees predicted were explained by various factors, but substantially by fund AUM, family AUM, index fund indicator and investment style. The independent consultant also compared the advisory fees of the AllianceBernstein Mutual Funds to similar funds managed by 19 other large asset managers, regardless of the fund size and each Adviser’s proportion of mutual fund assets to non-mutual fund assets.
VI. NATURE AND QUALITY OF THE ADVISER’S SERVICES, INCLUDING THE PERFORMANCE OF THE PORTFOLIO
With assets under management of approximately $419 billion as of March 31, 2012, the Adviser has the investment experience to manage and provide non-investment services (described in Section I) to the Portfolio.
The information prepared by Lipper shows the 1, 3, 5 and 10 year performance returns and rankings of the Portfolio22 relative to its Lipper Performance Group (“PG”) and Lipper Performance Universe (“PU”)23 for the periods ended February 29, 2012.24
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Fund | | | PG Median | | | PU Median | | | PG Rank | | | PU Rank | |
Global Thematic Growth Portfolio25 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
1 year | | | –13.09 | | | | –0.41 | | | | –3.32 | | | | 3/3 | | | | 11/11 | |
3 year | | | 22.07 | | | | 24.54 | | | | 24.66 | | | | 3/3 | | | | 9/10 | |
5 year | | | 0.94 | | | | 0.94 | | | | 0.94 | | | | 2/3 | | | | 5/9 | |
10 year | | | 1.88 | | | | 6.28 | | | | 6.60 | | | | 3/3 | | | | 8/8 | |
19 | | The Deli study, originally published in 2002 based on 1997 data and updated for the February 2008 Presentation, may be of diminished value due to the age of the data used in the presentation and the changes experienced in the industry over the last four years. |
20 | | As mentioned previously, the Supreme Court cautioned against accepting mutual fund fee comparisons without careful scrutiny since the fees may not be the product of negotiations conducted at arm’s length. See Jones V. Harris at 1429. |
21 | | The two dimensional analysis showed patterns of lower advisory fees for funds with larger asset sizes and funds from larger family sizes compared to funds with smaller asset sizes and funds from smaller family sizes, which according to the independent consultant is indicative of a sharing of economies of scale and scope. However, in less liquid and active markets, such is not the case, as the empirical analysis showed potential for diseconomies of scale in those markets. The empirical analysis also showed diminishing economies of scale and scope as funds surpassed a certain high level of assets. |
22 | | The performance rankings are for the Class A shares of the Portfolio. The Portfolio’s performance returns shown were provided by Lipper. |
23 | | The Portfolio’s PG/PU are not identical to the Portfolio’s EG/EU as the criteria for including/excluding a fund in/from a PG/PU is somewhat different from that of an EG/EU. |
24 | | Note that the current Lipper investment classification/objective dictates the PG and PU throughout the life of the fund even if a fund had a different investment classification/objective at a different point in time. |
25 | | The Portfolio’s Lipper classification changed in 2009 from VA Science/Technology Funds to VA Global Growth as a result of changes to the Portfolio’s strategy. |
28
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products��Series Fund |
Set forth below are the 1, 3, 5, 10 year and since inception performance returns of the Portfolio (in bold)26 versus its benchmarks.27 Portfolio and benchmark volatility and reward-to-variability ratio (“Sharpe Ratio”) information is also shown.28
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Periods Ending February 29, 2012 Annualized Performance | |
| | 1
Year (%) | | | 3
Year (%) | | | 5
Year (%) | | | 10 Year (%) | | | Since Inception (%) | | | Annualized | | | Risk Period (Year) | |
| | | | | | | Volatility (%) | | | Sharpe (%) | | |
Global Thematic Growth Portfolio29 | | | –13.09 | | | | 22.07 | | | | 0.94 | | | | 1.88 | | | | 4.56 | | | | 23.46 | | | | 0.12 | | | | 10 | |
MSCI AC World Index | | | –1.49 | | | | 23.71 | | | | 0.07 | | | | 5.72 | | | | N/A | | | | 17.50 | | | | 0.30 | | | | 10 | |
MSCI World (Net) Index30 | | | –1.69 | | | | 22.66 | | | | -0.59 | | | | 5.04 | | | | 5.32 | | | | N/A | | | | N/A | | | | N/A | |
Inception Date: January 11, 1996 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CONCLUSION:
Based on the factors discussed above the Senior Officer’s conclusion is that the proposed advisory fee for the Portfolio is reasonable and within the range of what would have been negotiated at arm’s-length in light of all the surrounding circumstances. This conclusion in respect of the Portfolio is based on an evaluation of all of these factors and no single factor was dispositive.
Dated: May 25, 2012
26 | | The performance returns and risk measures shown in the table are for the Class A shares of the Portfolio. |
27 | | The Adviser provided Portfolio and benchmark performance return information for periods through February 29, 2012. |
28 | | Portfolio and benchmark volatility and Sharpe Ratio information was obtained through Lipper LANA, a database maintained by Lipper. Volatility is a statistical measure of the tendency of a market price or yield to vary over time. A Sharpe Ratio is a risk adjusted measure of return that divides a portfolio’s return in excess of the riskless return by the portfolio’s standard deviation. A portfolio with a greater volatility would be viewed as more risky than a portfolio with equivalent performance but lower volatility; for that reason, a greater return would be demanded for the more risky portfolio. A portfolio with a higher Sharpe Ratio would be viewed as better performing than a portfolio with a lower Sharpe Ratio. |
29 | | The Portfolio’s Lipper classification changed in 2009 from VA Science/Technology Funds to VA Global Growth as a result of changes to the Portfolio’s strategy. |
30 | | Benchmark since inception date is the nearest month end after the Portfolio’s inception date. |
29
AllianceBernstein
Variable Products Series Fund, Inc.
| | |
![LOGO](https://capedge.com/proxy/N-CSRS/0001193125-12-366259/g374623g16n16.jpg) | | AllianceBernstein Intermediate Bond Portfolio |
Semi-Annual Report
![LOGO](https://capedge.com/proxy/N-CSRS/0001193125-12-366259/g374623g81g54.jpg)
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT
Investment Products Offered
| Ø | | Are Not Bank Guaranteed |
AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (ABI) is the distributor of the AllianceBernstein family of mutual funds. ABI is a member of FINRA and is an affiliate of AllianceBernstein L.P., the manager of the funds.
You may obtain a description of the Fund’s proxy voting policies and procedures, and information regarding how the Fund voted proxies relating to portfolio securities during the most recent 12-month period ended June 30, without charge. Simply visit AllianceBernstein’s website at www.alliancebernstein.com or go to the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (the “Commission”) website at www.sec.gov, or call AllianceBernstein at (800) 227-4618.
The Fund files its complete schedule of portfolio holdings with the Commission for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year on Form N-Q. The Fund’s Forms N-Q are available on the Commission’s website at www.sec.gov. The Fund’s Forms N-Q may also be reviewed and copied at the Commission’s Public Reference Room in Washington, DC; information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling (800) SEC-0330.
AllianceBernstein® and the AB Logo are registered trademarks and service marks used by permission of the owner, AllianceBernstein L.P.
| | |
| | |
INTERMEDIATE BOND PORTFOLIO | | |
FUND EXPENSES (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
As a shareholder of the Fund, you incur two types of costs: (1) transaction costs, including sales charges (loads) on purchase payments, contingent deferred sales charges on redemptions and (2) ongoing costs, including management fees; distribution (12b-1) fees; and other Fund expenses. This example is intended to help you understand your ongoing costs (in dollars) of investing in the Fund and to compare these costs with the ongoing costs of investing in other mutual funds.
The Example is based on an investment of $1,000 invested at the beginning of the period and held for the entire period as indicated below.
Actual Expenses
The table below provides information about actual account values and actual expenses. You may use the information in this line, together with the amount you invested, to estimate the expenses that you paid over the period. Simply divide your account value by $1,000 (for example, an $8,600 account value divided by $1,000 = 8.6), then multiply the result by the number in the first line under the heading entitled “Expenses Paid During Period” to estimate the expenses you paid on your account during this period. The estimate of expenses does not include fees of other expenses of any variable insurance product. If such expenses were included, the estimate of expenses you paid during the period would be higher and your ending account value would be lower.
Hypothetical Example for Comparison Purposes
The table below provides information about hypothetical account values and hypothetical expenses based on the Fund’s actual expense ratio and an assumed annual rate of return of 5% before expenses, which is not the Fund’s actual return. The hypothetical account values and expenses may not be used to estimate the actual ending account balance or expenses you paid for the period. You may use this information to compare the ongoing costs of investing in the Fund and other funds by comparing this 5% hypothetical example with the 5% hypothetical examples that appear in the shareholder reports of other funds. The estimate of expenses does not include fees of other expenses of any variable insurance product. If such expenses were included, the estimate of expenses you paid during the period would be higher and your ending account value would be lower.
Please note that the expenses shown in the table are meant to highlight your ongoing costs only and do not reflect any transactional costs, such as sales charges (loads), or contingent deferred sales charges on redemptions. Therefore, the second line of each class’ table is useful in comparing ongoing costs only, and will not help you determine the relative total costs of owning different funds. In addition, if these transactional costs were included, your costs would have been higher.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Beginning Account Value January 1, 2012 | | | Ending Account Value June 30, 2012 | | | Expenses Paid During Period* | | | Annualized Expense Ratio* | |
Class A | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Actual | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,027.10 | | | $ | 3.53 | | | | 0.70 | % |
Hypothetical (5% return before expenses) | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,021.38 | | | $ | 3.52 | | | | 0.70 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class B | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Actual | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,026.60 | | | $ | 4.79 | | | | 0.95 | % |
Hypothetical (5% return before expenses) | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,020.14 | | | $ | 4.77 | | | | 0.95 | % |
* | | Expenses are equal to each classes’ annualized expense ratios, multiplied by the average account value over the period, multiplied by 182/366 (to reflect the one-half year period). |
1
| | |
INTERMEDIATE BOND PORTFOLIO |
SECURITY TYPE BREAKDOWN* |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
SECURITY TYPE | | U.S. $ VALUE | | | PERCENT OF TOTAL INVESTMENTS | |
Corporates—Investment Grades | | $ | 34,868,165 | | | | 28.6 | % |
Mortgage Pass-Throughs | | | 31,729,597 | | | | 26.0 | |
Governments—Treasuries | | | 17,715,890 | | | | 14.5 | |
Asset-Backed Securities | | | 10,929,327 | | | | 9.0 | |
Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securities | | | 9,401,859 | | | | 7.7 | |
Agencies | | | 7,106,515 | | | | 5.8 | |
Quasi-Sovereigns | | | 1,908,586 | | | | 1.6 | |
Corporates—Non-Investment Grades | | | 1,427,838 | | | | 1.2 | |
Governments—Sovereign Bonds | | | 763,448 | | | | 0.6 | |
Inflation-Linked Securities | | | 730,721 | | | | 0.6 | |
Collateralized Mortgage Obligations | | | 532,873 | | | | 0.4 | |
Local Governments—Municipal Bonds | | | 523,600 | | | | 0.4 | |
Preferred Stocks | | | 273,162 | | | | 0.2 | |
Other** | | | 84,437 | | | | 0.1 | |
Short-Term Investments | | | 3,978,313 | | | | 3.3 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Investments | | $ | 121,974,331 | | | | 100.0 | % |
* | | The Portfolio’s security type is expressed as a percentage of total investments and may vary over time. The Portfolio also enters into derivative transactions, which may be used for hedging or investment purposes (see “Portfolio of Investments” section of the report for additional details). |
** | | “Other” represents less than 0.1% weightings in the following security types: Common Stocks, Governments—Sovereign Agencies and Warrants. |
2
| | |
INTERMEDIATE BOND PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Principal Amount (000) | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
CORPORATES–INVESTMENT GRADES–29.6% | | | | | | | | | |
INDUSTRIAL–14.3% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
BASIC–1.5% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Alcoa, Inc. 5.40%, 4/15/21 | | | U.S.$ | | | | 180 | | | $ | 179,239 | |
AngloGold Ashanti Holdings PLC 5.375%, 4/15/20 | | | | | | | 250 | | | | 256,932 | |
ArcelorMittal 6.125%, 6/01/18 | | | | | | | 280 | | | | 283,905 | |
Dow Chemical Co. (The) 4.125%, 11/15/21 | | | | | | | 85 | | | | 91,171 | |
5.25%, 11/15/41 | | | | | | | 80 | | | | 88,435 | |
7.60%, 5/15/14 | | | | | | | 81 | | | | 90,166 | |
8.55%, 5/15/19 | | | | | | | 143 | | | | 190,201 | |
Eastman Chemical Co. 2.40%, 6/01/17 | | | | | | | 80 | | | | 80,848 | |
3.60%, 8/15/22 | | | | | | | 86 | | | | 87,714 | |
International Paper Co. 7.95%, 6/15/18 | | | | | | | 196 | | | | 246,985 | |
Teck Resources Ltd. 4.75%, 1/15/22 | | | | | | | 134 | | | | 143,984 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 1,739,580 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
CAPITAL GOODS–0.6% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
ADT Corp. (The) 3.50%, 7/15/22(a) | | | | | | | 68 | | | | 68,228 | |
Embraer SA 5.15%, 6/15/22 | | | | | | | 82 | | | | 84,173 | |
Holcim US Finance Sarl & Cie SCS 6.00%, 12/30/19(a) | | | | | | | 41 | | | | 42,986 | |
Owens Corning 6.50%, 12/01/16 | | | | | | | 160 | | | | 177,907 | |
Republic Services, Inc. 5.25%, 11/15/21 | | | | | | | 150 | | | | 172,213 | |
5.50%, 9/15/19 | | | | | | | 160 | | | | 185,144 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 730,651 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
COMMUNICATIONS–MEDIA–3.0% | | | | | | | | | |
CBS Corp. 3.375%, 3/01/22 | | | | | | | 251 | | | | 250,070 | |
5.75%, 4/15/20 | | | | | | | 83 | | | | 96,535 | |
Comcast Cable Communications Holdings, Inc. 9.455%, 11/15/22 | | | | | | | 280 | | | | 407,601 | |
DirecTV Holdings LLC/DirecTV Financing Co., Inc. 3.50%, 3/01/16 | | | | | | | 95 | | | | 100,200 | |
3.80%, 3/15/22 | | | | | | | 165 | | | | 166,863 | |
4.75%, 10/01/14 | | | | | | | 160 | | | | 171,749 | |
Globo Comunicacao e Participacoes SA 5.307%, 5/11/22(a)(b) | | | | | | | 305 | | | | 323,300 | |
Interpublic Group of Cos., Inc. (The) 4.00%, 3/15/22 | | | | | | | 32 | | | | 32,487 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
News America, Inc. 4.50%, 2/15/21 | | | U.S.$ | | | | 300 | | | $ | 328,906 | |
Omnicom Group, Inc. 3.625%, 5/01/22 | | | | | | | 103 | | | | 104,658 | |
Reed Elsevier Capital, Inc. 8.625%, 1/15/19 | | | | | | | 250 | | | | 317,165 | |
TCI Communications, Inc. 7.875%, 2/15/26 | | | | | | | 115 | | | | 155,022 | |
Time Warner Entertainment Co. LP 8.375%, 3/15/23 | | | | | | | 371 | | | | 502,540 | |
Virgin Media Secured Finance PLC 5.25%, 1/15/21 | | | | | | | 200 | | | | 221,567 | |
WPP Finance UK 8.00%, 9/15/14 | | | | | | | 315 | | | | 355,250 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 3,533,913 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
COMMUNICATIONS–TELECOMMUNICATIONS–1.5% | | | | | | | | | |
American Tower Corp. 5.05%, 9/01/20 | | | | | | | 340 | | | | 357,128 | |
AT&T Corp. 8.00%, 11/15/31 | | | | | | | 20 | | | | 29,632 | |
AT&T, Inc. 4.45%, 5/15/21 | | | | | | | 177 | | | | 200,366 | |
British Telecommunications PLC 2.00%, 6/22/15 | | | | | | | 215 | | | | 217,954 | |
5.95%, 1/15/18 | | | | | | | 106 | | | | 124,167 | |
Deutsche Telekom International Finance BV 4.875%, 3/06/42(a) | | | | | | | 320 | | | | 304,014 | |
Telecom Italia Capital SA 6.175%, 6/18/14 | | | | | | | 355 | | | | 357,663 | |
6.375%, 11/15/33 | | | | | | | 40 | | | | 31,400 | |
Telefonica Emisiones SAU 5.462%, 2/16/21 | | | | | | | 120 | | | | 104,495 | |
United States Cellular Corp. 6.70%, 12/15/33 | | | | | | | 80 | | | | 82,708 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 1,809,527 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER CYCLICAL–AUTOMOTIVE–0.5% | | | | | | | | | |
Ford Motor Credit Co. LLC 3.00%, 6/12/17 | | | | | | | 240 | | | | 238,678 | |
Harley-Davidson Funding Corp. 5.75%, 12/15/14(a) | | | | | | | 300 | | | | 324,863 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 563,541 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER CYCLICAL–ENTERTAINMENT–0.8% | | | | | | | | | |
Time Warner, Inc. 7.625%, 4/15/31 | | | | | | | 390 | | | | 503,740 | |
Viacom, Inc. 5.625%, 9/15/19 | | | | | | | 375 | | | | 442,242 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 945,982 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
3
| | |
INTERMEDIATE BOND PORTFOLIO | | |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Principal Amount (000) | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER CYCLICAL–OTHER–0.3% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Marriott International, Inc./DE Series J 5.625%, 2/15/13 | | | U.S.$ | | | | 372 | | | $ | 382,182 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER CYCLICAL–RETAILERS–0.4% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CVS Caremark Corp. 6.60%, 3/15/19 | | | | | | | 180 | | | | 224,470 | |
Macy’s Retail Holdings, Inc. 3.875%, 1/15/22 | | | | | | | 290 | | | | 304,898 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 529,368 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER NON-CYCLICAL–1.0% | | | | | | | | | |
Ahold Finance USA LLC 6.875%, 5/01/29 | | | | | | | 290 | | | | 360,543 | |
Bunge Ltd. Finance Corp. 5.10%, 7/15/15 | | | | | | | 206 | | | | 220,131 | |
Cadbury Schweppes US Finance LLC 5.125%, 10/01/13(a) | | | | | | | 350 | | | | 366,632 | |
Delhaize Group SA 5.875%, 2/01/14 | | | | | | | 105 | | | | 110,568 | |
Whirlpool Corp. 8.60%, 5/01/14 | | | | | | | 55 | | | | 61,234 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 1,119,108 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
ENERGY–2.6% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Anadarko Petroleum Corp. | | | | | | | | | | | | |
5.95%, 9/15/16 | | | | | | | 227 | | | | 257,595 | |
6.45%, 9/15/36 | | | | | | | 124 | | | | 143,360 | |
ConocoPhillips Holding Co. 6.95%, 4/15/29 | | | | | | | 155 | | | | 212,636 | |
Encana Corp. 3.90%, 11/15/21 | | | | | | | 375 | | | | 370,927 | |
Marathon Petroleum Corp. 3.50%, 3/01/16 | | | | | | | 50 | | | | 52,412 | |
5.125%, 3/01/21 | | | | | | | 209 | | | | 233,998 | |
Nabors Industries, Inc. 9.25%, 1/15/19 | | | | | | | 254 | | | | 329,773 | |
Noble Energy, Inc. 8.25%, 3/01/19 | | | | | | | 316 | | | | 403,976 | |
Noble Holding International Ltd. 4.90%, 8/01/20 | | | | | | | 32 | | | | 34,751 | |
Phillips 66 4.30%, 4/01/22(a) | | | | | | | 320 | | | | 336,897 | |
Southwestern Energy Co. 4.10%, 3/15/22(a) | | | | | | | 88 | | | | 89,191 | |
Valero Energy Corp. 6.125%, 2/01/20 | | | | | | | 177 | | | | 204,357 | |
Weatherford International Ltd./Bermuda 5.125%, 9/15/20 | | | | | | | 95 | | | | 101,987 | |
6.00%, 3/15/18 | | | | | | | 12 | | | | 13,681 | |
9.625%, 3/01/19 | | | | | | | 190 | | | | 247,616 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 3,033,157 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
OTHER INDUSTRIAL–0.3% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Noble Group Ltd. 6.75%, 1/29/20(a) | | | U.S.$ | | | | 335 | | | $ | 323,275 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
TECHNOLOGY–0.9% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Agilent Technologies, Inc. 5.00%, 7/15/20 | | | | | | | 64 | | | | 72,486 | |
Hewlett-Packard Co. 4.65%, 12/09/21 | | | | | | | 162 | | | | 169,809 | |
Intel Corp. 4.80%, 10/01/41 | | | | | | | 60 | | | | 68,714 | |
Motorola Solutions, Inc. 7.50%, 5/15/25 | | | | | | | 25 | | | | 30,901 | |
Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson 4.125%, 5/15/22 | | | | | | | 300 | | | | 300,830 | |
Xerox Corp. 8.25%, 5/15/14 | | | | | | | 375 | | | | 418,136 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 1,060,876 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
TRANSPORTATION–AIRLINES–0.3% | | | | | | | | | |
Southwest Airlines Co. 5.25%, 10/01/14 | | | | | | | 210 | | | | 227,289 | |
5.75%, 12/15/16 | | | | | | | 75 | | | | 86,657 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 313,946 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
TRANSPORTATION–SERVICES–0.6% | | | | | | | | | |
Asciano Finance Ltd. 3.125%, 9/23/15(a) | | | | | | | 310 | | | | 308,524 | |
Con-way, Inc. 6.70%, 5/01/34 | | | | | | | 138 | | | | 137,091 | |
Ryder System, Inc. 5.85%, 11/01/16 | | | | | | | 116 | | | | 131,715 | |
7.20%, 9/01/15 | | | | | | | 108 | | | | 123,645 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 700,975 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 16,786,081 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS–11.0% | | | | | | | | | |
BANKING–7.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Bank of America Corp. | | | | | | | | | | | | |
3.875%, 3/22/17 | | | | | | | 80 | | | | 81,496 | |
5.875%, 2/07/42 | | | | | | | 298 | | | | 326,423 | |
Series L 5.65%, 5/01/18 | | | | | | | 545 | | | | 582,765 | |
Barclays Bank PLC 5.125%, 1/08/20 | | | | | | | 230 | | | | 249,588 | |
Bear Stearns Cos. LLC (The) 5.70%, 11/15/14 | | | | | | | 450 | | | | 486,940 | |
Citigroup, Inc. | | | | | | | | | | | | |
4.50%, 1/14/22 | | | | | | | 85 | | | | 87,793 | |
8.50%, 5/22/19 | | | | | | | 340 | | | | 419,911 | |
Compass Bank 5.50%, 4/01/20 | | | | | | | 250 | | | | 236,262 | |
DNB Bank ASA 3.20%, 4/03/17(a) | | | | | | | 310 | | | | 313,540 | |
Fifth Third Bancorp 3.50%, 3/15/22 | | | | | | | 121 | | | | 122,279 | |
Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (The) 5.25%, 7/27/21 | | | | | | | 88 | | | | 89,392 | |
5.75%, 1/24/22 | | | | | | | 310 | | | | 327,237 | |
4
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Principal Amount (000) | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
6.00%, 6/15/20 | | | U.S.$ | | | | 395 | | | $ | 421,690 | |
7.50%, 2/15/19 | | | | | | | 95 | | | | 108,338 | |
HSBC Holdings PLC 4.00%, 3/30/22 | | | | | | | 320 | | | | 332,287 | |
5.10%, 4/05/21 | | | | | | | 194 | | | | 216,591 | |
JPMorgan Chase & Co. | | | | | | | | | | | | |
4.40%, 7/22/20 | | | | | | | 305 | | | | 321,693 | |
4.50%, 1/24/22 | | | | | | | 210 | | | | 226,216 | |
Macquarie Bank Ltd. 5.00%, 2/22/17(a) | | | | | | | 82 | | | | 83,517 | |
Macquarie Group Ltd. 4.875%, 8/10/17(a) | | | | | | | 342 | | | | 342,810 | |
Morgan Stanley 5.50%, 7/24/20–7/28/21 | | | | | | | 373 | | | | 365,847 | |
6.625%, 4/01/18 | | | | | | | 295 | | | | 308,443 | |
National Capital Trust II 5.486%, 3/23/15(a) | | | | | | | 122 | | | | 113,363 | |
National Westminster Bank PLC 6.50%, 9/07/21 | | | GBP | | | | 50 | | | | 66,126 | |
Nationwide Building Society 6.25%, 2/25/20(a) | | | U.S.$ | | | | 330 | | | | 355,982 | |
Royal Bank of Scotland PLC (The) 6.125%, 1/11/21 | | | | | | | 240 | | | | 266,620 | |
Santander US Debt SAU 2.991%, 10/07/13(a) | | | | | | | 400 | | | | 384,624 | |
Societe Generale SA 2.50%, 1/15/14(a) | | | | | | | 205 | | | | 201,360 | |
Standard Chartered PLC 6.409%, 1/30/17(a) | | | | | | | 100 | | | | 95,000 | |
UFJ Finance Aruba AEC 6.75%, 7/15/13 | | | | | | | 240 | | | | 253,083 | |
Unicredit Luxembourg Finance SA 6.00%, 10/31/17(a) | | | | | | | 190 | | | | 155,565 | |
Wachovia Corp. 5.50%, 5/01/13 | | | | | | | 410 | | | | 426,022 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 8,368,803 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
FINANCE–0.5% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
General Electric Capital Corp. 4.65%, 10/17/21 | | | | | | | 127 | | | | 141,037 | |
SLM Corp. 7.25%, 1/25/22 | | | | | | | 145 | | | | 153,337 | |
Series A 5.375%, 5/15/14 | | | | | | | 248 | | | | 256,671 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 551,045 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
INSURANCE–2.4% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Allstate Corp. (The) 6.125%, 5/15/37 | | | | | | | 237 | | | | 233,445 | |
American International Group, Inc. 6.40%, 12/15/20 | | | | | | | 215 | | | | 243,267 | |
Coventry Health Care, Inc. 6.30%, 8/15/14 | | | | | | | 280 | | | | 304,359 | |
Genworth Financial, Inc. 6.515%, 5/22/18 | | | | | | | 158 | | | | 151,409 | |
Guardian Life Insurance Co. of America 7.375%, 9/30/39(a) | | | | | | | 164 | | | | 213,976 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. 4.00%, 3/30/15 | | | U.S.$ | | | | 85 | | | $ | 89,145 | |
5.50%, 3/30/20 | | | | | | | 200 | | | | 208,811 | |
Humana, Inc. 6.30%, 8/01/18 | | | | | | | 50 | | | | 58,129 | |
7.20%, 6/15/18 | | | | | | | 85 | | | | 102,144 | |
Lincoln National Corp. 8.75%, 7/01/19 | | | | | | | 113 | | | | 142,298 | |
Markel Corp. 7.125%, 9/30/19 | | | | | | | 200 | | | | 232,637 | |
Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Co. 8.875%, 6/01/39(a) | | | | | | | 110 | | | | 157,616 | |
MetLife, Inc. 7.717%, 2/15/19 | | | | | | | 109 | | | | 138,049 | |
10.75%, 8/01/39 | | | | | | | 140 | | | | 195,650 | |
Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. 9.375%, 8/15/39(a) | | | | | | | 225 | | | | 296,027 | |
XL Group PLC 5.25%, 9/15/14 | | | | | | | 110 | | | | 115,870 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 2,882,832 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
OTHER FINANCE–0.4% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Aviation Capital Group Corp. 7.125%, 10/15/20(a) | | | | | | | 155 | | | | 157,636 | |
ORIX Corp. 4.71%, 4/27/15 | | | | | | | 312 | | | | 325,337 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 482,973 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
REITS–0.6% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
HCP, Inc. 5.375%, 2/01/21 | | | | | | | 327 | | | | 361,598 | |
Health Care REIT, Inc. 5.25%, 1/15/22 | | | | | | | 325 | | | | 344,748 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 706,346 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 12,991,999 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
UTILITY–3.6% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
ELECTRIC–1.6% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Constellation Energy Group, Inc. 5.15%, 12/01/20 | | | | | | | 150 | | | | 166,041 | |
FirstEnergy Corp. Series C 7.375%, 11/15/31 | | | | | | | 310 | | | | 389,134 | |
MidAmerican Energy Holdings Co. 6.125%, 4/01/36 | | | | | | | 260 | | | | 325,324 | |
Nisource Finance Corp. 6.80%, 1/15/19 | | | | | | | 340 | | | | 407,600 | |
Pacific Gas & Electric Co. 4.50%, 12/15/41 | | | | | | | 125 | | | | 132,240 | |
SPI Electricity & Gas Australia Holdings Pty Ltd. 6.15%, 11/15/13(a) | | | | | | | 235 | | | | 244,845 | |
TECO Finance, Inc. 4.00%, 3/15/16 | | | | | | | 95 | | | | 101,658 | |
5.15%, 3/15/20 | | | | | | | 120 | | | | 137,161 | |
5
| | |
INTERMEDIATE BOND PORTFOLIO | | |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Principal Amount (000) | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Union Electric Co. 6.70%, 2/01/19 | | | U.S.$ | | | | 45 | | | $ | 56,668 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 1,960,671 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
NATURAL GAS–2.0% | | | | | | | | | |
DCP Midstream LLC 5.35%, 3/15/20 | | | | | | | 108 | | | | 117,867 | |
Energy Transfer Partners LP | | | | | | | | | | | | |
6.70%, 7/01/18 | | | | | | | 24 | | | | 27,529 | |
7.50%, 7/01/38 | | | | | | | 336 | | | | 378,940 | |
Enterprise Products Operating LLC 5.20%, 9/01/20 | | | | | | | 55 | | | | 62,924 | |
EQT Corp. 8.125%, 6/01/19 | | | | | | | 205 | | | | 245,849 | |
Kinder Morgan Energy Partners LP | | | | | | | | | |
3.95%, 9/01/22 | | | | | | | 321 | | | | 325,209 | |
4.15%, 3/01/22 | | | | | | | 89 | | | | 91,494 | |
ONEOK, Inc. 4.25%, 2/01/22 | | | | | | | 310 | | | | 324,650 | |
Talent Yield Investments Ltd. 4.50%, 4/25/22(a) | | | | | | | 305 | | | | 312,029 | |
TransCanada PipeLines Ltd. 6.35%, 5/15/67 | | | | | | | 235 | | | | 241,992 | |
Williams Partners LP 5.25%, 3/15/20 | | | | | | | 173 | | | | 194,375 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 2,322,858 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 4,283,529 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
NON CORPORATE SECTORS–0.7% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
AGENCIES–NOT GOVERNMENT GUARANTEED–0.7% | | | | | | | | | |
Gazprom OAO Via Gaz Capital SA 6.212%, 11/22/16(a) | | | | | | | 340 | | | | 368,883 | |
Petrobras International Finance Co.–Pifco 5.75%, 1/20/20 | | | | | | | 275 | | | | 300,817 | |
VTB Bank OJSC Via VTB Capital SA 6.609%, 10/31/12(a) | | | | | | | 135 | | | | 136,856 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 806,556 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Corporates–Investment Grades (cost $32,340,804) | | | | | | | | | | | 34,868,165 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGHS–26.9% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
AGENCY FIXED RATE 30-YEAR–22.5% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp. Gold 4.50%, 10/01/39 | | | | | | | 2,798 | | | | 2,989,329 | |
Series 2005 5.50%, 1/01/35 | | | | | | | 3,131 | | | | 3,419,617 | |
Series 2007 5.50%, 7/01/35 | | | | | | | 121 | | | | 132,676 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Federal National Mortgage Association 3.50%, TBA | | U.S.$ | | | | | 1,700 | | | $ | 1,786,859 | |
3.50%, 12/01/41 | | | | | | | 1,737 | | | | 1,826,437 | |
4.00%, 1/01/41–12/01/41 | | | | | | | 4,691 | | | | 4,997,487 | |
4.50%, TBA | | | | | | | 1,105 | | | | 1,185,285 | |
5.50%, 5/01/38–6/01/38 | | | | | | | 1,602 | | | | 1,743,083 | |
6.00%, 5/01/31–7/01/39 | | | | | | | 1,775 | | | | 1,948,673 | |
Series 2002 7.00%, 3/01/32 | | | | | | | 18 | | | | 20,584 | |
Series 2003 5.00%, 11/01/33 | | | | | | | 121 | | | | 131,537 | |
5.50%, 4/01/33–7/01/33 | | | | | | | 424 | | | | 466,865 | |
Series 2004 5.50%, 4/01/34–11/01/34 | | | | | | | 385 | | | | 423,259 | |
6.00%, 9/01/34 | | | | | | | 215 | | | | 238,781 | |
Series 2005 4.50%, 8/01/35 | | | | | | | 362 | | | | 388,737 | |
5.00%, 10/01/35 | | | | | | | 970 | | | | 1,050,192 | |
5.50%, 2/01/35 | | | | | | | 469 | | | | 516,697 | |
Series 2006 5.00%, 2/01/36 | | | | | | | 195 | | | | 211,288 | |
Series 2007 4.50%, 9/01/35–8/01/37 | | | | | | | 496 | | | | 532,238 | |
5.00%, 7/01/36 | | | | | | | 146 | | | | 158,029 | |
Series 2008 6.00%, 3/01/37 | | | | | | | 1,562 | | | | 1,724,177 | |
Series 2010 6.00%, 2/01/40–4/01/40 | | | | | | | 552 | | | | 605,604 | |
Government National Mortgage Association Series 1994 9.00%, 9/15/24 | | | | | | | 2 | | | | 1,901 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 26,499,335 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
AGENCY FIXED RATE 15-YEAR–3.7% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Federal National Mortgage Association 3.00%, TBA | | | | | | | 1,240 | | | | 1,299,094 | |
4.50%, TBA | | | | | | | 915 | | | | 980,623 | |
4.50%, 6/01/26 | | | | | | | 2,012 | | | | 2,154,445 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 4,434,162 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
AGENCY ARMs–0.7% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp. 5.143%, 11/01/35(c) | | | | | | | 274 | | | | 287,329 | |
Federal National Mortgage Association Series 2003 2.78%, 12/01/33(d) | | | | | | | 180 | | | | 193,100 | |
Series 2007 2.336%, 3/01/34(d) | | | | | | | 300 | | | | 315,671 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 796,100 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Mortgage Pass-Throughs (cost $30,530,187) | | | | | | | | | | | 31,729,597 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
6
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Principal Amount (000) | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
GOVERNMENTS–TREASURIES–15.0% | | | | | | | | | |
UNITED STATES–15.0% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
U.S. Treasury Bonds 3.00%, 5/15/42 | | U.S.$ | | | | | 555 | | | $ | 581,276 | |
4.50%, 2/15/36 | | | | | | | 1,315 | | | | 1,766,209 | |
4.625%, 2/15/40 | | | | | | | 2,935 | | | | 4,059,930 | |
U.S. Treasury Notes 0.875%, 11/30/16 | | | | | | | 1,340 | | | | 1,353,296 | |
1.00%, 8/31/16 | | | | | | | 9,305 | | | | 9,451,116 | |
1.75%, 5/15/22 | | | | | | | 500 | | | | 504,063 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Governments–Treasuries (cost $16,392,936) | | | | | | | | | | | 17,715,890 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
ASSET-BACKED SECURITIES–9.3% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
AUTOS–FIXED RATE–4.3% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Ally Auto Receivables Trust Series 2012-1, Class A2 0.71%, 9/15/14 | | | | | | | 387 | | | | 387,173 | |
Ally Master Owner Trust Series 2010-3, Class A 2.88%, 4/15/15(a) | | | | | | | 340 | | | | 344,875 | |
AmeriCredit Automobile Receivables Trust 0.96%, 1/09/17 | | | | | | | 355 | | | | 354,958 | |
Series 2011-5, Class A2 1.19%, 8/08/15 | | | | | | | 156 | | | | 156,462 | |
Bank of America Auto Trust Series 2012-1, Class A4 1.03%, 12/15/16 | | | | | | | 245 | | | | 244,863 | |
CarMax Auto Owner Trust Series 2011-3, Class A3 1.07%, 6/15/16 | | | | | | | 176 | | | | 175,402 | |
Series 2012-1, Class A3 0.89%, 9/15/16 | | | | | | | 160 | | | | 160,121 | |
Exeter Automobile Receivables Trust Series 2012-1A, Class A 2.02%, 8/15/16(a) | | | | | | | 224 | | | | 224,439 | |
Ford Auto Securitization Trust Series 2011-R3A, Class A2 1.96%, 7/15/15(a) | | | CAD | | | | 521 | | | | 513,288 | |
Ford Credit Auto Lease Trust Series 2011-B, Class A2 0.82%, 1/15/14 | | U.S.$ | | | | | 463 | | | | 463,457 | |
Mercedes-Benz Auto Lease Trust Series 2012-A, Class A2 0.66%, 4/15/14 | | | | | | | 388 | | | | 388,034 | |
Navistar Financial Corp. Owner Trust 0.85%, 3/18/15(a) | | | | | | | 356 | | | | 355,990 | |
Nissan Auto Lease Trust Series 2012-A, Class A2A 0.68%, 7/15/14 | | | | | | | 285 | | | | 285,099 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Porsche Innovative Lease Owner Trust Series 2011-1, Class A3 1.09%, 9/22/14(a) | | U.S.$ | | | | | 455 | | | $ | 455,698 | |
Santander Drive Auto Receivables Trust 1.06%, 8/17/15 | | | | | | | 221 | | | | 220,986 | |
Series 2012-3, Class A3 1.08%, 4/15/16 | | | | | | | 325 | | | | 325,070 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 5,055,915 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
AUTOS–FLOATING RATE–1.8% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Ford Credit Floorplan Master Owner Trust Series 2010-3, Class A2 1.942%, 2/15/17(a)(c) | | | | | | | 430 | | | | 443,003 | |
Series 2012-1, Class A 0.712%, 1/15/16(c) | | | | | | | 643 | | | | 644,938 | |
GE Dealer Floorplan Master Note Trust Series 2012-2, Class A 0.994%, 4/22/19(c) | | | | | | | 485 | | | | 485,000 | |
Nissan Master Owner Trust Receivables Series 2012-A, Class A 0.712%, 5/15/17(c) | | | | | | | 556 | | | | 557,427 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 2,130,368 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
CREDIT CARDS–FLOATING RATE–1.7% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
American Express Credit Account Master Trust Series 2011-1, Class A 0.412%, 4/17/17(c) | | | | | | | 735 | | | | 735,848 | |
Discover Card Master Trust Series 2009-A2, Class A 1.542%, 2/17/15(c) | | | | | | | 185 | | | | 185,244 | |
Series 2010-A1, Class A1 0.892%, 9/15/15(c) | | | | | | | 166 | | | | 166,662 | |
GE Capital Credit Card Master Note Trust 0.543%, 6/15/18(c) | | | | | | | 300 | | | | 300,001 | |
Gracechurch Card Funding PLC Series 2012-1A, Class A1 0.942%, 2/15/17(a)(c) | | | | | | | 320 | | | | 320,168 | |
Penarth Master Issuer PLC Series 2012-1A, Class A1 0.813%, 3/18/14(a)(c) | | | | | | | 335 | | | | 335,229 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 2,043,152 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
OTHER ABS–FIXED RATE–0.7% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CNH Equipment Trust Series 2010-C, Class A3 1.17%, 5/15/15 | | | | | | | 247 | | | | 248,160 | |
Series 2012-A, Class A3 0.94%, 5/15/17 | | | | | | | 241 | | | | 241,900 | |
7
| | |
INTERMEDIATE BOND PORTFOLIO | | |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Principal Amount (000) | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
GE Equipment Midticket LLC Series 2011-1, Class A3 1.00%, 8/24/15 | | U.S.$ | | | | | 155 | | | $ | 155,740 | |
GE Equipment Small Ticket LLC Series 2011-2A, Class A2 1.14%, 6/23/14(a) | | | | | | | 202 | | | | 201,991 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 847,791 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
CREDIT CARDS–FIXED RATE–0.5% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Discover Card Master Trust 0.86%, 11/15/17 | | | | | | | 300 | | | | 300,348 | |
Series 2012-A1, Class A1 0.81%, 8/15/17 | | | | | | | 224 | | | | 224,552 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 524,900 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
HOME EQUITY LOANS–FIXED RATE–0.2% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Asset Backed Funding Certificates Series 2003-WF1, Class A2 1.37%, 12/25/32 | | | | | | | 66 | | | | 57,962 | |
Citifinancial Mortgage Securities, Inc. Series 2003-1, Class AFPT 3.36%, 1/25/33 | | | | | | | 62 | | | | 56,342 | |
Credit-Based Asset Servicing and Securitization LLC Series 2003-CB1, Class AF 3.95%, 1/25/33 | | | | | | | 146 | | | | 132,516 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 246,820 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
HOME EQUITY LOANS–FLOATING RATE–0.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
HSBC Home Equity Loan Trust Series 2005-3, Class A1 0.504%, 1/20/35(c) | | | | | | | 87 | | | | 79,523 | |
Option One Mortgage Loan Trust Series 2007-2, Class M1 0.605%, 3/25/37(c)(e) | | | | | | | 113 | | | | 858 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 80,381 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Asset-Backed Securities (cost $11,077,700) | | | | | | | | | | | 10,929,327 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE-BACKED SECURITIES–8.0% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
NON-AGENCY FIXED RATE CMBS–7.5% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Banc of America Merrill Lynch Commercial Mortgage, Inc. Series 2006-5, Class A4 5.414%, 9/10/47 | | | | | | | 455 | | | | 503,519 | |
Greenwich Capital Commercial Funding Corp. Series 2005-GG5, Class AJ 5.417%, 4/10/37 | | | | | | | 235 | | | | 164,490 | |
Series 2007-GG9, Class A4 5.444%, 3/10/39 | | | | | | | 585 | | | | 648,958 | |
GS Mortgage Securities Corp. II Series 2004-GG2, Class A6 5.396%, 8/10/38 | | | | | | | 300 | | | | 321,348 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
JP Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Corp. Series 2006-CB14, Class A4 5.481%, 12/12/44 | | U.S.$ | | | | | 545 | | | $ | 607,680 | |
Series 2007-LD11, Class A4 6.009%, 6/15/49 | | | | | | | 550 | | | | 603,792 | |
Series 2010-C2, Class A1 2.749%, 11/15/43(a) | | | | | | | 265 | | | | 273,644 | |
LB-UBS Commercial Mortgage Trust Series 2004-C4, Class A4 5.447%, 6/15/29 | | | | | | | 830 | | | | 883,138 | |
Series 2006-C1, Class A4 5.156%, 2/15/31 | | | | | | | 1,240 | | | | 1,381,320 | |
Series 2007-C2, Class A3 5.43%, 2/15/40 | | | | | | | 555 | | | | 619,527 | |
Merrill Lynch Mortgage Trust Series 2005-CIP1, Class A2 4.96%, 7/12/38 | | | | | | | 291 | | | | 294,838 | |
Merrill Lynch/Countrywide Commercial Mortgage Trust Series 2006-3, Class A2 5.291%, 7/12/46 | | | | | | | 653 | | | | 666,564 | |
Series 2006-4, Class AM 5.204%, 12/12/49 | | | | | | | 285 | | | | 281,956 | |
Series 2007-9, Class A4
5.70%, 9/12/49 | | | | | | | 1,105 | | | | 1,213,221 | |
UBS Brclays Commercial Mortgage Trust 3.525%, 6/10/22 | | | | | | | 327 | | | | 324,353 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 8,788,348 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
NON-AGENCY FLOATING RATE CMBS–0.5% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CW Capital Cobalt Ltd. Series 2007-C3, Class A4 6.007%, 5/15/46 | | | | | | | 555 | | | | 613,511 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securities (cost $8,739,324) | | | | | | | | | | | 9,401,859 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
AGENCIES–6.0% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
AGENCY DEBENTURES–4.6% | | | | | | | | | |
Federal National Mortgage Association 6.25%, 5/15/29 | | | | | | | 1,670 | | | | 2,404,863 | |
6.625%, 11/15/30 | | | | | | | 80 | | | | 121,372 | |
Residual Funding Corp. Principal Strip Zero Coupon, 7/15/20 | | | | | | | 3,365 | | | | 2,932,116 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 5,458,351 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
AGENCY SUBORDINATED–1.4% | | | | | | | | | |
Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp. 2.375%, 1/13/22 | | | | | | | 1,606 | | | | 1,648,164 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Agencies (cost $6,375,640) | | | | | | | | | | | 7,106,515 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
8
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Principal Amount (000) | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
QUASI-SOVEREIGNS–1.6% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
QUASI-SOVEREIGN BONDS–1.6% | | | | | | | | | |
INDONESIA–0.3% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Perusahaan Listrik Negara PT 5.50%, 11/22/21(a) | | U.S.$ | | | | | 360 | | | $ | 376,200 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
KAZAKHSTAN–0.2% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
KazMunayGas National Co. 7.00%, 5/05/20(a) | | | | | | | 212 | | | | 240,620 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
MALAYSIA–0.4% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Petronas Capital Ltd. 5.25%, 8/12/19(a) | | | | | | | 420 | | | | 482,642 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
MEXICO–0.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Petroleos Mexicanos 5.50%, 6/27/44(a) | | | | | | | 116 | | | | 118,610 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
SOUTH KOREA–0.3% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Korea National Oil Corp. 3.125%, 4/03/17(a) | | | | | | | 310 | | | | 316,114 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
UNITED ARAB EMIRATES–0.3% | | | | | | | | | |
IPIC GMTN Ltd. 3.75%, 3/01/17(a) | | | | | | | 360 | | | | 374,400 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Quasi-Sovereigns (cost $1,771,663) | | | | | | | | | | | 1,908,586 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
CORPORATES–NON-INVESTMENT GRADES–1.2% | | | | | | | | | |
INDUSTRIAL–0.9% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
BASIC–0.2% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
LyondellBasell Industries NV 5.75%, 4/15/24(a) | | | | | | | 200 | | | | 212,294 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
CAPITAL GOODS–0.3% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Ball Corp. 5.00%, 3/15/22 | | | | | | | 195 | | | | 202,800 | |
BE Aerospace, Inc. 5.25%, 4/01/22 | | | | | | | 190 | | | | 195,700 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 398,500 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER CYCLICAL–ENTERTAINMENT–0.0% | | | | | | | | | |
Greektown Holdings LLC 10.75%, 12/01/13(e)(f)(g) | | | | | | | 55 | | | | 0 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER CYCLICAL–OTHER–0.3% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Host Hotels & Resorts LP 5.25%, 3/15/22(a) | | | | | | | 125 | | | | 128,125 | |
Wynn Las Vegas LLC/Wynn Las Vegas Capital Corp. 5.375%, 3/15/22(a) | | | | | | | 190 | | | | 188,575 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 316,700 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER CYCLICAL–RETAILERS–0.0% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Dollar General Corp. 4.125%, 7/15/17 | | | | | | | 50 | | | | 50,687 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER NON-CYCLICAL–0.0% | | | | | | | | | |
Voyager Learning Exchange 8.375%, 12/01/14(e)(g)(h) | | | | | | | 70 | | | | 0 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
ENERGY–0.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Cimarex Energy Co. 5.875%, 5/01/22 | | U.S.$ | | | | | 93 | | | $ | 96,604 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 1,074,785 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS–0.2% | | | | | | | | | |
BANKING–0.2% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
ABN Amro Bank NV 4.31%, 3/10/16 | | | EUR | | | | 125 | | | | 104,404 | |
LBG Capital No.1 PLC 8.00%, 6/15/20(a) | | | U.S.$ | | | | 175 | | | | 147,000 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 251,404 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
UTILITY–0.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
ELECTRIC–0.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CMS Energy Corp. 5.05%, 3/15/22 | | | | | | | 98 | | | | 101,649 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Corporates–Non-Investment Grades (cost $1,245,315) | | | | | | | | | | | 1,427,838 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
GOVERNMENTS–SOVEREIGN BONDS–0.7% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
INDONESIA–0.3% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Indonesia Government International Bond 5.25%, 1/17/42(a) | | | | | | | 350 | | | | 366,188 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
QATAR–0.4% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
State of Qatar 4.50%, 1/20/22(a) | | | | | | | 360 | | | | 397,260 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Governments–Sovereign Bonds (cost $699,954) | | | | | | | | | | | 763,448 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
INFLATION-LINKED SECURITIES–0.6% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
UNITED STATES–0.6% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
U.S. Treasury Inflation Index 3.00%, 7/15/12 (TIPS) (cost $732,282) | | | | | | | 730 | | | | 730,721 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
COLLATERALIZED MORTGAGE OBLIGATIONS–0.5% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
NON-AGENCY FIXED RATE–0.3% | | | | | | | | | |
Citigroup Mortgage Loan Trust, Inc. Series 2005-2, Class 1A4 2.771%, 5/25/35 | | | | | | | 169 | | | | 147,695 | |
JP Morgan Alternative Loan Trust Series 2006-A3, Class 2A1 2.959%, 7/25/36 | | | | | | | 304 | | | | 156,117 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 303,812 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
NON-AGENCY FLOATING RATE–0.2% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Countrywide Alternative Loan Trust Series 2005-62, Class 2A1 1.147%, 12/25/35(c) | | | | | | | 83 | | | | 46,215 | |
9
| | |
INTERMEDIATE BOND PORTFOLIO | | |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Principal Amount (000) | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
WaMu Mortgage Pass Through Certificates Series 2007-OA1, Class A1A 0.858%, 2/25/47(c) | | U.S.$ | | | | | 256 | | | $ | 148,093 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | 194,308 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
AGENCY FIXED RATE–0.0% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Fannie Mae Grantor Trust Series 2004-T5, Class AB4 0.805%, 5/28/35 | | | | | | | 50 | | | | 34,753 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Collateralized Mortgage Obligations (cost $862,540) | | | | | | | | | | | 532,873 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS–MUNICIPAL BONDS–0.5% | | | | | | | | | |
UNITED STATES–0.5% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
California GO 7.625%, 3/01/40 (cost $413,406) | | | | | | | 405 | | | | 523,600 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Shares | | | | |
PREFERRED STOCKS–0.2% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS–0.2% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
FINANCE–0.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Citigroup Capital XII 8.50% | | | | | | | 7,000 | | | | 175,875 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
REITS–0.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Sovereign Real Estate Investment Trust 12.00%(a) | | | | | | | 93 | | | | 97,287 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Preferred Stocks (cost $262,658) | | | | | | | | | | | 273,162 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
GOVERNMENTS–SOVEREIGN AGENCIES–0.1% | | | | | | | | | |
GERMANY–0.1% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Landwirtschaftliche Rentenbank 5.125%, 2/01/17 (cost $71,309) | | U.S.$ | | | | | 70 | | | $ | 81,977 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Shares | | | | |
COMMON STOCKS–0.0% | | | | | | | | | |
Greektown Superholdings, Inc.(e)(f)(g) (cost $4) | | | | | | | 41 | | | | 2,460 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
WARRANTS–0.0% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Talon Equity Co., expiring 11/15/24(e)(f)(g) (cost $0) | | | | | | | 47 | | | | 0 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Principal Amount (000) | | | | |
SHORT-TERM INVESTMENTS–3.4% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
TIME DEPOSIT–3.4% | | | | | | | | | | | | |
State Street Time Deposit 0.01%, 7/02/12 (cost $3,978,313) | | U.S.$ | | | | | 3,978 | | | | 3,978,313 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
TOTAL INVESTMENTS–103.6% (cost $115,494,035) | | | | | | | | | | | 121,974,331 | |
Other assets less liabilities–(3.6)% | | | | | | | | | | | (4,186,328 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
NET ASSETS–100.0% | | | | | | | | | | $ | 117,788,003 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
FUTURES CONTRACTS (see Note D)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Type | | Number of Contracts | | | Expiration Month | | | Original Value | | | Value at June 30, 2012 | | | Unrealized Appreciation/ (Depreciation) | |
Sold Contracts | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
U.S. T-Note 2 Yr Futures | | | 13 | | | | September 2012 | | | $ | 2,863,525 | | | $ | 2,862,437 | | | $ | 1,088 | |
FORWARD CURRENCY EXCHANGE CONTRACTS (see Note D)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Counterparty & Description | | Contract Amount (000) | | | U.S. $ Value on Origination Date | | | U.S. $ Value at June 30, 2012 | | | Unrealized Appreciation/ (Depreciation) | |
Buy Contracts | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Barclays Bank PLC Wholesale: Norwegian Krone settling 7/12/12 | | | 7,057 | | | $ | 1,179,027 | | | $ | 1,185,945 | | | $ | 6,918 | |
Royal Bank of Scotland PLC: Mexican Peso settling 7/26/12 | | | 16,068 | | | | 1,140,934 | | | | 1,201,843 | | | | 60,909 | |
10
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Counterparty & Description | | Contract Amount (000) | | | U.S. $ Value on Origination Date | | | U.S. $ Value at June 30, 2012 | | | Unrealized Appreciation/ (Depreciation) | |
Sale Contracts | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Royal Bank of Canada: Canadian Dollar settling 8/10/12 | | | 521 | | | $ | 507,928 | | | $ | 511,293 | | | $ | (3,365 | ) |
Royal Bank of Scotland PLC: Euro settling 8/03/12 | | | 1,008 | | | | 1,275,388 | | | | 1,276,103 | | | | (715 | ) |
State Street Bank & Trust Co.: Great British Pound settling 8/03/12 | | | 59 | | | | 91,956 | | | | 91,738 | | | | 218 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | $ | 63,965 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
INTEREST RATE SWAP TRANSACTIONS (see Note D)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Rate Type | | | | |
Swap Counterparty | | Notional Amount (000) | | | Termination Date | | | Payments made by the Fund | | | Payments received by the Fund | | | Unrealized Appreciation/ (Depreciation) | |
JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA | | $ | 1,390 | | | | 1/30/17 | | | | 1.059 | % | | | 3 Month LIBOR | | | $ | (14,820 | ) |
JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA | | | 1,520 | | | | 2/7/22 | | | | 2.043 | % | | | 3 Month LIBOR | | | | (52,135 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | $ | (66,955 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
(a) | | Security is exempt from registration under Rule 144A of the Securities Act of 1933. These securities are considered liquid and may be resold in transactions exempt from registration, normally to qualified institutional buyers. At June 30, 2012, the aggregate market value of these securities amounted to $13,335,179 or 11.3% of net assets. |
(b) | | Coupon rate adjusts periodically based upon a predetermined schedule. Stated interest rate in effect at June 30, 2012. |
(c) | | Floating Rate Security. Stated interest rate was in effect at June 30, 2012. |
(d) | | Variable rate coupon, rate shown as of June 30, 2012. |
(f) | | Non-income producing security. |
(h) | | Security is in default and is non-income producing. |
Currency Abbreviations:
CAD—Canadian Dollar
EUR—Euro
GBP—Great British Pound
Glossary:
ABS—Asset-Backed Securities
ARMs—Adjustable Rate Mortgages
CMBS—Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securities
GO—General Obligation
LIBOR—London Interbank Offered Rates
OJSC—Open Joint Stock Company
REIT—Real Estate Investment Trust
TBA—To Be Announced
TIPS—Treasury Inflation Protected Security
See notes to financial statements.
11
| | |
INTERMEDIATE BOND PORTFOLIO |
STATEMENTOF ASSETS & LIABILITIES |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | |
ASSETS | | | | |
Investments in securities, at value (cost $115,494,035) | | $ | 121,974,331 | |
Cash | | | 3,575 | (a) |
Receivable for investment securities sold | | | 1,680,213 | |
Interest and dividends receivable | | | 872,883 | |
Unrealized appreciation of forward currency exchange contracts | | | 68,045 | |
Receivable for capital stock sold | | | 27,413 | |
Receivable for variation margin on futures contracts | | | 406 | |
| | | | |
Total assets | | | 124,626,866 | |
| | | | |
LIABILITIES | | | | |
Payable for investment securities purchased | | | 6,424,165 | |
Payable for capital stock redeemed | | | 199,042 | |
Unrealized depreciation on interest rate swap contracts | | | 66,955 | |
Advisory fee payable | | | 45,313 | |
Administrative fee payable | | | 19,952 | |
Distribution fee payable | | | 6,685 | |
Unrealized depreciation of forward currency exchange contracts | | | 4,080 | |
Transfer Agent fee payable | | | 161 | |
Accrued expenses | | | 72,510 | |
| | | | |
Total liabilities | | | 6,838,863 | |
| | | | |
NET ASSETS | | $ | 117,788,003 | |
| | | | |
COMPOSITION OF NET ASSETS | | | | |
Capital stock, at par | | $ | 9,170 | |
Additional paid-in capital | | | 99,228,034 | |
Undistributed net investment income | | | 6,798,914 | |
Accumulated net realized gain on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | 5,187,750 | |
Net unrealized appreciation on investments and foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities | | | 6,564,135 | |
| | | | |
| | $ | 117,788,003 | |
| | | | |
Net Asset Value Per Share—1 billion shares of capital stock authorized, $.001 par value
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class | | Net Assets | | | Shares Outstanding | | | Net Asset Value | |
A | | $ | 86,466,035 | | | | 6,711,490 | | | $ | 12.88 | |
B | | $ | 31,321,968 | | | | 2,458,667 | | | $ | 12.74 | |
(a) | | An amount of $3,575 has been segregated to collateralize margin requirements for open futures contracts outstanding at June 30, 2012. |
See notes to financial statements.
12
| | |
INTERMEDIATE BOND PORTFOLIO |
STATEMENTOF OPERATIONS | | |
Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | |
INVESTMENT INCOME | | | | |
Interest | | $ | 2,147,960 | |
Dividends | | | 13,018 | |
| | | | |
| | | 2,160,978 | |
| | | | |
EXPENSES | | | | |
Advisory fee (see Note B) | | | 283,018 | |
Distribution fee—Class B | | | 40,327 | |
Transfer agency—Class A | | | 1,113 | |
Transfer agency—Class B | | | 386 | |
Custodian | | | 69,930 | |
Administrative | | | 30,509 | |
Audit | | | 24,156 | |
Legal | | | 15,061 | |
Printing | | | 8,858 | |
Directors’ fees | | | 1,977 | |
Miscellaneous | | | 5,732 | |
| | | | |
Total expenses | | | 481,067 | |
| | | | |
Net investment income | | | 1,679,911 | |
| | | | |
REALIZED AND UNREALIZED GAIN (LOSS) ON INVESTMENT AND FOREIGN CURRENCY TRANSACTIONS | | | | |
Net realized gain (loss) on: | | | | |
Investment transactions | | | 2,169,288 | |
Futures contracts | | | 13,438 | |
Swap contracts | | | (269,394 | ) |
Foreign currency transactions | | | (198,583 | ) |
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of: | | | | |
Investments | | | 125,787 | |
Futures contracts | | | 3,459 | |
Swap contracts | | | 41,994 | |
Foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities and other assets | | | (178,861 | ) |
| | | | |
Net gain on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | 1,707,128 | |
| | | | |
NET INCREASE IN NET ASSETS FROM OPERATIONS | | $ | 3,387,039 | |
| | | | |
See notes to financial statements.
13
| | |
| | |
INTERMEDIATE BOND PORTFOLIO |
STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN NET ASSETS | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | |
INCREASE (DECREASE) IN NET ASSETS FROM OPERATIONS | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income | | $ | 1,679,911 | | | $ | 4,962,166 | |
Net realized gain on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | 1,714,749 | | | | 4,100,096 | |
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of investments and foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities and other assets | | | (7,621 | ) | | | 277,835 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Net increase in net assets from operations | | | 3,387,039 | | | | 9,340,097 | |
DIVIDENDS AND DISTRIBUTIONS TO SHAREHOLDERS FROM | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income | | | | | | | | |
Class A | | | –0 | – | | | (5,325,732 | ) |
Class B | | | –0 | – | | | (1,547,372 | ) |
Net realized gain on investment transactions | | | | | | | | |
Class A | | | –0 | – | | | (406,275 | ) |
Class B | | | –0 | – | | | (125,758 | ) |
CAPITAL STOCK TRANSACTIONS | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (25,600,521 | ) | | | (20,557,001 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Total decrease | | | (22,213,482 | ) | | | (18,622,041 | ) |
NET ASSETS | | | | | | | | |
Beginning of period | | | 140,001,485 | | | | 158,623,526 | |
| | | | | | | | |
End of period (including undistributed net investment income of $6,798,914 and $5,119,003, respectively) | | $ | 117,788,003 | | | $ | 140,001,485 | |
| | | | | | | | |
See notes to financial statements.
14
| | |
INTERMEDIATE BOND PORTFOLIO |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
NOTE A: Significant Accounting Policies
The AllianceBernstein Intermediate Bond Portfolio (the “Portfolio”), is a series of AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund, Inc. (the “Fund”). The Portfolio’s investment objective is to generate income and price appreciation without assuming what the Adviser considers undue risk. The Portfolio is diversified as defined under the Investment Company Act of 1940. The Fund was incorporated in the State of Maryland on November 17, 1987, as an open-end series investment company. The Fund offers thirteen separately managed pools of assets which have differing investment objectives and policies. The Portfolio offers Class A and Class B shares. Both classes of shares have identical voting, dividend, liquidating and other rights, except that Class B shares bear a distribution expense and have exclusive voting rights with respect to the Class B distribution plan.
The Portfolio offers and sells its shares only to separate accounts of certain life insurance companies for the purpose of funding variable annuity contracts and variable life insurance policies. Sales are made without a sales charge at the Portfolio’s net asset value per share.
The financial statements have been prepared in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“U.S. GAAP”) which require management to make certain estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities in the financial statements and amounts of income and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. The following is a summary of significant accounting policies followed by the Portfolio.
1. Security Valuation
Portfolio securities are valued at their current market value determined on the basis of market quotations or, if market quotations are not readily available or are deemed unreliable, at “fair value” as determined in accordance with procedures established by and under the general supervision of the Fund’s Board of Directors.
In general, the market value of securities which are readily available and deemed reliable are determined as follows: Securities listed on a national securities exchange (other than securities listed on the NASDAQ Stock Market, Inc. (“NASDAQ”)) or on a foreign securities exchange are valued at the last sale price at the close of the exchange or foreign securities exchange. If there has been no sale on such day, the securities are valued at the last traded price from the previous day. Securities listed on more than one exchange are valued by reference to the principal exchange on which the securities are traded; securities listed only on NASDAQ are valued in accordance with the NASDAQ Official Closing Price; listed or over the counter market (“OTC”) put or call options are valued at the mid level between the current bid and ask prices. If either a current bid or current ask price is unavailable, AllianceBernstein L.P. (the “Adviser”) will have discretion to determine the best valuation (e.g. last trade price in the case of listed options); open futures contracts are valued using the closing settlement price or, in the absence of such a price, the most recent quoted bid price. If there are no quotations available for the day of valuation, the last available closing settlement price is used; U.S. government securities and other debt instruments having 60 days or less remaining until maturity are valued at amortized cost if their original maturity was 60 days or less; or by amortizing their fair value as of the 61st day prior to maturity if their original term to maturity exceeded 60 days; fixed-income securities, including mortgage backed and asset backed securities, may be valued on the basis of prices provided by a pricing service or at a price obtained from one or more of the major broker/dealers. In cases where broker/dealer quotes are obtained, the Adviser may establish procedures whereby changes in market yields or spreads are used to adjust, on a daily basis, a recently obtained quoted price on a security. Swaps and other derivatives are valued daily, primarily using independent pricing services, independent pricing models using market inputs, as well as third party broker-dealers or counterparties.
Securities for which market quotations are not readily available (including restricted securities) or are deemed unreliable are valued at fair value. Factors considered in making this determination may include, but are not limited to, information obtained by contacting the issuer, analysts, analysis of the issuer’s financial statements or other available documents. In addition, the Portfolio may use fair value pricing for securities primarily traded in non-U.S. markets because most foreign markets close well before the Portfolio values its securities at 4:00 p.m., Eastern Time. The earlier close of these foreign markets gives rise to the possibility that significant events, including broad market moves, may have occurred in the interim and may materially affect the value of those securities.
2. Fair Value Measurements
In accordance with U.S. GAAP regarding fair value measurements, fair value is defined as the price that the Portfolio would receive to sell an asset or pay to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement
15
| | |
INTERMEDIATE BOND PORTFOLIO | | |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
date. The U.S. GAAP disclosure requirements establish a framework for measuring fair value, and a three-level hierarchy for fair value measurements based upon the transparency of inputs to the valuation of an asset or liability. Inputs may be observable or unobservable and refer broadly to the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability. Observable inputs reflect the assumptions market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability based on market data obtained from sources independent of the Portfolio. Unobservable inputs reflect the Portfolio’s own assumptions about the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability based on the best information available in the circumstances. Each investment is assigned a level based upon the observability of the inputs which are significant to the overall valuation. The three-tier hierarchy of inputs is summarized below.
| • | | Level 1—quoted prices in active markets for identical investments |
| • | | Level 2—other significant observable inputs (including quoted prices for similar investments, interest rates, prepayment speeds, credit risk, etc.) |
| • | | Level 3—significant unobservable inputs (including the Portfolio’s own assumptions in determining the fair value of investments) |
The following table summarizes the valuation of the Portfolio’s investments by the above fair value hierarchy levels as of June 30, 2012:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Level 1 | | | Level 2 | | | Level 3 | | | Total | |
Investments in Securities: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Assets: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Corporates—Investment Grades | | $ | 68,228 | | | $ | 34,799,937 | | | $ | –0 | – | | $ | 34,868,165 | |
Mortgage Pass-Throughs | | | –0 | – | | | 31,729,597 | | | | –0 | – | | | 31,729,597 | |
Governments—Treasuries | | | –0 | – | | | 17,715,890 | | | | –0 | – | | | 17,715,890 | |
Asset-Backed Securities | | | –0 | – | | | 9,269,335 | | | | 1,659,992 | | | | 10,929,327 | |
Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securities | | | –0 | – | | | 5,905,362 | | | | 3,496,497 | | | | 9,401,859 | |
Agencies | | | –0 | – | | | 7,106,515 | | | | –0 | – | | | 7,106,515 | |
Quasi-Sovereigns | | | –0 | – | | | 1,908,586 | | | | –0 | – | | | 1,908,586 | |
Corporates—Non-Investment Grades | | | –0 | – | | | 1,427,838 | | | | –0 | –^ | | | 1,427,838 | |
Governments—Sovereign Bonds | | | –0 | – | | | 763,448 | | | | –0 | – | | | 763,448 | |
Inflation-Linked Securities | | | –0 | – | | | 730,721 | | | | –0 | – | | | 730,721 | |
Collateralized Mortgage Obligations | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 532,873 | | | | 532,873 | |
Local Governments—Municipal Bonds | | | –0 | – | | | 523,600 | | | | –0 | – | | | 523,600 | |
Preferred Stocks | | | 175,875 | | | | 97,287 | | | | –0 | – | | | 273,162 | |
Governments—Sovereign Agencies | | | –0 | – | | | 81,977 | | | | –0 | – | | | 81,977 | |
Common Stocks | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 2,460 | | | | 2,460 | |
Warrants | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | –^ | | | –0 | – |
Short-Term Investments | | | –0 | – | | | 3,978,313 | | | | –0 | – | | | 3,978,313 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Investments in Securities | | | 244,103 | | | | 116,038,406 | | | | 5,691,822 | | | | 121,974,331 | |
Other Financial Instruments*: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Assets: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Futures Contracts | | | 1,088 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 1,088 | # |
Forward Currency Exchange Contracts | | | –0 | – | | | 68,045 | | | | –0 | – | | | 68,045 | |
Liabilities: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Forward Currency Exchange Contracts | | | –0 | – | | | (4,080 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | (4,080 | ) |
Interest Rate Swap Contracts | | | –0 | – | | | (66,955 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | (66,955 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total | | $ | 245,191 | | | $ | 116,035,416 | | | $ | 5,691,822 | | | $ | 121,972,429 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
^ | | The Portfolio held securities with zero market value at period end. |
* | | Other financial instruments are derivative instruments, such as futures, forwards and swap contracts, which are valued at the unrealized appreciation/depreciation on the instrument. |
# | | Only variation margin receivable/payable at period end is reported within the statement of assets and liabilities. This amount reflects cumulative appreciation/(depreciation) of futures contracts as reported in the portfolio of investments. |
16
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Following is a reconciliation of investments in which significant unobservable inputs (Level 3) were used in determining fair value. The transfers between levels of the fair value hierarchy assumes the financial instrument was transferred at the beginning of the reporting period.
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Asset- Backed Securities | | | Commercial Mortgage- Backed Securities | | | Corporates - Non-Investment Grades^ | |
Balance as of 12/31/11 | | $ | 1,028,906 | | | $ | 1,587,514 | | | $ | –0 | – |
Accrued discounts/(premiums) | | | 74 | | | | 12,028 | | | | –0 | – |
Realized gain (loss) | | | (43,009 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
Change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation | | | 65,977 | | | | 67,314 | | | | –0 | – |
Purchases | | | 726,114 | | | | 1,829,641 | | | | –0 | – |
Sales | | | (118,070 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
Transfers in to Level 3 | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
Transfers out of Level 3 | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Balance as of 6/30/12 | | $ | 1,659,992 | | | $ | 3,496,497 | | | $ | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation from Investments held as of 6/30/12 * | | $ | 65,977 | | | $ | 67,314 | | | $ | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | |
| | Collateralized Mortgage Obligations | | | Common Stocks | | | Warrants^ | |
Balance as of 12/31/11 | | $ | 776,784 | | | $ | 2,870 | | | $ | –0 | – |
Accrued discounts/(premiums) | | | 4 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
Realized gain (loss) | | | (244,157 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
Change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation | | | 311,556 | | | | (410 | ) | | | –0 | – |
Purchases | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
Sales | | | (346,738 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
Transfers in to Level 3 | | | 35,424 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
Transfers out of Level 3 | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Balance as of 6/30/12 | | $ | 532,873 | | | $ | 2,460 | | | $ | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation from Investments held as of 6/30/12 * | | $ | 38,009 | | | $ | (410 | ) | | $ | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | |
| | Total | | | | | | | |
Balance as of 12/31/11 | | $ | 3,396,074 | | | | | | | | | |
Accrued discounts/(premiums) | | | 12,106 | | | | | | | | | |
Realized gain (loss) | | | (287,166 | ) | | | | | | | | |
Change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation | | | 444,437 | | | | | | | | | |
Purchases | | | 2,555,755 | | | | | | | | | |
Sales | | | (464,808 | ) | | | | | | | | |
Transfers in to Level 3 | | | 35,424 | | | | | | | | | |
Transfers out of Level 3 | | | –0 | – | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Balance as of 6/30/12 | | $ | 5,691,822 | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation from Investments held as of 6/30/12 * | | $ | 170,890 | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
^ | | The Portfolio held a security with zero market value at period end. |
* | | The unrealized appreciation/depreciation is included in net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of investments in the accompanying statement of operations. |
17
| | |
INTERMEDIATE BOND PORTFOLIO | | |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
The following presents information about significant unobservable inputs related to the Fund’s material categories of Level 3 investments at June 30, 2012:
| | | | | | | | |
| | Quantitative Information about Level 3 Fair Value Measurements |
| | Fair Value at 6/30/2012 | | Valuation Technique | | Unobservable Input | | Range |
Asset-backed Securities | | $1,659,992 | | Discounted Cash Flow | | Loss Severity Constant Prepayment Rate Probability of Default Yield | | 0-99
0-25%
0-8.3 CDR
0.69566-11 |
Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securities | | $3,496,497 | | Discounted Cash Flow | | Yield Spread over Treasury | | 2.734-18.023
184-1735 |
| | | | Broker Quotes | | Market Quotes | | 110.542569 |
Glossary:
CDR—Constant Default Rate
Asset-Backed Securities, Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securities and Collateralized Mortgage Obligations
Within the non-Agency Mortgage Backed (RMBS and CMO) as well as the non-Credit Card or non-Auto Loan backed Asset Backed Securities, due to the relative illiquidity of these markets, the inability of the Fund to observe trading activity in the markets, and the broker quotes not being indicative to trade, the Fund has determined securities in these sectors generally warrant a Level 3 classification.
Because of the wide range of spreads and relatively low trading activity of similar securities, the Fund’s Valuation Committee engages in a regular review process of such securities which meets as often as daily, and involves (as needed) participation from the Mortgage Trading Desk, Fixed Income Research, Risk, Pricing Group, Fund Accounting and Legal. The Fund’s Pricing Group gathers prices from Pricing Direct and IDC (and other vendors as deemed appropriate over time) and from major recognized brokers who make a market in these instruments. The Fund’s trading desk reports on trading activity and engages in dialogue with the trading personnel at the brokers. This review covers the entire portfolio of securities in this sector.
Because the Fund has declared these instruments as Level 3 (due to wide spreads, low quality ratings, and relatively low trading activity), significant inputs (including Constant Prepayment Rate (“CPR”), Loss Severity, and Probability of Default) generally considered observable are deemed unobservable in these asset classes. The Fund’s Valuation Committee periodically reviews these asset classes (as a standing practice) to confirm that the status remains unchanged.
The significant unobservable inputs used in the fair value measurement of the Fund’s Collateralized Mortgage Obligation Securities are CPR, Loss Severity, and Probability of Default. On non-evaluated assets, broker quotes are used when other market information not available to produce an evaluation and are considered non-observable. Generally, a change in the assumption used for the probability of default is accompanied by a directionally similar change in the assumption used for the loss severity and a directionally opposite change in the assumption used for prepayment rates.
The significant unobservable inputs used in the fair value measurement of the Fund’s Private Corporate and Asset Backed Securities are the spread over the public curve as well as the spreads or yields on the non-rated instruments.
18
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
3. Currency Translation
Assets and liabilities denominated in foreign currencies and commitments under forward currency exchange contracts are translated into U.S. dollars at the mean of the quoted bid and ask prices of such currencies against the U.S. dollar. Purchases and sales of portfolio securities are translated into U.S. dollars at the rates of exchange prevailing when such securities were acquired or sold. Income and expenses are translated into U.S. dollars at rates of exchange prevailing when accrued.
Net realized gain or loss on foreign currency transactions represents foreign exchange gains and losses from sales and maturities of foreign fixed income investments, foreign currency exchange contracts, holding of foreign currencies, currency gains or losses realized between the trade and settlement dates on foreign investment transactions, and the difference between the amounts of dividends, interest and foreign withholding taxes recorded on the Portfolio’s books and the U.S. dollar equivalent amounts actually received or paid. Net unrealized currency gains and losses from valuing foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities at period end exchange rates are reflected as a component of net unrealized appreciation or depreciation of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities.
4. Taxes
It is the Portfolio’s policy to meet the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code applicable to regulated investment companies and to distribute all of its investment company taxable income and net realized gains, if any, to shareholders. Therefore, no provisions for federal income or excise taxes are required. The Portfolio may be subject to taxes imposed by countries in which it invests. Such taxes are generally based on income and/or capital gains earned or repatriated. Taxes are accrued and applied to net investment income, net realized gains and net unrealized appreciation/depreciation as such income and/or gains are earned.
In accordance with U.S. GAAP requirements regarding accounting for uncertainties in income taxes, management has analyzed the Portfolio’s tax positions taken or expected to be taken on federal and state income tax returns for all open tax years (the current and the prior three tax years) and has concluded that no provision for income tax is required in the Portfolio’s financial statements.
5. Investment Income and Investment Transactions
Dividend income is recorded on the ex-dividend date or as soon as the Portfolio is informed of the dividend. Interest income is accrued daily. Investment transactions are accounted for on the date the securities are purchased or sold. Investment gains or losses are determined on the identified cost basis. The Portfolio amortizes premiums and accretes discounts as adjustments to interest income.
6. Class Allocations
All income earned and expenses incurred by the Portfolio are borne on a pro-rata basis by each outstanding class of shares, based on the proportionate interest in the Portfolio represented by the net assets of such class, except for class specific expenses which are allocated to the respective class. Expenses of the Fund are charged to each Portfolio in proportion to net assets. Realized and unrealized gains and losses are allocated among the various share classes based on respective net assets.
7. Dividends and Distributions
Dividends and distributions to shareholders, if any, are recorded on the ex-dividend date. Income dividends and capital gains distributions are determined in accordance with federal tax regulations and may differ from those determined in accordance with U.S. GAAP. To the extent these differences are permanent, such amounts are reclassified within the capital accounts based on their federal tax basis treatment; temporary differences do not require such reclassification.
NOTE B: Advisory Fee and Other Transactions with Affiliates
Under the terms of the investment advisory agreement, the Portfolio pays the Adviser an advisory fee at an annual rate of .45% of the first $2.5 billion, .40% of the next $2.5 billion and .35% in excess of $5 billion, of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets. The fee is accrued daily and paid monthly.
Pursuant to the investment advisory agreement, the Portfolio may reimburse the Adviser for certain legal and accounting services provided to the Portfolio by the Adviser. For the six months ended June 30, 2012, such fee amounted to $30,509.
The Portfolio compensates AllianceBernstein Investor Services, Inc. (“ABIS”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Adviser, under a Transfer Agency Agreement for providing personnel and facilities to perform transfer agency services for the Portfolio. Such compensation retained by ABIS amounted to $692 for the six months ended June 30, 2012.
19
| | |
INTERMEDIATE BOND PORTFOLIO | | |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Brokerage commissions paid on investment transactions for the six months ended June 30, 2012 amounted to $141, of which $0 and $0, respectively, was paid to Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. LLC and Sanford C. Bernstein Limited, affiliates of the Adviser.
NOTE C: Distribution Plan
The Portfolio has adopted a Distribution Plan (the “Plan”) for Class B shares pursuant to Rule 12b-1 under the Investment Company Act of 1940. Under the Plan, the Portfolio pays distribution and servicing fees to AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (the “Distributor”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Adviser, at an annual rate of up to .50% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The fees are accrued daily and paid monthly. The Board of Directors currently limits payments under the Plan to .25% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The Plan provides that the Distributor will use such payments in their entirety for distribution assistance and promotional activities.
The Portfolio is not obligated under the Plan to pay any distribution and servicing fees in excess of the amounts set forth above. The purpose of the payments to the Distributor under the Plan is to compensate the Distributor for its distribution services with respect to the sale of the Portfolio’s Class B shares. Since the Distributor’s compensation is not directly tied to its expenses, the amount of compensation received by it under the Plan during any year may be more or less than its actual expenses. For this reason, the Plan is characterized by the staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission as being of the “compensation” variety.
In the event that the Plan is terminated or not continued, no distribution or servicing fees (other than current amounts accrued but not yet paid) would be owed by the Portfolio to the Distributor.
The Plan also provides that the Adviser may use its own resources to finance the distribution of the Portfolio’s shares.
NOTE D: Investment Transactions
Purchases and sales of investment securities (excluding short-term investments) for the six months ended June 30, 2012 were as follows:
| | | | | | | | |
| | Purchases | | | Sales | |
Investment securities (excluding U.S. government securities) | | $ | 26,962,573 | | | $ | 17,095,064 | |
U.S. government securities | | | 55,817,046 | | | | 78,567,314 | |
The cost of investments for federal income tax purposes was substantially the same as the cost for financial reporting purposes. Accordingly, gross unrealized appreciation and unrealized depreciation (excluding futures, swap contracts and foreign currency transactions) are as follows:
| | | | |
Gross unrealized appreciation | | $ | 7,187,974 | |
Gross unrealized depreciation | | | (707,678 | ) |
| | | | |
Net unrealized appreciation | | $ | 6,480,296 | |
| | | | |
1. Derivative Financial Instruments
The Portfolio may use derivatives in an effort to earn income and enhance returns, to replace more traditional direct investments, to obtain exposure to otherwise inaccessible markets (collectively, “investment purposes”), or to hedge or adjust the risk profile of its portfolio.
The principal types of derivatives utilized by the Portfolio, as well as the methods in which they may be used are:
The Portfolio may buy or sell futures contracts for investment purposes or for the purpose of hedging its portfolio against adverse effects of potential movements in the market or for investment purposes. The Portfolio bears the market risk that arises from changes in the value of these instruments and the imperfect correlation between movements in the price of the futures contracts and movements in the price of the assets, reference rates or indices which they are designed to track. Among other things, the Portfolio may purchase or sell futures contracts for foreign currencies or options thereon for non-hedging purposes as a means of making direct investment in foreign currencies, as described below under “Currency Transactions”.
20
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
At the time the Portfolio enters into a futures contract, the Portfolio deposits and maintains as collateral an initial margin with the broker, as required by the exchange on which the transaction is effected. Pursuant to the contract, the Portfolio agrees to receive from or pay to the broker an amount of cash equal to the daily fluctuation in the value of the contract. Such receipts or payments are known as variation margin and are recorded by the Portfolio as unrealized gains or losses. Risks may arise from the potential inability of a counterparty to meet the terms of the contract. The credit/counterparty risk for exchange-traded futures contracts is generally less than privately negotiated futures contracts, since the clearinghouse, which is the issuer or counterparty to each exchange-traded future, provides a guarantee of performance. This guarantee is supported by a daily payment system (i.e., margin requirements). When the contract is closed, the Portfolio records a realized gain or loss equal to the difference between the value of the contract at the time it was opened and the time it was closed.
Use of long futures contracts subjects the Portfolio to risk of loss in excess of the amounts shown on the statement of assets and liabilities, up to the notional value of the futures contracts. Use of short futures contracts subjects the Portfolio to unlimited risk of loss. Under some circumstances, futures exchanges may establish daily limits on the amount that the price of a futures contract can vary from the previous day’s settlement price, which could effectively prevent liquidation of unfavorable positions.
During the six months ended June 30, 2012, the Portfolio held futures contracts for hedging and non-hedging purposes.
| • | | Forward Currency Exchange Contracts |
The Portfolio may enter into forward currency exchange contracts in order to hedge its exposure to changes in foreign currency exchange rates on its foreign portfolio holdings, to hedge certain firm purchase and sale commitments denominated in foreign currencies and for non-hedging purposes as a means of making direct investments in foreign currencies, as described below under “Currency Transactions”.
A forward currency exchange contract is a commitment to purchase or sell a foreign currency at a future date at a negotiated forward rate. The gain or loss arising from the difference between the original contract and the closing of such contract would be included in net realized gain or loss on foreign currency transactions. Fluctuations in the value of open forward currency exchange contracts are recorded for financial reporting purposes as unrealized appreciation and/or depreciation by the Portfolio. Risks may arise from the potential inability of a counterparty to meet the terms of a contract and from unanticipated movements in the value of a foreign currency relative to the U.S. dollar. The face or contract amount, in U.S. dollars reflects the total exposure the Portfolio has in that particular currency contract.
During the six months ended June 30, 2012, the Portfolio held forward currency exchange contracts for hedging and non-hedging purposes.
The Portfolio may enter into swaps to hedge its exposure to interest rates, credit risk, or currencies. The Portfolio may also enter into swaps for non-hedging purposes as a means of gaining market exposures, including by making direct investments in foreign currencies, as described below under “Currency Transactions”. A swap is an agreement that obligates two parties to exchange a series of cash flows at specified intervals based upon or calculated by reference to changes in specified prices or rates for a specified amount of an underlying asset. The payment flows are usually netted against each other, with the difference being paid by one party to the other. In addition, collateral may be pledged or received by the Portfolio in accordance with the terms of the respective swap agreements to provide value and recourse to the Portfolio or its counterparties in the event of default, bankruptcy or insolvency by one of the parties to the swap agreement.
Risks may arise as a result of the failure of the counterparty to the swap contract to comply with the terms of the swap contract. The loss incurred by the failure of a counterparty is generally limited to the net interim payment to be received by the Portfolio, and/or the termination value at the end of the contract. Therefore, the Portfolio considers the creditworthiness of each counterparty to a swap contract in evaluating potential counterparty risk. This risk is mitigated by having a netting arrangement between the Portfolio and the counterparty and by the posting of collateral by the counterparty to the Portfolio to cover the Portfolio’s exposure to the counterparty. Additionally, risks may arise from unanticipated movements in interest rates or in the value of the underlying securities. The
21
| | |
INTERMEDIATE BOND PORTFOLIO | | |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Portfolio accrues for the interim payments on swap contracts on a daily basis, with the net amount recorded within unrealized appreciation/depreciation of swap contracts on the statement of assets and liabilities, where applicable. Once the interim payments are settled in cash, the net amount is recorded as realized gain/(loss) on swaps on the statement of operations, in addition to any realized gain/(loss) recorded upon the termination of swap contracts. Fluctuations in the value of swap contracts are recorded as a component of net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of swap contracts on the statement of operations.
Interest Rate Swaps:
The Portfolio is subject to interest rate risk exposure in the normal course of pursuing its investment objectives. Because the Portfolio holds fixed rate bonds, the value of these bonds may decrease if interest rates rise. To help hedge against this risk and to maintain its ability to generate income at prevailing market rates, the Portfolio may enter into interest rate swap contracts. Interest rate swaps are agreements between two parties to exchange cash flows based on a notional amount. The Portfolio may elect to pay a fixed rate and receive a floating rate, or, receive a fixed rate and pay a floating rate on a notional amount.
In addition, the Portfolio may also enter into interest rate swap transactions to preserve a return or spread on a particular investment or portion of its portfolio, or protecting against an increase in the price of securities the Portfolio anticipates purchasing at a later date. Interest rate swaps involve the exchange by a Portfolio with another party of their respective commitments to pay or receive interest (e.g., an exchange of floating rate payments for fixed rate payments) computed based on a contractually-based principal (or “notional”) amount. Interest rate swaps are entered into on a net basis (i.e., the two payment streams are netted out, with the Portfolio receiving or paying, as the case may be, only the net amount of the two payments).
During the six months ended June 30, 2012, the Portfolio held interest rate swap contracts for hedging and non-hedging purposes.
Credit Default Swaps:
The Portfolio may enter into credit default swaps, including to manage its exposure to the market or certain sectors of the market, to reduce its risk exposure to defaults by corporate and sovereign issuers held by the Portfolio, or to create exposure to corporate or sovereign issuers to which it is not otherwise exposed. The Portfolio may purchase credit protection (“Buy Contract”) or provide credit protection (“Sale Contract”) on the referenced obligation of the credit default swap. During the term of the swap agreement, the Portfolio receives/(pays) fixed payments from/(to) the respective counterparty, calculated at the agreed upon rate applied to the notional amount. The accrual for these interim payments is recorded within unrealized appreciation/depreciation of swap contracts on the statement of assets and liabilities. Upfront premiums paid or received in connection with credit default swap contracts are recognized as cost or proceeds on the statement of assets and liabilities and are amortized on a straight line basis over the life of the contract. Amortized upfront premiums are included in net realized gain/(loss) from swaps on the statement of operations. If the Portfolio is a buyer/(seller) of protection and a credit event occurs, as defined under the terms of the swap agreement, the Portfolio will either (i) receive from the seller/(pay to the buyer) of protection an amount equal to the notional amount of the swap contract (the “Maximum Payout Amount”) and deliver/(take delivery of) the referenced obligation or (ii) receive/(pay) a net settlement amount in the form of cash or securities equal to the notional amount of the swap less the recovery value of the referenced obligation.
Credit default swaps may involve greater risks than if a Portfolio had invested in the referenced obligation directly. Credit default swaps are subject to general market risk, liquidity risk, counterparty risk and credit risk. If the Portfolio is a buyer of protection and no credit event occurs, it will lose the payments it made to its counterparty. If the Portfolio is a seller of protection and a credit event occurs, the value of the referenced obligation received by the Portfolio coupled with the periodic payments previously received, may be less than the Maximum Payout Amount it pays to the buyer, resulting in a net loss to the Portfolio.
During the six months ended June 30, 2012, the Portfolio held credit default swap contracts for hedging purposes.
Implied credit spreads utilized in determining the market value of credit default swaps on issuers as of period end are disclosed in the portfolio of investments. The implied spreads serve as an indicator of the current status of the payment/performance risk and typically reflect the likelihood of default by the issuer of the referenced obligation. The implied credit spread of a particular reference obligation also reflects the cost of buying/selling protection and
22
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
may reflect upfront payments required to be made to enter into the agreement. Widening credit spreads typically represent a deterioration of the referenced obligation’s credit soundness and greater likelihood of default or other credit event occurring as defined under the terms of the agreement. A credit spread identified as “Defaulted” indicates a credit event has occurred for the referenced obligation.
In certain circumstances Maximum Payout Amounts may be partially offset by recovery values of the respective referenced obligations, upfront premium received upon entering into the agreement, or net amounts received from settlement of buy protection credit default swap agreements entered into by the Portfolio for the same reference obligation with the same counterparty. As of June 30, 2012, the Portfolio did not have Buy Contracts outstanding with respect to the same referenced obligation and same counterparty for its Sale Contracts outstanding.
Documentation governing the Portfolio’s OTC derivatives may contain provisions for early termination of such transaction in the event the net assets of the Portfolio decline below specific levels set forth in the documentation (“net asset contingent features”). If these levels are triggered, the Portfolio’s counterparty has the right to terminate such transaction and require the Portfolio to pay or receive a settlement amount in connection with the terminated transaction. As of June 30, 2012, the Portfolio had OTC derivatives with contingent features in net liability positions in the amount of $66,955. If a trigger event had occurred at June 30, 2012, for those derivatives in a net liability position, an amount of $66,955 would be required to be posted by the Portfolio.
At June 30, 2012, the Portfolio had entered into the following derivatives:
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Asset Derivatives | | | Liability Derivatives | |
Derivative Type | | Statement of Assets and Liabilities Location | | Fair Value | | | Statement of Assets and Liabilities Location | | Fair Value | |
Foreign exchange contracts | | Unrealized appreciation of forward currency exchange contracts | | $ | 68,045 | | | Unrealized depreciation of forward currency exchange contracts | | $ | 4,080 | |
Interest rate contracts | | | | | | | | Unrealized depreciation on interest rate swap contracts | | | 66,955 | |
Interest rate contracts | | Receivable/Payable for variation margin on futures contracts | | | 1,088 | * | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total | | | | | $69,133 | | | | | | $71,035 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
* | | Only variation margin receivable/payable at period end is reported within the statement of assets and liabilities. This amount reflects cumulative appreciation/(depreciation) of futures contracts as reported in the portfolio of investments. |
The effect of derivative instruments on the statement of operations for the six months ended June 30, 2012:
| | | | | | | | | | |
Derivative Type | | Location of Gain or (Loss) on Derivatives | | Realized Gain or (Loss) on Derivatives | | | Change in Unrealized Appreciation or (Depreciation) | |
Foreign exchange contracts | | Net realized gain (loss) on foreign currency transactions; Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities | | $ | (102,309 | ) | | $ | 61,505 | |
Credit contracts | | Net realized gain (loss) on swap contracts; Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of swap contracts | | | (289,320 | ) | | | 108,949 | |
23
| | |
INTERMEDIATE BOND PORTFOLIO | | |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Derivative Type | | Location of Gain or (Loss) on Derivatives | | Realized Gain or (Loss) on Derivatives | | | Change in Unrealized Appreciation or (Depreciation) | |
Interest rate contracts | | Net realized gain (loss) on swap contracts; Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of swap contracts | | $ | 19,926 | | | $ | (66,955 | ) |
Interest rate contracts | | Net realized gain (loss) on futures contracts; Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of futures contracts | | | 13,438 | | | | 3,459 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Total | | | | $ | (358,265 | ) | | $ | 106,958 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
For the six months ended June 30, 2012, the average monthly principal amount of foreign currency exchange contracts was $11,063,888 the average monthly original value of futures contracts was $3,725,294 and the average monthly notional amount of interest rate swaps was $3,452,278. For two months of the period, the average monthly notional amount of credit default swaps was $7,051,433.
2. Currency Transactions
The Portfolio may invest in non-U.S. Dollar securities on a currency hedged or unhedged basis. The Portfolio may seek investment opportunities by taking long or short positions in currencies through the use of currency-related derivatives, including forward currency exchange contracts, futures and options on futures, swaps, and other options. The Portfolio may enter into transactions for investment opportunities when it anticipates that a foreign currency will appreciate or depreciate in value but securities denominated in that currency are not held by the Portfolio and do not present attractive investment opportunities. Such transactions may also be used when the Adviser believes that it may be more efficient than a direct investment in a foreign currency-denominated security. The Portfolio may also conduct currency exchange contracts on a spot basis (i.e., for cash at the spot rate prevailing in the currency exchange market for buying or selling currencies).
3. Dollar Rolls
The Portfolio may enter into dollar rolls. Dollar rolls involve sales by the Portfolio of securities for delivery in the current month and the Portfolio’s simultaneously contracting to repurchase substantially similar (same type and coupon) securities on a specified future date. During the roll period, the Portfolio forgoes principal and interest paid on the securities. The Portfolio is compensated by the difference between the current sales price and the lower forward price for the future purchase (often referred to as the “drop”) as well as by the interest earned on the cash proceeds of the initial sale. Dollar rolls involve the risk that the market value of the securities the Portfolio is obligated to repurchase under the agreement may decline below the repurchase price. Dollar rolls are speculative techniques and may be considered to be borrowings by the Portfolio. For the six months ended June 30, 2012, the Portfolio earned drop income of $45,761 which is included in interest income in the accompanying statement of operations.
4. Reverse Repurchase Agreements
Under a reverse repurchase agreement, the Portfolio sells securities and agrees to repurchase them at a mutually agreed upon date and price. At the time the Portfolio enters into a reverse repurchase agreement, it will establish a segregated account with the custodian containing liquid assets having a value at least equal to the repurchase price. For the six months ended June 30, 2012, the Portfolio had no transactions in reverse repurchase agreements.
24
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
NOTE E: Capital Stock
Each class consists of 500,000,000 authorized shares. Transactions in capital shares for each class were as follows:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | SHARES | | | | | AMOUNT | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | | | | | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | |
Class A | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Shares sold | | | 85,284 | | | | 326,624 | | | | | $ | 1,082,670 | | | $ | 4,048,336 | |
Shares issued in reinvestment of dividends and distributions | | | –0 | – | | | 473,329 | | | | | | –0 | – | | | 5,732,006 | |
Shares redeemed | | | (1,831,804 | ) | | | (1,998,010 | ) | | | | | (23,190,323 | ) | | | (24,835,417 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (1,746,520 | ) | | | (1,198,057 | ) | | | | $ | (22,107,653 | ) | | $ | (15,055,075 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class B | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Shares sold | | | 88,117 | | | | 297,861 | | | | | $ | 1,107,305 | | | $ | 3,645,115 | |
Shares issued in reinvestment of dividends and distributions | | | –0 | – | | | 139,311 | | | | | | –0 | – | | | 1,673,131 | |
Shares redeemed | | | (366,777 | ) | | | (882,320 | ) | | | | | (4,600,173 | ) | | | (10,820,172 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (278,660 | ) | | | (445,148 | ) | | | | $ | (3,492,868 | ) | | $ | (5,501,926 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
NOTE F: Risks Involved in Investing in the Portfolio
Interest Rate Risk and Credit Risk—Interest rate risk is the risk that changes in interest rates will affect the value of the Portfolio’s investments in fixed-income debt securities such as bonds or notes. Increases in interest rates may cause the value of the Portfolio’s investments to decline. Credit risk is the risk that the issuer or guarantor of a debt security, or the counterparty to a derivative contract, will be unable or unwilling to make timely principal and/or interest payments, or to otherwise honor its obligations. The degree of risk for a particular security may be reflected in its credit risk rating. Credit risk is greater for medium quality and lower-rated securities. Lower-rated debt securities and similar unrated securities (commonly known as “junk bonds”) have speculative elements or are predominantly speculative risks.
Prior to September 15, 2008, the Portfolio had swap counterparty exposure to Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. (“Lehman Brothers”), as a guarantor for Lehman Brothers Special Financing Inc. (“LBSF”), which filed for bankruptcy on September 15, 2008. As a result, on September 15, 2008, the Portfolio terminated all outstanding swap contracts with LBSF prior to their scheduled maturity dates in accordance with the terms of the swap agreements. Upon the termination of the swap contracts, Lehman Brothers’ obligations to the Portfolio amounted to $920,116. The Portfolio’s claim to these obligations is subject to the pending bankruptcy proceeding against the Lehman Brothers estate (the “Bankruptcy Claim”). In accordance with its error correction policy, the Adviser has agreed to make the Portfolio whole in respect of the amount of the recovery that would be paid on the Bankruptcy Claim in the event the Bankruptcy Claim is not honored by the Lehman Brothers estate, or with respect to any diminution in value upon the sale of the Bankruptcy Claim, in either case resulting from the manner in which the Bankruptcy Claim was processed by the Adviser. On April 9, 2012, the portfolio management team determined to dispose of the position held by the Portfolio that reflects the Bankruptcy Claim (thereby realizing upon the corresponding undertaking of the Adviser to make payment in respect of said Claim to make the Portfolio whole). On that date, the Bankruptcy Claim was being valued at $457,758 (49.75% of the Bankruptcy Claim), based upon the estimated recovery value. Accordingly, on April 13, 2012, the Adviser reimbursed the Portfolio in an amount equal to $457,758.
Foreign Securities Risk—Investing in securities of foreign companies or foreign governments involves special risks which include changes in foreign currency exchange rates and the possibility of future political and economic developments which could adversely affect the value of such securities. Moreover, securities of many foreign companies or foreign governments and their markets may be less liquid and their prices more volatile than those of comparable U.S. companies or of the U.S. government.
Emerging Market Risk—Investments in emerging market countries may have more risk because the markets are less developed and less liquid and because these investments may be subject to increased economic, political, regulatory, and other uncertainties.
25
| | |
INTERMEDIATE BOND PORTFOLIO | | |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Inflation Risk—This is the risk that the value of assets or income from investments will be less in the future as inflation decreases the value of money. As inflation increases, the real value of the Portfolio’s assets can decline as can the real value of the Portfolio’s distributions.
Currency Risk—This is the risk that changes in foreign currency exchange rates may negatively affect the value of the Portfolio’s investments or reduce the returns of the Portfolio. For example, the value of the Portfolio’s investments in foreign currency-denominated securities or currencies may decrease if the U.S. Dollar is strong (i.e., gaining value relative to other currencies) and other currencies are weak (i.e., losing value relative to the U.S. Dollar). Currency markets are generally not as regulated as securities markets. Independent of the Portfolio’s investments denominated in foreign currencies, the Portfolio’s positions in various foreign currencies may cause the Portfolio to experience investment losses due to the changes in exchange rates and interest rates.
Derivatives Risk—The Portfolio may enter into derivative transactions such as forwards, options, futures and swaps. Derivatives may be illiquid, difficult to price, and leveraged so that small changes may produce disproportionate losses for the Portfolio, and subject to counterparty risk to a greater degree than more traditional investments. Derivatives may result in significant losses, including losses that are far greater than the value of the derivatives reflected in the statement of assets and liabilities.
Leverage Risk—When the Portfolio borrows money or otherwise leverages its portfolio, it may be volatile because leverage tends to exaggerate the effect of any increase or decrease in the value of the Portfolio’s investments. The Portfolio may create leverage through the use of reverse repurchase arrangements, forward currency exchange contracts, forward commitments, dollar rolls or futures contracts or by borrowing money. The use of derivative instruments by the Portfolio, such as forwards, futures, options and swaps, may also result in a form of leverage. Leverage may result in higher returns to the Portfolio than if the Portfolio were not leveraged, but may also adversely affect returns, particularly if the market is declining.
Indemnification Risk—In the ordinary course of business, the Portfolio enters into contracts that contain a variety of indemnifications. The Portfolio’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown. However, the Portfolio has not had prior claims or losses pursuant to these indemnification provisions and expects the risk of loss thereunder to be remote. Therefore, the Portfolio has not accrued any liability in connection with these indemnification provisions.
NOTE G: Joint Credit Facility
A number of open-end mutual funds managed by the Adviser, including the Portfolio, participate in a $140 million revolving credit facility (the “Facility”) intended to provide short-term financing, if necessary, subject to certain restrictions in connection with abnormal redemption activity. Commitment fees related to the Facility are paid by the participating funds and are included in miscellaneous expenses in the statement of operations. The Portfolio did not utilize the Facility during the six months ended June 30, 2012.
NOTE H: Distributions to Shareholders
The tax character of distributions to be paid for the year ending December 31, 2012 will be determined at the end of the current fiscal year. The tax character of distributions paid during the fiscal years ended December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010 were as follows:
| | | | | | | | |
| | 2011 | | | 2010 | |
Distributions paid from: | | | | | | | | |
Ordinary income | | $ | 6,977,197 | | | $ | 8,816,158 | |
Net long-term capital gains | | | 427,940 | | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | |
Total taxable distributions paid | | $ | 7,405,137 | | | $ | 8,816,158 | |
| | | | | | | | |
26
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
As of December 31, 2011, the components of accumulated earnings/(deficit) on a tax basis were as follows:
| | | | |
Undistributed ordinary income | | $ | 5,400,794 | |
Undistributed capital gains | | | 3,087,741 | |
Accumulated capital and other losses | | | (52 | )(a) |
Unrealized appreciation/(depreciation) | | | 6,675,277 | (b) |
| | | | |
Total accumulated earnings/(deficit) | | $ | 15,163,760 | |
| | | | |
(a) | | As of December 31, 2011, the cumulative deferred loss on straddles was $52. |
(b) | | The differences between book-basis and tax-basis unrealized appreciation/(depreciation) are attributable primarily to the tax treatment of swaps, the realization for tax purposes of gains/losses on certain derivative instruments, and the tax treatment of Treasury inflation-protected securities. |
For tax purposes, net capital losses may be carried over to offset future capital gains, if any. Under the Regulated Investment Company Modernization Act of 2010, funds are permitted to carry forward capital losses incurred in taxable years beginning after December 22, 2010 for an indefinite period. These post-enactment capital losses must be utilized prior to the pre-enactment capital losses, which are subject to expiration. Post-enactment capital loss carryforwards will retain their character as either short-term or long-term capital losses rather than being considered short-term as under previous regulation. As of December 31, 2011, the Portfolio did not have any capital loss carryforwards.
NOTE I: Recent Accounting Pronouncement
In December 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued an Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) related to disclosures about offsetting assets and liabilities in financial statements. The amendments in this update require an entity to disclose both gross and net information for derivatives and other financial instruments that are either offset in the statement of assets and liabilities or subject to an enforceable master netting arrangement or similar agreement. The ASU is effective during interim or annual reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2013. At this time, management is evaluating the implication of this ASU and its impact on the financial statements has not been determined.
NOTE J: Subsequent Events
Management has evaluated subsequent events for possible recognition or disclosure in the financial statements through the date the financial statements are issued. Management has determined that there are no material events that would require disclosure in the Portfolio’s financial statements through this date.
27
| | |
| | |
INTERMEDIATE BOND PORTFOLIO |
FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Selected Data For A Share Of Capital Stock Outstanding Throughout Each Period
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | CLASS A | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, | |
| | | 2011 | | | 2010 | | | 2009 | | | 2008 | | | 2007 | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | | | $12.54 | | | | $12.39 | | | | $11.98 | | | | $10.50 | | | | $11.78 | | | | $11.78 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Income From Investment Operations | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income (a) | | | .17 | | | | .42 | | | | .48 | | | | .52 | | | | .51 | | | | .54 | |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | .17 | | | | .38 | | | | .60 | | | | 1.37 | | | | (1.22 | ) | | | .01 | |
Contributions from Adviser | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | .00 | (b) | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) in net asset value from operations | | | .34 | | | | .80 | | | | 1.08 | | | | 1.89 | | | | (.71 | ) | | | .55 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Less: Dividends and Distributions | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Dividends from net investment income | | | –0 | – | | | (.60 | ) | | | (.67 | ) | | | (.41 | ) | | | (.57 | ) | | | (.55 | ) |
Distributions from net realized gain on investment transactions | | | –0 | – | | | (.05 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total dividends and distributions | | | –0 | – | | | (.65 | ) | | | (.67 | ) | | | (.41 | ) | | | (.57 | ) | | | (.55 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net asset value, end of period | | | $12.88 | | | | $12.54 | | | | $12.39 | | | | $11.98 | | | | $10.50 | | | | $11.78 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Return | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total investment return based on net asset value (c) | | | 2.71 | %* | | | 6.64 | % | | | 9.20 | %* | | | 18.51 | %* | | | (6.38 | )%* | | | 4.85 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Ratios/Supplemental Data | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net assets, end of period (000’s omitted) | | | $86,466 | | | | $106,028 | | | | $119,599 | | | | $129,647 | | | | $129,111 | | | | $66,305 | |
Ratio to average net assets of: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Expenses | | | .70 | %(d) | | | .65 | % | | | .68 | %(e) | | | .69 | % | | | .64 | % | | | .78 | % |
Net investment income | | | 2.73 | %(d) | | | 3.42 | % | | | 3.90 | %(e) | | | 4.69 | % | | | 4.72 | % | | | 4.58 | % |
Portfolio turnover rate | | | 66 | % | | | 108 | % | | | 94 | % | | | 102 | % | | | 106 | % | | | 90 | % |
See footnote summary on page 29.
28
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Selected Data For A Share Of Capital Stock Outstanding Throughout Each Period
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | CLASS B | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, | |
| | | 2011 | | | 2010 | | | 2009 | | | 2008 | | | 2007 | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | | | $12.41 | | | | $12.26 | | | | $11.86 | | | | $10.40 | | | | $11.67 | | | | $11.67 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Income From Investment Operations | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income (a) | | | .16 | | | | .39 | | | | .44 | | | | .49 | | | | .48 | | | | .50 | |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | .17 | | | | .37 | | | | .60 | | | | 1.36 | | | | (1.21 | ) | | | .02 | |
Contributions from Adviser | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | .00 | (b) | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) in net asset value from operations | | | .33 | | | | .76 | | | | 1.04 | | | | 1.85 | | | | (.73 | ) | | | .52 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Less: Dividends and Distributions | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Dividends from net investment income | | | –0 | – | | | (.56 | ) | | | (.64 | ) | | | (.39 | ) | | | (.54 | ) | | | (.52 | ) |
Distributions from net realized gain on investment transactions | | | –0 | – | | | (.05 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total dividends and distributions | | | –0 | – | | | (.61 | ) | | | (.64 | ) | | | (.39 | ) | | | (.54 | ) | | | (.52 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net asset value, end of period | | | $12.74 | | | | $12.41 | | | | $12.26 | | | | $11.86 | | | | $10.40 | | | | $11.67 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Return | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total investment return based on net asset value (c) | | | 2.66 | %* | | | 6.38 | % | | | 8.93 | %* | | | 18.20 | %* | | | (6.59 | )%* | | | 4.60 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Ratios/Supplemental Data | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net assets, end of period (000’s omitted) | | | $31,322 | | | | $33,973 | | | | $39,025 | | | | $41,341 | | | | $40,929 | | | | $20,289 | |
Ratio to average net assets of: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Expenses | | | .95 | %(d) | | | .90 | % | | | .93 | %(e) | | | .94 | % | | | .89 | % | | | 1.03 | % |
Net investment income | | | 2.49 | %(d) | | | 3.17 | % | | | 3.64 | %(e) | | | 4.44 | % | | | 4.47 | % | | | 4.32 | % |
Portfolio turnover rate | | | 66 | % | | | 108 | % | | | 94 | % | | | 102 | % | | | 106 | % | | | 90 | % |
(a) | | Based on average shares outstanding. |
(b) | | Amount is less than $.005. |
(c) | | Total investment return is calculated assuming an initial investment made at the net asset value at the beginning of the period, reinvestment of all dividends and distributions at net asset value during the period, and redemption on the last day of the period. Total return does not reflect (i) insurance company’s separate account related expense charges and (ii) the deductions of taxes that a shareholder would pay on Portfolio distributions or the redemption of Portfolio shares. Total investment return calculated for a period of less than one year is not annualized. |
(e) | | The ratio includes expenses attributable to costs of proxy solicitation. |
* | | Includes the impact of proceeds received and credited to the Portfolio resulting from class action settlements, which enhanced the Portfolio’s performance for the six months ended June 30, 2012 and the years ended December 31, 2010, December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008 by 0.05%, 0.04%, 0.01% and 0.09%, respectively. |
See notes to financial statements.
29
| | |
| | |
INTERMEDIATE BOND PORTFOLIO | | |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
THE FOLLOWING IS NOT PART OF THE SHAREHOLDER REPORT OR THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
SUMMARY OF SENIOR OFFICER’S EVALUATION OF INVESTMENT ADVISORY AGREEMENT1
The following is a summary of the evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement between AllianceBernstein L.P. (the “Adviser”) and the AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund, Inc. (the “Fund”), with respect to AllianceBernstein Intermediate Bond Portfolio (the “Portfolio”)2 prepared by Philip L. Kirstein, the Senior Officer of the Fund for the Directors of the Fund, as required by the August 2004 agreement between the Adviser and the New York State Attorney General (the “NYAG”). The Senior Officer’s evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement is not meant to diminish the responsibility or authority of the Board of Directors to perform its duties pursuant to Section 15 of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “40 Act”) and applicable state law. The purpose of the summary is to provide shareholders with a synopsis of the independent evaluation of the reasonableness of the advisory fees proposed to be paid by the Portfolio which was provided to the Directors in connection with their review of the proposed approval of the continuance of the Investment Advisory Agreement.
The Senior Officer’s evaluation considered the following factors:
| 1. | Advisory fees charged to institutional and other clients of the Adviser for like services; |
| 2. | Advisory fees charged by other mutual fund companies for like services; |
| 3. | Costs to the Adviser and its affiliates of supplying services pursuant to the advisory agreement, excluding any intra-corporate profit; |
| 4. | Profit margins of the Adviser and its affiliates from supplying such services; |
| 5. | Possible economies of scale as the Portfolio grows larger; and |
| 6. | Nature and quality of the Adviser’s services including the performance of the Portfolio. |
These factors, with the exception of the first factor, are generally referred to as the “Gartenberg factors,” which were articulated by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in 1982. Gartenberg v. Merrill Lynch Asset Management, Inc., 694 F. 2d 923 (2d Cir. 1982). On March 30, 2010, the Supreme Court held the Gartenberg decision was correct in its basic formulation of what §36(b) requires: to face liability under §36(b), “an investment adviser must charge a fee that is so disproportionately large that it bears no reasonable relationship to the services rendered and could not have been the product of arm’s length bargaining.” Jones v. Harris Associates L.P., 130 S. Ct. 1418 (2010). In Jones, the Court stated the Gartenberg approach fully incorporates the correct understanding of fiduciary duty within the context of section 36(b) and noted with approval that “Gartenberg insists that all relevant circumstances be taken into account” and “uses the range of fees that might result from arm’s length bargaining as the benchmark for reviewing challenged fees.”3
ADVISORY FEES, NET ASSETS, & EXPENSE RATIOS
The Adviser proposed that the Portfolio pay the advisory fee set forth in the table below for receiving the services to be provided pursuant to the Investment Advisory Agreement. The fee schedule below, implemented in January 2004 in consideration of the Adviser’s settlement with the NYAG in December 2003, is based on a master schedule that contemplates eight categories of funds with almost all funds in each category having the same advisory fee schedule.4 Also shown are the Portfolio’s net assets on September 30, 2011.
| | | | | | |
Category | | Advisory Fee Based on % of Average Daily Net Assets | | September 30, 2011 Net Assets ($MM) | |
Low Risk Income | | 45 bp on 1st $2.5 billion 40 bp on next $2.5 billion 35 bp on the balance | | $ | 147.3 | |
1 | | The information in the fee evaluation was completed on October 20, 2011 and discussed with the Board of Directors on November 1-3, 2011. |
2 | | Future references to the Portfolio do not include “AllianceBernstein.” References in the fee summary pertaining to performance and expense ratios refer to Class A shares of the Portfolio. |
3 | | Jones v. Harris at 1427. |
4 | | Most of the AllianceBernstein Mutual Funds, which the Adviser manages, were affected by the Adviser’s settlement with the NYAG. |
30
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
The Portfolio’s Investment Advisory Agreement provides for the Adviser to be reimbursed for certain clerical, legal, accounting, administrative and other services provided to the Portfolio. During the Portfolio’s most recently completed fiscal year, the Adviser received $75,195 (0.04% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets) for providing such services.
Set forth below are the Portfolio’s total expense ratios for the most recently completed fiscal year:
| | | | |
Portfolio | | Total Expense Ratio | | Fiscal Year |
Intermediate Bond Portfolio | | Class A 0.68% Class B 0.93% | | December 31 |
I. ADVISORY FEES CHARGED TO INSTITUTIONAL AND OTHER CLIENTS
The advisory fees charged to investment companies which the Adviser manages and sponsors are normally higher than those charged to similar sized institutional accounts, including pension plans and sub-advised investment companies. The fee differential reflects, among other things, different services provided to such clients, and different liabilities assumed. Services provided by the Adviser to the Portfolio that are not provided to non-investment company clients and sub-advised investment companies include providing office space and personnel to serve as Fund Officers, who among other responsibilities make the certifications required under the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002, and coordinating with and monitoring the Portfolio’s third party service providers such as Fund counsel, auditors, custodians, transfer agents and pricing services. The accounting, administrative, legal and compliance requirements for the Portfolio are more costly than those for institutional assets due to the greater complexities and time required for investment companies, although as previously noted, the Adviser is reimbursed for providing some of these services. Servicing the Portfolio’s investors is more time consuming and labor intensive compared to institutional clients since the Adviser needs to communicate with a more extensive network of financial intermediaries and shareholders. The Adviser also believes that it incurs substantial entrepreneurial risk when offering a new mutual fund since establishing a new mutual fund requires a large upfront investment and it may take a long time for the fund to achieve profitability since the fund must be priced to scale from inception in order to be competitive and assets are acquired one account at a time. In addition, managing the cash flow of an investment company may be more difficult than managing that of a stable pool of assets, such as an institutional account with little cash movement in either direction, particularly, if a fund is in net redemption and the Adviser is frequently forced to sell securities to raise cash for redemptions. However, managing a fund with positive cash flow may be easier at times than managing a stable pool of assets. Finally, in recent years, investment advisers have been sued by institutional clients and have suffered reputational damage both by the attendant publicity and outcomes other than complete victories. Accordingly, the legal and reputational risks associated with institutional accounts are greater than previously thought, although still not equal to those related to the mutual fund industry.
Notwithstanding the Adviser’s view that managing an investment company is not comparable to managing other institutional accounts because the services provided are different, the Supreme Court has indicated consideration should be given to the advisory fees charged to institutional accounts with a similar investment style as the Portfolio.5 In addition to the AllianceBernstein Institutional fee schedule, set forth below is what would have been the effective advisory fee of the Portfolio had the AllianceBernstein Institutional fee schedule been applicable to the Portfolio versus the Portolio’s advisory fee based on September 30, 2011 net assets.6
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Fund | | Net Assets 9/30/11 ($MM) | | AllianceBernstein Institutional Fee Schedule | | Effective AB Inst. Adv. Fee (%) | | | Fund Advisory Fee (%) | |
Intermediate Bond Portfolio | | $147.3 | | U.S. Strategic Core Plus 0.50% on the first $30 million 0.20% on the balance Minimum Account Size: $25 million | | | 0.261 | | | | 0.450 | |
The Adviser manages Sanford C. Bernstein Fund, Inc. (“SCB Fund”), an open-end management investment company. Intermediate Duration Portfolio of SCB Fund has a similar investment style as the Portfolio. Set forth below is Intermediate
5 | | The Supreme Court stated that “courts may give such comparisons the weight that they merit in light of the similarities and differences between the services that the clients in question require, but the courts must be wary of inapt comparisons.” Among the significant differences the Supreme Court noted that may exist between services provided to mutual funds and institutional accounts are “higher marketing costs.” Jones v. Harris at 1428. |
6 | | The Adviser has indicated that with respect to institutional accounts with assets greater than $300 million, it will negotiate a fee schedule. Discounts that are negotiated vary based upon each client relationship. |
31
| | |
INTERMEDIATE BOND PORTFOLIO | | |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Duration Portfolio’s advisory fee and what would have been the effective advisory fee of the Portfolio had the fee schedule of Intermediate Duration Portfolio been applicable to the Portfolio versus the Portfolio’s advisory fees based on September 30, 2011 net assets:
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | SCB Fund Portfolio | | Fee Schedule | | SCB Fund Effective Fee (%) | | | Portfolio Advisory Fee (%) | |
Intermediate Bond Portfolio | | Intermediate Duration Portfolio | | 50 bp on 1st $1 billion 45 bp on next $2 billion 40 bp on next $2 billion 35 bp on next $2 billion 30 on the balance | | | 0.500% | | | | 0.450% | |
Certain of the AllianceBernstein Mutual Funds (“ABMF”), which the Adviser manages, have a similar investment style as the Portfolio and their fee schedules are set forth below. ABMF was also affected by the Adviser’s settlement with the NYAG. As a result, the Portfolio has the same breakpoints as AllianceBernstein Bond Fund, Inc.—Intermediate Bond Portfolio. Sanford C. Bernstein Fund II, Inc.—Intermediate Duration Institutional Portfolio was not affected by the settlement since the fund has lower breakpoints than the NYAG related fee schedule. Also shown are what would have been the effective advisory fees of the Portfolio had the ABMF fee schedules been applicable to the Portfolio and the Portfolio’s advisory fee based on September 30, 2011 net assets:
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | ABMF Fund | | Fee Schedule | | ABMF Effective Fee (%) | | | Portfolio Advisory Fee (%) | |
Intermediate Bond Portfolio | | Bond Fund, Inc.—Intermediate Bond Portfolio | | 0.45% on first $2.5 billion 0.40% on next $2.5 billion 0.35% on the balance | | | 0.450% | | | | 0.450% | |
| | | | |
Intermediate Bond Portfolio | | Intermediate Duration Institutional Portfolio7 | | 0.50% on first $1 billion 0.45% on the balance | | | 0.500% | | | | 0.450% | |
The Adviser provides sub-advisory services to certain other investment companies managed by other fund families that have an investment style similar to that of the Portfolio. The Adviser charges the fee set forth below for the sub-advisory relationship that has a somewhat similar investment style as the Portfolio. Also shown are the Portfolio’s advisory fee and what would have been the effective advisory fee of the Portfolio had the fee schedule of the sub-advisory relationship been applicable to the Portfolio based on September 30, 2011 net assets.
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Fund | | | | Fee Schedule | | Effective Sub-Adv. Fee (%) | | | Portfolio Advisory Fee (%) | |
Intermediate Bond Portfolio | | Client # 1 | | AB Sub-Advisory Fee Schedule: 0.29% on first $100 million 0.20% thereafter | | | 0.261% | | | | 0.450% | |
It is fair to note that the services the Adviser provides pursuant to sub-advisory agreements are generally confined to the services related to the investment process; in other words, they are not as comprehensive as the services provided to the Portfolio by the Adviser. In addition, to the extent that this is the only sub-advisory relationship and it is with an affiliate of the Adviser, the fee schedule may not reflect arm’s-length bargaining or negotiations.
While it appears that the sub-advisory relationship is paying a lower fee than the Portfolio, it is difficult to evaluate the relevance of such a lower fee due to differences in terms of the services provided, risks involved and other competitive factors between the Portfolio and the sub-advisory relationship. There could be various business reasons why an investment adviser would be willing to manage a sub-advisory relationship for a different fee than it would be willing to manage investment company assets.
7 | | Intermediate Duration Institutional Portfolio has an expense cap of 0.45%, which effectively reduces the advisory fee of the fund. |
32
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
II. MANAGEMENT FEES CHARGED BY OTHER MUTUAL FUND COMPANIES FOR LIKE SERVICES.
Lipper, Inc. (“Lipper”), an analytical service that is not affiliated with the Adviser, compared the fees charged to the Portfolio with fees charged to other investment companies for similar services offered by other investment advisers.8 Lipper’s analysis included the comparison of the Portfolio’s contractual management fee, estimated at the approximate current asset level of the Portfolio, to the median of the Portfolio’s Lipper Expense Group (“EG”)9 and the Portfolio’s contractual management fee ranking.10
Lipper describes an EG as a representative sample of comparable funds. Lipper’s standard methodology for screening funds to be included in an EG entails the consideration of several fund criteria, including fund type, investment classification/objective, load type and similar 12b-1/non-12b-1 service fees, asset (size) comparability, expense components and attributes. An EG will typically consist of seven to twenty funds.
The Portfolio’s original EG had an insufficient number of peers. Consequently, Lipper expanded the Portfolio’s EG to include peers that have a similar but not the same Lipper classification/objective as the Portfolio. However, because Lipper had expanded the Portfolio’s EG, under Lipper’s standard guidelines, the Portfolio’s Lipper Expense Universe (“EU”) was also expanded to include universes of those peers that had a similar but not the same Lipper investment objective/classification. A “normal” EU will include funds that have the same investment objective/classification as the subject portfolio.11
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Fund | | Contractual Management Fee (%)12 | | | Lipper Exp. Group Median (%) | | | Lipper Group Rank | |
Intermediate Bond Portfolio | | | 0.450 | | | | 0.513 | | | | 2/16 | |
Set forth below is a comparison of the Portfolio’s total expense ratio and the medians of the Portfolio’s EG and EU. The Portfolio’s total expense ratio ranking is also shown.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Fund | | Expense Ratio (%)13 | | | Lipper Exp. Group Median (%) | | | Lipper Group Rank | | | Lipper Exp. Universe Median (%) | | | Lipper Universe Rank | |
Intermediate Bond Portfolio | | | 0.677 | | | | 0.659 | | | | 11/16 | | | | 0.621 | | | | 26/33 | |
Based on this analysis, the Portfolio has more favorable ranking on a management fee basis than on a total expense basis.
III. COSTS TO THE ADVISER AND ITS AFFILIATES OF SUPPLYING SERVICES PURSUANT TO THE MANAGEMENT FEE ARRANGEMENT, EXCLUDING ANY INTRA-CORPORATE PROFIT.
The Adviser utilizes two profitability reporting systems, which operate independently but are aligned with each other, to estimate the Adviser’s profitability in connection with investment advisory services provided to the Portfolio. The Senior Officer has retained a consultant to provide independent advice regarding the alignment of the two profitability systems as well as the methodologies and allocations utilized by both profitability systems. See Section IV for additional discussion.
IV. PROFIT MARGINS OF THE ADVISER AND ITS AFFILIATES FOR SUPPLYING SUCH SERVICES.
The Portfolio’s profitability information, prepared by the Adviser for the Board of Directors, was reviewed by the Senior Officer and the consultant. The Adviser’s profitability from providing investment advisory services to the Portfolio decreased during calendar year 2010, relative to 2009.
8 | | The Supreme Court cautioned against accepting mutual fund fee comparisons without careful scrutiny since “these comparisons are problematic because these fees, like those challenged, may not be the product of negotiations conducted at arm’s length.” Jones v. Harris at 1429. |
9 | | Lipper does not consider average account size when constructing EGs. Funds with relatively small average account sizes tend to have higher transfer agent expense ratio than comparable sized funds that have relatively large average account sizes. Note that there are limitations on Lipper expense category data because different funds categorize expenses differently. |
10 | | The contractual management fee is calculated by Lipper using the Portfolio’s contractual management fee rate at a hypothetical asset level. The hypothetical asset level is based on the combined net assets of all classes of the Portfolio, rounded up to the next $25 million. Lipper’s total expense ratio information is based on the most recent annual report except as otherwise noted. A ranking of “1” would mean that the Portfolio had the lowest effective fee rate in the Lipper peer group. |
11 | | Except for asset size comparability, Lipper uses the same criteria for selecting an EG peer when selecting an EU peer. Unlike the EG, the EU allows for the same adviser to be represented by more than just one fund. |
12 | | The contractual management fee does not reflect any expense reimbursements made by the Fund to the Adviser for certain clerical, legal, accounting, administrative, and other services. |
13 | | Most recently completed fiscal year Class A share total expense ratio. |
33
| | |
INTERMEDIATE BOND PORTFOLIO | | |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
In addition to the Adviser’s direct profits from managing the Portfolio, certain of the Adviser’s affiliates have business relationships with the Portfolio and may earn a profit from providing other services to the Portfolio. The courts have referred to this type of business opportunity as “fall-out benefits” to the Adviser and indicated that such benefits should be factored into the evaluation of the total relationship between the Portfolio and the Adviser. Neither case law nor common business practice precludes the Adviser’s affiliates from earning a reasonable profit on this type of relationship provided the affiliates’ charges and services are competitive and the relationship otherwise complies with the 40 Act restrictions. These affiliates provide transfer agent and distribution services to the Portfolio and receive transfer agent fees, Rule 12b-1 payments and front-end sales loads.
The Portfolio has adopted a distribution plan for Class B shares pursuant to Rule 12b-1 under the 40 Act. Under the distribution plan, the Portfolio pays distribution and servicing fees to its principal underwriter and distributor, AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (“ABI”), an affiliate of the Adviser, at an annual rate of up to 0.50% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The current annual rate that the Portfolio pays to ABI for 12b-1 fees is 0.25%. During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010, ABI received $102,923 in Rule 12b-1 fees from the Portfolio.
The Adviser may compensate ABI for payments made by ABI to brokers for registration fees and services related to printing, distribution and advertising in connection with Class B shares. During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010, the Adviser determined that it made payments in the amount of $292,991 on behalf of the Portfolio to ABI.
Financial intermediaries, such as insurers, market and sell shares of the Portfolio and typically receive compensation from ABI, the Adviser and/or the Portfolio for selling shares of the Portfolio. These financial intermediaries receive compensation in any or all of the following forms: 12b-1 fees, defrayal of costs for educational seminars and training, additional distribution support, and payments related to providing contract-holder record-keeping and/or administrative services. Payments related to providing contract-holder record keeping and/or administrative services will generally not exceed 0.35% of the average daily net assets of the Portfolio attributable to the firm over the year. With respect to the Fund,14 ABI paid approximately $400,000 in 2010 and expects to pay approximately $400,000 in 2011 for educational support and distribution assistance (revenue sharing payments).
The transfer agent of the Portfolio is AllianceBernstein Investor Services, Inc. (“ABIS”). During the most recently completed fiscal year, ABIS received a fee of $1,385 from the Portfolio.15
V. POSSIBLE ECONOMIES OF SCALE
The Adviser has indicated that economies of scale are being shared with shareholders through fee structures,16 subsidies and enhancement to services. Based on some of the professional literature that has considered economies of scale in the mutual fund industry, it is thought that to the extent economies of scale exist, they may more often exist across a fund family as opposed to a specific fund. This is because the costs incurred by the Adviser, such as investment research or technology for trading or compliance systems can be spread across a greater asset base as the fund family increases in size. It is also possible that as the level of services required to operate a successful investment company has increased over time, and advisory firms make such investments in their business to provide services, there may be a sharing of economies of scale without a reduction in advisory fees.
In February 2008, an independent consultant, retained by the Senior Officer, provided the Board of Directors an update of the Deli17 study on advisory fees and various fund characteristics.18 The independent consultant first reiterated the results of his previous two dimensional comparison analysis (fund size and family size) with the Board of Directors.19 The
14 | | The fee is inclusive of other Portfolios of the Fund (Equity and Blend), which are not discussed in this summary. |
15 | | The Fund (which includes the Portfolio and other Portfolios of the Fund) paid ABIS a flat fee of $18,000 in 2010. |
16 | | Fee structures include fee reductions, pricing at scale and breakpoints in advisory fee schedules. |
17 | | The Deli study, originally published in 2002 based on 1997 data and updated for the February 2008 Presentation, may be of diminished value due to the age of data used in the presentation and the changes experienced in the industry over the last four years. |
18 | | As mentioned previously, the Supreme Court cautioned against accepting mutual fund fee comparisons without careful scrutiny since the fees may not be the product of negotiations conducted at arm’s length. See Jones V. Harris at 1429. |
19 | | The two dimensional analysis showed patterns of lower advisory fees for funds with larger asset sizes and funds from larger family sizes compared to funds with smaller asset sizes and funds from smaller family sizes, which according to the independent consultant is indicative of a sharing of economies of scale and scope. However, in less liquid and active markets, such is not the case, as the empirical analysis showed potential for diseconomies of scale in those markets. The empirical analysis also showed diminishing economies of scale and scope as funds surpassed a certain high level of assets. |
34
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
independent consultant then discussed the results of the regression model that was utilized to study the effects of various factors on advisory fees. The regression model output indicated that the bulk of the variation in fees predicted were explained by various factors, but substantially by fund AUM, family AUM, index fund indicator and investment style. The independent consultant also compared the advisory fees of the AllianceBernstein Mutual Funds to similar funds managed by 19 other large asset managers, regardless of the fund size and each Adviser’s proportion of mutual fund assets to non-mutual fund assets.
VI. NATURE AND QUALITY OF THE ADVISER’S SERVICES, INCLUDING THE PERFORMANCE OF THE FUND
With assets under management of approximately $402 billion as of September 30, 2011, the Adviser has the investment experience to manage and provide non-investment services (described in Section I) to the Portfolio.
The information prepared by Lipper shows the 1, 3, 5 and 10 year performance rankings20 of the Portfolio relative to its Lipper Performance Group (“PG”) and Lipper Performance Universe (“PU”)21 for the periods ended July 31, 2011.22
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Fund
Return (%) | | | PG
Median (%) | | | PU
Median (%) | | | PG
Rank | | | PU
Rank | |
Intermediate Bond Portfolio | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
1 year | | | 5.88 | | | | 5.68 | | | | 5.42 | | | | 3/10 | | | | 5/18 | |
3 year | | | 8.66 | | | | 7.52 | | | | 7.52 | | | | 3/10 | | | | 5/18 | |
5 year | | | 6.57 | | | | 6.01 | | | | 6.07 | | | | 4/10 | | | | 8/17 | |
10 year | | | 5.28 | | | | 4.83 | | | | 5.16 | | | | 3/9 | | | | 7/16 | |
Set forth below are the 1, 3, 5 and 10 year and since inception performance returns of the Fund (in bold)23 versus its benchmarks.24 Portfolio and benchmark volatility and reward-to-variability ratio (“Sharpe Ratio”) information is also shown.25
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Periods Ending July 31, 2011 Annualized Performance | |
| | 1 Year (%) | | | 3 Year (%) | | | 5 Year (%) | | | 10 Year (%) | | | Since Inception (%) | | | Annualized | | | Risk Period (Year) | |
| | | | | | Volatility (%) | | | Sharpe (%) | | |
Intermediate Bond Portfolio | | | 5.88 | | | | 8.66 | | | | 6.57 | | | | 5.28 | | | | 5.71 | | | | 4.62 | | | | 0.67 | | | | 10 | |
Barclays Capital U.S. Government Bond Index | | | 3.26 | | | | 5.52 | | | | 6.19 | | | | 5.33 | | | | 6.08 | | | | 4.59 | | | | 0.71 | | | | 10 | |
Inception Date: September 17, 1992 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CONCLUSION:
Based on the factors discussed above the Senior Officer’s conclusion is that the proposed advisory fee for the Fund is reasonable and within the range of what would have been negotiated at arm’s length in light of all the surrounding circumstances. This conclusion in respect of the Fund is based on an evaluation of all of these factors and no single factor was dispositive.
Dated: November 28, 2011
20 | | The performance returns and rankings of the Portfolio are for the Portfolio’s Class A shares. It should be noted that performance returns of the Portfolio were provided by Lipper. |
21 | | The Portfolio’s PG/PU may not be identical to its respective EG/EU as the criteria for including/excluding a fund to/from PG/PU is somewhat different than that of EG/EU. |
22 | | The current Lipper investment classification/objective dictates the PG and PU throughout the life of the Portfolio even if a Portfolio had a different investment classification/objective at a different point in time. |
23 | | The performance returns and risk measures shown in the table are for the Class A shares of the Portfolio. |
24 | | The Adviser provided Portfolio and benchmark performance return information for periods through July 31, 2011. |
25 | | Portfolio and benchmark volatility and Sharpe Ratio information was obtained through Lipper LANA, a database maintained by Lipper. Volatility is a statistical measure of the tendency of a market price or yield to vary over time. A Sharpe Ratio is a risk adjusted measure of return that divides a fund’s return in excess of the riskless return by the fund’s standard deviation. A fund with a greater volatility would be viewed as more risky than a fund with equivalent performance but lower volatility; for that reason, a greater return would be demanded for the more risky fund. A fund with a higher Sharpe Ratio would be regarded as better performing than a fund with a lower Sharpe Ratio. |
35
AllianceBernstein
Variable Products Series Fund, Inc.
| | |
![LOGO](https://capedge.com/proxy/N-CSRS/0001193125-12-366259/g374704g16n16.jpg) | | AllianceBernstein International Growth Portfolio |
Semi-Annual Report
![LOGO](https://capedge.com/proxy/N-CSRS/0001193125-12-366259/g374704g81g54.jpg)
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT
Investment Products Offered
| Ø | | Are Not Bank Guaranteed |
AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (ABI) is the distributor of the AllianceBernstein family of mutual funds. ABI is a member of FINRA and is an affiliate of AllianceBernstein L.P., the manager of the funds.
You may obtain a description of the Fund’s proxy voting policies and procedures, and information regarding how the Fund voted proxies relating to portfolio securities during the most recent 12-month period ended June 30, without charge. Simply visit AllianceBernstein’s website at www.alliancebernstein.com or go to the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (the “Commission”) website at www.sec.gov, or call AllianceBernstein at (800) 227-4618.
The Fund files its complete schedule of portfolio holdings with the Commission for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year on Form N-Q. The Fund’s Forms N-Q are available on the Commission’s website at www.sec.gov. The Fund’s Forms N-Q may also be reviewed and copied at the Commission’s Public Reference Room in Washington, DC; information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling (800) SEC-0330.
AllianceBernstein® and the AB Logo are registered trademarks and service marks used by permission of the owner, AllianceBernstein L.P.
| | |
| | |
INTERNATIONAL GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
FUND EXPENSES (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
As a shareholder of the Fund, you incur two types of costs: (1) transaction costs, including sales charges (loads) on purchase payments, contingent deferred sales charges on redemptions and (2) ongoing costs, including management fees; distribution (12b-1) fees; and other Fund expenses. This example is intended to help you understand your ongoing costs (in dollars) of investing in the Fund and to compare these costs with the ongoing costs of investing in other mutual funds.
The Example is based on an investment of $1,000 invested at the beginning of the period and held for the entire period as indicated below.
Actual Expenses
The table below provides information about actual account values and actual expenses. You may use the information in this line, together with the amount you invested, to estimate the expenses that you paid over the period. Simply divide your account value by $1,000 (for example, an $8,600 account value divided by $1,000 = 8.6), then multiply the result by the number in the first line under the heading entitled “Expenses Paid During Period” to estimate the expenses you paid on your account during this period. The estimate of expenses does not include fees or other expenses of any variable insurance product. If such expenses were included, the estimate of expenses you paid during the period would be higher and your ending account value would be lower.
Hypothetical Example for Comparison Purposes
The table below provides information about hypothetical account values and hypothetical expenses based on the Fund’s actual expense ratio and an assumed annual rate of return of 5% before expenses, which is not the Fund’s actual return. The hypothetical account values and expenses may not be used to estimate the actual ending account balance or expenses you paid for the period. You may use this information to compare the ongoing costs of investing in the Fund and other funds by comparing this 5% hypothetical example with the 5% hypothetical examples that appear in the shareholder reports of other funds. The estimate of expenses does not include fees or other expenses of any variable insurance product. If such expenses were included, the estimate of expenses you paid during the period would be higher and your ending account value would be lower.
Please note that the expenses shown in the table are meant to highlight your ongoing costs only and do not reflect any transactional costs, such as sales charges (loads), or contingent deferred sales charges on redemptions. Therefore, the second line of each class’ table is useful in comparing ongoing costs only, and will not help you determine the relative total costs of owning different funds. In addition, if these transactional costs were included, your costs would have been higher.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Beginning Account Value January 1, 2012 | | | Ending Account Value June 30, 2012 | | | Expenses Paid During Period* | | | Annualized Expense Ratio* | |
Class A | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Actual | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,031.20 | | | $ | 4.90 | | | | 0.97 | % |
Hypothetical (5% return before expenses) | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,020.04 | | | $ | 4.87 | | | | 0.97 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class B | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Actual | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,029.50 | | | $ | 6.16 | | | | 1.22 | % |
Hypothetical (5% return before expenses) | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,018.80 | | | $ | 6.12 | | | | 1.22 | % |
* | | Expenses are equal to each classes’ annualized expense ratios, multiplied by the average account value over the period, multiplied by 182/366 (to reflect the one-half year period). |
1
| | |
INTERNATIONAL GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
TEN LARGEST HOLDINGS* | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
COMPANY | | U.S. $ VALUE | | | PERCENT OF NET ASSETS | |
British American Tobacco PLC | | $ | 4,786,433 | | | | 3.4 | % |
Nestle SA | | | 4,092,827 | | | | 2.9 | |
Anheuser-Busch InBev NV | | | 4,000,560 | | | | 2.9 | |
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. | | | 3,431,116 | | | | 2.4 | |
Partners Group Holding AG | | | 3,299,695 | | | | 2.4 | |
BG Group PLC | | | 3,144,705 | | | | 2.2 | |
AIA Group Ltd. | | | 2,766,009 | | | | 2.0 | |
Prudential PLC | | | 2,656,882 | | | | 1.9 | |
FANUC Corp. | | | 2,531,467 | | | | 1.8 | |
Shire PLC | | | 2,295,867 | | | | 1.6 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | $ | 33,005,561 | | | | 23.5 | % |
SECTOR DIVERSIFICATION**
June 30, 2012 (unaudited)
| | | | | | | | |
SECTOR | | U.S. $ VALUE | | | PERCENT OF TOTAL INVESTMENTS | |
Financials | | $ | 25,225,089 | | | | 18.2 | % |
Consumer Staples | | | 20,998,671 | | | | 15.2 | |
Consumer Discretionary | | | 18,894,363 | | | | 13.7 | |
Information Technology | | | 17,210,966 | | | | 12.4 | |
Industrials | | | 13,813,926 | | | | 10.0 | |
Energy | | | 13,671,287 | | | | 9.9 | |
Materials | | | 11,552,611 | | | | 8.3 | |
Health Care | | | 11,312,802 | | | | 8.2 | |
Utilities | | | 2,166,980 | | | | 1.6 | |
Short-Term Investments | | | 3,529,627 | | | | 2.5 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Investments | | $ | 138,376,322 | | | | 100.0 | % |
** | | The Portfolio’s sector breakdown is expressed as a percentage of total investments (excluding security lending collateral) and may vary over time. The Portfolio also enters into derivative transactions, which may be used for hedging or investment purposes (see “Portfolio of Investments” section of the report for additional details). |
Please note: The sector classifications presented herein are based on the Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS) which was developed by Morgan Stanley Capital International and Standard & Poor’s. The components are divided into sector, industry group, and industry sub-indices as classified by the GICS for each of the market capitalization indices in the broad market. These sector classifications are broadly defined. The “Portfolio of Investments” section of the report reflects more specific industry information and is consistent with the investment restrictions discussed in the Fund’s prospectus.
2
| | |
INTERNATIONAL GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
COUNTRY DIVERSIFICATION* | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
COUNTRY | | U.S. $ VALUE | | | PERCENT OF TOTAL INVESTMENTS | |
United Kingdom | | $ | 34,400,723 | | | | 24.9 | % |
Switzerland | | | 12,796,587 | | | | 9.2 | |
France | | | 10,967,612 | | | | 7.9 | |
Japan | | | 10,519,557 | | | | 7.6 | |
Germany | | | 8,401,939 | | | | 6.1 | |
China | | | 6,766,017 | | | | 4.9 | |
Brazil | | | 6,114,741 | | | | 4.4 | |
Hong Kong | | | 5,658,500 | | | | 4.1 | |
Belgium | | | 4,518,855 | | | | 3.3 | |
South Korea | | | 4,379,954 | | | | 3.2 | |
South Africa | | | 3,588,979 | | | | 2.6 | |
Russia | | | 3,056,433 | | | | 2.2 | |
Italy | | | 2,929,964 | | | | 2.1 | |
Other | | | 20,746,834 | | | | 15.0 | |
Short-Term Investments | | | 3,529,627 | | | | 2.5 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Investments | | $ | 138,376,322 | | | | 100.0 | % |
* | | All data are as of June 30, 2012. The Portfolio’s country breakdown is expressed as a percentage of total investments (excluding security lending collateral) and may vary over time. “Other” country weightings represent 2.1% or less in the following countries: Canada, Denmark, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Mexico, Netherlands, Singapore, Sweden, Taiwan, Thailand and United States. |
3
| | |
INTERNATIONAL GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMMON STOCKS–95.5% | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
FINANCIALS–18.0% | | | | | | | | |
CAPITAL MARKETS–3.9% | | | | | | | | |
Aberdeen Asset Management PLC | | | 376,260 | | | $ | 1,532,504 | |
Azimut Holding SpA | | | 62,905 | | | | 645,858 | |
Partners Group Holding AG | | | 18,553 | | | | 3,299,695 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 5,478,057 | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMMERCIAL BANKS–7.0% | | | | | | | | |
Bangkok Bank PCL (NVDR) | | | 277,900 | | | | 1,690,724 | |
Bank Mandiri Persero TBK PT | | | 974,000 | | | | 755,752 | |
Bank Rakyat Indonesia Persero Tbk PT | | | 870,000 | | | | 595,867 | |
HDFC Bank Ltd. | | | 64,710 | | | | 657,162 | |
HSBC Holdings PLC | | | 199,321 | | | | 1,756,385 | |
Itausa-Investimentos Itau SA (Preference Shares) | | | 146,355 | | | | 619,376 | |
Sberbank of Russia (Sponsored ADR)(a) | | | 92,965 | | | | 1,005,881 | |
Standard Chartered PLC | | | 63,327 | | | | 1,375,651 | |
United Overseas Bank Ltd.(a) | | | 96,000 | | | | 1,425,555 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 9,882,353 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER FINANCE–0.3% | | | | | | | | |
Muthoot Finance Ltd.(b) | | | 144,060 | | | | 350,842 | |
| | | | | | | | |
DIVERSIFIED FINANCIAL SERVICES–2.1% | | | | | | | | |
Deutsche Boerse AG | | | 18,070 | | | | 974,895 | |
FirstRand Ltd. | | | 228,550 | | | | 739,782 | |
IG Group Holdings PLC | | | 162,058 | | | | 1,218,050 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,932,727 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INSURANCE–3.9% | | | | | | | | |
AIA Group Ltd. | | | 800,800 | | | | 2,766,009 | |
Prudential PLC | | | 229,140 | | | | 2,656,882 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 5,422,891 | |
| | | | | | | | |
REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT & DEVELOPMENT–0.4% | | | | | | | | |
BR Malls Participacoes SA | | | 47,800 | | | | 547,374 | |
| | | | | | | | |
THRIFTS & MORTGAGE FINANCE–0.4% | | | | | | | | |
Housing Development Finance Corp. | | | 52,000 | | | | 610,845 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 25,225,089 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER STAPLES–15.0% | | | | | | | | |
BEVERAGES–4.9% | | | | | | | | |
Anheuser-Busch InBev NV | | | 50,742 | | | | 4,000,560 | |
Cia de Bebidas das Americas (Preference Shares) | | | 22,148 | | | | 852,398 | |
Grupo Modelo SAB de CV | | | 89,130 | | | | 788,424 | |
Pernod-Ricard SA(a) | | | 11,370 | | | | 1,215,818 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 6,857,200 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
FOOD & STAPLES RETAILING–1.0% | | | | | | | | |
Brazil Pharma SA | | | 97,400 | | | $ | 521,309 | |
Olam International Ltd.(a) | | | 297,262 | | | | 430,538 | |
Raia Drogasil SA | | | 44,000 | | | | 443,615 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,395,462 | |
| | | | | | | | |
FOOD PRODUCTS–4.3% | | | | | | | | |
Danone | | | 29,866 | | | | 1,856,069 | |
Nestle SA | | | 68,582 | | | | 4,092,827 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 5,948,896 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HOUSEHOLD PRODUCTS–1.4% | | | | | | | | |
Reckitt Benckiser Group PLC | | | 38,040 | | | | 2,010,680 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TOBACCO–3.4% | | | | | | | | |
British American Tobacco PLC | | | 94,147 | | | | 4,786,433 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 20,998,671 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER DISCRETIONARY–13.5% | | | | | | | | |
AUTOMOBILES–2.4% | | | | | | | | |
Nissan Motor Co., Ltd. | | | 219,100 | | | | 2,080,515 | |
Volkswagen AG (Preference Shares) | | | 8,149 | | | | 1,291,028 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 3,371,543 | |
| | | | | | | | |
DISTRIBUTORS–0.8% | | | | | | | | |
Li & Fung Ltd. | | | 550,000 | | | | 1,063,500 | |
| | | | | | | | |
DIVERSIFIED CONSUMER SERVICES–0.3% | | | | | | | | |
Estacio Participacoes SA | | | 28,600 | | | | 346,019 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HOTELS, RESTAURANTS & LEISURE–0.2% | | | | | | | | |
Ajisen China Holdings Ltd.(a) | | | 365,500 | | | | 255,281 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INTERNET & CATALOG RETAIL–0.7% | | | | | | | | |
Rakuten, Inc. | | | 98,800 | | | | 1,021,460 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MEDIA–1.9% | | | | | | | | |
Eutelsat Communications | | | 13,834 | | | | 425,558 | |
Informa PLC | | | 111,283 | | | | 664,021 | |
Naspers Ltd. | | | 14,550 | | | | 777,151 | |
SES SA (FDR) | | | 33,764 | | | | 798,307 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,665,037 | |
| | | | | | | | |
SPECIALTY RETAIL–3.6% | | | | | | | | |
Belle International Holdings Ltd. | | | 723,000 | | | | 1,240,502 | |
Fast Retailing Co., Ltd. | | | 5,400 | | | | 1,080,495 | |
Hennes & Mauritz AB–Class B | | | 34,260 | | | | 1,229,725 | |
Yamada Denki Co., Ltd. | | | 14,240 | | | | 729,065 | |
Zhongsheng Group Holdings Ltd.(a) | | | 683,000 | | | | 834,822 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 5,114,609 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TEXTILES, APPAREL & LUXURY GOODS–3.6% | | | | | | | | |
Brunello Cucinelli SpA(b) | | | 46,693 | | | | 664,171 | |
Cie Financiere Richemont SA | | | 40,422 | | | | 2,219,562 | |
LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton SA | | | 12,090 | | | | 1,839,973 | |
4
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
Trinity Ltd. | | | 526,000 | | | $ | 333,208 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 5,056,914 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 18,894,363 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY–11.7% | | | | | | | | |
COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT–0.4% | | | | | | | | |
ZTE Corp.–Class H(a) | | | 304,200 | | | | 594,151 | |
| | | | | | | | |
ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT, INSTRUMENTS & COMPONENTS–0.6% | | | | | | | | |
Murata Manufacturing Co., Ltd. | | | 15,500 | | | | 815,309 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INTERNET SOFTWARE & SERVICES–3.6% | | | | | | | | |
Baidu, Inc. (Sponsored ADR)(b) | | | 17,530 | | | | 2,015,599 | |
Mail.ru Group Ltd. (GDR)(b)(c) | | | 24,250 | | | | 825,858 | |
Tencent Holdings Ltd. | | | 74,800 | | | | 2,208,939 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 5,050,396 | |
| | | | | | | | |
IT SERVICES–0.8% | | | | | | | | |
Tata Consultancy Services Ltd. | | | 49,020 | | | | 1,131,776 | |
| | | | | | | | |
SEMICONDUCTORS & SEMICONDUCTOR EQUIPMENT–4.2% | | | | | | | | |
ARM Holdings PLC | | | 131,425 | | | | 1,041,230 | |
ASML Holding NV | | | 26,747 | | | | 1,373,620 | |
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. | | | 3,240 | | | | 3,431,116 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 5,845,966 | �� |
| | | | | | | | |
SOFTWARE–2.1% | | | | | | | | |
SAP AG | | | 32,247 | | | | 1,909,518 | |
Temenos Group AG(b) | | | 68,179 | | | | 1,127,254 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 3,036,772 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 16,474,370 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INDUSTRIALS–9.8% | | | | | | | | |
AEROSPACE & DEFENSE–0.7% | | | | | |
Safran SA | | | 26,310 | | | | 977,059 | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMMERCIAL SERVICES & SUPPLIES–0.6% | | | | | | | | |
Aggreko PLC | | | 27,290 | | | | 887,489 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSTRUCTION & ENGINEERING–0.7% | | | | | | | | |
Samsung Engineering Co., Ltd. | | | 5,980 | | | | 948,838 | |
| | | | | | | | |
ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT–0.8% | | | | | | | | |
Schneider Electric SA | | | 21,070 | | | | 1,171,148 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INDUSTRIAL CONGLOMERATES–0.9% | | | | | | | | |
Bidvest Group Ltd. | | | 56,038 | | | | 1,251,314 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MACHINERY–3.0% | | | | | | | | |
FANUC Corp. | | | 15,400 | | | | 2,531,467 | |
Komatsu Ltd. | | | 67,800 | | | | 1,618,477 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 4,149,944 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES–2.0% | | | | | | | | |
Experian PLC | | | 141,038 | | | $ | 1,989,786 | |
Intertek Group PLC | | | 20,310 | | | | 850,905 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,840,691 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TRADING COMPANIES & DISTRIBUTORS–1.1% | | | | | | | | |
Wolseley PLC | | | 42,590 | | | | 1,587,443 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 13,813,926 | |
| | | | | | | | |
ENERGY–9.7% | | | | | | | | |
ENERGY EQUIPMENT & SERVICES–3.5% | | | | | | | | |
Saipem SpA | | | 36,375 | | | | 1,619,935 | |
Schlumberger Ltd. | | | 26,500 | | | | 1,720,115 | |
Technip SA | | | 14,760 | | | | 1,538,227 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 4,878,277 | |
| | | | | | | | |
OIL, GAS & CONSUMABLE FUELS–6.2% | | | | | | | | |
Afren PLC(b) | | | 638,783 | | | | 1,038,372 | |
BG Group PLC | | | 153,614 | | | | 3,144,705 | |
China Shenhua Energy Co., Ltd.–Class H | | | 315,000 | | | | 1,112,506 | |
NovaTek OAO (Sponsored GDR)(c) | | | 7,933 | | | | 847,069 | |
Tullow Oil PLC | | | 47,098 | | | | 1,088,556 | |
Ultrapar Participacoes SA | | | 69,400 | | | | 1,561,802 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 8,793,010 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 13,671,287 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MATERIALS–8.2% | | | | | | | | |
CHEMICALS–4.7% | | | | | | | | |
Croda International PLC | | | 42,910 | | | | 1,524,601 | |
Israel Chemicals Ltd. | | | 152,830 | | | | 1,690,964 | |
Lanxess AG | | | 12,540 | | | | 793,588 | |
Linde AG | | | 9,900 | | | | 1,541,832 | |
Potash Corp. of Saskatchewan, Inc. | | | 23,320 | | | | 1,019,291 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 6,570,276 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONTAINERS & PACKAGING–0.8% | | | | | | | | |
Klabin SA (Preference Shares) | | | 269,900 | | | | 1,222,848 | |
| | | | | | | | |
METALS & MINING–2.7% | | | | | | | | |
African Minerals Ltd.(a)(b) | | | 157,890 | | | | 784,183 | |
First Quantum Minerals Ltd. | | | 79,590 | | | | 1,407,151 | |
Franco-Nevada Corp. | | | 9,530 | | | | 430,961 | |
Kenmare Resources PLC(b) | | | 998,600 | | | | 618,897 | |
Umicore SA | | | 11,210 | | | | 518,295 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 3,759,487 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 11,552,611 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HEALTH CARE–8.1% | | | | | | | | |
HEALTH CARE EQUIPMENT & SUPPLIES–1.2% | | | | | | | | |
Cie Generale d’Optique Essilor International SA(a) | | | 12,330 | | | | 1,145,453 | |
5
| | |
INTERNATIONAL GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
Elekta AB | | | 11,630 | | | $ | 531,441 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,676,894 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS & SERVICES–0.6% | | | | | | | | |
Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA | | | 12,015 | | | | 848,597 | |
| | | | | | | | |
PHARMACEUTICALS–6.3% | | | | | | | | |
Aspen Pharmacare Holdings Ltd.(b) | | | 53,261 | | | | 820,732 | |
Bayer AG | | | 14,467 | | | | 1,042,481 | |
Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma Corp. | | | 44,700 | | | | 642,769 | |
Novo Nordisk A/S–Class B | | | 10,691 | | | | 1,550,588 | |
Pharmstandard OJSC (GDR)(b)(c) | | | 26,500 | | | | 377,625 | |
Roche Holding AG | | | 11,910 | | | | 2,057,249 | |
Shire PLC | | | 79,801 | | | | 2,295,867 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 8,787,311 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 11,312,802 | |
| | | | | | | | |
UTILITIES–1.5% | | | | | | | | |
MULTI-UTILITIES–1.5% | | | | | | | | |
National Grid PLC | | | 204,470 | | | | 2,166,980 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Common Stocks (cost $123,939,580) | | | | | | | 134,110,099 | |
| | | | | | | | |
WARRANTS–0.6% | | | | | | | | |
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY–0.6% | | | | | | | | |
ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT, INSTRUMENTS & COMPONENTS–0.6% | | | | | | | | |
Hon Hai Precision Industry Co., Ltd., JPMorgan Chase Bank NA, expiring 9/29/14(b)(c) (cost $823,487) | | �� | 247,180 | | | | 736,596 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
SHORT-TERM INVESTMENTS–2.5% | | | | | | | | |
TIME DEPOSIT–2.5% | | | | | | | | |
State Street Time Deposit 0.01%, 7/02/12 (cost $3,529,627) | | U.S.$ | 3,530 | | | $ | 3,529,627 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Investments Before Security Lending Collateral for Securities Loaned–98.6% (cost $128,292,694) | | | | | | | 138,376,322 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | Shares | | | | |
INVESTMENTS OF CASH COLLATERAL FOR SECURITY LOANED–2.7% | | | | | | | | |
INVESTMENT COMPANIES–2.7% | | | | | | | | |
AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves–Class I, 0.20%(d) (cost $3,842,134) | | | 3,842,134 | | | | 3,842,134 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TOTAL INVESTMENTS–101.3% (cost $132,134,828) | | | | | | | 142,218,456 | |
Other assets less liabilities–(1.3)% | | | | | | | (1,789,146 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
NET ASSETS–100.0% | | | | | | $ | 140,429,310 | |
| | | | | | | | |
FORWARD CURRENCY EXCHANGE CONTRACTS (see Note D)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Counterparty & Description | | Contract Amount (000) | | | U.S. $ Value on Origination Date | | | U.S. $ Value at June 30, 2012 | | | Unrealized Appreciation/ (Depreciation) | |
Buy Contracts | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Barclays Bank PLC Wholesale: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Australian Dollar settling 8/14/12 | | | 2,356 | | | $ | 2,372,480 | | | $ | 2,401,862 | | | $ | 29,382 | |
Great British Pound settling 8/14/12 | | | 1,436 | | | | 2,249,034 | | | | 2,248,751 | | | | (283) | |
Japanese Yen settling 8/14/12 | | | 477,264 | | | | 6,019,258 | | | | 5,974,151 | | | | (45,107) | |
Swedish Krona settling 8/14/12 | | | 53,618 | | | | 7,788,548 | | | | 7,739,147 | | | | (49,401) | |
Citibank NA:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Australian Dollar settling 8/14/12 | | | 9,646 | | | | 9,658,752 | | | | 9,833,772 | | | | 175,020 | |
Deutsche Bank AG London: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Great British Pound settling 8/14/12 | | | 2,529 | | | | 3,997,970 | | | | 3,960,371 | | | | (37,599) | |
HSBC BankUSA: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Canadian Dollar settling 8/14/12 | | | 1,603 | | | | 1,599,369 | | | | 1,573,048 | | | | (26,321) | |
Royal Bank of Scotland PLC: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Swiss Franc settling 8/14/12 | | | 9,401 | | | | 9,824,371 | | | | 9,914,558 | | | | 90,187 | |
6
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Counterparty & Description | | Contract Amount (000) | | | U.S. $ Value on Origination Date | | | U.S. $ Value at June 30, 2012 | | | Unrealized Appreciation/ (Depreciation) | |
Buy Contracts (continued) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
State Street Bank and Trust Company: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Norwegian Krone settling 8/14/12 | | | 45,527 | | | $ | 7,783,537 | | | $ | 7,641,807 | | | $ | (141,730 | ) |
Westpac Banking Corp.: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Japanese Yen settling 8/14/12 | | | 620,121 | | | | 7,841,047 | | | | 7,762,365 | | | | (78,682 | ) |
New Zealand Dollar settling 8/14/12 | | | 4,064 | | | | 3,177,967 | | | | 3,243,957 | | | | 65,990 | |
| | | | |
Sale Contracts | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Citibank NA:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Euro settling 8/14/12 | | | 2,421 | | | | 3,080,212 | | | | 3,064,882 | | | | 15,330 | |
Credit Suisse London Branch (GFX): | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Canadian Dollar settling 8/14/12 | | | 3,760 | | | | 3,744,274 | | | | 3,689,744 | | | | 54,530 | |
Euro settling 8/14/12 | | | 4,509 | | | | 5,871,485 | | | | 5,708,200 | | | | 163,285 | |
Norwegian Krone settling 8/14/12 | | | 2,047 | | | | 335,427 | | | | 343,594 | | | | (8,167 | ) |
Swiss Franc settling 8/14/12 | | | 8,369 | | | | 8,975,525 | | | | 8,826,183 | | | | 149,342 | |
Deutsche Bank AG London: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Euro settling 8/14/12 | | | 4,295 | | | | 5,368,106 | | | | 5,437,285 | | | | (69,179 | ) |
Japanese Yen settling 8/14/12 | | | 281,162 | | | | 3,526,869 | | | | 3,519,446 | | | | 7,423 | |
New Zealand Dollar settling 8/14/12 | | | 683 | | | | 520,617 | | | | 545,183 | | | | (24,566 | ) |
Goldman Sachs International: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Australian Dollar settling 8/14/12 | | | 5,814 | | | | 5,727,197 | | | | 5,927,177 | | | | (199,980 | ) |
Great British Pound settling 8/14/12 | | | 6,433 | | | | 10,371,283 | | | | 10,073,969 | | | | 297,314 | |
JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A.: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Norwegian Krone settling 8/14/12 | | | 3,059 | | | | 509,511 | | | | 513,460 | | | | (3,949 | ) |
Royal Bank of Canada: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Swedish Krona settling 8/14/12 | | | 2,515 | | | | 347,895 | | | | 363,011 | | | | (15,116 | ) |
Royal Bank of Scotland PLC: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Euro settling 8/14/12 | | | 8,452 | | | | 10,598,970 | | | | 10,699,868 | | | | (100,898 | ) |
Great British Pound settling 8/14/12 | | | 409 | | | | 632,408 | | | | 640,487 | | | | (8,079 | ) |
Swedish Krona settling 8/14/12 | | | 2,750 | | | | 381,251 | | | | 396,931 | | | | (15,680 | ) |
State Street Bank and Trust Company: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Swiss Franc settling 8/14/12 | | | 1,032 | | | | 1,132,225 | | | | 1,088,377 | | | | 43,848 | |
UBS AG: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Swiss Franc settling 8/14/12 | | | 3,521 | | | | 3,672,912 | | | | 3,713,346 | | | | (40,434 | ) |
Westpac Banking Corp.: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
New Zealand Dollar settling 8/14/12 | | | 3,381 | | | | 2,574,209 | | | | 2,698,774 | | | | (124,565 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | $ | 101,915 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
(a) | | Represents entire or partial securities out on loan. See Note E for securities lending information. |
(b) | | Non-income producing security. |
(c) | | Security is exempt from registration under Rule 144A of the Securities Act of 1933. These securities are considered liquid and may be resold in transactions exempt from registration, normally to qualified institutional buyers. At June 30, 2012, the aggregate market value of these securities amounted to $2,787,148 or 2.0% of net assets. |
(d) | | Investment in affiliated money market mutual fund. The rate shown represents the 7-day yield as of period end. |
Glossary:
ADR—American Depositary Receipt
FDR—Fiduciary Depositary Receipt
GDR—Global Depositary Receipt
NVDR—Non Voting Depositary Receipt
OJSC—Open Joint Stock Company
See notes to financial statements.
7
| | |
INTERNATIONAL GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
STATEMENTOF ASSETS & LIABILITIES |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | |
ASSETS | | | | |
Investments in securities, at value | | | | |
Unaffiliated issuers (cost $128,292,694) | | $ | 138,376,322 | (a) |
Affiliated issuers (cost $3,842,134—including investment of cash collateral for securities loaned of $3,842,134) | | | 3,842,134 | |
Foreign currencies, at value (cost $1,518,571) | | | 1,520,456 | |
Receivable for investment securities sold and foreign currency transactions | | | 3,945,203 | |
Unrealized appreciation of forward currency exchange contracts | | | 1,091,651 | |
Dividends and interest receivable | | | 570,650 | |
Receivable for capital stock sold | | | 67,087 | |
| | | | |
Total assets | | | 149,413,503 | |
| | | | |
LIABILITIES | | | | |
Payable for collateral received on securities loaned | | | 3,842,134 | |
Payable for investment securities purchased and foreign currency transactions | | | 3,570,316 | |
Unrealized depreciation of forward currency exchange contracts | | | 989,736 | |
Payable for capital stock redeemed | | | 376,735 | |
Advisory fee payable | | | 86,830 | |
Administrative fee payable | | | 16,543 | |
Distribution fee payable | | | 11,863 | |
Transfer Agent fee payable | | | 169 | |
Accrued expenses and other liabilities | | | 89,867 | |
| | | | |
Total liabilities | | | 8,984,193 | |
| | | | |
NET ASSETS | | $ | 140,429,310 | |
| | | | |
COMPOSITION OF NET ASSETS | | | | |
Capital stock, at par | | $ | 9,075 | |
Additional paid-in capital | | | 187,406,766 | |
Undistributed net investment income | | | 2,891,458 | |
Accumulated net realized loss on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | (60,057,271 | ) |
Net unrealized appreciation on investments and foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities | | | 10,179,282 | |
| | | | |
| | $ | 140,429,310 | |
| | | | |
Net Asset Value Per Share—1 billion shares of capital stock authorized, $.001 par value
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class | | Net Assets | | | Shares Outstanding | | | Net Asset Value | |
A | | $ | 82,288,818 | | | | 5,292,684 | | | $ | 15.55 | |
B | | $ | 58,140,492 | | | | 3,782,272 | | | $ | 15.37 | |
(a) | | Includes securities on loan with a value of $3,779,752 (see Note E). |
See notes to financial statements.
8
| | |
INTERNATIONAL GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
STATEMENTOF OPERATIONS | | |
Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | |
INVESTMENT INCOME | | | | |
Dividends | | | | |
Unaffiliated issuers (net of foreign taxes withheld of $210,391) | | $ | 2,304,186 | |
Affiliated issuers | | | 5,558 | |
Interest | | | 172 | |
Securities lending income | | | 76,236 | |
| | | | |
| | | 2,386,152 | |
| | | | |
EXPENSES | | | | |
Advisory fee (see Note B) | | | 572,412 | |
Distribution fee—Class B | | | 76,158 | |
Transfer agency—Class A | | | 1,150 | |
Transfer agency—Class B | | | 764 | |
Custodian | | | 65,558 | |
Administrative | | | 27,359 | |
Audit | | | 25,674 | |
Printing | | | 21,736 | |
Legal | | | 13,126 | |
Directors’ fees | | | 1,973 | |
Miscellaneous | | | 10,086 | |
| | | | |
Total expenses | | | 815,996 | |
| | | | |
Net investment income | | | 1,570,156 | |
| | | | |
REALIZED AND UNREALIZED GAIN (LOSS) ON INVESTMENT AND FOREIGN CURRENCY TRANSACTIONS | | | | |
Net realized loss on: | | | | |
Investment transactions | | | (2,607,192 | )(a) |
Foreign currency transactions | | | (736,689 | ) |
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of: | | | | |
Investments | | | 7,389,573 | (b) |
Foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities | | | (714,093 | ) |
| | | | |
Net gain on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | 3,331,599 | |
| | | | |
NET INCREASE IN NET ASSETS FROM OPERATIONS | | $ | 4,901,755 | |
| | | | |
(a) | | Net of foreign capital gains taxes of $1,394. |
(b) | | Net of increase in accrued foreign capital gains taxes of $18,794. |
See notes to financial statements.
9
| | |
| | |
INTERNATIONAL GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN NET ASSETS | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | |
INCREASE (DECREASE) IN NET ASSETS FROM OPERATIONS | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income | | $ | 1,570,156 | | | $ | 2,573,318 | |
Net realized gain (loss) on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | (3,343,881 | ) | | | 1,719,878 | |
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of investments and foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities | | | 6,675,480 | | | | (33,949,194 | ) |
Contributions from Adviser (see Note B) | | | –0 | – | | | 23,222 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) in net assets from operations | | | 4,901,755 | | | | (29,632,776 | ) |
DIVIDENDS TO SHAREHOLDERS FROM | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income | | | | | | | | |
Class A | | | –0 | – | | | (3,419,977 | ) |
Class B | | | –0 | – | | | (1,907,699 | ) |
CAPITAL STOCK TRANSACTIONS | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (13,706,307 | ) | | | (17,023,668 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Total decrease | | | (8,804,552 | ) | | | (51,984,120 | ) |
NET ASSETS | | | | | | | | |
Beginning of period | | | 149,233,862 | | | | 201,217,982 | |
| | | | | | | | |
End of period (including undistributed net investment income of $2,891,458 and $1,321,302, respectively) | | $ | 140,429,310 | | | $ | 149,233,862 | |
| | | | | | | | |
See notes to financial statements.
10
| | |
INTERNATIONAL GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
NOTE A: Significant Accounting Policies
The AllianceBernstein International Growth Portfolio (the “Portfolio”) is a series of AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund, Inc. (the “Fund”). The Portfolio’s investment objective is long-term growth of capital. The Portfolio is diversified as defined under the Investment Company Act of 1940. The Fund was incorporated in the State of Maryland on November 17, 1987, as an open-end series investment company. The Fund offers thirteen separately managed pools of assets which have differing investment objectives and policies. The Portfolio offers Class A and Class B shares. Both classes of shares have identical voting, dividend, liquidating and other rights, except that Class B shares bear a distribution expense and have exclusive voting rights with respect to the Class B distribution plan.
The Portfolio offers and sells its shares only to separate accounts of certain life insurance companies for the purpose of funding variable annuity contracts and variable life insurance policies. Sales are made without a sales charge at the Portfolio’s net asset value per share.
The financial statements have been prepared in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“U.S. GAAP”) which require management to make certain estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities in the financial statements and amounts of income and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. The following is a summary of significant accounting policies followed by the Portfolio.
1. Security Valuation
Portfolio securities are valued at their current market value determined on the basis of market quotations or, if market quotations are not readily available or are deemed unreliable, at “fair value” as determined in accordance with procedures established by and under the general supervision of the Fund’s Board of Directors.
In general, the market value of securities which are readily available and deemed reliable are determined as follows: Securities listed on a national securities exchange (other than securities listed on the NASDAQ Stock Market, Inc. (“NASDAQ”)) or on a foreign securities exchange are valued at the last sale price at the close of the exchange or foreign securities exchange. If there has been no sale on such day, the securities are valued at the last traded price from the previous day. Securities listed on more than one exchange are valued by reference to the principal exchange on which the securities are traded; securities listed only on NASDAQ are valued in accordance with the NASDAQ Official Closing Price; listed or over the counter market (“OTC”) put or call options are valued at the mid level between the current bid and ask prices. If either a current bid or current ask price is unavailable, AllianceBernstein L.P. (the “Adviser”) will have discretion to determine the best valuation (e.g. last trade price in the case of listed options); open futures contracts are valued using the closing settlement price or, in the absence of such a price, the most recent quoted bid price. If there are no quotations available for the day of valuation, the last available closing settlement price is used; U.S. government securities and other debt instruments having 60 days or less remaining until maturity are valued at amortized cost if their original maturity was 60 days or less; or by amortizing their fair value as of the 61st day prior to maturity if their original term to maturity exceeded 60 days; fixed-income securities, including mortgage backed and asset backed securities, may be valued on the basis of prices provided by a pricing service or at a price obtained from one or more of the major broker/dealers. In cases where broker/dealer quotes are obtained, the Adviser may establish procedures whereby changes in market yields or spreads are used to adjust, on a daily basis, a recently obtained quoted price on a security. Swaps and other derivatives are valued daily, primarily using independent pricing services, independent pricing models using market inputs, as well as third party broker-dealers or counterparties.
Securities for which market quotations are not readily available (including restricted securities) or are deemed unreliable are valued at fair value. Factors considered in making this determination may include, but are not limited to, information obtained by contacting the issuer, analysts, analysis of the issuer’s financial statements or other available documents. In addition, the Portfolio may use fair value pricing for securities primarily traded in non-U.S. markets because most foreign markets close well before the Portfolio values its securities at 4:00 p.m., Eastern Time. The earlier close of foreign markets gives rise to the possibility that significant events, including broad market moves, may have occurred between the close of the foreign markets and the time at which the Portfolio values its securities which may materially affect the value of securities trading in such markets. To account for this, the Portfolio may frequently value many of its foreign equity securities using fair value prices based on third party vendor modeling tools to the extent available.
2. Fair Value Measurements
In accordance with U.S. GAAP regarding fair value measurements, fair value is defined as the price that the Portfolio would receive to sell an asset or pay to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date.
11
| | |
INTERNATIONAL GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
The U.S. GAAP disclosure requirements establish a framework for measuring fair value, and a three-level hierarchy for fair value measurements based upon the transparency of inputs to the valuation of an asset or liability. Inputs may be observable or unobservable and refer broadly to the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability. Observable inputs reflect the assumptions market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability based on market data obtained from sources independent of the Portfolio. Unobservable inputs reflect the Portfolio’s own assumptions about the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability based on the best information available in the circumstances. Each investment is assigned a level based upon the observability of the inputs which are significant to the overall valuation. The three-tier hierarchy of inputs is summarized below.
| • | | Level 1—quoted prices in active markets for identical investments |
| • | | Level 2—other significant observable inputs (including quoted prices for similar investments, interest rates, prepayment speeds, credit risk, etc.) |
| • | | Level 3—significant unobservable inputs (including the Portfolio’s own assumptions in determining the fair value of investments) |
The following table summarizes the valuation of the Portfolio’s investments by the above fair value hierarchy levels as of June 30, 2012:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Level 1 | | | Level 2 | | | Level 3 | | | Total | |
Investments in Securities: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Assets: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Common Stocks: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Financials | | $ | 1,166,750 | | | $ | 24,058,339 | | | $ | –0 | – | | $ | 25,225,089 | |
Consumer Staples | | | 2,605,746 | | | | 18,392,925 | | | | –0 | – | | | 20,998,671 | |
Consumer Discretionary | | | 1,010,190 | | | | 17,884,173 | | | | –0 | – | | | 18,894,363 | |
Information Technology | | | 2,015,599 | | | | 14,458,771 | | | | –0 | – | | | 16,474,370 | |
Industrials | | | –0 | – | | | 13,813,926 | | | | –0 | – | | | 13,813,926 | |
Energy | | | 3,281,917 | | | | 10,389,370 | | | | –0 | – | | | 13,671,287 | |
Materials | | | 4,080,251 | | | | 7,472,360 | | | | –0 | – | | | 11,552,611 | |
Health Care | | | 377,625 | | | | 10,935,177 | | | | –0 | – | | | 11,312,802 | |
Utilities | | | –0 | – | | | 2,166,980 | | | | –0 | – | | | 2,166,980 | |
Warrants | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 736,596 | | | | 736,596 | |
Short-Term Investments | | | –0 | – | | | 3,529,627 | | | | –0 | – | | | 3,529,627 | |
Investments of Cash Collateral for Security Loaned in Affiliated Money Market Fund | | | 3,842,134 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 3,842,134 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Investments in Securities | | | 18,380,212 | | | | 123,101,648 | + | | | 736,596 | | | | 142,218,456 | |
Other Financial Instruments*: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Assets: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Forward Currency Exchange Contracts | | | –0 | – | | | 1,091,651 | | | | –0 | – | | | 1,091,651 | |
Liabilities: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Forward Currency Exchange Contracts | | | –0 | – | | | (989,736 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | (989,736 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total | | $ | 18,380,212 | | | $ | 123,203,563 | | | $ | 736,596 | | | $ | 142,320,371 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
* | | Other financial instruments are derivative instruments, such as futures, forwards and swap contracts, which are valued at the unrealized appreciation/depreciation on the instrument. |
+ | | A significant portion of the Portfolio’s foreign equity investments are categorized as Level 2 investments since they are valued using fair value prices based on third party vendor modeling tools to the extent available, see Note A.1. |
12
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Following is a reconciliation of investments in which significant unobservable inputs (Level 3) were used in determining fair value. The transfers between levels of the fair value hierarchy assumes the financial instrument was transferred at the beginning of the reporting period.
| | | | | | | | |
| | Warrants | | | Total | |
Balance as of 12/31/11 | | $ | 765,226 | | | $ | 765,226 | |
Accrued discounts/(premiums) | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
Realized gain (loss) | | | (7,524 | ) | | | (7,524 | ) |
Change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation | | | 90,152 | | | | 90,152 | |
Purchases | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
Sales | | | (111,258 | ) | | | (111,258 | ) |
Transfers into Level 3 | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
Transfers out of Level 3 | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | |
Balance as of 6/30/12 | | $ | 736,596 | | | $ | 736,596 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation from Investments held as of 6/30/12 * | | $ | 90,152 | | | $ | 90,152 | |
| | | | | | | | |
* | | The unrealized appreciation/depreciation is included in net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of investments in the accompanying statement of operations. |
3. Currency Translation
Assets and liabilities denominated in foreign currencies and commitments under forward currency exchange contracts are translated into U.S. dollars at the mean of the quoted bid and ask prices of such currencies against the U.S. dollar. Purchases and sales of portfolio securities are translated into U.S. dollars at the rates of exchange prevailing when such securities were acquired or sold. Income and expenses are translated into U.S. dollars at rates of exchange prevailing when accrued.
Net realized gain or loss on foreign currency transactions represents foreign exchange gains and losses from sales and maturities of foreign fixed income investments, foreign currency exchange contracts, holding of foreign currencies, currency gains or losses realized between the trade and settlement dates on foreign investment transactions, and the difference between the amounts of dividends, interest and foreign withholding taxes recorded on the Portfolio’s books and the U.S. dollar equivalent amounts actually received or paid. Net unrealized currency gains and losses from valuing foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities at period end exchange rates are reflected as a component of net unrealized appreciation or depreciation of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities.
4. Taxes
It is the Portfolio’s policy to meet the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code applicable to regulated investment companies and to distribute all of its investment company taxable income and net realized gains, if any, to shareholders. Therefore, no provisions for federal income or excise taxes are required. The Portfolio may be subject to taxes imposed by countries in which it invests. Such taxes are generally based on income and/or capital gains earned or repatriated. Taxes are accrued and applied to net investment income, net realized gains and net unrealized appreciation/depreciation as such income and/or gains are earned.
In accordance with U.S. GAAP requirements regarding accounting for uncertainties in income taxes, management has analyzed the Portfolio’s tax positions taken or expected to be taken on federal and state income tax returns for all open tax years (the current and the prior three tax years) and has concluded that no provision for income tax is required in the Portfolio’s financial statements.
5. Investment Income and Investment Transactions
Dividend income is recorded on the ex-dividend date or as soon as the Portfolio is informed of the dividend. Interest income is accrued daily. Investment transactions are accounted for on the date the securities are purchased or sold. Investment gains or losses are determined on the identified cost basis. The Portfolio amortizes premiums and accretes discounts as adjustments to interest income.
6. Class Allocations
All income earned and expenses incurred by the Portfolio are borne on a pro-rata basis by each outstanding class of shares, based on the proportionate interest in the Portfolio represented by the net assets of such class, except for class specific expenses which are allocated to the respective class. Expenses of the Fund are charged to each Portfolio in proportion to net assets. Realized and unrealized gains and losses are allocated among the various share classes based on respective net assets.
13
| | |
INTERNATIONAL GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
7. Dividends and Distributions
Dividends and distributions to shareholders, if any, are recorded on the ex-dividend date. Income dividends and capital gains distributions are determined in accordance with federal tax regulations and may differ from those determined in accordance with U.S. GAAP. To the extent these differences are permanent, such amounts are reclassified within the capital accounts based on their federal tax basis treatment; temporary differences do not require such reclassification.
NOTE B: Advisory Fee and Other Transactions with Affiliates
Under the terms of the investment advisory agreement, the Portfolio pays the Adviser an advisory fee at an annual rate of .75% of the first $2.5 billion, .65% of the next $2.5 billion and .60% in excess of $5 billion, of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets. The fee is accrued daily and paid monthly.
During the year ended December 31, 2011, the Adviser reimbursed the Portfolio $23,222 for trading losses incurred due to a trade entry error.
Pursuant to the investment advisory agreement, the Portfolio may reimburse the Adviser for certain legal and accounting services provided to the Portfolio by the Adviser. For the six months ended June 30, 2012, such fee amounted to $27,359.
Brokerage commissions paid on investment transactions for the six months ended June 30, 2012 amounted to $117,986, of which $0 and $551, respectively, was paid to Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. LLC and Sanford C. Bernstein Limited, affiliates of the Adviser.
The Portfolio compensates AllianceBernstein Investor Services, Inc. (“ABIS”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Adviser, under a Transfer Agency Agreement for providing personnel and facilities to perform transfer agency services for the Portfolio. Such compensation retained by ABIS amounted to $692 for the six months ended June 30, 2012.
NOTE C: Distribution Plan
The Portfolio has adopted a Distribution Plan (the “Plan”) for Class B shares pursuant to Rule 12b-1 under the Investment Company Act of 1940. Under the Plan, the Portfolio pays distribution and servicing fees to AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (the “Distributor”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Adviser, at an annual rate of up to .50% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The fees are accrued daily and paid monthly. The Board of Directors currently limits payments under the Plan to .25% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The Plan provides that the Distributor will use such payments in their entirety for distribution assistance and promotional activities.
The Portfolio is not obligated under the Plan to pay any distribution and servicing fees in excess of the amounts set forth above. The purpose of the payments to the Distributor under the Plan is to compensate the Distributor for its distribution services with respect to the sale of the Portfolio’s Class B shares. Since the Distributor’s compensation is not directly tied to its expenses, the amount of compensation received by it under the Plan during any year may be more or less than its actual expenses. For this reason, the Plan is characterized by the staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission as being of the “compensation” variety.
In the event that the Plan is terminated or not continued, no distribution or servicing fees (other than current amounts accrued but not yet paid) would be owed by the Portfolio to the Distributor.
The Plan also provides that the Adviser may use its own resources to finance the distribution of the Portfolio’s shares.
NOTE D: Investment Transactions
Purchases and sales of investment securities (excluding short-term investments) for the six months ended June 30, 2012 were as follows:
| | | | | | | | |
| | Purchases | | | Sales | |
Investment securities (excluding U.S. government securities) | | $ | 40,596,643 | | | $ | 54,488,119 | |
U.S. government securities | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
14
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
The cost of investments for federal income tax purposes was substantially the same as the cost for financial reporting purposes. Accordingly, gross unrealized appreciation and unrealized depreciation (excluding foreign currency transactions) are as follows:
| | | | |
Gross unrealized appreciation | | $ | 17,935,464 | |
Gross unrealized depreciation | | | (7,851,836 | ) |
| | | | |
Net unrealized appreciation | | $ | 10,083,628 | |
| | | | |
1. Derivative Financial Instruments
The Portfolio may use derivatives in an effort to earn income and enhance returns, to replace more traditional direct investments, to obtain exposure to otherwise inaccessible markets (collectively, “investment purposes”), or to hedge or adjust the risk profile of its portfolio.
The principal type of derivatives utilized by the Portfolio, as well as the methods in which they may be used are:
| • | | Forward Currency Exchange Contracts |
The Portfolio may enter into forward currency exchange contracts in order to hedge its exposure to changes in foreign currency exchange rates on its foreign portfolio holdings, to hedge certain firm purchase and sale commitments denominated in foreign currencies and for non-hedging purposes as a means of making direct investments in foreign currencies, as described below under “Currency Transactions”.
A forward currency exchange contract is a commitment to purchase or sell a foreign currency at a future date at a negotiated forward rate. The gain or loss arising from the difference between the original contract and the closing of such contract would be included in net realized gain or loss on foreign currency transactions. Fluctuations in the value of open forward currency exchange contracts are recorded for financial reporting purposes as unrealized appreciation and/or depreciation by the Portfolio. Risks may arise from the potential inability of a counterparty to meet the terms of a contract and from unanticipated movements in the value of a foreign currency relative to the U.S. dollar. The face or contract amount, in U.S. dollars reflects the total exposure the Portfolio has in that particular currency contract.
During the six months ended June 30, 2012, the Portfolio held forward currency exchange contracts for hedging and non-hedging purposes.
Documentation governing the Portfolio’s OTC derivatives may contain provisions for early termination of such transaction in the event the net assets of the Portfolio decline below specific levels set forth in the documentation (“net asset contingent features”). If these levels are triggered, the Portfolio’s counterparty has the right to terminate such transaction and require the Portfolio to pay or receive a settlement amount in connection with the terminated transaction. As of June 30, 2012, the Portfolio had OTC derivatives with contingent features in net liability positions in the amount of $241,085. If a trigger event had occurred at June 30, 2012, for those derivatives in a net liability position, an amount of $241,085 would be required to be posted by the Portfolio.
At June 30, 2012, the Portfolio had entered into the following derivatives:
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Asset Derivatives | | | Liability Derivatives | |
Derivative Type | | Statement of Assets and Liabilities Location | | Fair Value | | | Statement of Assets and Liabilities Location | | Fair Value | |
Foreign exchange contracts | | Unrealized appreciation of forward currency exchange contracts | | $ | 1,091,651 | | | Unrealized depreciation of forward currency exchange contracts | | $ | 989,736 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total | | | | $ | 1,091,651 | | | | | $ | 989,736 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
15
| | |
INTERNATIONAL GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
The effect of derivative instruments on the statement of operations for the six months ended June 30, 2012:
| | | | | | | | | | |
Derivative Type | | Location of Gain or (Loss) on Derivatives | | Realized Gain or (Loss) on Derivatives | | | Change in Unrealized Appreciation or (Depreciation) | |
Foreign exchange contracts | | Net realized gain (loss) on foreign currency transactions; Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities | | $ | (804,057 | ) | | $ | (722,528 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Total | | | | $ | (804,057 | ) | | $ | (722,528 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | |
For the six months ended June 30, 2012, the average monthly principal amount of foreign currency exchange contracts was $112,061,309.
2. Currency Transactions
The Portfolio may invest in non-U.S. Dollar securities on a currency hedged or unhedged basis. The Portfolio may seek investment opportunities by taking long or short positions in currencies through the use of currency-related derivatives, including forward currency exchange contracts, futures and options on futures, swaps, and other options. The Portfolio may enter into transactions for investment opportunities when it anticipates that a foreign currency will appreciate or depreciate in value but securities denominated in that currency are not held by the Portfolio and do not present attractive investment opportunities. Such transactions may also be used when the Adviser believes that it may be more efficient than a direct investment in a foreign currency-denominated security. The Portfolio may also conduct currency exchange contracts on a spot basis (i.e., for cash at the spot rate prevailing in the currency exchange market for buying or selling currencies).
NOTE E: Securities Lending
The Portfolio may enter into securities lending transactions. Under the Portfolio’s securities lending program, all securities loans will be collateralized continually by cash. The Portfolio will be compensated for the loan from a portion of the net return from the income earned on cash collateral after a rebate is paid to the borrower (in some cases, this rebate may be a “negative rebate” or fee paid by the borrower to the Portfolio in connection with the loan), and payments for fees of the securities lending agent and for certain other administrative expenses. It is the policy of the Portfolio to receive collateral consisting of cash in an amount exceeding the value of the securities loaned. The Portfolio will have the right to call a loan and obtain the securities loaned at any time on notice to the borrower within the normal and customary settlement time for the securities. While the securities are on loan, the borrower is obligated to pay the Portfolio amounts equal to any income or other distributions from the securities. The Portfolio will not have the right to vote any securities during the existence of a loan, but will have the right to regain ownership of loaned securities in order to exercise voting or other ownership rights. The lending agent has agreed to indemnify the Portfolio in the case of default of any securities borrower. Collateral received and securities loaned are marked to market daily to ensure that the securities loaned are secured by collateral. The lending agent will invest the cash collateral received in AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves, an eligible money market vehicle, in accordance with the investment restrictions of the Portfolio, and as approved by the Fund’s Board of Directors. The collateral received on securities loaned is recorded as an asset as well as a corresponding liability in the statement of assets and liabilities. When the Portfolio lends securities, its investment performance will continue to reflect changes in the value of the securities loaned. At June 30, 2012, the Portfolio had securities on loan with a value of $3,779,752 and had received cash collateral which has been invested into AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves of $3,842,134. The cash collateral will be adjusted on the next business day after period end to maintain the required collateral amount. The Portfolio earned securities lending income of $76,236 and $5,558 from the borrowers and AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves, respectively, for the six months ended June 30, 2012; these amounts are reflected in the statement of operations. A principal risk of lending portfolio securities is that the borrower will fail to return the loaned securities upon termination of the loan and that the collateral will not be sufficient to replace the loaned securities. A summary of the Portfolio’s transactions in shares of AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves for the six months ended June 30, 2012 is as follows:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Market Value December 31, 2011 (000) | | | Purchases at Cost (000) | | | Sales Proceeds (000) | | | Market Value June 30, 2012 (000) | | | Dividend Income (000) | |
$ | 514 | | | $ | 48,631 | | | $ | 45,303 | | | $ | 3,842 | | | $ | 6 | |
16
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
NOTE F: Capital Stock
Each class consists of 500,000,000 authorized shares. Transactions in capital shares for each class were as follows:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | SHARES | | | | | AMOUNT | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | | | | | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | |
Class A | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Shares sold | | | 74,054 | | | | 280,915 | | | | | $ | 1,199,916 | | | $ | 4,924,201 | |
Shares issued in reinvestment of dividends | | | –0 | – | | | 183,771 | | | | | | –0 | – | | | 3,419,977 | |
Shares redeemed | | | (809,024 | ) | | | (1,296,842 | ) | | | | | (12,847,173 | ) | | | (22,010,446 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (734,970 | ) | | | (832,156 | ) | | | | $ | (11,647,257 | ) | | $ | (13,666,268 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class B | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Shares sold | | | 276,292 | | | | 598,049 | | | | | $ | 4,373,744 | | | $ | 10,061,521 | |
Shares issued in reinvestment of dividends | | | –0 | – | | | 103,398 | | | | | | –0 | – | | | 1,907,699 | |
Shares redeemed | | | (400,172 | ) | | | (900,547 | ) | | | | | (6,432,794 | ) | | | (15,326,620 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (123,880 | ) | | | (199,100 | ) | | | | $ | (2,059,050 | ) | | $ | (3,357,400 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
NOTE G: Risks Involved in Investing in the Portfolio
Foreign Securities Risk—Investing in securities of foreign companies or foreign governments involves special risks which include changes in foreign currency exchange rates and the possibility of future political and economic developments which could adversely affect the value of such securities. Moreover, securities of many foreign companies or foreign governments and their markets may be less liquid and their prices more volatile than those of comparable U.S. companies or of the U.S. government.
Currency Risk—This is the risk that changes in foreign currency exchange rates may negatively affect the value of the Portfolio’s investments or reduce the returns of the Portfolio. For example, the value of the Portfolio’s investments in foreign currency-denominated securities or currencies may decrease if the U.S. Dollar is strong (i.e., gaining value relative to other currencies) and other currencies are weak (i.e., losing value relative to the U.S. Dollar). Currency markets are generally not as regulated as securities markets. Independent of the Portfolio’s investments denominated in foreign currencies, the Portfolio’s positions in various foreign currencies may cause the Portfolio to experience investment losses due to the changes in exchange rates and interest rates.
Emerging Market Risk—Investments in emerging market countries may have more risk because the markets are less developed and less liquid, and because these investments may be subject to increased economic, political, regulatory and other uncertainties.
Capitalization Risk—Investments in small- and mid-capitalization companies may be more volatile than investments in large-capitalization companies. Investments in small-capitalization companies may have additional risks because these companies have limited product lines, markets or financial resources.
Derivatives Risk—The Portfolio may enter into derivative transactions such as forwards, options, futures and swaps. Derivatives may be illiquid, difficult to price, and leveraged so that small changes may produce disproportionate losses for the Portfolio, and subject to counterparty risk to a greater degree than more traditional investments. Derivatives may result in significant losses, including losses that are far greater than the value of the derivatives reflected in the statement of assets and liabilities.
Indemnification Risk—In the ordinary course of business, the Portfolio enters into contracts that contain a variety of indemnifications. The Portfolio’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown. However, the Portfolio has not had prior claims or losses pursuant to these indemnification provisions and expects the risk of loss thereunder to be remote. Therefore, the Portfolio has not accrued any liability in connection with these indemnification provisions.
NOTE H: Joint Credit Facility
A number of open-end mutual funds managed by the Adviser, including the Portfolio, participate in a $140 million revolving credit facility (the “Facility”) intended to provide short-term financing, if necessary, subject to certain restrictions in connection with abnormal redemption activity. Commitment fees related to the Facility are paid by the participating funds and are included in miscellaneous expenses in the statement of operations. The Portfolio did not utilize the Facility during the six months ended June 30, 2012.
17
| | |
INTERNATIONAL GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
NOTE I: Distributions to Shareholders
The tax character of distributions to be paid for the year ending December 31, 2012 will be determined at the end of the current fiscal year. The tax character of distributions paid during the fiscal years ended December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010 were as follows:
| | | | | | | | |
| | 2011 | | | 2010 | |
Distributions paid from: | | | | | | | | |
Ordinary income | | $ | 5,327,676 | | | $ | 3,746,516 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total taxable distributions | | | 5,327,676 | | | | 3,746,516 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total distributions paid | | $ | 5,327,676 | | | $ | 3,746,516 | |
| | | | | | | | |
As of December 31, 2011, the components of accumulated earnings/(deficit) on a tax basis were as follows:
| | | | |
Undistributed ordinary income | | $ | 2,280,548 | |
Accumulated capital and other losses | | | (55,931,156 | )(a) |
Unrealized appreciation/(depreciation) | | | 1,762,323 | (b) |
| | | | |
Total accumulated earnings/(deficit) | | $ | (51,888,285 | ) |
| | | | |
(a) | | On December 31, 2011, the Portfolio had a net capital loss carryforward of $49,677,815. During the fiscal year, the Portfolio utilized $7,463,081 of capital loss carryforwards to offset current year net realized gains. At December 31, 2011, the Portfolio had a post-October short-term capital loss deferral of $4,868,647 and a post-October long-term capital loss deferral of $1,384,694 which are deemed to arise on January 1, 2012. |
(b) | | The differences between book-basis and tax-basis unrealized appreciation/(depreciation) are attributable primarily to the tax deferral of losses on wash sales, the tax treatment of passive foreign investment companies (PFICs), and the realization for tax purposes of gains/losses on certain derivative instruments. |
For tax purposes, net capital losses may be carried over to offset future capital gains, if any. Under the Regulated Investment Company Modernization Act of 2010, funds are permitted to carry forward capital losses incurred in taxable years beginning after December 22, 2010 for an indefinite period. These post-enactment capital losses must be utilized prior to the pre-enactment capital losses, which are subject to expiration. Post-enactment capital loss carryforwards will retain their character as either short-term or long-term capital losses rather than being considered short-term as under previous regulation.
As of December 31, 2011, the Portfolio had a net capital loss carryforward of $49,677,815 which will expire as follows:
| | | | | | | | |
Short-Term Amount | | | Long-Term Amount | | Expiration | |
| $ 7,176,740 | | | n/a | | | 2016 | |
| 42,501,075 | | | n/a | | | 2017 | |
NOTE J: Recent Accounting Pronouncement
In December 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued an Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) related to disclosures about offsetting assets and liabilities in financial statements. The amendments in this update require an entity to disclose both gross and net information for derivatives and other financial instruments that are either offset in the statement of assets and liabilities or subject to an enforceable master netting arrangement or similar agreement. The ASU is effective during interim or annual reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2013. At this time, management is evaluating the implication of this ASU and its impact on the financial statements has not been determined.
NOTE K: Subsequent Events
Management has evaluated subsequent events for possible recognition or disclosure in the financial statements through the date the financial statements are issued. Management has determined that there are no material events that would require disclosure in the Portfolio’s financial statements through this date.
18
| | |
|
INTERNATIONAL GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Selected Data For A Share Of Capital Stock Outstanding Throughout Each Period
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | CLASS A | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, | |
| | | 2011 | | | 2010 | | | 2009 | | | 2008 | | | 2007 | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | | | $15.08 | | | | $18.42 | | | | $16.66 | | | | $12.52 | | | | $24.89 | | | | $30.37 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Income From Investment Operations | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income (a) | | | .17 | | | | .26 | | | | .18 | | | | .22 | | | | .38 | | | | .20 | |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | .30 | | | | (3.08 | ) | | | 1.92 | | | | 4.59 | | | | (12.35 | ) | | | 5.16 | |
Contributions from Adviser | | | –0 | – | | | .00 | (b) | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | .00 | (b) | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) in net asset value from operations | | | .47 | | | | (2.82 | ) | | | 2.10 | | | | 4.81 | | | | (11.97 | ) | | | 5.36 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Less: Dividends and Distributions | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Dividends from net investment income | | | –0 | – | | | (.52 | ) | | | (.34 | ) | | | (.67 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | (.56 | ) |
Distributions from net realized gain on investment transactions | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | (.40 | ) | | | (10.28 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total dividends and distributions | | | –0 | – | | | (.52 | ) | | | (.34 | ) | | | (.67 | ) | | | (.40 | ) | | | (10.84 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net asset value, end of period | | | $15.55 | | | | $15.08 | | | | $18.42 | | | | $16.66 | | | | $12.52 | | | | $24.89 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Return | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total investment return based on net asset value (c) | | | 3.12 | % | | | (15.85 | )% | | | 12.89 | % | | | 39.58 | % | | | (48.85 | )%* | | | 18.13 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Ratios/Supplemental Data | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net assets, end of period (000’s omitted) | | | $82,289 | | | | $90,912 | | | | $126,339 | | | | $124,335 | | | | $80,458 | | | | $165,642 | |
Ratio to average net assets of: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Expenses | | | .97 | %(d) | | | .94 | % | | | .93 | %(e) | | | .99 | % | | | .98 | % | | | 1.21 | %(e) |
Net investment income | | | 2.15 | %(d) | | | 1.53 | % | | | 1.08 | %(e) | | | 1.55 | % | | | 1.93 | % | | | .66 | %(e) |
Portfolio turnover rate | | | 27 | % | | | 66 | % | | | 104 | % | | | 118 | % | | | 90 | % | | | 126 | % |
See footnote summary on page 20.
19
| | |
INTERNATIONAL GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Selected Data For A Share Of Capital Stock Outstanding Throughout Each Period
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | CLASS B | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, | |
| | | 2011 | | | 2010 | | | 2009 | | | 2008 | | | 2007 | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | | | $14.93 | | | | $18.24 | | | | $16.51 | | | | $12.41 | | | | $24.73 | | | | $30.20 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Income From Investment Operations | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income (a) | | | .15 | | | | .22 | | | | .14 | | | | .18 | | | | .31 | | | | .13 | |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | .29 | | | | (3.06 | ) | | | 1.89 | | | | 4.55 | | | | (12.23 | ) | | | 5.11 | |
Contributions from Adviser | | | –0 | – | | | .00 | (b) | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | .00 | (b) | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) in net asset value from operations | | | .44 | | | | (2.84 | ) | | | 2.03 | | | | 4.73 | | | | (11.92 | ) | | | 5.24 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Less: Dividends and Distributions | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Dividends from net investment income | | | –0 | – | | | (.47 | ) | | | (.30 | ) | | | (.63 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | (.43 | ) |
Distributions from net realized gain on investment transactions | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | (.40 | ) | | | (10.28 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total dividends and distributions | | | –0 | – | | | (.47 | ) | | | (.30 | ) | | | (.63 | ) | | | (.40 | ) | | | (10.71 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net asset value, end of period | | | $15.37 | | | | $14.93 | | | | $18.24 | | | | $16.51 | | | | $12.41 | | | | $24.73 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Return | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total investment return based on net asset value (c) | | | 2.95 | % | | | (16.04 | )% | | | 12.61 | % | | | 39.24 | % | | | (48.96 | )%* | | | 17.78 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Ratios/Supplemental Data | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net assets, end of period (000’s omitted) | | | $58,140 | | | | $58,322 | | | | $74,879 | | | | $72,604 | | | | $45,309 | | | | $57,633 | |
Ratio to average net assets of: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Expenses | | | 1.22 | %(d) | | | 1.19 | % | | | 1.18 | %(e) | | | 1.24 | % | | | 1.23 | % | | | 1.45 | %(e) |
Net investment income | | | 1.91 | %(d) | | | 1.27 | % | | | .83 | %(e) | | | 1.28 | % | | | 1.63 | % | | | .45 | %(e) |
Portfolio turnover rate | | | 27 | % | | | 66 | % | | | 104 | % | | | 118 | % | | | 90 | % | | | 126 | % |
(a) | | Based on average shares outstanding. |
(b) | | Amount is less than $.005. |
(c) | | Total investment return is calculated assuming an initial investment made at the net asset value at the beginning of the period, reinvestment of all dividends and distributions at net asset value during the period, and redemption on the last day of the period. Total return does not reflect (i) insurance company’s separate account related expense charges and (ii) the deductions of taxes that a shareholder would pay on Portfolio distributions or the redemption of Portfolio shares. Total investment return calculated for a period of less than one year is not annualized. |
(e) | | The ratio includes expenses attributable to costs of proxy solicitation. |
* | | Includes the impact of proceeds received and credited to the Portfolio resulting from class action settlements, which enhanced the Portfolio’s performance for the year ended December 31, 2008 by 0.01%. |
See notes to financial statements.
20
| | |
| | |
INTERNATIONAL GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
CONTINUANCE DISCLOSURE | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
INFORMATION REGARDING THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE PORTFOLIO’S ADVISORY AGREEMENT
The disinterested directors (the “directors”) of AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund, Inc. (the “Fund”) unanimously approved the continuance of the Fund’s Advisory Agreement with the Adviser in respect of AllianceBernstein International Growth Portfolio (the “Portfolio”) at a meeting held on May 1-3, 2012.
Prior to approval of the continuance of the Advisory Agreement, the directors had requested from the Adviser, and received and evaluated, extensive materials. They reviewed the proposed continuance of the Advisory Agreement with the Adviser and with experienced counsel who are independent of the Adviser, who advised on the relevant legal standards. The directors also reviewed an independent evaluation prepared by the Fund’s Senior Officer (who is also the Fund’s Independent Compliance Officer) of the reasonableness of the advisory fee in the Advisory Agreement, in which the Senior Officer concluded that the contractual fee for the Portfolio was reasonable. The directors also discussed the proposed continuance in private sessions with counsel and the Fund’s Senior Officer.
The directors considered their knowledge of the nature and quality of the services provided by the Adviser to the Portfolio gained from their experience as directors or trustees of most of the registered investment companies advised by the Adviser, their overall confidence in the Adviser’s integrity and competence they have gained from that experience, the Adviser’s initiative in identifying and raising potential issues with the directors and its responsiveness, frankness and attention to concerns raised by the directors in the past, including the Adviser’s willingness to consider and implement organizational and operational changes designed to improve investment results and the services provided to the AllianceBernstein Funds. The directors noted that they have four regular meetings each year, at each of which they receive presentations from the Adviser on the investment results of the Portfolio and review extensive materials and information presented by the Adviser.
The directors also considered all other factors they believed relevant, including the specific matters discussed below. In their deliberations, the directors did not identify any particular information that was all-important or controlling, and different directors may have attributed different weights to the various factors. The directors determined that the selection of the Adviser to manage the Portfolio and the overall arrangements between the Portfolio and the Adviser, as provided in the Advisory Agreement, including the advisory fee, were fair and reasonable in light of the services performed, expenses incurred and such other matters as the directors considered relevant in the exercise of their business judgment. The material factors and conclusions that formed the basis for the directors’ determinations included the following:
Nature, Extent and Quality of Services Provided
The directors considered the scope and quality of services provided by the Adviser under the Advisory Agreement, including the quality of the investment research capabilities of the Adviser and the other resources it has dedicated to performing services for the Portfolio. They also noted the professional experience and qualifications of the Portfolio’s portfolio management team and other senior personnel of the Adviser. The directors also considered that the Advisory Agreement provides that the Portfolio will reimburse the Adviser for the cost to it of providing certain clerical, accounting, administrative and other services provided at the Portfolio’s request by employees of the Adviser or its affiliates. Requests for these reimbursements are approved by the directors on a quarterly basis and, to the extent requested and paid, result in a higher rate of total compensation from the Portfolio to the Adviser than the fee rate stated in the Portfolio’s Advisory Agreement. The directors noted that the methodology used to determine the reimbursement amounts had been reviewed by an independent consultant retained by the Fund’s Senior Officer. The quality of administrative and other services, including the Adviser’s role in coordinating the activities of the Portfolio’s other service providers, also were considered. The directors concluded that, overall, they were satisfied with the nature, extent and quality of services provided to the Portfolio under the Advisory Agreement.
Costs of Services Provided and Profitability
The directors reviewed a schedule of the revenues, expenses and related notes indicating the profitability of the Portfolio to the Adviser for calendar years 2010 and 2011 that had been prepared with an expense allocation methodology arrived at in consultation with an independent consultant retained by the Fund’s Senior Officer. The directors reviewed the assumptions and methods of allocation used by the Adviser in preparing fund-specific profitability data and noted that there are a number of potentially acceptable allocation methodologies for information of this type. The directors noted that the profitability information reflected all revenues and expenses of the Adviser’s relationship with the Portfolio, including those relating to its subsidiaries which provide transfer agency, distribution and brokerage services to the Portfolio. The directors recognized that it is difficult to make comparisons of profitability of the Advisory Agreement with fund advisory contracts for unaffiliated funds because comparative information is not generally publicly available and is affected by numerous factors. The directors
21
| | |
INTERNATIONAL GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
CONTINUANCE DISCLOSURE | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
focused on the profitability of the Adviser’s relationship with the Portfolio before taxes and distribution expenses. The directors concluded that they were satisfied that the Adviser’s level of profitability from its relationship with the Portfolio was not unreasonable.
Fall-Out Benefits
The directors considered the other benefits to the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationships with the Portfolio, including but not limited to benefits relating to soft dollar arrangements (whereby the Adviser receives brokerage and research services from brokers that execute transactions for certain clients, including the Portfolio); 12b-1 fees and sales charges received by the Fund’s principal underwriter (which is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Adviser) in respect of the Portfolio’s Class B shares; transfer agency fees paid by the Portfolio to a wholly owned subsidiary of the Adviser; and brokerage commissions paid by the Portfolio to brokers affiliated with the Adviser. The directors recognized that the Adviser’s profitability would be somewhat lower without these benefits. The directors also understood that the Adviser also might derive reputational and other benefits from its association with the Portfolio.
Investment Results
In addition to the information reviewed by the directors in connection with the meeting, the directors receive detailed performance information for the Portfolio at each regular Board meeting during the year. The directors noted that the Portfolio is a clone of another fund managed by the Adviser (the “Corresponding Fund”) and is managed to track the investment performance of its Corresponding Fund, although investment results may differ between the Portfolio and its Corresponding Fund due to differences in their expense ratios and other factors. At the May 2012 meeting, the directors reviewed information prepared by Lipper showing the performance of the Class A Shares of the Portfolio as compared with that of a group of similar funds selected by Lipper (the “Performance Group”) and as compared with that of a broader array of funds selected by Lipper (the “Performance Universe”), and information prepared by the Adviser showing performance of the Class A Shares as compared with the Morgan Stanley Capital International (MSCI) All Country (AC) World (ex US) Index (Net) (the “MSCI AC World Index”) and the MSCI World (ex US) Index (Net) (the “MSCI World Index”), in each case for the 1-, 3-, 5- and 10-year periods ended February 29, 2012, and (in the case of comparisons with the MSCI World Index) the since inception period (September 1994 inception). The directors noted that the Portfolio was in the 5th quintile of the Performance Group and 4th quintile of the Performance Universe for the 1- and 5-year periods, in the 3rd quintile of the Performance Group and the Performance Universe for the 3-year period, and in the 2nd quintile of the Performance Group and the Performance Universe for the 10-year period. The Portfolio outperformed the MSCI AC World Index in the 1- and 10-year periods and lagged that index in the 3- and 5-year periods. It outperformed the MSCI World Index in the 1-, 3- and 10-year and the since inception periods and essentially matched that index in the 5-year period. The directors noted that all reference points showed negative results in the 1- and 5-year periods. The directors also reviewed performance information for periods ended March 31, 2012 (for which the data was not limited to Class A Shares), and noted that in the 3-month period the Portfolio had lagged the Lipper VA International Growth Funds Average and outperformed both indices. Based on their review, and their discussion with the Adviser of the reasons for the Portfolio’s performance, the directors retained confidence in the Adviser’s ability to manage the Portfolio. The directors determined to continue to monitor the Portfolio’s performance closely.
Advisory Fees and Other Expenses
The directors considered the advisory fee rate paid by the Portfolio to the Adviser and information prepared by Lipper concerning advisory fee rates paid by other funds in the same Lipper category as the Portfolio at a common asset level. The directors recognized that it is difficult to make comparisons of advisory fees because there are variations in the services that are included in the fees paid by other funds.
The directors also considered the fees the Adviser charges non-fund clients pursuing a substantially similar investment style. For this purpose, they reviewed the relevant fee information from the Adviser’s Form ADV and the evaluation from the Fund’s Senior Officer. The directors noted that the institutional fee schedule started at a higher fee rate than the Portfolio’s starting fee rate, but had more breakpoints starting at lower asset levels. As a result, the application of the institutional fee schedule to the level of assets of the Portfolio would result in a lower fee rate than that being paid by the Portfolio. The directors noted that the Adviser may, in some cases, agree to fee rates with large institutional clients that are lower than those reviewed by the directors and that they had previously discussed with the Adviser its policies in respect of such arrangements. The directors noted that the advisory fee schedule for the Portfolio is the same as that for its Corresponding Fund.
22
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
The Adviser reviewed with the directors the significantly greater scope of the services it provides to the Portfolio relative to institutional clients. The Adviser also noted that because mutual funds are constantly issuing and redeeming shares, they are more difficult to manage than an institutional account, where the assets tend to be relatively stable. In light of the substantial differences in services rendered by the Adviser to institutional clients as compared to funds such as the Portfolio, the directors considered these fee comparisons inapt and did not place significant weight on them in their deliberations.
The directors also considered the total expense ratio of the Class A shares of the Portfolio in comparison to the fees and expenses of funds within two comparison groups created by Lipper: an Expense Group and an Expense Universe. Lipper described an Expense Group as a representative sample of funds similar to the Portfolio and an Expense Universe as a broader group, consisting of all funds in the investment classification/objective with a similar load type as the Portfolio. The Class A expense ratio of the Portfolio was based on the Portfolio’s latest fiscal year. The directors noted that it was likely that the expense ratios of some of the other funds in the Portfolio’s Lipper category were lowered by waivers or reimbursements by those funds’ investment advisers, which in some cases might be voluntary or temporary. The directors view the expense ratio information as relevant to their evaluation of the Adviser’s services because the Adviser is responsible for coordinating services provided to the Portfolio by others.
The directors noted that, at the Portfolio’s current size, its contractual effective advisory fee rate of 75 basis points, plus the 3 basis point impact of the administrative expense reimbursement in the latest fiscal year, was lower than the Expense Group median. The directors also noted that the Portfolio’s total expense ratio was lower than the Expense Group and the Expense Universe medians. The directors concluded that the Portfolio’s expense ratio was satisfactory.
Economies of Scale
The directors noted that the advisory fee schedule for the Portfolio contains breakpoints that reduce the fee rates on assets above specified levels. The directors took into consideration prior presentations by an independent consultant on economies of scale in the mutual fund industry and for the AllianceBernstein Funds, and by the Adviser concerning certain of its views on economies of scale. The directors also had requested and received from the Adviser certain updates on economies of scale at the May 2012 meetings. The directors believe that economies of scale may be realized (if at all) by the Adviser across a variety of products and services, and not only in respect of a single fund. The directors noted that there is no established methodology for establishing breakpoints that give effect to the fund-specific services provided by a fund’s adviser and to the economies of scale that an adviser may realize in its overall mutual fund business or those components of it which directly or indirectly affect a fund’s operations. The directors observed that in the mutual fund industry as a whole, as well as among funds similar to the Portfolio, there is no uniformity or pattern in the fees and asset levels at which breakpoints (if any) apply. The directors also noted that the advisory agreements for many funds do not have breakpoints at all. Having taken these factors into account, the directors concluded that the Portfolio’s shareholders would benefit from a sharing of economies of scale in the event the Portfolio’s net assets exceed a breakpoint in the future.
23
| | |
| | |
INTERNATIONAL GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
THE FOLLOWING IS NOT PART OF THE SHAREHOLDER REPORT OR THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
SUMMARY OF SENIOR OFFICER’S EVALUATION OF INVESTMENT ADVISORY AGREEMENT1
The following is a summary of the evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement between AllianceBernstein L.P. (the “Adviser”) and the AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund (the “Fund”), in respect of AllianceBernstein International Growth Portfolio (the “Portfolio”).2 The evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement was prepared by Philip L. Kirstein, the Senior Officer of the Fund, for the Directors of the Fund, as required by a September 2004 agreement between the Adviser and the New York State Attorney General (the “NYAG”). The Senior Officer’s evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement is not meant to diminish the responsibility or authority of the Board of Directors of the Fund to perform its duties pursuant to Section 15 of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “40 Act”) and applicable state law. The purpose of the summary is to provide shareholders with a synopsis of the independent evaluation of the reasonableness of the advisory fees proposed to be paid by the Portfolio which was provided to the Directors in connection with their review of the proposed approval of the continuance of the Investment Advisory Agreement. The Senior Officer’s evaluation considered the following factors:
| 1. | Advisory fees charged to institutional and other clients of the Adviser for like services; |
| 2. | Advisory fees charged by other mutual fund companies for like services; |
| 3. | Costs to the Adviser and its affiliates of supplying services pursuant to the advisory agreement, excluding any intra-corporate profit; |
| 4. | Profit margins of the Adviser and its affiliates from supplying such services; |
| 5. | Possible economies of scale as the Portfolio grows larger; and |
| 6. | Nature and quality of the Adviser’s services including the performance of the Portfolio. |
These factors, with the exception of the first factor, are generally referred to as the “Gartenberg factors,” which were articulated by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in 1982. Gartenberg v. Merrill Lynch Asset Management, Inc., 694 F. 2d 923 (2d Cir. 1982). The first factor is an additional factor required to be considered by the AoD. On March 30, 2010, the Supreme Court held the Gartenberg decision was correct in its basic formulation of what §36(b) requires: to face liability under §36(b), “an investment adviser must charge a fee that is so disproportionately large that it bears no reasonable relationship to the services rendered and could not have been the product of arm’s length bargaining.” Jones v. Harris Associates L.P., 130 S. Ct. 1418 (2010). In the Jones decision, the Court stated the Gartenberg approach fully incorporates the correct understanding of fiduciary duty within the context of section 36(b) and noted with approval that “Gartenberg insists that all relevant circumstances be taken into account” and “uses the range of fees that might result from arm’s-length bargaining as the benchmark for reviewing challenged fees.”
PORTFOLIO ADVISORY FEES, NET ASSETS & EXPENSE RATIOS
The Adviser proposed that the Portfolio pay the advisory fee set forth in the table below for receiving the services to be provided pursuant to the Investment Advisory Agreement. The fee schedule below, implemented in January 2004 in consideration of the Adviser’s settlement with the NYAG in December 2003, is based on a master schedule that contemplates eight categories of funds with almost all funds in each category having the same advisory fee schedule.
| | | | | | | | |
Category | | Advisory Fee Based on % of Average Daily Net Assets | | Net Assets 3/31/12 ($MIL) | | | Portfolio |
International | | 75 bp on 1st $2.5 billion 65 bp on next $2.5 billion 60 bp on the balance | | $ | 160.2 | | | International Growth Portfolio |
The Adviser is reimbursed as specified in the Investment Advisory Agreement for certain clerical, legal, accounting, administrative and other services provided to the Portfolio. During the Portfolio’s most recently completed fiscal year, the Adviser received $60,911 (0.03% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets) for such services.
1 | | The information in the fee summary was completed on April 19, 2012 and discussed with the Board of Directors on May 1-3, 2012. |
2 | | Future references to the Fund and the Portfolio do not include “AllianceBernstein.” References in the fee summary pertaining to performance and expense ratio rankings refer to the Class A shares of the Portfolio. |
24
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Set forth below are the Portfolio’s total expense ratios for the most recently completed fiscal year:
| | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Total Expense Ratio | | Fiscal Year |
International Growth Portfolio | | Class A 0.94% | | December 31 |
| | Class B 1.19% | | |
I. ADVISORY FEES CHARGED TO INSTITUTIONAL AND OTHER CLIENTS
The advisory fees charged to investment companies which the Adviser manages and sponsors are normally higher than those charged to similar sized institutional accounts, including pension plans and sub-advised investment companies. The fee differential reflects, among other things, different services provided to such clients, and different liabilities assumed. Services provided by the Adviser to the Portfolio that are not provided to non-investment company clients and sub-advised investment companies include providing office space and personnel to serve as Fund Officers, who among other responsibilities make the certifications required under the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002, and coordinating with and monitoring the Portfolio’s third party service providers such as Fund counsel, auditors, custodians, transfer agents and pricing services. The accounting, administrative, legal and compliance requirements for the Portfolio are more costly than those for institutional assets due to the greater complexities and time required for investment companies, although as previously noted, the Adviser is reimbursed for providing such services. Also, retail mutual funds managed by the Adviser are widely held. Servicing the Portfolio’s investors is more time consuming and labor intensive compared to institutional clients since the Adviser needs to communicate with a more extensive network of financial intermediaries and shareholders. The Adviser also believes that it incurs substantial entrepreneurial risk when offering a new mutual fund, since establishing a new mutual fund requires a large upfront investment, and it may take a long time for the fund to achieve profitability since the fund must be priced to scale from inception in order to be competitive and assets are acquired one account at a time. In addition, managing the cash flow of an investment company may be more difficult than managing that of a stable pool of assets, such as an institutional account with little cash movement in either direction, particularly, if a fund is in net redemption and the Adviser is frequently forced to sell securities to raise cash for redemptions. However, managing a fund with positive cash flow may be easier at times than managing a stable pool of assets. In recent years, investment advisers have been sued by institutional clients and have suffered reputational damage both by the attendant publicity and outcomes other than complete victories. Accordingly, the legal and reputational risks associated with institutional accounts are greater than previously thought, although still not equal to those related to the mutual fund industry.
Notwithstanding the Adviser’s view that managing an investment company is not comparable to managing other institutional accounts because the services provided are different, the Supreme Court has indicated consideration should be given to the advisory fees charged to institutional accounts that have a substantially similar investment style as the Portfolio.3 In addition to the AllianceBernstein institutional fee schedule, set forth below is what would have been the effective advisory fee of the Portfolio had the AllianceBernstein institutional fee schedule been applicable to the Portfolio versus the Portfolio’s advisory fee based on March 31, 2012 net assets:4
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Net Assets 3/31/12 ($MIL) | | AllianceBernstein Institutional Fee Schedule | | Effective AB Inst. Adv. Fee | | | Portfolio Advisory Fee | |
International Growth Portfolio | | $160.2 | | International Research Growth AC Schedule | | | 0.575 | % | | | 0.750 | % |
| | | | 85 bp on first $25m | | | | | | | | |
| | | | 65 bp on next $25m | | | | | | | | |
| | | | 55 bp on next $50m | | | | | | | | |
| | | | 45 bp on the balance | | | | | | | | |
| | | | Minimum account size $25m | | | | | | | | |
3 | | The Supreme Court stated that “courts may give such comparisons the weight that they merit in light of the similarities and differences between the services that the clients in question require, but the courts must be wary of inapt comparisons.” Among the significant differences the Supreme Court noted that may exist between services provided to mutual funds and institutional accounts are “higher marketing costs.” Jones v. Harris at 1428. |
4 | | The Adviser has indicated that with respect to institutional accounts with assets greater than $300 million, it will negotiate a fee schedule. Discounts that are negotiated vary based upon each client relationship. |
25
| | |
INTERNATIONAL GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
The Adviser also manages AllianceBernstein International Growth Fund, Inc. (“International Growth Fund, Inc.”), a retail mutual fund, which has a substantially similar investment style as the Portfolio. Set forth below is the fee schedule of International Growth Fund, Inc. and what would have been the effective advisory fee of the Portfolio had the fee schedule of the retail mutual fund been applicable to the Portfolio:5
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | AllianceBernstein Mutual Fund | | Fee Schedule | | ABMF Effective Fee | | | Portfolio Advisory Fee | |
International Growth Portfolio | | International Growth Fund, Inc. | | 0.75% on first $2.5 billion 0.65% on next $2.5 billion 0.60% on the balance | | | 0.750% | | | | 0.750% | |
The Adviser represented that it does not sub-advise any registered investment company with a substantially similar investment style as the Portfolio.
II. MANAGEMENT FEES CHARGED BY OTHER MUTUAL FUND COMPANIES FOR LIKE SERVICES.
Lipper, Inc. (“Lipper”), an analytical service that is not affiliated with the Adviser, compared the fees charged to the Portfolio with fees charged to other investment companies for similar services offered by other investment advisers.6 Lipper’s analysis included the comparison of the Portfolio’s contractual management fee, estimated at the approximate current asset level of the Portfolio, to the median of the Portfolio’s Lipper Expense Group (“EG”) and the Portfolio’s contractual management fee ranking.7
Lipper describes an EG as a representative sample of comparable funds. Lipper’s standard methodology for screening funds to be included in an EG entails the consideration of several fund criteria, including fund type, investment classification/objective, load type and similar 12b-1/non-12b-1 service fees, asset (size) comparability, expense components and attributes. An EG will typically consist of seven to twenty funds.
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Contractual Management Fee8 | | | Lipper Exp. Group Median (%) | | | Rank | |
International Growth Portfolio | | | 0.750 | | | | 0.924 | | | | 2/12 | |
Lipper also analyzed the Portfolio’s most recently completed fiscal year total expense ratio in comparison to the Portfolio’s EG and Lipper Expense Universe (“EU”). The EU9 is a broader group compared to the EG, consisting of all funds that have the same investment classification/objective and load type as the subject Portfolio.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Expense Ratio (%)10 | | | Lipper Exp. Group Median (%) | | | Lipper Group Rank | | | Lipper Exp. Universe Median (%) | | | Lipper Universe Rank | |
International Growth Portfolio | | | 0.941 | | | | 1.083 | | | | 3/12 | | | | 1.001 | | | | 13/36 | |
Based on this analysis, the Portfolio has a more favorable ranking on a management fee basis than on a total expense ratio basis.
5 | | The retail mutual fund was also affected by the settlement between the Adviser and the NYAG. As a result, the Portfolio has the same breakpoints in its advisory fee schedule as the retail mutual fund. |
6 | | The Supreme Court cautioned against accepting mutual fund fee comparisons without careful scrutiny since “these comparisons are problematic because these fees, like those challenged, may not be the product of the negotiations conducted at arm’s-length.” Jones v. Harris at 1429. |
7 | | The contractual management fee is calculated by Lipper using the Portfolio’s contractual management fee rate at a hypothetical asset level. The hypothetical asset level is based on the combined net assets of all classes of the Portfolio, rounded up to the next $25 million. Lipper’s total expense ratio information is based on the most recent annual report except as otherwise noted. A ranking of “1” would mean that the Portfolio had the lowest effective fee rate in the Lipper peer group. |
8 | | The contractual management fee does not reflect any expense reimbursements made by the Portfolio to the Adviser for certain clerical, legal, accounting, administrative and other services. |
9 | | Except for asset (size) comparability, Lipper uses the same criteria for selecting an EG when selecting an EU. Unlike the EG, the EU allows for the same adviser to be represented by more than just one fund. |
10 | | Most recently completed fiscal year end Class A total expense ratio. |
26
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
III. COSTS TO THE ADVISER AND ITS AFFILIATES OF SUPPLYING SERVICES PURSUANT TO THE ADVISORY FEE ARRANGEMENT, EXCLUDING ANY INTRA-CORPORATE PROFIT.
The Adviser utilizes two profitability reporting systems, which operate independently but are aligned with each other, to estimate the Adviser’s profitability in connection with investment advisory services provided to the Portfolio. The Senior Officer has retained a consultant to provide independent advice regarding the alignment of the two profitability systems as well as the methodologies and allocations utilized by both profitability systems.
IV. PROFIT MARGINS OF THE ADVISER AND ITS AFFILIATES FOR SUPPLYING SUCH SERVICES.
The Portfolio’s profitability information, prepared by the Adviser for the Board of Directors, was reviewed by the Senior Officer and the consultant. The Adviser’s profitability from providing investment advisory services to the Portfolio increased during calendar year 2011, relative to 2010.
In addition to the Adviser’s direct profits from managing the Portfolio, certain of the Adviser’s affiliates have business relationships with the Portfolio and may earn a profit from providing other services to the Portfolio. The courts have referred to this type of business opportunity as “fall-out benefits” to the Adviser and indicated that such benefits should be factored into the evaluation of the total relationship between the Portfolio and the Adviser. Neither case law nor common business practice precludes the Adviser’s affiliates from earning a reasonable profit on this type of relationship provided the affiliates’ charges and services are competitive. These affiliates provide transfer agent, distribution and brokerage related services to the Portfolio and receive transfer agent fees, Rule 12b-1 payments, and brokerage commissions. In addition, the Adviser benefits from soft dollar arrangements which offset expenses the Adviser would otherwise incur.
The Portfolio has adopted a distribution plan for Class B shares pursuant to Rule 12b-1 under the 40 Act. Under the distribution plan, the Portfolio pays distribution and servicing fees to its principal underwriter, AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (“ABI”), at an annual rate of up to 0.50% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The current annual rate that the Portfolio pays to ABI for 12b-1 fees is 0.25%. During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011, AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (“ABI”), the Portfolio’s distributor and an affiliate of the Adviser, received $169,758 in Rule 12b-1 fees.
During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011, the Adviser incurred distribution expenses in the amount of $619,002 in connection with activities primarily intended to result in the sale of the Portfolio’s Class B shares. This amount includes the 12b-1 fees paid by the Portfolio to the adviser.
Financial intermediaries, such as insurers, market and sell shares of the Portfolio and typically receive compensation from ABI, the Advisers and/or the Portfolio for selling shares of the Portfolio. These financial intermediaries receive compensation in any or all of the following forms: 12b-1 fees, defrayal of costs for educational seminars and training, additional distribution support, recordkeeping and/or administrative services. Payments related to providing contract-holder recordkeeping and/or administrative services will generally not exceed 0.35% of the average daily net assets of the Portfolio attributable to the relevant intermediary over the year.
The transfer agent of the Portfolio is AllianceBernstein Investor Services, Inc. (“ABIS”). During the most recently completed fiscal year, ABIS received a fee of $1,310 from the Portfolio.11
The Portfolio effected brokerage transactions through and pais commissions to the Adviser’s affiliate, Sanford C. Bernstein & Co., LLC (“SCB & Co.”) nor its U.K. affiliate, Sanford C. Bernstein Limited (“SCB Ltd.”), collectively “SCB,” during the Portfolio’s most recently completed fiscal year. The Adviser represented that SCB’s profitability from business conducted with the Portfolio is comparable to the profitability of SCB’s dealings with other similar third party clients. In the ordinary course of business, SCB receives and pays liquidity rebates from electronic communications networks (“ECNs”) derived from trading for its clients, including the Portfolio. These credits and charges are not being passed onto any SCB client. The Adviser also receives certain soft dollar benefits from brokers that execute agency trades for the Portfolio and other clients. These soft dollar benefits reduce the Adviser’s cost of doing business and increase its profitability.
V. POSSIBLE ECONOMIES OF SCALE
The Adviser has indicated that economies of scale are being shared with shareholders through fee structures,12 subsidies and enhancement to services. Based on some of the professional literature that has considered economies of scale in the mutual
11 | | The Fund, which includes the Portfolio and other Portfolios of the Fund paid ABIS a flat fee of $18,000 in 2010. |
12 | | Fee structures include fee reductions, pricing at scale and breakpoints in advisory fee schedules. |
27
| | |
INTERNATIONAL GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
fund industry, it is thought that to the extent economies of scale exist, they may more often exist across a fund family as opposed to a specific fund. This is because the costs incurred by the Adviser, such as investment research or technology for trading or compliance systems can be spread across a greater asset base as the fund family increases in size. It is also possible that as the level of services required to operate a successful investment company has increased over time, and advisory firms make such investments in their business to provide services, there may be a sharing of economies of scale without a reduction in advisory fees.
An independent consultant, retained by the Senior Officer, provided the Board of Directors information on the Adviser’s firm-wide average costs from 2005 through 2011 and potential economies of scale. The independent consultant noted that from 2005 through 2007 the Adviser experienced significant growth in assets under management (“AUM”). During this period, operating expenses increased, in part to keep up with growth, and in part reflecting market returns. However, from 2008 through the first quarter of 2009, AUM rapidly and significantly decreased. Some operating expenses, including base compensation and office space, adjusted more slowly during this period, resulting in an increase in average costs. Since 2009, AUM has moved within a range of $400 to $500 million ending 2011 with an average of $411 million in the fourth quarter. The independent consultant noted that changes in operating expenses reflect changes in business composition and business practices in response to changes in financial markets. Finally, the independent consultant concluded that the increase in average cost and the decline in net operating margin across the company since 2008 are inconsistent with the view that there are currently “economies of scale” to be shared with clients through lower fees.
In February 2008, the independent consultant provided the Board of Directors an update of the Deli13 study on advisory fees and various fund characteristics.14 The independent consultant first reiterated the results of his previous two dimensional comparison analysis (fund size and family size) with the Board of Directors.15 The independent consultant then discussed the results of the regression model that was utilized to study the effects of various factors on advisory fees. The regression model output indicated that the bulk of the variation in fees predicted were explained by various factors, but substantially by fund AUM, family AUM, index fund indicator and investment style. The independent consultant also compared the advisory fees of the AllianceBernstein Mutual Funds to similar funds managed by 19 other large asset managers, regardless of the fund size and each Adviser’s proportion of mutual fund assets to non-mutual fund assets.
VI. NATURE AND QUALITY OF THE ADVISER’S SERVICES, INCLUDING THE PERFORMANCE OF THE PORTFOLIO
With assets under management of approximately $419 billion as of March 31, 2012, the Adviser has the investment experience to manage and provide non-investment services (described in Section I) to the Portfolio.
The information prepared by Lipper shows the 1, 3, 5 and 10 year performance returns and rankings of the Portfolio16 relative to its Lipper Performance Group (“PG”) and Lipper Performance Universe (“PU”)17 for the periods ended February 29, 2012.18
13 | | The Deli study, originally published in 2002 based on 1997 data and updated for the February 2008 Presentation, may be of diminished value due to the age of the data used in the presentation and the changes experienced in the industry over the last four years. |
14 | | As mentioned previously, the Supreme Court cautioned against accepting mutual fund fee comparisons without careful scrutiny since the fees may not be the product of negotiations conducted at arm’s length. See Jones V. Harris at 1429. |
15 | | The two dimensional analysis showed patterns of lower advisory fees for funds with larger asset sizes and funds from larger family sizes compared to funds with smaller asset sizes and funds from smaller family sizes, which according to the independent consultant is indicative of a sharing of economies of scale and scope. However, in less liquid and active markets, such is not the case, as the empirical analysis showed potential for diseconomies of scale in those markets. The empirical analysis also showed diminishing economies of scale and scope as funds surpassed a certain high level of assets. |
16 | | The performance rankings are for the Class A shares of the Portfolio. The Portfolio’s performance returns shown were provided by Lipper. |
17 | | The Portfolio’s PG is identical to the Portfolio’s respective EG. The Portfolio’s PU is not identical to the Portfolio’s EU as the criteria for including/excluding a fund from a PU is somewhat different from that of an EU. |
18 | | Note that the current Lipper investment classification/objective dictates the PG and PU throughout the life of the fund even if a fund had a different investment classification/objective at a different point in time. |
28
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Fund | | | PG Median | | | PU Median | | | PG Rank | | | PU Rank | |
International Growth Portfolio | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
1 year | | | –5.44 | | | | –2.00 | | | | –3.51 | | | | 10/12 | | | | 29/46 | |
3 year | | | 21.92 | | | | 21.84 | | | | 21.64 | | | | 5/11 | | | | 18/39 | |
5 year | | | –2.36 | | | | –0.70 | | | | –0.87 | | | | 9/10 | | | | 27/35 | |
10 year | | | 9.08 | | | | 7.04 | | | | 6.96 | | | | 4/10 | | | | 7/24 | |
Set forth below are the 1, 3, 5, 10 year and since inception performance returns of the Portfolio (in bold)19 versus its benchmarks.20 Portfolio and benchmark volatility and reward-to-variability ratio (“Sharpe Ratio”) information is also shown.21
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Periods Ending February 29, 2012 Annualized Performance | |
| | 1 Year (%) | | | 3 Year (%) | | | 5 Year (%) | | | 10 Year (%) | | | Since Inception (%) | | | Annualized | | | Risk Period (Year) | |
| | | | | | Volatility (%) | | | Sharpe (%) | | |
International Growth Portfolio | | | –5.44 | | | | 21.92 | | | | –2.36 | | | | 9.08 | | | | 8.13 | | | | 20.96 | | | | 0.43 | | | | 10 | |
MSCI AC World ex US Index (Net) | | | –6.10 | | | | 22.79 | | | | –0.75 | | | | 7.99 | | | | N/A | | | | 19.43 | | | | 0.40 | | | | 10 | |
MSCI World ex US Index (Net)22 | | | –7.86 | | | | 20.38 | | | | –2.31 | | | | 6.75 | | | | 4.66 | | | | N/A | | | | N/A | | | | N/A | |
Inception Date: September 23, 1994 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CONCLUSION:
Based on the factors discussed above the Senior Officer’s conclusion is that the proposed advisory fee for the Portfolio is reasonable and within the range of what would have been negotiated at arm’s-length in light of all the surrounding circumstances. This conclusion in respect of the Portfolio is based on an evaluation of all of these factors and no single factor was dispositive.
Dated: May 25, 2012
19 | | The performance returns and risk measures shown in the table are for the Class A shares of the Portfolio. |
20 | | The Adviser provided Portfolio and benchmark performance return information for periods through February 29, 2012. |
21 | | Portfolio and benchmark volatility and Sharpe Ratio information was obtained through Lipper LANA, a database maintained by Lipper. Volatility is a statistical measure of the tendency of a market price or yield to vary over time. A Sharpe Ratio is a risk adjusted measure of return that divides a portfolio’s return in excess of the riskless return by the portfolio’s standard deviation. A portfolio with a greater volatility would be viewed as more risky than a portfolio with equivalent performance but lower volatility; for that reason, a greater return would be demanded for the more risky portfolio. A portfolio with a higher Sharpe Ratio would be viewed as better performing than a portfolio with a lower Sharpe Ratio. |
22 | | Benchmark since inception date is the nearest month end after the Portfolio’s inception date. |
29
AllianceBernstein
Variable Products Series Fund, Inc.
| | |
![LOGO](https://capedge.com/proxy/N-CSRS/0001193125-12-366259/g374712g16n16.jpg) | | AllianceBernstein International Value Portfolio |
Semi-Annual Report
![LOGO](https://capedge.com/proxy/N-CSRS/0001193125-12-366259/g374712g81g54.jpg)
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT
Investment Products Offered
| Ø | | Are Not Bank Guaranteed |
AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (ABI) is the distributor of the AllianceBernstein family of mutual funds. ABI is a member of FINRA and is an affiliate of AllianceBernstein L.P., the manager of the funds.
You may obtain a description of the Fund’s proxy voting policies and procedures, and information regarding how the Fund voted proxies relating to portfolio securities during the most recent 12-month period ended June 30, without charge. Simply visit AllianceBernstein’s website at www.alliancebernstein.com or go to the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (the “Commission”) website at www.sec.gov, or call AllianceBernstein at (800) 227-4618.
The Fund files its complete schedule of portfolio holdings with the Commission for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year on Form N-Q. The Fund’s Forms N-Q are available on the Commission’s website at www.sec.gov. The Fund’s Forms N-Q may also be reviewed and copied at the Commission’s Public Reference Room in Washington, DC; information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling (800) SEC-0330.
AllianceBernstein® and the AB Logo are registered trademarks and service marks used by permission of the owner, AllianceBernstein L.P.
| | |
| | |
INTERNATIONAL VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
FUND EXPENSES (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
As a shareholder of the Fund, you incur two types of costs: (1) transaction costs, including sales charges (loads) on purchase payments, contingent deferred sales charges on redemptions and (2) ongoing costs, including management fees; distribution (12b-1) fees; and other Fund expenses. This example is intended to help you understand your ongoing costs (in dollars) of investing in the Fund and to compare these costs with the ongoing costs of investing in other mutual funds.
The Example is based on an investment of $1,000 invested at the beginning of the period and held for the entire period as indicated below.
Actual Expenses
The table below provides information about actual account values and actual expenses. You may use the information in this line, together with the amount you invested, to estimate the expenses that you paid over the period. Simply divide your account value by $1,000 (for example, an $8,600 account value divided by $1,000 = 8.6), then multiply the result by the number in the first line under the heading entitled “Expenses Paid During Period” to estimate the expenses you paid on your account during this period. The estimate of expenses does not include fees or other expenses of any variable insurance product. If such expenses were included, the estimate of expenses you paid during the period would be higher and your ending account value would be lower.
Hypothetical Example for Comparison Purposes
The table below provides information about hypothetical account values and hypothetical expenses based on the Fund’s actual expense ratio and an assumed annual rate of return of 5% before expenses, which is not the Fund’s actual return. The hypothetical account values and expenses may not be used to estimate the actual ending account balance or expenses you paid for the period. You may use this information to compare the ongoing costs of investing in the Fund and other funds by comparing this 5% hypothetical example with the 5% hypothetical examples that appear in the shareholder reports of other funds. The estimate of expenses does not include fees or other expenses of any variable insurance product. If such expenses were included, the estimate of expenses you paid during the period would be higher and your ending account value would be lower.
Please note that the expenses shown in the table are meant to highlight your ongoing costs only and do not reflect any transactional costs, such as sales charges (loads), or contingent deferred sales charges on redemptions. Therefore, the second line of each class’ table is useful in comparing ongoing costs only, and will not help you determine the relative total costs of owning different funds. In addition, if these transactional costs were included, your costs would have been higher.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Beginning Account Value January 1, 2012 | | | Ending Account Value June 30, 2012 | | | Expenses Paid During Period* | | | Annualized Expense Ratio* | |
Class A | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Actual | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,005.20 | | | $ | 4.04 | | | | 0.81 | % |
Hypothetical (5% return before expenses) | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,020.84 | | | $ | 4.07 | | | | 0.81 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class B | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Actual | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,003.50 | | | $ | 5.28 | | | | 1.06 | % |
Hypothetical (5% return before expenses) | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,019.59 | | | $ | 5.32 | | | | 1.06 | % |
* | | Expenses are equal to each classes’ annualized expense ratios, multiplied by the average account value over the period, multiplied by 182/366 (to reflect the one-half year period). |
1
| | |
INTERNATIONAL VALUE PORTFOLIO |
TEN LARGEST HOLDINGS* | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
COMPANY | | U.S. $ VALUE | | | PERCENT OF NET ASSETS | |
BP PLC | | $ | 41,049,015 | | | | 3.9 | % |
AstraZeneca PLC | | | 32,094,671 | | | | 3.0 | |
Royal Dutch Shell PLC (Euronext Amsterdam)—Class A | | | 31,413,052 | | | | 3.0 | |
Vodafone Group PLC | | | 23,383,815 | | | | 2.2 | |
Nippon Telegraph & Telephone Corp. | | | 23,152,047 | | | | 2.2 | |
Roche Holding AG | | | 19,650,097 | | | | 1.9 | |
Novartis AG | | | 19,013,201 | | | | 1.8 | |
National Australia Bank Ltd. | | | 18,560,474 | | | | 1.7 | |
Nissan Motor Co., Ltd. | | | 18,186,223 | | | | 1.7 | |
Telecom Italia SpA | | | 17,441,835 | | | | 1.6 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | $ | 243,944,430 | | | | 23.0 | % |
SECTOR DIVERSIFICATION**
June 30, 2012 (unaudited)
| | | | | | | | |
SECTOR | | U.S. $ VALUE | | | PERCENT OF TOTAL INVESTMENTS | |
Financials | | $ | 217,869,453 | | | | 20.5 | % |
Consumer Discretionary | | | 148,472,944 | | | | 14.0 | |
Energy | | | 146,001,306 | | | | 13.8 | |
Materials | | | 102,151,540 | | | | 9.6 | |
Health Care | | | 89,737,872 | | | | 8.5 | |
Telecommunication Services | | | 86,161,751 | | | | 8.1 | |
Industrials | | | 67,353,260 | | | | 6.4 | |
Information Technology | | | 66,232,966 | | | | 6.2 | |
Consumer Staples | | | 57,608,583 | | | | 5.4 | |
Utilities | | | 33,328,918 | | | | 3.1 | |
Short-Term Investments | | | 47,135,248 | | | | 4.4 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Investments | | $ | 1,062,053,841 | | | | 100.0 | % |
** | | The Portfolio’s sector breakdown is expressed as a percentage of total investments (excluding security lending collateral) and may vary over time. The Portfolio also enters into derivative transactions, which may be used for hedging or investment purposes (see “Portfolio of Investments” section of the report for additional details). |
Please note: The sector classifications presented herein are based on the Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS) which was developed by Morgan Stanley Capital International and Standard & Poor’s. The components are divided into sector, industry group, and industry sub-indices as classified by the GICS for each of the market capitalization indices in the broad market. These sector classifications are broadly defined. The “Portfolio of Investments” section of the report reflects more specific industry information and is consistent with the investment restrictions discussed in the Fund’s prospectus.
2
| | |
INTERNATIONAL VALUE PORTFOLIO |
COUNTRY DIVERSIFICATION* | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
COUNTRY | | U.S.$ VALUE | | | PERCENT OF TOTAL INVESTMENTS | |
Japan | | $ | 269,072,685 | | | | 25.3 | % |
United Kingdom | | | 249,034,002 | | | | 23.5 | |
Germany | | | 67,768,161 | | | | 6.4 | |
France | | | 63,798,864 | | | | 6.0 | |
Australia | | | 52,128,364 | | | | 4.9 | |
Netherlands | | | 50,749,734 | | | | 4.8 | |
Switzerland | | | 44,154,856 | | | | 4.2 | |
Brazil | | | 31,165,161 | | | | 2.9 | |
Italy | | | 30,991,986 | | | | 2.9 | |
Canada | | | 30,925,224 | | | | 2.9 | |
South Korea | | | 27,935,971 | | | | 2.6 | |
Taiwan | | | 14,772,055 | | | | 1.4 | |
Russia | | | 13,733,837 | | | | 1.3 | |
Other | | | 68,687,693 | | | | 6.5 | |
Short-Term Investments | | | 47,135,248 | | | | 4.4 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Investments | | $ | 1,062,053,841 | | | | 100.0 | % |
* | | All data are as of June 30, 2012. The Portfolio’s country breakdown is expressed as a percentage of total investments (excluding security lending collateral) and may vary over time. “Other” country weightings represent 1.2% or less in the following countries: Belgium, China, Hong Kong, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Singapore, South Africa, Thailand and Turkey. |
3
| | |
INTERNATIONAL VALUE PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMMON STOCKS–95.6% | | | | | |
FINANCIALS–20.5% | | | | | | | | |
CAPITAL MARKETS–2.4% | | | | | | | | |
Deutsche Bank AG | | | 282,060 | | | $ | 10,180,458 | |
Macquarie Group Ltd. | | | 548,240 | | | | 14,804,603 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 24,985,061 | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMMERCIAL BANKS–11.1% | | | | | | | | |
Australia & New Zealand Banking Group Ltd. | | | 195,370 | | | | 4,450,547 | |
Banco do Brasil SA | | | 835,400 | | | | 8,123,158 | |
Barclays PLC | | | 3,014,970 | | | | 7,704,004 | |
HSBC Holdings PLC | | | 1,931,886 | | | | 17,023,469 | |
KB Financial Group, Inc. | | | 236,461 | | | | 7,724,444 | |
Lloyds Banking Group PLC(a) | | | 17,581,940 | | | | 8,588,939 | |
Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Inc.(b) | | | 2,795,700 | | | | 13,393,850 | |
National Australia Bank Ltd. | | | 762,000 | | | | 18,560,474 | |
Societe Generale SA(a) | | | 371,564 | | | | 8,713,019 | |
Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group, Inc. | | | 412,200 | | | | 13,616,991 | |
Turkiye Vakiflar Bankasi Tao–Class D | | | 2,365,592 | | | | 4,932,349 | |
Westpac Banking Corp. | | | 230,970 | | | | 5,043,510 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 117,874,754 | |
| | | | | | | | |
DIVERSIFIED FINANCIAL SERVICES–2.2% | | | | | | | | |
ING Groep NV(a) | | | 2,262,120 | | | | 15,165,469 | |
ORIX Corp.(b) | | | 87,130 | | | | 8,120,147 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 23,285,616 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INSURANCE–3.9% | | | | | | | | |
Aegon NV | | | 1,798,383 | | | | 8,340,152 | |
Allianz SE | | | 92,050 | | | | 9,258,829 | |
Aviva PLC | | | 1,122,900 | | | | 4,808,203 | |
Muenchener Rueckversicherungs AG | | | 86,910 | | | | 12,263,350 | |
Suncorp Group Ltd. | | | 850,146 | | | | 7,103,874 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 41,774,408 | |
| | | | | | | | |
REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT & DEVELOPMENT–0.9% | | | | | | | | |
Evergrande Real Estate Group Ltd.(b) | | | 9,557,000 | | | | 4,949,518 | |
New World Development Co., Ltd.(b) | | | 4,248,000 | | | | 5,000,096 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 9,949,614 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 217,869,453 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER DISCRETIONARY–14.0% | | | | | |
AUTO COMPONENTS–3.2% | | | | | |
Cie Generale des Etablissements Michelin–Class B(b) | | | 155,800 | | | | 10,193,414 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
GKN PLC | | | 3,178,130 | | | $ | 9,010,560 | |
Magna International, Inc.–Class A(b) | | | 195,260 | | | | 7,711,821 | |
NGK Spark Plug Co., Ltd. | | | 323,000 | | | | 4,266,330 | |
Sumitomo Rubber Industries Ltd. | | | 229,900 | | | | 2,994,434 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 34,176,559 | |
| | | | | | | | |
AUTOMOBILES–6.9% | | | | | | | | |
Bayerische Motoren Werke AG | | | 110,300 | | | | 7,982,174 | |
Honda Motor Co., Ltd.(b) | | | 404,000 | | | | 14,097,796 | |
Kia Motors Corp. | | | 40,200 | | | | 2,649,569 | |
Mazda Motor Corp.(a) | | | 5,140,000 | | | | 6,999,405 | |
Nissan Motor Co., Ltd. | | | 1,915,200 | | | | 18,186,223 | |
Renault SA(b) | | | 198,450 | | | | 7,924,608 | |
Volkswagen AG (Preference Shares) | | | 95,970 | | | | 15,204,318 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 73,044,093 | |
| | | | | | | | |
DISTRIBUTORS–0.2% | | | | | | | | |
Jardine Cycle & Carriage Ltd. | | | 58,000 | | | | 2,137,654 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HOUSEHOLD DURABLES–1.6% | | | | | | | | |
Sharp Corp./Japan | | | 2,152,000 | | | | 10,964,315 | |
Sony Corp. | | | 404,500 | | | | 5,784,048 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 16,748,363 | |
| | | | | | | | |
LEISURE EQUIPMENT & PRODUCTS–0.3% | | | | | | | | |
Namco Bandai Holdings, Inc. | | | 276,300 | | | | 3,789,081 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MEDIA–0.3% | | | | | | | | |
Informa PLC | | | 508,000 | | | | 3,031,215 | |
| | | | | | | | |
SPECIALTY RETAIL–1.0% | | | | | | | | |
Shimamura Co., Ltd. | | | 25,100 | | | | 2,900,437 | |
Yamada Denki Co., Ltd. | | | 144,950 | | | | 7,421,203 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 10,321,640 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TEXTILES, APPAREL & LUXURY GOODS–0.5% | | | | | | | | |
Yue Yuen Industrial Holdings Ltd. | | | 1,675,500 | | | | 5,224,339 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 148,472,944 | |
| | | | | | | | |
ENERGY–13.8% | | | | | | | | |
ENERGY EQUIPMENT & SERVICES–0.8% | | | | | | | | |
Seadrill Ltd. | | | 242,570 | | | | 8,651,374 | |
| | | | | | | | |
OIL, GAS & CONSUMABLE FUELS–13.0% | | | | | | | | |
BP PLC | | | 6,146,720 | | | | 41,049,015 | |
China Petroleum & Chemical Corp.–Class H | | | 5,186,000 | | | | 4,634,865 | |
ENI SpA | | | 637,800 | | | | 13,550,151 | |
Gazprom OAO (Sponsored ADR)(a) | | | 828,610 | | | | 7,871,795 | |
4
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
JX Holdings, Inc. | | | 1,426,000 | | | $ | 7,349,618 | |
LUKOIL OAO (London) (Sponsored ADR)(a) | | | 104,530 | | | | 5,862,042 | |
Nexen, Inc. (Toronto) | | | 523,892 | | | | 8,871,327 | |
Petroleo Brasileiro SA (Sponsored ADR)(b) | | | 626,520 | | | | 11,365,073 | |
PTT PCL | | | 529,300 | | | | 5,382,994 | |
Royal Dutch Shell PLC (Euronext Amsterdam)–Class A | | | 930,739 | | | | 31,413,052 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 137,349,932 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 146,001,306 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MATERIALS–9.6% | | | | | | | | |
CHEMICALS–3.2% | | | | | | | | |
Agrium, Inc. (Toronto)(b) | | | 118,510 | | | | 10,503,052 | |
Air Water, Inc. | | | 136,000 | | | | 1,648,983 | |
Koninklijke DSM NV | | | 324,425 | | | | 15,993,972 | |
OCI Co., Ltd.(b) | | | 18,170 | | | | 3,636,320 | |
Ube Industries Ltd./Japan | | | 1,168,000 | | | | 2,716,755 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 34,499,082 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS–0.5% | | | | | | | | |
Taiheiyo Cement Corp. | | | 2,229,000 | | | | 5,118,303 | |
| | | | | | | | |
METALS & MINING–5.9% | | | | | | | | |
Anglo American PLC | | | 377,810 | | | | 12,416,857 | |
Dowa Holdings Co., Ltd. | | | 494,000 | | | | 3,063,405 | |
Exxaro Resources Ltd. | | | 180,700 | | | | 4,219,621 | |
Goldcorp, Inc. | | | 101,970 | | | | 3,839,024 | |
KGHM Polska Miedz SA | | | 142,420 | | | | 6,232,956 | |
OneSteel Ltd. | | | 2,401,131 | | | | 2,165,356 | |
Rio Tinto PLC | | | 334,840 | | | | 15,912,824 | |
Vale SA (Sponsored ADR) (Local Preference Shares) | | | 598,510 | | | | 11,676,930 | |
Xstrata PLC | | | 239,170 | | | | 3,007,182 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 62,534,155 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 102,151,540 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HEALTH CARE–8.5% | | | | | | | | |
PHARMACEUTICALS–8.5% | | | | | | | | |
AstraZeneca PLC | | | 718,200 | | | | 32,094,671 | |
GlaxoSmithKline PLC | | | 617,220 | | | | 14,019,556 | |
Novartis AG | | | 340,060 | | | | 19,013,201 | |
Otsuka Holdings Co., Ltd. | | | 161,600 | | | | 4,960,347 | |
Roche Holding AG | | | 113,760 | | | | 19,650,097 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 89,737,872 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES–8.1% | | | | | | | | |
DIVERSIFIED TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES–4.7% | | | | | | | | |
Nippon Telegraph & Telephone Corp. | | | 496,500 | | | | 23,152,047 | |
Telecom Italia SpA (ordinary shares) | | | 11,258,700 | | | | 11,125,183 | |
Telecom Italia SpA (savings shares) | | | 7,794,800 | | | | 6,316,652 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Vivendi SA | | | 529,066 | | | $ | 9,830,505 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 50,424,387 | |
| | | | | | | | |
WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES–3.4% | | | | | | | | |
NTT DoCoMo, Inc. | | | 7,424 | | | | 12,353,549 | |
Vodafone Group PLC | | | 8,319,405 | | | | 23,383,815 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 35,737,364 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 86,161,751 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INDUSTRIALS–6.4% | | | | | | | | |
AEROSPACE & DEFENSE–0.9% | | | | | | | | |
Safran SA | | | 255,170 | | | | 9,476,099 | |
| | | | | | | | |
AIRLINES–0.2% | | | | | | | | |
Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd. | | | 1,427,000 | | | | 2,317,218 | |
| | | | | | | | |
BUILDING PRODUCTS–1.0% | | | | | | | | |
Asahi Glass Co., Ltd.(b) | | | 1,532,000 | | | | 10,335,177 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSTRUCTION & ENGINEERING–1.3% | | | | | | | | |
Bouygues SA | | | 505,785 | | | | 13,572,032 | |
| | | | | | | | |
ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT–1.1% | | | | | | | | |
Sumitomo Electric Industries Ltd. | | | 922,600 | | | | 11,496,404 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INDUSTRIAL CONGLOMERATES–0.3% | | | | | |
Cookson Group PLC | | | 331,760 | | | | 3,069,903 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MACHINERY–0.2% | | | | | | | | |
IHI Corp. | | | 1,157,000 | | | | 2,474,809 | |
| | | | | | | | |
ROAD & RAIL–0.3% | | | | | | | | |
East Japan Railway Co. | | | 44,600 | | | | 2,800,488 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TRADING COMPANIES & DISTRIBUTORS–1.1% | | | | | | | | |
Mitsubishi Corp. | | | 398,900 | | | | 8,063,478 | |
Mitsui & Co., Ltd. | | | 252,200 | | | | 3,747,652 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 11,811,130 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 67,353,260 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY–6.2% | | | | | | | | |
COMPUTERS & PERIPHERALS–1.4% | | | | | | | | |
Fujitsu Ltd. | | | 2,073,000 | | | | 9,920,782 | |
Pegatron Corp. | | | 197,000 | | | | 259,905 | |
Wistron Corp. | | | 3,564,560 | | | | 4,400,171 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 14,580,858 | |
| | | | | | | | |
ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT, INSTRUMENTS & COMPONENTS–1.0% | | | | | | | | |
AU Optronics Corp. | | | 10,198,990 | | | | 4,144,768 | |
5
| | |
INTERNATIONAL VALUE PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
LG Display Co., Ltd.(a) | | | 335,990 | | | $ | 6,343,294 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 10,488,062 | |
| | | | | | | | |
OFFICE ELECTRONICS–0.8% | | | | | | | | |
Konica Minolta Holdings, Inc. | | | 1,134,000 | | | | 8,933,597 | |
| | | | | | | | |
SEMICONDUCTORS & SEMICONDUCTOR EQUIPMENT–2.6% | | | | | | | | |
Advanced Semiconductor Engineering, Inc.(a) | | | 7,269,211 | | | | 5,967,211 | |
GCL-Poly Energy Holdings Ltd.(b) | | | 15,868,000 | | | | 3,528,753 | |
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. | | | 7,160 | | | | 7,582,344 | |
Sumco Corp.(a) | | | 404,400 | | | | 3,678,678 | |
Tokyo Electron Ltd. | | | 158,500 | | | | 7,432,842 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 28,189,828 | |
| | | | | | | | |
SOFTWARE–0.4% | | | | | | | | |
Nintendo Co., Ltd. | | | 34,600 | | | | 4,040,621 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 66,232,966 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER STAPLES–5.4% | | | | | |
BEVERAGES–0.7% | | | | | | | | |
Asahi Group Holdings Ltd. | | | 364,900 | | | | 7,839,633 | |
| | | | | | | | |
FOOD & STAPLES RETAILING–1.5% | | | | | | | | |
Delhaize Group SA | | | 135,534 | | | | 4,964,857 | |
Koninklijke Ahold NV | | | 908,200 | | | | 11,250,141 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 16,214,998 | |
| | | | | | | | |
FOOD PRODUCTS–0.5% | | | | | | | | |
Nestle SA | | | 92,020 | | | | 5,491,558 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TOBACCO–2.7% | | | | | | | | |
Imperial Tobacco Group PLC | | | 328,360 | | | | 12,651,137 | |
Japan Tobacco, Inc. | | | 520,200 | | | | 15,411,257 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 28,062,394 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 57,608,583 | |
| | | | | | | | |
UTILITIES–3.1% | | | | | | | | |
ELECTRIC UTILITIES–1.8% | | | | | | | | |
E.ON AG | | | 596,000 | | | | 12,879,032 | |
| | | | | | | | |
EDP–Energias de Portugal SA | | | 2,752,400 | | | $ | 6,511,099 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 19,390,131 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MULTI-UTILITIES–1.3% | | | | | | | | |
National Grid PLC | | | 929,380 | | | | 9,849,600 | |
Veolia Environnement SA | | | 322,920 | | | | 4,089,187 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 13,938,787 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 33,328,918 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Common Stocks (cost $1,114,058,870) | | | | | | | 1,014,918,593 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | Principal Amount (000) | | | | |
SHORT-TERM INVESTMENTS–4.5% | | | | | | | | |
TIME DEPOSIT–4.5% | | | | | | | | |
State Street Time Deposit 0.01%, 7/02/12 (cost $47,135,248) | | $ | 47,135 | | | | 47,135,248 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Investments Before Security Lending Collateral for Securities Loaned–100.1% (cost $1,161,194,118) | | | | | | | 1,062,053,841 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | Shares | | | | |
INVESTMENTS OF CASH COLLATERAL FOR SECURITY LOANED–5.6% | | | | | | | | |
INVESTMENT COMPANIES–5.6% | | | | | | | | |
AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves–Class I, 0.20%(c) (cost $59,746,259) | | | 59,746,259 | | | | 59,746,259 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TOTAL INVESTMENTS–105.7% (cost $1,220,940,377) | | | | | | | 1,121,800,100 | |
Other assets less liabilities–(5.7)% | | | | | | | (60,562,251 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
NET ASSETS–100.0% | | | | | | $ | 1,061,237,849 | |
| | | | | | | | |
FUTURES CONTRACTS (see Note D)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Type | | Number of Contracts | | | Expiration Month | | | Original Value | | | Value at June 30, 2012 | | | Unrealized Appreciation/ (Depreciation) | |
Purchased Contracts | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
EURO STOXX 50 Index Futures | | | 380 | | | | September 2012 | | | $ | 10,296,479 | | | $ | 10,844,063 | | | $ | 547,584 | |
6
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
FORWARD CURRENCY EXCHANGE CONTRACTS (see Note D)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Counterparty & Description | | Contract Amount (000) | | | U.S. $ Value on Origination Date | | | U.S. $ Value at June 30, 2012 | | | Unrealized Appreciation/ (Depreciation) | |
Buy Contracts | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Barclays Bank PLC Wholselale: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Japanese Yen settling 7/13/12 | | | 3,788,476 | | | $ | 47,926,879 | | | $ | 47,401,220 | | | $ | (525,659 | ) |
Citibank NA: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Japanese Yen settling 7/13/12 | | | 5,649,920 | | | | 69,957,490 | | | | 70,691,514 | | | | 734,024 | |
New Zealand Dollar settling 7/13/12 | | | 15,444 | | | | 12,596,312 | | | | 12,354,021 | | | | (242,291 | ) |
Credit Suisse London Branch (GFX): | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Australian Dollar settling 7/13/12 | | | 56,352 | | | | 57,340,414 | | | | 57,621,604 | | | | 281,190 | |
Great British Pound settling 7/13/12 | | | 36,546 | | | | 59,123,900 | | | | 57,235,143 | | | | (1,888,757 | ) |
Norwegian Krone settling 7/13/12 | | | 345,840 | | | | 59,347,222 | | | | 58,116,761 | | | | (1,230,461 | ) |
Swedish Krona settling 7/13/12 | | | 414,927 | | | | 60,794,274 | | | | 59,960,479 | | | | (833,795 | ) |
Deutsche Bank AG London: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Great British Pound settling 7/13/12 | | | 26,011 | | | | 41,146,801 | | | | 40,736,149 | | | | (410,652 | ) |
New Zealand Dollar settling 7/13/12 | | | 13,620 | | | | 11,060,257 | | | | 10,894,960 | | | | (165,297 | ) |
HSBC BankUSA: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Euro settling 7/13/12 | | | 14,620 | | | | 18,163,888 | | | | 18,503,060 | | | | 339,172 | |
Great British Pound settling 7/13/12 | | | 13,471 | | | | 21,329,173 | | | | 21,097,100 | | | | (232,073 | ) |
Japanese Yen settling 10/15/12 | | | 475,844 | | | | 5,995,489 | | | | 5,961,615 | | | | (33,874 | ) |
Royal Bank of Canada: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Canadian Dollar settling 7/13/12 | | | 3,338 | | | | 3,300,376 | | | | 3,277,940 | | | | (22,436 | ) |
Royal Bank of Scotland PLC: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Japanese Yen settling 7/13/12 | | | 4,168,790 | | | | 52,627,599 | | | | 52,159,690 | | | | (467,909 | ) |
State Street Bank and Trust Co.: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Swiss Franc settling 7/13/12 | | | 31,317 | | | | 33,069,030 | | | | 33,002,300 | | | | (66,730 | ) |
UBS AG: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Euro settling 7/13/12 | | | 5,336 | | | | 7,009,850 | | | | 6,753,237 | | | | (256,613 | ) |
Swiss Franc settling 7/13/12 | | | 45,464 | | | | 50,339,424 | | | | 47,910,609 | | | | (2,428,815 | ) |
Westpac Banking Corp.: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Japanese Yen settling 10/15/12 | | | 1,681,261 | | | | 21,277,207 | | | | 21,063,690 | | | | (213,517 | ) |
| | | | |
Sale Contracts | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Barclays Bank PLC Wholselale: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Euro settling 7/13/12 | | | 26,124 | | | | 33,119,354 | | | | 33,062,513 | | | | 56,841 | |
Citibank NA: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Swiss Franc settling 7/13/12 | | | 59,453 | | | | 62,988,881 | | | | 62,652,417 | | | | 336,464 | |
Credit Suisse London Branch (GFX): | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Australian Dollar settling 7/13/12 | | | 22,769 | | | | 22,331,058 | | | | 23,281,983 | | | | (950,925 | ) |
Norwegian Krone settling 7/13/12 | | | 90,471 | | | | 14,888,940 | | | | 15,203,220 | | | | (314,280 | ) |
Deutsche Bank AG London: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Australian Dollar settling 7/13/12 | | | 74,769 | | | | 77,006,088 | | | | 76,453,537 | | | | 552,551 | |
Euro settling 10/15/12 | | | 23,873 | | | | 29,857,961 | | | | 30,243,060 | | | | (385,099 | ) |
Japanese Yen settling 7/13/12 | | | 2,000,797 | | | | 24,692,052 | | | | 25,033,871 | | | | (341,819 | ) |
Goldman Sachs International: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Norwegian Krone settling 7/13/12 | | | 19,607 | | | | 3,405,146 | | | | 3,294,863 | | | | 110,283 | |
Swedish Krona settling 7/13/12 | | | 31,474 | | | | 4,644,252 | | | | 4,548,261 | | | | 95,991 | |
Royal Bank of Canada: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Canadian Dollar settling 7/13/12 | | | 30,081 | | | | 29,922,114 | | | | 29,539,755 | | | | 382,359 | |
Swedish Krona settling 7/13/12 | | | 34,867 | | | | 4,828,676 | | | | 5,038,578 | | | | (209,902 | ) |
7
| | |
INTERNATIONAL VALUE PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIO OF INVESTMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Counterparty & Description | | Contract Amount (000) | | | U.S. $ Value on Origination Date | | | U.S. $ Value at June 30, 2012 | | | Unrealized Appreciation/ (Depreciation) | |
Sale Contracts (continued) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Royal Bank of Scotland PLC: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Great British Pound settling 7/13/12 | | | 12,132 | | | $ | 18,761,167 | | | $ | 19,000,075 | | | $ | (238,908 | ) |
Swiss Franc settling 7/13/12 | | | 17,328 | | | | 19,075,297 | | | | 18,260,493 | | | | 814,804 | |
Standard Chartered Bank: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Japanese Yen settling 7/13/12 | | | 11,606,389 | | | | 139,684,547 | | | | 145,218,552 | | | | (5,534,005 | ) |
UBS AG: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Australian Dollar settling 7/13/12 | | | 3,293 | | | | 3,386,752 | | | | 3,367,191 | | | | 19,561 | |
Euro settling 7/13/12 | | | 62,632 | | | | 82,065,770 | | | | 79,267,008 | | | | 2,798,762 | |
Westpac Banking Corp.: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
New Zealand Dollar settling 7/13/12 | | | 29,064 | | | | 23,556,663 | | | | 23,248,980 | | | | 307,683 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | $ | (10,164,132 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
(a) | | Non-income producing security. |
(b) | | Represents entire or partial securities out on loan. See Note E for securities lending information. |
(c) | | Investment in affiliated money market mutual fund. The rate shown represents the 7-day yield as of period end. |
Glossary:
ADR—American Depositary Receipt
See notes to financial statements.
8
| | |
INTERNATIONAL VALUE PORTFOLIO |
STATEMENTOF ASSETS & LIABILITIES |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | |
ASSETS | | | | |
Investments in securities, at value Unaffiliated issuers (cost $1,161,194,118) | | $ | 1,062,053,841 | (a) |
Affiliated issuers (cost $59,746,259—including investment of cash collateral for securities loaned of $59,746,259) | | | 59,746,259 | |
Cash | | | 761,670 | (b) |
Foreign currencies, at value (cost $7,708,158) | | | 7,653,260 | |
Unrealized appreciation of forward currency exchange contracts | | | 6,829,685 | |
Dividends and interest receivable | | | 6,625,360 | |
Receivable for investment securities sold and foreign currency transactions | | | 2,514,279 | |
Receivable for variation margin on futures contracts | | | 505,635 | |
Receivable for capital stock sold | | | 205,876 | |
| | | | |
Total assets | | | 1,146,895,865 | |
| | | | |
LIABILITIES | | | | |
Payable for collateral received on securities loaned | | | 59,746,259 | |
Unrealized depreciation of forward currency exchange contracts | | | 16,993,817 | |
Payable for investment securities purchased and foreign currency transactions | | | 7,062,846 | |
Advisory fee payable | | | 645,098 | |
Payable for capital stock redeemed | | | 562,451 | |
Distribution fee payable | | | 205,439 | |
Administrative fee payable | | | 14,553 | |
Transfer Agent fee payable | | | 154 | |
Accrued expenses and other liabilities | | | 427,399 | |
| | | | |
Total liabilities | | | 85,658,016 | |
| | | | |
NET ASSETS | | $ | 1,061,237,849 | |
| | | | |
COMPOSITION OF NET ASSETS | | | | |
Capital stock, at par | | $ | 92,726 | |
Additional paid-in capital | | | 2,255,769,786 | |
Undistributed net investment income | | | 14,481,251 | |
Accumulated net realized loss on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | (1,100,291,462 | ) |
Net unrealized depreciation on investments and foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities | | | (108,814,452 | ) |
| | | | |
| | $ | 1,061,237,849 | |
| | | | |
Net Asset Value Per Share—1 billion shares of capital stock authorized, $.001 par value
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class | | Net Assets | | | Shares Outstanding | | | Net Asset Value | |
A | | $ | 46,988,825 | | | | 4,065,974 | | | $ | 11.56 | |
B | | $ | 1,014,249,024 | | | | 88,659,579 | | | $ | 11.44 | |
(a) | | Includes securities on loan with a value of $57,775,543 (see Note E). |
(b) | | An amount of $761,670 has been segregated to collateralize margin requirements for open futures contracts outstanding at June 30, 2012. |
See notes to financial statements.
9
| | |
INTERNATIONAL VALUE PORTFOLIO |
STATEMENTOF OPERATIONS |
Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | |
INVESTMENT INCOME | | | | |
Dividends | | | | |
Unaffiliated issuers (net of foreign taxes withheld of $2,380,372) | | $ | 26,026,116 | |
Affiliated issuers | | | 48,633 | |
Interest | | | 1,904 | |
Securities lending income | | | 1,193,751 | |
| | | | |
| | | 27,270,404 | |
| | | | |
EXPENSES | | | | |
Advisory fee (see Note B) | | | 4,272,314 | |
Distribution fee—Class B | | | 1,353,922 | |
Transfer agency—Class A | | | 116 | |
Transfer agency—Class B | | | 2,239 | |
Custodian | | | 151,404 | |
Printing | | | 67,950 | |
Audit | | | 39,991 | |
Administrative | | | 25,343 | |
Legal | | | 23,349 | |
Directors’ fees | | | 1,941 | |
Miscellaneous | | | 23,525 | |
| | | | |
Total expenses | | | 5,962,094 | |
| | | | |
Net investment income | | | 21,308,310 | |
| | | | |
REALIZED AND UNREALIZED GAIN (LOSS) ON INVESTMENT AND FOREIGN CURRENCY TRANSACTIONS | | | | |
Net realized gain (loss) on: | | | | |
Investment transactions | | | (45,168,713 | ) |
Futures contracts | | | (219,098 | ) |
Options written | | | 1,246,998 | |
Foreign currency transactions | | | 1,547,280 | |
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of: | | | | |
Investments | | | 42,261,491 | (a) |
Futures contracts | | | 409,294 | |
Foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities | | | (11,665,119 | ) |
| | | | |
Net loss on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | (11,587,867 | ) |
| | | | |
NET INCREASE IN NET ASSETS FROM OPERATIONS | | $ | 9,720,443 | |
| | | | |
(a) | | Net of increase in accrued foreign capital gains taxes of $3,779. |
See notes to financial statements.
10
| | |
| | |
INTERNATIONAL VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
STATEMENTOF CHANGESIN NET ASSETS | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | |
INCREASE (DECREASE) IN NET ASSETS FROM OPERATIONS | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income | | $ | 21,308,310 | | | $ | 29,160,097 | |
Net realized loss on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | (42,593,533 | ) | | | (10,266,028 | ) |
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of investments and foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities | | | 31,005,666 | | | | (276,094,522 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) in net assets from operations | | | 9,720,443 | | | | (257,200,453 | ) |
DIVIDENDS TO SHAREHOLDERS FROM | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income | | | | | | | | |
Class A | | | –0 | – | | | (3,148,264 | ) |
Class B | | | –0 | – | | | (46,818,834 | ) |
Tax return of capital | | | | | | | | |
Class A | | | –0 | – | | | (39,373 | ) |
Class B | | | –0 | – | | | (585,535 | ) |
CAPITAL STOCK TRANSACTIONS | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (43,769,801 | ) | | | (27,178,898 | ) |
CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS | | | | | | | | |
Proceeds from third party regulatory settlement (see Note F) | | | –0 | – | | | (37,567 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Total decrease | | | (34,049,358 | ) | | | (335,008,924 | ) |
NET ASSETS | | | | | | | | |
Beginning of period | | | 1,095,287,207 | | | | 1,430,296,131 | |
| | | | | | | | |
End of period (including undistributed net investment income of $14,481,251 and distributions in excess of net investment income of ($6,827,059), respectively) | | $ | 1,061,237,849 | | | $ | 1,095,287,207 | |
| | | | | | | | |
See notes to financial statements.
11
| | |
INTERNATIONAL VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
NOTE A : Significant Accounting Policies
The AllianceBernstein International Value Portfolio (the “Portfolio”) is a series of AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund, Inc. (the “Fund”). The Portfolio’s investment objective is long-term growth of capital. The Portfolio is diversified as defined under the Investment Company Act of 1940. The Fund was incorporated in the State of Maryland on November 17, 1987, as an open-end series investment company. The Fund offers thirteen separately managed pools of assets which have differing investment objectives and policies. The Portfolio offers Class A and Class B shares. Both classes of shares have identical voting, dividend, liquidating and other rights, except that Class B shares bear a distribution expense and have exclusive voting rights with respect to the Class B distribution plan.
The Portfolio offers and sells its shares only to separate accounts of certain life insurance companies for the purpose of funding variable annuity contracts and variable life insurance policies. Sales are made without a sales charge at the Portfolio’s net asset value per share.
The financial statements have been prepared in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“U.S. GAAP”) which require management to make certain estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities in the financial statements and amounts of income and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. The following is a summary of significant accounting policies followed by the Portfolio.
1. Security Valuation
Portfolio securities are valued at their current market value determined on the basis of market quotations or, if market quotations are not readily available or are deemed unreliable, at “fair value” as determined in accordance with procedures established by and under the general supervision of the Fund’s Board of Directors.
In general, the market value of securities which are readily available and deemed reliable are determined as follows: Securities listed on a national securities exchange (other than securities listed on the NASDAQ Stock Market, Inc. (“NASDAQ”)) or on a foreign securities exchange are valued at the last sale price at the close of the exchange or foreign securities exchange. If there has been no sale on such day, the securities are valued at the last traded price from the previous day. Securities listed on more than one exchange are valued by reference to the principal exchange on which the securities are traded; securities listed only on NASDAQ are valued in accordance with the NASDAQ Official Closing Price; listed or over the counter market (“OTC”) put or call options are valued at the mid level between the current bid and ask prices. If either a current bid or current ask price is unavailable, AllianceBernstein L.P. (the “Adviser”) will have discretion to determine the best valuation (e.g. last trade price in the case of listed options); open futures contracts are valued using the closing settlement price or, in the absence of such a price, the most recent quoted bid price. If there are no quotations available for the day of valuation, the last available closing settlement price is used; U.S. government securities and other debt instruments having 60 days or less remaining until maturity are valued at amortized cost if their original maturity was 60 days or less; or by amortizing their fair value as of the 61st day prior to maturity if their original term to maturity exceeded 60 days; fixed-income securities, including mortgage backed and asset backed securities, may be valued on the basis of prices provided by a pricing service or at a price obtained from one or more of the major broker/dealers. In cases where broker/dealer quotes are obtained, the Adviser may establish procedures whereby changes in market yields or spreads are used to adjust, on a daily basis, a recently obtained quoted price on a security. Swaps and other derivatives are valued daily, primarily using independent pricing services, independent pricing models using market inputs, as well as third party broker-dealers or counterparties.
Securities for which market quotations are not readily available (including restricted securities) or are deemed unreliable are valued at fair value. Factors considered in making this determination may include, but are not limited to, information obtained by contacting the issuer, analysts, analysis of the issuer’s financial statements or other available documents. In addition, the Portfolio may use fair value pricing for securities primarily traded in non-U.S. markets because most foreign markets close well before the Portfolio values its securities at 4:00 p.m., Eastern Time. The earlier close of foreign markets gives rise to the possibility that significant events, including broad market moves, may have occurred between the close of the foreign markets and the time at which the Portfolio values its securities which may materially affect the value of securities trading in such markets. To account for this, the Portfolio may frequently value many of its foreign equity securities using fair value prices based on third party vendor modeling tools to the extent available.
12
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
2. Fair Value Measurements
In accordance with U.S. GAAP regarding fair value measurements, fair value is defined as the price that the Portfolio would receive to sell an asset or pay to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. The U.S. GAAP disclosure requirements establish a framework for measuring fair value, and a three-level hierarchy for fair value measurements based upon the transparency of inputs to the valuation of an asset or liability. Inputs may be observable or unobservable and refer broadly to the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability. Observable inputs reflect the assumptions market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability based on market data obtained from sources independent of the Portfolio. Unobservable inputs reflect the Portfolio’s own assumptions about the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability based on the best information available in the circumstances. Each investment is assigned a level based upon the observability of the inputs which are significant to the overall valuation. The three-tier hierarchy of inputs is summarized below.
| • | | Level 1—quoted prices in active markets for identical investments |
| • | | Level 2—other significant observable inputs (including quoted prices for similar investments, interest rates, prepayment speeds, credit risk, etc.) |
| • | | Level 3—significant unobservable inputs (including the Portfolio’s own assumptions in determining the fair value of investments) |
The following table summarizes the valuation of the Portfolio’s investments by the above fair value hierarchy levels as of June 30, 2012:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Level 1 | | | Level 2 | | | Level 3 | | | Total | |
Investments in Securities: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Assets: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Common Stocks: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Financials | | $ | 8,123,158 | | | $ | 209,746,295 | | | $ | –0 | – | | $ | 217,869,453 | |
Consumer Discretionary | | | 7,711,821 | | | | 140,761,123 | | | | –0 | – | | | 148,472,944 | |
Energy | | | 8,871,327 | | | | 137,129,979 | | | | –0 | – | | | 146,001,306 | |
Materials | | | 14,342,076 | | | | 87,809,464 | | | | –0 | – | | | 102,151,540 | |
Health Care | | | –0 | – | | | 89,737,872 | | | | –0 | – | | | 89,737,872 | |
Telecommunication Services | | | –0 | – | | | 86,161,751 | | | | –0 | – | | | 86,161,751 | |
Industrials | | | –0 | – | | | 67,353,260 | | | | –0 | – | | | 67,353,260 | |
Information Technology | | | –0 | – | | | 66,232,966 | | | | –0 | – | | | 66,232,966 | |
Consumer Staples | | | –0 | – | | | 57,608,583 | | | | –0 | – | | | 57,608,583 | |
Utilities | | | –0 | – | | | 33,328,918 | | | | –0 | – | | | 33,328,918 | |
Short-Term Investments | | | –0 | – | | | 47,135,248 | | | | –0 | – | | | 47,135,248 | |
Investments of Cash Collateral for Security Loaned in Affiliated Money Market Fund | | | 59,746,259 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 59,746,259 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Investments in Securities | | | 98,794,641 | | | | 1,023,005,459 | + | | | –0 | – | | | 1,121,800,100 | |
Other Financial Instruments* : | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Assets: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Futures Contracts | | | 547,584 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 547,584 | # |
Forward Currency Exchange Contracts | | | –0 | – | | | 6,829,685 | | | | –0 | – | | | 6,829,685 | |
Liabilities: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Forward Currency Exchange Contracts | | | –0 | – | | | (16,993,817 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | (16,993,817 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total | | $ | 99,342,225 | | | $ | 1,012,841,327 | | | $ | –0 | – | | $ | 1,112,183,552 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
* | | Other financial instruments are derivative instruments, such as futures, forwards and swap contracts, which are valued at the unrealized appreciation/depreciation on the instrument. |
+ | | A significant portion of the Portfolio’s foreign equity investments are categorized as Level 2 investments since they are valued using fair value prices based on third party vendor modeling tools to the extent available, see Note A.1. |
# | | Only variation margin receivable/payable at period end is reported within the statement of assets and liabilities. This amount reflects cumulative appreciation/(depreciation) of futures contracts as reported in the portfolio of investments. |
13
| | |
INTERNATIONAL VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
3. Currency Translation
Assets and liabilities denominated in foreign currencies and commitments under forward currency exchange contracts are translated into U.S. dollars at the mean of the quoted bid and ask prices of such currencies against the U.S. dollar. Purchases and sales of portfolio securities are translated into U.S. dollars at the rates of exchange prevailing when such securities were acquired or sold. Income and expenses are translated into U.S. dollars at rates of exchange prevailing when accrued.
Net realized gain or loss on foreign currency transactions represents foreign exchange gains and losses from sales and maturities of foreign fixed income investments, foreign currency exchange contracts, holding of foreign currencies, currency gains or losses realized between the trade and settlement dates on foreign investment transactions, and the difference between the amounts of dividends, interest and foreign withholding taxes recorded on the Portfolio’s books and the U.S. dollar equivalent amounts actually received or paid. Net unrealized currency gains and losses from valuing foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities at period end exchange rates are reflected as a component of net unrealized appreciation or depreciation of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities.
4. Taxes
It is the Portfolio’s policy to meet the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code applicable to regulated investment companies and to distribute all of its investment company taxable income and net realized gains, if any, to shareholders. Therefore, no provisions for federal income or excise taxes are required. The Portfolio may be subject to taxes imposed by countries in which it invests. Such taxes are generally based on income and/or capital gains earned or repatriated. Taxes are accrued and applied to net investment income, net realized gains and net unrealized appreciation/depreciation as such income and/or gains are earned.
In accordance with U.S. GAAP requirements regarding accounting for uncertainties in income taxes, management has analyzed the Portfolio’s tax positions taken or expected to be taken on federal and state income tax returns for all open tax years (the current and the prior three tax years) and has concluded that no provision for income tax is required in the Portfolio’s financial statements.
5. Investment Income and Investment Transactions
Dividend income is recorded on the ex-dividend date or as soon as the Portfolio is informed of the dividend. Interest income is accrued daily. Investment transactions are accounted for on the date the securities are purchased or sold. Investment gains or losses are determined on the identified cost basis. The Portfolio amortizes premiums and accretes discounts as adjustments to interest income.
6. Class Allocations
All income earned and expenses incurred by the Portfolio are borne on a pro-rata basis by each outstanding class of shares, based on the proportionate interest in the Portfolio represented by the net assets of such class, except for class specific expenses which are allocated to the respective class. Expenses of the Fund are charged to each Portfolio in proportion to net assets. Realized and unrealized gains and losses are allocated among the various share classes based on respective net assets.
7. Dividends and Distributions
Dividends and distributions to shareholders, if any, are recorded on the ex-dividend date. Income dividends and capital gains distributions are determined in accordance with federal tax regulations and may differ from those determined in accordance with U.S. GAAP. To the extent these differences are permanent, such amounts are reclassified within the capital accounts based on their federal tax basis treatment; temporary differences do not require such reclassification.
NOTE B : Advisory Fee and Other Transactions with Affiliates
Under the terms of the investment advisory agreement, the Portfolio pays the Adviser an advisory fee at an annual rate of .75% of the first $2.5 billion, .65% of the next $2.5 billion and .60% in excess of $5 billion, of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets. The fee is accrued daily and paid monthly. The Adviser has agreed to waive its fees and bear certain expenses to the extent necessary to limit total operating expenses on an annual basis to 1.20% and 1.45% of daily average net assets for Class A and Class B shares, respectively (the “Expense Caps”). The Expense Caps extend through May 1, 2013 and then may be extended by the Adviser for additional one year terms. For the six months ended June 30, 2012, there was no such reimbursement.
Pursuant to the investment advisory agreement, the Portfolio may reimburse the Adviser for certain legal and accounting services provided to the Portfolio by the Adviser. For the six months ended June 30, 2012, such fee amounted to $25,343.
14
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Brokerage commissions paid on investment transactions for the six months ended June 30, 2012 amounted to $872,929, of which $0 and $1,307, respectively, was paid to Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. LLC and Sanford C. Bernstein Limited, affiliates of the Adviser.
The Portfolio compensates AllianceBernstein Investor Services, Inc. (“ABIS”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Adviser, under a Transfer Agency Agreement for providing personnel and facilities to perform transfer agency services for the Portfolio. Such compensation retained by ABIS amounted to $692 for the six months ended June 30, 2012.
NOTE C : Distribution Plan
The Portfolio has adopted a Distribution Plan (the “Plan”) for Class B shares pursuant to Rule 12b-1 under the Investment Company Act of 1940. Under the Plan, the Portfolio pays distribution and servicing fees to AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (the “Distributor”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Adviser, at an annual rate of up to .50% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The fees are accrued daily and paid monthly. The Board of Directors currently limits payments under the Plan to .25% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The Plan provides that the Distributor will use such payments in their entirety for distribution assistance and promotional activities.
The Portfolio is not obligated under the Plan to pay any distribution and servicing fees in excess of the amounts set forth above. The purpose of the payments to the Distributor under the Plan is to compensate the Distributor for its distribution services with respect to the sale of the Portfolio’s Class B shares. Since the Distributor’s compensation is not directly tied to its expenses, the amount of compensation received by it under the Plan during any year may be more or less than its actual expenses. For this reason, the Plan is characterized by the staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission as being of the “compensation” variety.
In the event that the Plan is terminated or not continued, no distribution or servicing fees (other than current amounts accrued but not yet paid) would be owed by the Portfolio to the Distributor.
The Plan also provides that the Adviser may use its own resources to finance the distribution of the Portfolio’s shares.
NOTE D : Investment Transactions
Purchases and sales of investment securities (excluding short-term investments) for the six months ended June 30, 2012 were as follows:
| | | | | | | | |
| | Purchases | | | Sales | |
Investment securities (excluding U.S. government securities) | | $ | 233,089,049 | | | $ | 294,940,999 | |
U.S. government securities | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
The cost of investments for federal income tax purposes was substantially the same as the cost for financial reporting purposes. Accordingly, gross unrealized appreciation and unrealized depreciation (excluding futures and foreign currency transactions) are as follows:
| | | | |
Gross unrealized appreciation | | $ | 62,570,684 | |
Gross unrealized depreciation | | | (161,710,961 | ) |
| | | | |
Net unrealized depreciation | | $ | (99,140,277 | ) |
| | | | |
1. Derivative Financial Instruments
The Portfolio may use derivatives in an effort to earn income and enhance returns, to replace more traditional direct investments, to obtain exposure to otherwise inaccessible markets (collectively, “investment purposes”), or to hedge or adjust the risk profile of its portfolio.
The principal types of derivatives utilized by the Portfolio, as well as the methods in which they may be used are:
The Portfolio may buy or sell futures contracts for investment purposes or for the purpose of hedging its portfolio against adverse effects of potential movements in the market. The Portfolio bears the market risk that arises from changes in the value of these instruments and the imperfect correlation between movements in the price of the futures contracts and movements in the price of the assets, reference rates or indices which they are designed to track. Among other things, the Portfolio may purchase or sell futures contracts for foreign currencies or options thereon for non-hedging purposes as a means of making direct investment in foreign currencies, as described below under “Currency Transactions”.
15
| | |
INTERNATIONAL VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
At the time the Portfolio enters into a futures contract, the Portfolio deposits and maintains as collateral an initial margin with the broker, as required by the exchange on which the transaction is effected. Pursuant to the contract, the Portfolio agrees to receive from or pay to the broker an amount of cash equal to the daily fluctuation in the value of the contract. Such receipts or payments are known as variation margin and are recorded by the Portfolio as unrealized gains or losses. Risks may arise from the potential inability of a counterparty to meet the terms of the contract. The credit/counterparty risk for exchange-traded futures contracts is generally less than privately negotiated futures contracts, since the clearinghouse, which is the issuer or counterparty to each exchange-traded future, provides a guarantee of performance. This guarantee is supported by a daily payment system (i.e., margin requirements). When the contract is closed, the Portfolio records a realized gain or loss equal to the difference between the value of the contract at the time it was opened and the time it was closed.
Use of long futures contracts subjects the Portfolio to risk of loss in excess of the amounts shown on the statement of assets and liabilities, up to the notional value of the futures contracts. Use of short futures contracts subjects the Portfolio to unlimited risk of loss. Under some circumstances, futures exchanges may establish daily limits on the amount that the price of a futures contract can vary from the previous day’s settlement price, which could effectively prevent liquidation of unfavorable positions.
During the six months ended June 30, 2012, the Portfolio held futures contracts for non-hedging purposes.
| • | | Forward Currency Exchange Contracts |
The Portfolio may enter into forward currency exchange contracts in order to hedge its exposure to changes in foreign currency exchange rates on its foreign portfolio holdings, to hedge certain firm purchase and sale commitments denominated in foreign currencies and for non-hedging purposes as a means of making direct investments in foreign currencies, as described below under “Currency Transactions”.
A forward currency exchange contract is a commitment to purchase or sell a foreign currency at a future date at a negotiated forward rate. The gain or loss arising from the difference between the original contract and the closing of such contract would be included in net realized gain or loss on foreign currency transactions. Fluctuations in the value of open forward currency exchange contracts are recorded for financial reporting purposes as unrealized appreciation and/or depreciation by the Portfolio. Risks may arise from the potential inability of a counterparty to meet the terms of a contract and from unanticipated movements in the value of a foreign currency relative to the U.S. dollar. The face or contract amount, in U.S. dollars reflects the total exposure the Portfolio has in that particular currency contract.
During the six months ended June 30, 2012, the Portfolio held forward currency exchange contracts for hedging and non-hedging purposes.
For hedging and investment purposes, the Portfolio may purchase and write (sell) put and call options on U.S. and foreign securities, including government securities, and foreign currencies that are traded on U.S. and foreign securities exchanges and over-the-counter markets. Among other things, the Portfolio may use options transactions for non-hedging purposes as a means of making direct investments in foreign currencies, as described below under “Currency Transactions” and may use options strategies involving the purchase and/or writing of various combinations of call and/or put options, for hedging and investment purposes.
The risk associated with purchasing an option is that the Portfolio pays a premium whether or not the option is exercised. Additionally, the Portfolio bears the risk of loss of the premium and change in market value should the counterparty not perform under the contract. Put and call options purchased are accounted for in the same manner as portfolio securities. The cost of securities acquired through the exercise of call options is increased by premiums paid. The proceeds from securities sold through the exercise of put options are decreased by the premiums paid.
When the Portfolio writes an option, the premium received by the Portfolio is recorded as a liability and is subsequently adjusted to the current market value of the option written. Premiums received from written options which expire unexercised are recorded by the Portfolio on the expiration date as realized gains from options written. The difference between the premium received and the amount paid on effecting a closing purchase transaction, including brokerage commissions, is also treated as a realized gain, or if the premium received is less than the
16
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
amount paid for the closing purchase transaction, as a realized loss. If a call option is exercised, the premium received is added to the proceeds from the sale of the underlying security or currency in determining whether the Portfolio has realized a gain or loss. If a put option is exercised, the premium received reduces the cost basis of the security or currency purchased by the Portfolio. In writing an option, the Portfolio bears the market risk of an unfavorable change in the price of the security or currency underlying the written option. Exercise of an option written by the Portfolio could result in the Portfolio selling or buying a security or currency at a price different from the current market value.
During the six months ended June 30, 2012, the Portfolio held purchased options for hedging purposes. During the six months ended June 30, 2012, the Portfolio held written options for hedging purposes.
For the six months ended June 30, 2012, the Portfolio had the following transactions in written options:
| | | | | | | | |
| | Number of Contracts | | | Premiums Received | |
Options written outstanding as of 12/31/11 | | | –0 | – | | $ | –0 | – |
Options written | | | 53,200 | | | | 1,366,053 | |
Options expired | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
Options bought back | | | (53,200 | ) | | | (1,366,053 | ) |
Options exercised | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | |
Options written outstanding as of 06/30/12 | | | –0 | – | | $ | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | |
Documentation governing the Portfolio’s OTC derivatives may contain provisions for early termination of such transaction in the event the net assets of the Portfolio decline below specific levels set forth in the documentation (“net asset contingent features”). If these levels are triggered, the Portfolio’s counterparty has the right to terminate such transaction and require the Portfolio to pay or receive a settlement amount in connection with the terminated transaction. As of June 30, 2012, the Portfolio had OTC derivatives with contingent features in net liability positions in the amount of $6,753,138. If a trigger event had occurred at June 30, 2012, for those derivatives in a net liability position, an amount of $6,753,138 would be required to be posted by the Portfolio.
At June 30, 2012, the Portfolio had entered into the following derivatives:
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Asset Derivatives | | | Liability Derivatives | |
Derivative Type | | Statement of Assets and Liabilities Location | | Fair Value | | | Statement of Assets and Liabilities Location | | Fair Value | |
Foreign exchange contracts | | Unrealized appreciation of forward currency exchange contracts | | $ | 6,829,685 | | | Unrealized depreciation of forward currency exchange contracts | | $ | 16,993,817 | |
Equity contracts | | Receivable/Payable for variation margin on futures contracts | | | 547,584 | * | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total | | | | $ | 7,377,269 | | | | | $ | 16,993,817 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
* | | Only variation margin receivable/payable at period end is reported within the statement of assets and liabilities. This amount reflects cumulative appreciation/(depreciation) of futures contracts as reported in the portfolio of investments. |
The effect of derivative instruments on the statement of operations for the six months ended June 30, 2012:
| | | | | | | | | | |
Derivative Type | | Location of Gain or (Loss) on Derivatives | | Realized Gain or (Loss) on Derivatives | | | Change in Unrealized Appreciation or (Depreciation) | |
Foreign exchange contracts | | Net realized gain (loss) on foreign currency transactions; Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities | | $ | 1,866,766 | | | $ | (11,751,648 | ) |
17
| | |
INTERNATIONAL VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Derivative Type | | Location of Gain or (Loss) on Derivatives | | Realized Gain or (Loss) on Derivatives | | | Change in Unrealized Appreciation or (Depreciation) | |
Equity contracts | | Net realized gain (loss) on options written; Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of options written | | $ | 1,246,998 | | | $ | –0 | – |
Equity contracts | | Net realized gain (loss) on investment transactions; Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of investments | | | (5,766,270 | ) | | | –0 | – |
Equity contracts | | Net realized gain (loss) on futures contracts; Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of futures contracts | | | (219,098 | ) | | | 409,294 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Total | | | | $ | (2,871,604 | ) | | $ | (11,342,354 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | |
For the six months ended June 30, 2012, the average monthly principal amount of foreign currency exchange contracts was $802,193,785 and the average monthly original value of futures contracts was $11,556,657. For three months of the period, the average monthly cost of purchased options contracts was $7,528,701.
2. Currency Transactions
The Portfolio may invest in non-U.S. Dollar securities on a currency hedged or unhedged basis. The Portfolio may seek investment opportunities by taking long or short positions in currencies through the use of currency-related derivatives, including forward currency exchange contracts, futures and options on futures, swaps, and other options. The Portfolio may enter into transactions for investment opportunities when it anticipates that a foreign currency will appreciate or depreciate in value but securities denominated in that currency are not held by the Portfolio and do not present attractive investment opportunities. Such transactions may also be used when the Adviser believes that it may be more efficient than a direct investment in a foreign currency-denominated security. The Portfolio may also conduct currency exchange contracts on a spot basis (i.e., for cash at the spot rate prevailing in the currency exchange market for buying or selling currencies).
NOTE E : Securities Lending
The Portfolio may enter into securities lending transactions. Under the Portfolio’s securities lending program, all securities loans will be collateralized continually by cash. The Portfolio will be compensated for the loan from a portion of the net return from the income earned on cash collateral after a rebate is paid to the borrower (in some cases, this rebate may be a “negative rebate” or fee paid by the borrower to the Portfolio in connection with the loan), and payments for fees of the securities lending agent and for certain other administrative expenses. It is the policy of the Portfolio to receive collateral consisting of cash in an amount exceeding the value of the securities loaned. The Portfolio will have the right to call a loan and obtain the securities loaned at any time on notice to the borrower within the normal and customary settlement time for the securities. While the securities are on loan, the borrower is obligated to pay the Portfolio amounts equal to any income or other distributions from the securities. The Portfolio will not have the right to vote any securities during the existence of a loan, but will have the right to regain ownership of loaned securities in order to exercise voting or other ownership rights. The lending agent has agreed to indemnify the Portfolio in the case of default of any securities borrower. Collateral received and securities loaned are marked to market daily to ensure that the securities loaned are secured by collateral. The lending agent will invest the cash collateral received in AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves, an eligible money market vehicle, in accordance with the investment restrictions of the Portfolio, and as approved by the Fund’s Board of Directors. The collateral received on securities loaned is recorded as an asset as well as a corresponding liability in the statement of assets and liabilities. When the Portfolio lends securities, its investment performance will continue to reflect changes in the value of the securities loaned. At June 30, 2012, the Portfolio had securities on loan with a value of $57,775,543 and had received cash collateral which has been invested into AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves of $59,746,259. The cash collateral will be adjusted on the next business day after period end to maintain the required collateral amount. The Portfolio earned securities lending income of $1,193,751 and $48,633 from the borrowers and AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves, respectively, for the six months ended June 30, 2012; these amounts are reflected in the statement of operations. A principal
18
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
risk of lending portfolio securities is that the borrower will fail to return the loaned securities upon termination of the loan and that the collateral will not be sufficient to replace the loaned securities. A summary of the Portfolio’s transactions in shares of AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves for the six months ended June 30, 2012 is as follows:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Market Value December 31, 2011 (000) | | Purchases at Cost (000) | | | Sales Proceeds (000) | | | Market Value June 30, 2012 (000) | | | Dividend Income (000) | |
$35,009 | | $ | 522,797 | | | $ | 498,060 | | | $ | 59,746 | | | $ | 49 | |
NOTE F : Capital Stock
Each class consists of 500,000,000 authorized shares. Transactions in capital shares for each class were as follows:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | SHARES | | | | | AMOUNT | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | | | | | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | |
Class A | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Shares sold | | | 339,424 | | | | 1,263,722 | | | | | $ | 4,192,707 | | | $ | 17,627,302 | |
Shares issued in reinvestment of dividends | | | –0 | – | | | 251,905 | | | | | | –0 | – | | | 3,187,638 | |
Shares redeemed | | | (1,665,288 | ) | | | (3,122,480 | ) | | | | | (20,203,413 | ) | | | (44,808,960 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (1,325,864 | ) | | | (1,606,853 | ) | | | | $ | (16,010,706 | ) | | $ | (23,994,020 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class B | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Shares sold | | | 5,575,701 | | | | 11,078,334 | | | | | $ | 65,138,989 | | | $ | 146,348,238 | |
Shares issued in reinvestment of dividends | | | –0 | – | | | 3,808,040 | | | | | | –0 | – | | | 47,404,368 | |
Shares redeemed | | | (7,578,693 | ) | | | (14,009,848 | ) | | | | | (92,898,084 | ) | | | (196,937,484 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) | | | (2,002,992 | ) | | | 876,526 | | | | | $ | (27,759,095 | ) | | $ | (3,184,878 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
The Portfolio reversed a prior period accrual in the amount of $37,567 related to a third-party’s settlement of regulatory proceedings involving allegations of improper trading during the year ended December 31, 2011. This amount is presented in the Portfolio’s statement of changes in net assets. Neither the Portfolio nor its affiliates were involved in the proceedings or the calculation of the payment.
NOTE G : Risks Involved in Investing in the Portfolio
Foreign Securities Risk—Investing in securities of foreign companies or foreign governments involves special risks which include changes in foreign currency exchange rates and the possibility of future political and economic developments which could adversely affect the value of such securities. Moreover, securities of many foreign companies or foreign governments and their markets may be less liquid and their prices more volatile than those of comparable U.S. companies or of the U.S. government.
Currency Risk—This is the risk that changes in foreign currency exchange rates may negatively affect the value of the Portfolio’s investments or reduce the returns of the Portfolio. For example, the value of the Portfolio’s investments in foreign currency-denominated securities or currencies may decrease if the U.S. Dollar is strong (i.e., gaining value relative to other currencies) and other currencies are weak (i.e., losing value relative to the U.S. Dollar). Currency markets are generally not as regulated as securities markets. Independent of the Portfolio’s investments denominated in foreign currencies, the Portfolio’s positions in various foreign currencies may cause the Portfolio to experience investment losses due to the changes in exchange rates and interest rates.
Derivatives Risk—The Portfolio may enter into derivative transactions such as forwards, options, futures and swaps. Derivatives may be illiquid, difficult to price, and leveraged so that small changes may produce disproportionate losses for the Portfolio, and subject to counterparty risk to a greater degree than more traditional investments. Derivatives may result in significant losses, including losses that are far greater than the value of the derivatives reflected in the statement of assets and liabilities.
Indemnification Risk—In the ordinary course of business, the Portfolio enters into contracts that contain a variety of indemnifications. The Portfolio’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown. However, the Portfolio has not had prior claims or losses pursuant to these indemnification provisions and expects the risk of loss thereunder to be remote. Therefore, the Portfolio has not accrued any liability in connection with these indemnification provisions.
19
| | |
INTERNATIONAL VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
NOTE H : Joint Credit Facility
A number of open-end mutual funds managed by the Adviser, including the Portfolio, participate in a $140 million revolving credit facility (the “Facility”) intended to provide short-term financing, if necessary, subject to certain restrictions in connection with abnormal redemption activity. Commitment fees related to the Facility are paid by the participating funds and are included in miscellaneous expenses in the statement of operations. The Portfolio did not utilize the Facility during the six months ended June 30, 2012.
NOTE I : Distributions to Shareholders
The tax character of distributions to be paid for the year ending December 31, 2012 will be determined at the end of the current fiscal year. The tax character of distributions paid during the fiscal years ended December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010 were as follows:
| | | | | | | | |
| | 2011 | | | 2010 | |
Distributions paid from: | | | | | | | | |
Ordinary income | | $ | 49,967,098 | | | $ | 39,740,381 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total taxable distributions | | | 49,967,098 | | | | 39,740,381 | |
Tax return of capital | | | 624,908 | | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | |
Total distributions paid | | $ | 50,592,006 | | | $ | 39,740,381 | |
| | | | | | | | |
As of December 31, 2011, the components of accumulated earnings/(deficit) on a tax basis were as follows:
| | | | |
Accumulated capital and other losses | | $ | (1,031,483,019 | )(a) |
Unrealized appreciation/(depreciation) | | | (172,862,087 | )(b) |
| | | | |
Total accumulated earnings/(deficit) | | $ | (1,204,345,106 | ) |
| | | | |
(a) | | On December 31, 2011, the Portfolio had a net capital loss carryforward of $1,018,841,094. At December 31, 2011, the Portfolio had a qualified late-year loss deferral of $3,217,884, a post-October short-term capital loss deferral of $7,569,063 and a post-October long-term capital loss deferral of $1,854,978 which are deemed to arise on January 1, 2012. |
(b) | | The differences between book-basis and tax-basis unrealized appreciation/(depreciation) are attributable primarily to the tax deferral of losses on wash sales, the tax treatment of passive foreign investment companies (PFICs), and the realization for tax purposes of gains/losses on certain derivative instruments. |
For tax purposes, net capital losses may be carried over to offset future capital gains, if any. Under the Regulated Investment Company Modernization Act of 2010, funds are permitted to carry forward capital losses incurred in taxable years beginning after December 22, 2010 for an indefinite period. These post-enactment capital losses must be utilized prior to the pre-enactment capital losses, which are subject to expiration. Post-enactment capital loss carryforwards will retain their character as either short-term or long-term capital losses rather than being considered short-term as under previous regulation.
As of December 31, 2011, the Portfolio had a net capital loss carryforward of $1,018,841,094 which will expire as follows:
| | | | | | | | |
SHORT-TERM AMOUNT | | | LONG-TERM AMOUNT | | | EXPIRATION |
$ | 41,335,504 | | | | n/a | | | 2016 |
| 917,130,062 | | | | n/a | | | 2017 |
| 50,169,345 | | | | n/a | | | 2018 |
| 706,426 | | | $ | 9,499,757 | | | No expiration |
NOTE J : Recent Accounting Pronouncement
In December 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued an Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) related to disclosures about offsetting assets and liabilities in financial statements. The amendments in this update require an entity to disclose both gross and net information for derivatives and other financial instruments that are either offset in the statement of assets and liabilities or subject to an enforceable master netting arrangement or similar agreement. The ASU is effective during interim or annual reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2013. At this time, management is evaluating the implication of this ASU and its impact on the financial statements has not been determined.
20
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
NOTE K : Subsequent Events
Management has evaluated subsequent events for possible recognition or disclosure in the financial statements through the date the financial statements are issued. Management has determined that there are no material events that would require disclosure in the Portfolio’s financial statements through this date.
21
| | |
|
INTERNATIONAL VALUE PORTFOLIO |
FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Selected Data For A Share Of Capital Stock Outstanding Throughout Each Period
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | CLASS A | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, | |
| | | 2011 | | | 2010 | | | 2009 | | | 2008 | | | 2007 | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | | | $11.50 | | | | $14.90 | | | | $14.70 | | | | $11.05 | | | | $25.14 | | | | $24.96 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Income From Investment Operations | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income (a) | | | .24 | | | | .36 | | | | .27 | | | | .29 | | | | .54 | | | | .43 | |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | (.18 | ) | | | (3.19 | ) | | | .39† | | | | 3.54 | | | | (13.15 | ) | | | 1.07 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) in net asset value from operations | | | .06 | | | | (2.83 | ) | | | .66 | | | | 3.83 | | | | (12.61 | ) | | | 1.50 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Less: Dividends and Distributions | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Dividends from net investment income | | | –0 | – | | | (.56 | ) | | | (.46 | ) | | | (.18 | ) | | | (.23 | ) | | | (.31 | ) |
Distributions from net realized gain on investment transactions | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | (1.25 | ) | | | (1.01 | ) |
Tax return of capital | | | –0 | – | | | (.01 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total dividends and distributions | | | –0 | – | | | (.57 | ) | | | (.46 | ) | | | (.18 | ) | | | (1.48 | ) | | | (1.32 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net asset value, end of period | | | $11.56 | | | | $11.50 | | | | $14.90 | | | | $14.70 | | | | $11.05 | | | | $25.14 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Return | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total investment return based on net asset value (b) | | | .52 | % | | | (19.25 | )% | | | 4.59 | % | | | 34.68 | % | | | (53.18 | )% | | | 5.84 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Ratios/Supplemental Data | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net assets, end of period (000’s omitted) | | | $46,989 | | | | $62,003 | | | | $104,274 | | | | $179,342 | | | | $155,183 | | | | $219,691 | |
Ratio to average net assets of: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Expenses | | | .81 | %(c) | | | .82 | % | | | .85 | %(d) | | | .83 | % | | | .81 | % | | | .81 | % |
Net investment income | | | 3.87 | %(c) | | | 2.55 | % | | | 1.94 | %(d) | | | 2.40 | % | | | 2.98 | % | | | 1.68 | % |
Portfolio turnover rate | | | 21 | % | | | 62 | % | | | 52 | % | | | 52 | % | | | 36 | % | | | 23 | % |
See footnote summary on page 23.
22
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Selected Data For A Share Of Capital Stock Outstanding Throughout Each Period
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | CLASS B | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, | |
| | | 2011 | | | 2010 | | | 2009 | | | 2008 | | | 2007 | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | | | $11.40 | | | | $14.77 | | | | $14.54 | | | | $10.93 | | | | $24.88 | | | | $24.74 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Income From Investment Operations | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income (a) | | | .23 | | | | .31 | | | | .24 | | | | .28 | | | | .50 | | | | .36 | |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | (.19 | ) | | | (3.14 | ) | | | .38† | | | | 3.47 | | | | (13.02 | ) | | | 1.06 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) in net asset value from operations | | | .04 | | | | (2.83 | ) | | | .62 | | | | 3.75 | | | | (12.52 | ) | | | 1.42 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Less: Dividends and Distributions | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Dividends from net investment income | | | –0 | – | | | (.53 | ) | | | (.39 | ) | | | (.14 | ) | | | (.18 | ) | | | (.27 | ) |
Distributions from net realized gain on investment transactions | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | (1.25 | ) | | | (1.01 | ) |
Tax return of capital | | | –0 | – | | | (.01 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total dividends and distributions | | | –0 | – | | | (.54 | ) | | | (.39 | ) | | | (.14 | ) | | | (1.43 | ) | | | (1.28 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net asset value, end of period | | | $11.44 | | | | $11.40 | | | | $14.77 | | | | $14.54 | | | | $10.93 | | | | $24.88 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Return | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total investment return based on net asset value (b) | | | .35 | % | | | (19.44 | )% | | | 4.30 | % | | | 34.36 | % | | | (53.28 | )% | | | 5.58 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Ratios/Supplemental Data | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net assets, end of period (000,000’s omitted) | | | $1,014 | | | | $1,033 | | | | $1,326 | | | | $1,708 | | | | $1,659 | | | | $2,818 | |
Ratio to average net assets of: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Expenses | | | 1.06 | %(c) | | | 1.07 | % | | | 1.10 | %(d) | | | 1.08 | % | | | 1.06 | % | | | 1.06 | % |
Net investment income | | | 3.73 | %(c) | | | 2.23 | % | | | 1.73 | %(d) | | | 2.38 | % | | | 2.77 | % | | | 1.41 | % |
Portfolio turnover rate | | | 21 | % | | | 62 | % | | | 52 | % | | | 52 | % | | | 36 | % | | | 23 | % |
(a) | | Based on average shares outstanding. |
(b) | | Total investment return is calculated assuming an initial investment made at the net asset value at the beginning of the period, reinvestment of all dividends and distributions at net asset value during the period, and redemption on the last day of the period. Total return does not reflect (i) insurance company’s separate account related expense charges and (ii) the deductions of taxes that a shareholder would pay on Portfolio distributions or the redemption of Portfolio shares. Total investment return calculated for a period of less than one year is not annualized. |
(d) | | The ratio includes expenses attributable to costs of proxy solicitation. |
† | | Due to the timing of sales and repurchase of capital shares, the net realized and unrealized gain (loss) per share is not in accord with the Portfolio’s change in net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investment transactions for the period. |
See notes to financial statements.
23
| | |
| | |
INTERNATIONAL VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
CONTINUANCE DISCLOSURE | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
INFORMATION REGARDING THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE PORTFOLIO’S ADVISORY AGREEMENT
The disinterested directors (the “directors”) of AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund, Inc. (the “Fund”) unanimously approved the continuance of the Fund’s Advisory Agreement with the Adviser in respect of AllianceBernstein International Value Portfolio (the “Portfolio”) at a meeting held on May 1-3, 2012.
Prior to approval of the continuance of the Advisory Agreement, the directors had requested from the Adviser, and received and evaluated, extensive materials. They reviewed the proposed continuance of the Advisory Agreement with the Adviser and with experienced counsel who are independent of the Adviser, who advised on the relevant legal standards. The directors also reviewed an independent evaluation prepared by the Fund’s Senior Officer (who is also the Fund’s Independent Compliance Officer) of the reasonableness of the advisory fee in the Advisory Agreement, in which the Senior Officer concluded that the contractual fee for the Portfolio was reasonable. The directors also discussed the proposed continuance in private sessions with counsel and the Fund’s Senior Officer.
The directors considered their knowledge of the nature and quality of the services provided by the Adviser to the Portfolio gained from their experience as directors or trustees of most of the registered investment companies advised by the Adviser, their overall confidence in the Adviser’s integrity and competence they have gained from that experience, the Adviser’s initiative in identifying and raising potential issues with the directors and its responsiveness, frankness and attention to concerns raised by the directors in the past, including the Adviser’s willingness to consider and implement organizational and operational changes designed to improve investment results and the services provided to the AllianceBernstein Funds. The directors noted that they have four regular meetings each year, at each of which they receive presentations from the Adviser on the investment results of the Portfolio and review extensive materials and information presented by the Adviser.
The directors also considered all other factors they believed relevant, including the specific matters discussed below. In their deliberations, the directors did not identify any particular information that was all-important or controlling, and different directors may have attributed different weights to the various factors. The directors determined that the selection of the Adviser to manage the Portfolio and the overall arrangements between the Portfolio and the Adviser, as provided in the Advisory Agreement, including the advisory fee, were fair and reasonable in light of the services performed, expenses incurred and such other matters as the directors considered relevant in the exercise of their business judgment. The material factors and conclusions that formed the basis for the directors’ determinations included the following:
Nature, Extent and Quality of Services Provided
The directors considered the scope and quality of services provided by the Adviser under the Advisory Agreement, including the quality of the investment research capabilities of the Adviser and the other resources it has dedicated to performing services for the Portfolio. They also noted the professional experience and qualifications of the Portfolio’s portfolio management team and other senior personnel of the Adviser. The directors also considered that the Advisory Agreement provides that the Portfolio will reimburse the Adviser for the cost to it of providing certain clerical, accounting, administrative and other services provided at the Portfolio’s request by employees of the Adviser or its affiliates. Requests for these reimbursements are approved by the directors on a quarterly basis and, to the extent requested and paid, result in a higher rate of total compensation from the Portfolio to the Adviser than the fee rate stated in the Portfolio’s Advisory Agreement. The directors noted that the methodology used to determine the reimbursement amounts had been reviewed by an independent consultant retained by the Fund’s Senior Officer. The quality of administrative and other services, including the Adviser’s role in coordinating the activities of the Portfolio’s other service providers, also were considered. The directors concluded that, overall, they were satisfied with the nature, extent and quality of services provided to the Portfolio under the Advisory Agreement.
Costs of Services Provided and Profitability
The directors reviewed a schedule of the revenues, expenses and related notes indicating the profitability of the Portfolio to the Adviser for calendar years 2010 and 2011 that had been prepared with an expense allocation methodology arrived at in consultation with an independent consultant retained by the Fund’s Senior Officer. The directors reviewed the assumptions and methods of allocation used by the Adviser in preparing fund-specific profitability data and noted that there are a number of potentially acceptable allocation methodologies for information of this type. The directors noted that the profitability information reflected all revenues and expenses of the Adviser’s relationship with the Portfolio, including those relating to its subsidiaries which provide transfer agency, distribution and brokerage services to the Portfolio. The directors recognized that it is difficult to make comparisons of profitability of the Advisory Agreement with fund advisory contracts for unaffiliated funds because comparative information is not generally publicly available and is affected by numerous factors. The directors
24
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
focused on the profitability of the Adviser’s relationship with the Portfolio before taxes and distribution expenses. The directors concluded that they were satisfied that the Adviser’s level of profitability from its relationship with the Portfolio was not unreasonable.
Fall-Out Benefits
The directors considered the other benefits to the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationships with the Portfolio, including but not limited to benefits relating to soft dollar arrangements (whereby the Adviser receives brokerage and research services from brokers that execute transactions for certain clients, including the Portfolio); 12b-1 fees and sales charges received by the Fund’s principal underwriter (which is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Adviser) in respect of the Portfolio’s Class B shares; transfer agency fees paid by the Portfolio to a wholly owned subsidiary of the Adviser; and brokerage commissions paid by the Portfolio to brokers affiliated with the Adviser. The directors recognized that the Adviser’s profitability would be somewhat lower without these benefits. The directors also understood that the Adviser also might derive reputational and other benefits from its association with the Portfolio.
Investment Results
In addition to the information reviewed by the directors in connection with the meeting, the directors receive detailed performance information for the Portfolio at each regular Board meeting during the year. The directors noted that the Portfolio is a clone of another fund managed by the Adviser (the “Corresponding Fund”) and is managed to track the investment performance of its Corresponding Fund, although investment results may differ between the Portfolio and its Corresponding Fund due to differences in their expense ratios and other factors. At the May 2012 meeting, the directors reviewed information prepared by Lipper showing the performance of the Class A Shares of the Portfolio as compared with that of a group of similar funds selected by Lipper (the “Performance Group”) and as compared with that of a broader array of funds selected by Lipper (the “Performance Universe”), and information prepared by the Adviser showing performance of the Class A Shares as compared with the Morgan Stanley Capital International Europe, Australasia and Far East Index (Net) (the “Index”), in each case for the 1-, 3- and 5-year periods ended February 29, 2012 and (in the case of comparisons with the Index) the since inception period (May 2001 inception). The directors noted that the Portfolio was in the 5th quintile of the Performance Group and the Performance Universe for the 1- and 5-year periods, in the 4th quintile of the Performance Group and the Performance Universe for the 3-year period, and 3rd out of 3 of the Performance Group and in the 4th quintile of the Performance Universe for the 10-year period. The Portfolio outperformed the Index in the since inception period and lagged the Index in all other periods. The directors noted that all reference points showed negative results in the 1- and 5-year periods. The directors also reviewed performance information for periods ended March 31, 2012 (for which the data was not limited to Class A Shares), and noted that in the 3-month period the Portfolio had outperformed the Lipper VA International Value Funds Average and the Index.
The directors noted that they had discussed with the Adviser their concerns about the relative performance of the Portfolio. The directors took into account the Adviser’s recent restructuring of the Adviser’s research and portfolio management teams and investment process changes that are intended to improve the investment performance of its equity services. The Adviser had stated its belief that, in the case of its value funds, it had adhered to its rigorous process for value investing during a period when value investing had not generally obtained favorable returns. The Adviser believed that other managers of value funds may not pursue value characteristics to the same degree as the Adviser, and that their funds’ short-term performance may have benefited from style drift. The Adviser also reiterated its conviction that, over the long term, rigorous value investing would yield superior investment returns. The directors were satisfied with the Adviser’s explanation.
Based on their review and their discussion with the Adviser of the reasons for the Portfolio’s performance, the directors retained confidence in the Adviser’s ability to manage the Portfolio. The directors determined to continue to monitor the Portfolio’s performance closely.
Advisory Fees and Other Expenses
The directors considered the advisory fee rate paid by the Portfolio to the Adviser and information prepared by Lipper concerning advisory fee rates paid by other funds in the same Lipper category as the Portfolio at a common asset level. The directors recognized that it is difficult to make comparisons of advisory fees because there are variations in the services that are included in the fees paid by other funds.
The directors also considered the fees the Adviser charges non-fund clients pursuing a similar investment style. For this purpose, they reviewed the relevant fee information from the Adviser’s Form ADV and the evaluation from the Fund’s
25
| | |
INTERNATIONAL VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
CONTINUANCEDISCLOSURE | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Senior Officer. The directors noted that the institutional fee schedule started at a higher fee rate than the Portfolio’s starting fee rate, but had more breakpoints starting at lower asset levels. As a result, the application of the institutional fee schedule to the level of assets of the Portfolio would result in a lower fee rate than that being paid by the Portfolio. The directors noted that the Adviser may, in some cases, agree to fee rates with large institutional clients that are lower than those reviewed by the directors and that they had previously discussed with the Adviser its policies in respect of such arrangements. The directors also reviewed information that indicated that the Portfolio’s fee rate is higher than the sub-advisory fee rate earned by the Adviser for sub-advising certain registered investment companies with a similar investment style. The directors noted that the advisory fee schedule for the Portfolio is the same as that for its Corresponding Fund.
The Adviser reviewed with the directors the significantly greater scope of the services it provides to the Portfolio relative to institutional clients and sub-advised funds. The Adviser also noted that because mutual funds are constantly issuing and redeeming shares, they are more difficult to manage than an institutional account, where the assets tend to be relatively stable. In light of the substantial differences in services rendered by the Adviser to institutional clients as compared to funds such as the Portfolio, the directors considered these fee comparisons inapt and did not place significant weight on them in their deliberations.
The directors also considered the total expense ratio of the Class A shares of the Portfolio in comparison to the fees and expenses of funds within two comparison groups created by Lipper: an Expense Group and an Expense Universe. Lipper described an Expense Group as a representative sample of funds similar to the Portfolio and an Expense Universe as a broader group, consisting of all funds in the investment classification/objective with a similar load type as the Portfolio. The directors noted that because of the small number of funds in the Portfolio’s Lipper category, Lipper had expanded the Expense Group of the Fund to include peers that had a similar (but not the same) Lipper investment objective/classification. The Expense Universe for the Portfolio had also been expanded by Lipper pursuant to Lipper’s standard guidelines. The Class A expense ratio of the Portfolio was based on the Portfolio’s latest fiscal year. The directors noted that it was likely that the expense ratios of some of the other funds in the Portfolio’s Lipper category were lowered by waivers or reimbursements by those funds’ investment advisers, which in some cases might be voluntary or temporary. The directors view the expense ratio information as relevant to their evaluation of the Adviser’s services because the Adviser is responsible for coordinating services provided to the Portfolio by others.
The directors noted that, at the Portfolio’s current size, its contractual effective advisory fee rate of 75 basis points, plus the less than 1 basis point impact of the administrative expense reimbursement in the latest fiscal year, was the same as the Expense Group median. The directors noted that the Portfolio’s total expense ratio, which had been capped by the Adviser (although the expense ratio was currently lower than the cap), was lower than the Expense Group and the Expense Universe medians. The directors concluded that the Portfolio’s expense ratio was satisfactory.
Economies of Scale
The directors noted that the advisory fee schedule for the Portfolio contains breakpoints that reduce the fee rates on assets above specified levels. The directors took into consideration prior presentations by an independent consultant on economies of scale in the mutual fund industry and for the AllianceBernstein Funds, and by the Adviser concerning certain of its views on economies of scale. The directors also had requested and received from the Adviser certain updates on economies of scale at the May 2012 meetings. The directors believe that economies of scale may be realized (if at all) by the Adviser across a variety of products and services, and not only in respect of a single fund. The directors noted that there is no established methodology for establishing breakpoints that give effect to the fund-specific services provided by a fund’s adviser and to the economies of scale that an adviser may realize in its overall mutual fund business or those components of it which directly or indirectly affect a fund’s operations. The directors observed that in the mutual fund industry as a whole, as well as among funds similar to the Portfolio, there is no uniformity or pattern in the fees and asset levels at which breakpoints (if any) apply. The directors also noted that the advisory agreements for many funds do not have breakpoints at all. Having taken these factors into account, the directors concluded that the Portfolio’s shareholders would benefit from a sharing of economies of scale in the event the Portfolio’s net assets exceed a breakpoint in the future.
26
| | |
| | |
INTERNATIONAL VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
THE FOLLOWING IS NOT PART OF THE SHAREHOLDER REPORT OR THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
SUMMARY OF SENIOR OFFICER’S EVALUATION OF INVESTMENT ADVISORY AGREEMENT1
The following is a summary of the evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement between AllianceBernstein L.P. (the “Adviser”) and the AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund (the “Fund”), in respect of AllianceBernstein International Value Portfolio (the “Portfolio”).2 The evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement was prepared by Philip L. Kirstein, the Senior Officer of the Fund, for the Directors of the Fund, as required by a September 2004 agreement between the Adviser and the New York State Attorney General (the “NYAG”). The Senior Officer’s evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement is not meant to diminish the responsibility or authority of the Board of Directors of the Fund to perform its duties pursuant to Section 15 of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “40 Act”) and applicable state law. The purpose of the summary is to provide shareholders with a synopsis of the independent evaluation of the reasonableness of the advisory fees proposed to be paid by the Portfolio which was provided to the Directors in connection with their review of the proposed approval of the continuance of the Investment Advisory Agreement. The Senior Officer’s evaluation considered the following factors:
| 1. | Advisory fees charged to institutional and other clients of the Adviser for like services; |
| 2. | Advisory fees charged by other mutual fund companies for like services; |
| 3. | Costs to the Adviser and its affiliates of supplying services pursuant to the advisory agreement, excluding any intra-corporate profit; |
| 4. | Profit margins of the Adviser and its affiliates from supplying such services; |
| 5. | Possible economies of scale as the Portfolio grows larger; and |
| 6. | Nature and quality of the Adviser’s services including the performance of the Portfolio. |
These factors, with the exception of the first factor, are generally referred to as the “Gartenberg factors,” which were articulated by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in 1982. Gartenberg v. Merrill Lynch Asset Management, Inc., 694 F. 2d 923 (2d Cir. 1982). The first factor is an additional factor required to be considered by the AoD. On March 30, 2010, the Supreme Court held the Gartenberg decision was correct in its basic formulation of what §36(b) requires: to face liability under §36(b), “an investment adviser must charge a fee that is so disproportionately large that it bears no reasonable relationship to the services rendered and could not have been the product of arm’s length bargaining.” Jones v. Harris Associates L.P., 130 S. Ct. 1418 (2010). In the Jones decision, the Court stated the Gartenberg approach fully incorporates the correct understanding of fiduciary duty within the context of section 36(b) and noted with approval that “Gartenberg insists that all relevant circumstances be taken into account” and “uses the range of fees that might result from arm’s-length bargaining as the benchmark for reviewing challenged fees.”3
PORTFOLIO ADVISORY FEES, NET ASSETS & EXPENSE RATIOS
The Adviser proposed that the Portfolio pay the advisory fee set forth in the table below for receiving the services to be provided pursuant to the Investment Advisory Agreement. The fee schedule below, implemented in January 2004 in consideration of the Adviser’s settlement with the NYAG in December 2003, is based on a master schedule that contemplates eight categories of funds with almost all funds in each category having the same advisory fee schedule.
| | | | | | | | |
Category | | Advisory Fee Based on % of Average Daily Net Assets | | Net Assets 3/31/12 ($MIL) | | | Portfolio |
International | | 75 bp on first $2.5 billion 65 bp on next $2.5 billion 60 bp on the balance | | $ | 1,206.9 | | | International Value Portfolio |
1 | | The information in the fee summary was completed on April 19, 2012 and discussed with the Board of Directors on May 1-3, 2012. |
2 | | Future references to the Fund and the Portfolio do not include “AllianceBernstein.” References in the fee summary pertaining to performance and expense ratio rankings refer to the Class A shares of the Portfolio. |
3 | | Jones v. Harris at 1427. |
27
| | |
INTERNATIONAL VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
The Adviser is reimbursed as specified in the Investment Advisory Agreement for certain clerical, legal, accounting, administrative and other services provided to the Portfolio. During the Portfolio’s most recently completed fiscal year, the Adviser received $61,186 (0.005% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets) for such services.
The Adviser has agreed to waive that portion of its management fees and/or reimburse the Portfolio for that portion of its total operating expenses to the degree necessary to limit the Portfolio’s expense ratios to the amounts set forth below for the Portfolio’s fiscal year. The waiver is terminable by the Adviser on May 1st of each year upon at least 60 days written notice. It should be noted that the Portfolio was operating below its expense caps for the most recent fiscal year; accordingly the expense limitation undertaking of the Portfolio was of no effect. In addition, set forth below are the gross expense ratios of the Portfolio for the most recently completed fiscal year:
| | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Expense Cap Pursuant to Expense Limitation Undertaking | | Gross Expense Ratio | | | Fiscal Year End |
International Value Portfolio | | Class A 1.20% Class B 1.45% | |
| 0.82%
1.07% |
| | December 31 |
I. ADVISORY FEES CHARGED TO INSTITUTIONAL AND OTHER CLIENTS
The advisory fees charged to investment companies which the Adviser manages and sponsors are normally higher than those charged to similar sized institutional accounts, including pension plans and sub-advised investment companies. The fee differential reflects, among other things, different services provided to such clients, and different liabilities assumed. Services provided by the Adviser to the Portfolio that are not provided to non-investment company clients and sub-advised investment companies include providing office space and personnel to serve as Fund Officers, who among other responsibilities make the certifications required under the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002, and coordinating with and monitoring the Portfolio’s third party service providers such as Fund counsel, auditors, custodians, transfer agents and pricing services. The accounting, administrative, legal and compliance requirements for the Portfolio are more costly than those for institutional assets due to the greater complexities and time required for investment companies, although as previously noted, the Adviser is reimbursed for providing such services. Also, retail mutual funds managed by the Adviser are widely held. Servicing the Portfolio’s investors is more time consuming and labor intensive compared to institutional clients since the Adviser needs to communicate with a more extensive network of financial intermediaries and shareholders. The Adviser also believes that it incurs substantial entrepreneurial risk when offering a new mutual fund, since establishing a new mutual fund requires a large upfront investment, and it may take a long time for the fund to achieve profitability since the fund must be priced to scale from inception in order to be competitive and assets are acquired one account at a time. In addition, managing the cash flow of an investment company may be more difficult than managing that of a stable pool of assets, such as an institutional account with little cash movement in either direction, particularly, if a fund is in net redemption and the Adviser is frequently forced to sell securities to raise cash for redemptions. However, managing a fund with positive cash flow may be easier at times than managing a stable pool of assets. In recent years, investment advisers have been sued by institutional clients and have suffered reputational damage both by the attendant publicity and outcomes other than complete victories. Accordingly, the legal and reputational risks associated with institutional accounts are greater than previously thought, although still not equal to those related to the mutual fund industry.
Notwithstanding the Adviser’s view that managing an investment company is not comparable to managing other institutional accounts because the services provided are different, the Supreme Court has indicated consideration should be given to the advisory fees charged to institutional accounts that have a substantially similar investment style as the Portfolio.4 In
4 | | The Supreme Court stated that “courts may give such comparisons the weight that they merit in light of the similarities and differences between the services that the clients in question require, but the courts must be wary of inapt comparisons.” Among the significant differences the Supreme Court noted that may exist between services provided to mutual funds and institutional accounts are “higher marketing costs.” Jones v. Harris at 1428. |
28
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
addition to the AllianceBernstein institutional fee schedule, set forth below is what would have been the effective advisory fee of the Portfolio had the AllianceBernstein institutional fee schedule been applicable to the Portfolio versus the Portfolio’s advisory fee based on March 31, 2012 net assets:5
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Net Assets 3/31/12 ($MIL) | | AllianceBernstein Institutional Fee Schedule | | Effective AB Inst. Adv. Fee | | | Portfolio Advisory Fee | |
International Value Portfolio | | $1,206.9 | | International Value Schedule 80 bp on first $25m 60 bp on the next $25m 50 bp on the next $50m 40 bp on the balance Minimum account size $25m | | | 0.417 | % | | | 0.750 | % |
The Adviser also manages AllianceBernstein International Value Fund, Inc. (“International Value Fund, Inc.”), a retail mutual fund, which has a substantially similar investment style as the Portfolio. Set forth below is the fee schedule of International Value Fund, Inc. and what would have been the effective advisory fee of the Portfolio had the fee schedule of the retail mutual fund been applicable to the Portfolio:6
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | AllianceBernstein Mutual Fund | | Fee Schedule | | ABMF Effective Fee | | | Portfolio Advisory Fee | |
International Value Portfolio | | International Value Fund, Inc. | | 0.75% on first $2.5 billion 0.65% on next $2.5 billion 0.60% on the balance | | | 0.750% | | | | 0.750% | |
The Adviser provides sub-advisory services to certain other investment companies managed by other fund families that have an investment style similar to that of the Portfolio. The Adviser charges the fees set forth below for the sub-advisory relationships that have a somewhat similar investment style as the Portfolio. Also shown are the Portfolio’s advisory fee and what would have been the effective advisory fees of the Portfolio had the fee schedules of the sub-advisory relationships been applicable to the Portfolio based on March 31, 2012 net assets.
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | | | Fee Schedule | | Effective Sub-Adv. Fee(%) | | | Portfolio Advisory Fee(%) | |
International Value Portfolio | | Client # 1 | | 0.75% bp on first $50 million 0.60% bp on next $15 million 0.50% bp on next $70 million 0.40% bp on the balance | | | 0.423 | | | | 0.750 | |
| | | | |
| | Client #27 | | 0.60% of average daily net assets | | | 0.600 | | | | 0.750 | |
| | | | |
| | Client #3 | | 0.35% on the first $1 billion 0.325 % on the balance | | | 0.346 | | | | 0.750 | |
| | | | |
| | Client #4 | | 0.22% on the first $1 billion 0.18% on the next $1.5 billion 0.16% on the balance +/- Performance Fee (v. ACWI ex U.S.) | | | 0.213 | 8 | | | 0.750 | |
It is fair to note that the services the Adviser provides pursuant to sub-advisory agreements are generally confined to the services related to the investment process; in other words, they are not as comprehensive as the services provided to the
5 | | The Adviser has indicated that with respect to institutional accounts with assets greater than $300 million, it will negotiate a fee schedule. Discounts that are negotiated vary based upon each client relationship. |
6 | | The retail mutual fund was also affected by the settlement between the Adviser and the NYAG. As a result, the Portfolio has the same breakpoints in its advisory fee schedule as the retail mutual fund. |
7 | | The client is an affiliate of the Adviser. |
8 | | The sub-advised fund’s sub-advisory fee shown does not include any performance fee adjustment. |
29
| | |
INTERNATIONAL VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Portfolios by the Adviser. In addition, to the extent that certain of these sub-advisory relationships are with affiliates of the Adviser, the fee schedules may not reflect arm’s length bargaining or negotiations.
While it appears that the sub-advisory relationships are paying a lower fee than the Portfolios, it is difficult to evaluate the relevance of such lower fees due to differences in terms of the services provided, risks involved and other competitive factors between the Portfolios and the sub-advisory relationships. There could be various business reasons why an investment adviser would be willing to provide a sub-advisory relationship investment related services at a different fee level than an investment company it is is sponsoring where the investment adviser is providing all the services, not just investment management, generally required by a registered investment company.
II. MANAGEMENT FEES CHARGED BY OTHER MUTUAL FUND COMPANIES FOR LIKE SERVICES.
Lipper, Inc. (“Lipper”), an analytical service that is not affiliated with the Adviser, compared the fees charged to the Portfolio with fees charged to other investment companies for similar services offered by other investment advisers.9 Lipper’s analysis included the comparison of the Portfolio’s contractual management fee, estimated at the approximate current asset level of the Portfolio, to the median of the Portfolio’s Lipper Expense Group (“EG”) and the Portfolio’s contractual management fee ranking.10
Lipper describes an EG as a representative sample of comparable funds. Lipper’s standard methodology for screening funds to be included in an EG entails the consideration of several fund criteria, including fund type, investment classification/objective, load type and similar 12b-1/non-12b-1 service fees, asset (size) comparability, expense components and attributes. An EG will typically consist of seven to twenty funds. The Portfolio’s original EG had an insufficient number of peers. Consequently, Lipper expanded the Portfolio’s EG to include peers that have similar but not the same Lipper investment classification/objective as the Portfolio.11
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Contractual Management Fee12 | | | Lipper Exp. Group Median (%) | | | Rank | |
International Value Portfolio | | | 0.750 | | | | 0.755 | | | | 5/12 | |
Because Lipper had expanded the EG of the Portfolio, under Lipper’s standard guidelines, the Lipper Expense Universe (“EU”) was also expanded to include the universes of those peers that had a similar but not the same Lipper investment classification/objective.13 A “normal” EU will include funds that have the same investment classification/objective as the subject Portfolio.14
Set forth below is a comparison of the Portfolio’s total expense ratio and the medians of the Portfolio’s EG and EU. The Portfolio’s total expense ratio ranking is also shown in the table below.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Expense Ratio (%)15 | | | Lipper Exp. Group Median (%) | | | Lipper Group Rank | | | Lipper Exp. Universe Median (%) | | | Lipper Universe Rank | |
International Value Portfolio | | | 0.819 | | | | 0.842 | | | | 3/12 | | | | 0.996 | | | | 10/82 | |
9 | | The Supreme Court cautioned against accepting mutual fund fee comparisons without careful scrutiny since “these comparisons are problematic because these fees, like those challenged, may not be the product of the negotiations conducted at arm’s-length.” Jones v. Harris at 1429. |
10 | | The contractual management fee is calculated by Lipper using the Portfolio’s contractual management fee rate at a hypothetical asset level. The hypothetical asset level is based on the combined net assets of all classes of the Portfolio, rounded up to the next $25 million. Lipper’s total expense ratio information is based on the most recent annual report except as otherwise noted. A ranking of “1” would mean that the Portfolio had the lowest effective fee rate in the Lipper peer group. |
11 | | The Portfolio’s EG includes the Portfolio, five other VIP International Value funds (“IFVE”), three VIP International Growth funds (“IFGE”) and three VIP International Core funds (“IFCE”). |
12 | | The contractual management fee does not reflect any expense reimbursements made by the Portfolio to the Adviser for certain clerical, legal, accounting, administrative and other services. In addition, the contractual management fee does not reflect any advisory fee waiver or expense cap that would effectively reduce the actual management fee. |
13 | | Except for asset (size) comparability, Lipper uses the same criteria for selecting an EG peer when selecting an EU peer. Unlike the EG, the EU allows for the same adviser to be represented by more than just one fund. |
14 | | The Portfolio’s EU includes the Portfolio, EG and all other VIP IFVE, IFGE and IFCE funds, excluding outliers. |
15 | | Most recently completed fiscal year end Class A total expense ratio. |
30
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Based on this analysis, the Portfolio has a more favorable ranking on a total expense ratio basis than on a management fee basis.
III. COSTS TO THE ADVISER AND ITS AFFILIATES OF SUPPLYING SERVICES PURSUANT TO THE ADVISORY FEE ARRANGEMENT, EXCLUDING ANY INTRA-CORPORATE PROFIT.
The Adviser utilizes two profitability reporting systems, which operate independently but are aligned with each other, to estimate the Adviser’s profitability in connection with investment advisory services provided to the Portfolio. The Senior Officer has retained a consultant to provide independent advice regarding the alignment of the two profitability systems as well as the methodologies and allocations utilized by both profitability systems.
IV. PROFIT MARGINS OF THE ADVISER AND ITS AFFILIATES FOR SUPPLYING SUCH SERVICES.
The Portfolio’s profitability information, prepared by the Adviser for the Board of Directors, was reviewed by the Senior Officer and the consultant. The Adviser’s profitability from providing investment advisory services to the Portfolio decreased during calendar year 2011, relative to 2010.
In addition to the Adviser’s direct profits from managing the Portfolio, certain of the Adviser’s affiliates have business relationships with the Portfolio and may earn a profit from providing other services to the Portfolio. The courts have referred to this type of business opportunity as “fall-out benefits” to the Adviser and indicated that such benefits should be factored into the evaluation of the total relationship between the Portfolio and the Adviser. Neither case law nor common business practice precludes the Adviser’s affiliates from earning a reasonable profit on this type of relationship provided the affiliates’ charges and services are competitive. These affiliates provide transfer agent, distribution and brokerage related services to the Portfolio and receive transfer agent fees, Rule 12b-1 payments, and brokerage commissions. In addition, the Adviser benefits from soft dollar arrangements which offset expenses the Adviser would otherwise incur.
The Portfolio has adopted a distribution plan for Class B shares pursuant to Rule 12b-1 under the 40 Act. Under the distribution plan, the Portfolio pays distribution and servicing fees to its principal underwriter, AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (“ABI”), at an annual rate of up to 0.50% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The current annual rate that the Portfolio pays to ABI for 12b-1 fees is 0.25%. During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011, AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (“ABI”), the Portfolio’s distributor and an affiliate of the Adviser, received $3,038,287 in Rule 12b-1 fees.
During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011, the Adviser incurred distribution expenses in the amount of $7,252,929 in connection with activities primarily intended to result in the sale of the Portfolio’s Class B shares. This amount includes the 12b-1 fees paid by the Portfolio to the Adviser.
Financial intermediaries, such as insurers, market and sell shares of the Portfolio and typically receive compensation from ABI, the Advisers and/or the Portfolio for selling shares of the Portfolio. These financial intermediaries receive compensation in any or all of the following forms: 12b-1 fees, defrayal of costs for educational seminars and training, additional distribution support, recordkeeping and/or administrative services. Payments related to providing contract-holder recordkeeping and/or administrative services will generally not exceed 0.35% of the average daily net assets of the Portfolio attributable to the relevant intermediary over the year. With respect to the Fund, which includes the Portfolio and other Portfolios of the Fund not discussed in this summary, ABI paid approximately $500,000 in 2011.
The transfer agent of the Portfolio is AllianceBernstein Investor Services, Inc. (“ABIS”). During the most recently completed fiscal year, ABIS received a fee of $1,310 from the Portfolio.16
The Portfolio effected brokerage transactions through the Adviser’s affiliate, Sanford C. Bernstein & Co., LLC (“SCB & Co.”) and/or its U.K. affiliate, Sanford C. Bernstein Limited (“SCB Ltd.”), collectively “SCB,” and paid commissions during the Portfolio’s most recently completed fiscal year. The Adviser represented that SCB’s profitability from business conducted with the Portfolio is comparable to the profitability of SCB’s dealings with other similar third party clients. In the ordinary course of business, SCB receives and pays liquidity rebates from electronic communications networks (“ECNs”) derived from trading for its clients, including the Portfolio. These credits and charges are not being passed onto any SCB client. The Adviser also receives certain soft dollar benefits from brokers that execute agency trades for the Portfolio and other clients. These soft dollar benefits reduce the Adviser’s cost of doing business and increase its profitability.
16 | | The Fund, which includes the Portfolio and other Portfolios of the Fund paid ABIS a flat fee of $18,000 in 2010. |
31
| | |
INTERNATIONAL VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
V. POSSIBLE ECONOMIES OF SCALE
The Adviser has indicated that economies of scale are being shared with shareholders through fee structures,17 subsidies and enhancement to services. Based on some of the professional literature that has considered economies of scale in the mutual fund industry, it is thought that to the extent economies of scale exist, they may more often exist across a fund family as opposed to a specific fund. This is because the costs incurred by the Adviser, such as investment research or technology for trading or compliance systems can be spread across a greater asset base as the fund family increases in size. It is also possible that as the level of services required to operate a successful investment company has increased over time, and advisory firms make such investments in their business to provide services, there may be a sharing of economies of scale without a reduction in advisory fees.
An independent consultant, retained by the Senior Officer, provided the Board of Directors information on the Adviser’s firm-wide average costs from 2005 through 2011 and potential economies of scale. The independent consultant noted that from 2005 through 2007 the Adviser experienced significant growth in assets under management (“AUM”). During this period, operating expenses increased, in part to keep up with growth, and in part reflecting market returns. However, from 2008 through the first quarter of 2009, AUM rapidly and significantly decreased. Some operating expenses, including base compensation and office space, adjusted more slowly during this period, resulting in an increase in average costs. Since 2009, AUM has moved within a range of $400 to $500 million ending 2011 with an average of $411 million in the fourth quarter. The independent consultant noted that changes in operating expenses reflect changes in business composition and business practices in response to changes in financial markets. Finally, the independent consultant concluded that the increase in average cost and the decline in net operating margin across the company since 2008 are inconsistent with the view that there are currently “economies of scale” to be shared with clients through lower fees.
In February 2008, the independent consultant provided the Board of Directors an update of the Deli18 study on advisory fees and various fund characteristics.19 The independent consultant first reiterated the results of his previous two dimensional comparison analysis (fund size and family size) with the Board of Directors.20 The independent consultant then discussed the results of the regression model that was utilized to study the effects of various factors on advisory fees. The regression model output indicated that the bulk of the variation in fees predicted were explained by various factors, but substantially by fund AUM, family AUM, index fund indicator and investment style. The independent consultant also compared the advisory fees of the AllianceBernstein Mutual Funds to similar funds managed by 19 other large asset managers, regardless of the fund size and each Adviser’s proportion of mutual fund assets to non-mutual fund assets.
VI. NATURE AND QUALITY OF THE ADVISER’S SERVICES, INCLUDING THE PERFORMANCE OF THE PORTFOLIO
With assets under management of approximately $419 billion as of March 31, 2012, the Adviser has the investment experience to manage and provide non-investment services (described in Section I) to the Portfolio.
17 | | Fee structures include fee reductions, pricing at scale and breakpoints in advisory fee schedules. |
18 | | The Deli study, originally published in 2002 based on 1997 data and updated for the February 2008 Presentation, may be of diminished value due to the age of the data used in the presentation and the changes experienced in the industry over the last four years. |
19 | | As mentioned previously, the Supreme Court cautioned against accepting mutual fund fee comparisons without careful scrutiny since the fees may not be the product of negotiations conducted at arm’s length. See Jones V. Harris at 1429. |
20 | | The two dimensional analysis showed patterns of lower advisory fees for funds with larger asset sizes and funds from larger family sizes compared to funds with smaller asset sizes and funds from smaller family sizes, which according to the independent consultant is indicative of a sharing of economies of scale and scope. However, in less liquid and active markets, such is not the case, as the empirical analysis showed potential for diseconomies of scale in those markets. The empirical analysis also showed diminishing economies of scale and scope as funds surpassed a certain high level of assets. |
32
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
The information prepared by Lipper shows the 1, 3, 5 and 10 year performance returns and rankings of the Portfolio21 relative to its Lipper Performance Group (“PG”) and Lipper Performance Universe (“PU”)22 for the periods ended February 29, 2012.23
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Fund | | | PG Median | | | PU Median | | | PG Rank | | | PU Rank | |
International Value Portfolio | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
1 year | | | –13.97 | | | | –8.46 | | | | –10.07 | | | | 6/6 | | | | 19/23 | |
3 year | | | 18.46 | | | | 19.75 | | | | 19.98 | | | | 4/6 | | | | 15/20 | |
5 year | | | –8.43 | | | | –2.14 | | | | –3.19 | | | | 6/6 | | | | 15/15 | |
10 year | | | 5.70 | | | | 6.28 | | | | 6.28 | | | | 3/3 | | | | 7/11 | |
Set forth below are the 1, 3, 5 and 10 year and since inception performance returns of the Portfolio (in bold)24 versus its benchmark.25 Portfolio and benchmark volatility and reward-to-variability ratio (“Sharpe Ratio”) information is also shown.26
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | 1 Year (%) | | | 3 Year (%) | | | 5 Year (%) | | | 10 Year (%) | | | Since Inception (%) | | | Annualized | | | Risk Period (Year) | |
| | | | | | Volatility (%) | | | Sharpe (%) | | |
International Value Portfolio | | | –13.97 | | | | 18.46 | | | – | 8.43 | | | | 5.70 | | | | 5.17 | | | | 22.09 | | | | 0.28 | | | | 10 | |
MSCI EAFE Index (Net) | | | –17.45 | | | | 19.74 | | | – | 2.93 | | | | 6.31 | | | | 3.77 | | | | 18.69 | | | | 0.32 | | | | 10 | |
Inception Date: May 10, 2001 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CONCLUSION:
Based on the factors discussed above the Senior Officer’s conclusion is that the proposed advisory fee for the Portfolio is reasonable and within the range of what would have been negotiated at arm’s-length in light of all the surrounding circumstances. This conclusion in respect of the Portfolio is based on an evaluation of all of these factors and no single factor was dispositive.
Dated: May 25, 2012
21 | | The performance rankings are for the Class A shares of the Portfolio. The Portfolio’s performance returns shown were provided by Lipper. |
22 | | The Portfolio’s PG/PU are not identical to the Portfolio’s EG/EU as the criteria for including/excluding a fund in/from a PG/PU is somewhat different from that of an EG/EU. |
23 | | Lipper investment classification/objective dictates the PG and PU throughout the life of the fund even if a fund had a different investment classification/objective at a different point in time. |
24 | | The performance returns and risk measures shown in the table are for the Class A shares of the Portfolio. |
25 | | The Adviser provided Portfolio and benchmark performance return information for periods through February 29, 2012. |
26 | | Portfolio and benchmark volatility and Sharpe Ratio information was obtained through Lipper LANA, a database maintained by Lipper. Volatility is a statistical measure of the tendency of a market price or yield to vary over time. A Sharpe Ratio is a risk adjusted measure of return that divides a portfolio’s return in excess of the riskless return by the portfolio’s standard deviation. A portfolio with a greater volatility would be viewed as more risky than a portfolio with equivalent performance but lower volatility; for that reason, a greater return would be demanded for the more risky portfolio. A portfolio with a higher Sharpe Ratio would be viewed as better performing than a portfolio with a lower Sharpe Ratio. |
33
AllianceBernstein
Variable Products Series Fund, Inc.
| | |
![LOGO](https://capedge.com/proxy/N-CSRS/0001193125-12-366259/g374700g16n16.jpg) | | AllianceBernstein Large Cap Growth Portfolio |
Semi-Annual Report
![LOGO](https://capedge.com/proxy/N-CSRS/0001193125-12-366259/g374700g81g54.jpg)
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT
Investment Products Offered
| Ø | | Are Not Bank Guaranteed |
AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (ABI) is the distributor of the AllianceBernstein family of mutual funds. ABI is a member of FINRA and is an affiliate of AllianceBernstein L.P., the manager of the funds.
You may obtain a description of the Fund’s proxy voting policies and procedures, and information regarding how the Fund voted proxies relating to portfolio securities during the most recent 12-month period ended June 30, without charge. Simply visit AllianceBernstein’s website at www.alliancebernstein.com or go to the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (the “Commission”) website at www.sec.gov, or call AllianceBernstein at (800) 227-4618.
The Fund files its complete schedule of portfolio holdings with the Commission for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year on Form N-Q. The Fund’s Forms N-Q are available on the Commission’s website at www.sec.gov. The Fund’s Forms N-Q may also be reviewed and copied at the Commission’s Public Reference Room in Washington, DC; information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling (800) SEC-0330.
AllianceBernstein® and the AB Logo are registered trademarks and service marks used by permission of the owner, AllianceBernstein L.P.
| | |
| | |
LARGE CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
FUND EXPENSES (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
As a shareholder of the Fund, you incur two types of costs: (1) transaction costs, including sales charges (loads) on purchase payments, contingent deferred sales charges on redemptions and (2) ongoing costs, including management fees; distribution (12b-1) fees; and other Fund expenses. This example is intended to help you understand your ongoing costs (in dollars) of investing in the Fund and to compare these costs with the ongoing costs of investing in other mutual funds.
The Example is based on an investment of $1,000 invested at the beginning of the period and held for the entire period as indicated below.
Actual Expenses
The table below provides information about actual account values and actual expenses. You may use the information in this line, together with the amount you invested, to estimate the expenses that you paid over the period. Simply divide your account value by $1,000 (for example, an $8,600 account value divided by $1,000 = 8.6), then multiply the result by the number in the first line under the heading entitled “Expenses Paid During Period” to estimate the expenses you paid on your account during this period. The estimate of expenses does not include fees or other expenses of any variable insurance product. If such expenses were included, the estimate of expenses you paid during the period would be higher and your ending account value would be lower.
Hypothetical Example for Comparison Purposes
The table below provides information about hypothetical account values and hypothetical expenses based on the Fund’s actual expense ratio and an assumed annual rate of return of 5% before expenses, which is not the Fund’s actual return. The hypothetical account values and expenses may not be used to estimate the actual ending account balance or expenses you paid for the period. You may use this information to compare the ongoing costs of investing in the Fund and other funds by comparing this 5% hypothetical example with the 5% hypothetical examples that appear in the shareholder reports of other funds. The estimate of expenses does not include fees or other expenses of any variable insurance product. If such expenses were included, the estimate of expenses you paid during the period would be higher and your ending account value would be lower.
Please note that the expenses shown in the table are meant to highlight your ongoing costs only and do not reflect any transactional costs, such as sales charges (loads), or contingent deferred sales charges on redemptions. Therefore, the second line of each class’ table is useful in comparing ongoing costs only, and will not help you determine the relative total costs of owning different funds. In addition, if these transactional costs were included, your costs would have been higher.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Beginning Account Value January 1, 2012 | | | Ending Account Value June 30, 2012 | | | Expenses Paid During Period* | | | Annualized Expense Ratio* | |
Class A | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Actual | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,093.40 | | | $ | 4.42 | | | | 0.85 | % |
Hypothetical (5% return before expenses) | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,020.64 | | | $ | 4.27 | | | | 0.85 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class B | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Actual | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,092.10 | | | $ | 5.72 | | | | 1.10 | % |
Hypothetical (5% return before expenses) | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,019.39 | | | $ | 5.52 | | | | 1.10 | % |
* | | Expenses are equal to each classes’ annualized expense ratios, multiplied by the average account value over the period, multiplied by 182/366 (to reflect the one-half year period). |
1
| | |
LARGE CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
TEN LARGEST HOLDINGS* | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
COMPANY | | U.S. $ VALUE | | | PERCENT OF NET ASSETS | |
Apple, Inc. | | $ | 28,694,840 | | | | 8.0 | % |
Walt Disney Co. (The) | | | 13,556,235 | | | | 3.8 | |
Google, Inc.—Class A | | | 13,469,225 | | | | 3.8 | |
Schlumberger Ltd. | | | 12,368,276 | | | | 3.5 | |
Danaher Corp. | | | 11,905,071 | | | | 3.3 | |
QUALCOMM, Inc. | | | 11,226,758 | | | | 3.2 | |
UnitedHealth Group, Inc. | | | 10,194,327 | | | | 2.9 | |
Oracle Corp. | | | 9,079,290 | | | | 2.5 | |
Citrix Systems, Inc. | | | 8,861,546 | | | | 2.5 | |
Cognizant Technology Solutions Corp.—Class A | | | 8,646,000 | | | | 2.4 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | $ | 128,001,568 | | | | 35.9 | % |
SECTOR DIVERSIFICATION**
June 30, 2012 (unaudited)
| | | | | | | | |
SECTOR | | U.S. $ VALUE | | | PERCENT OF TOTAL INVESTMENTS | |
Technology | | $ | 117,696,580 | | | | 32.8 | % |
Consumer Discretionary | | | 65,591,225 | | | | 18.3 | |
Energy | | | 45,054,353 | | | | 12.6 | |
Health Care | | | 42,229,421 | | | | 11.8 | |
Producer Durables | | | 38,491,976 | | | | 10.7 | |
Financial Services | | | 15,585,917 | | | | 4.4 | |
Materials & Processing | | | 14,783,459 | | | | 4.1 | |
Consumer Staples | | | 7,059,982 | | | | 2.0 | |
Short-Term Investments | | | 11,960,077 | | | | 3.3 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Investments | | $ | 358,452,990 | | | | 100.0 | % |
** | | The Portfolio’s sector breakdown is expressed as a percentage of total investments (excluding security lending collateral) and may vary over time. |
Please note: The sector breakdown is classified in the above chart and throughout this report according to the Russell sector classification scheme. The Russell Sector scheme was developed by Russell Investments. Russell classifies index members into industries that most closely describe the nature of its business and its primary economic orientation. Multiple resources are used to obtain overall information about the company. Additional Russell sector scheme information can be found within Russell Index methodology documents available on Russell.com. The “Portfolio of Investments” section of the report reflects more specific industry information and is consistent with the investment restrictions discussed in the Fund’s prospectus.
2
| | |
LARGE CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMMON STOCKS–97.2% | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
TECHNOLOGY–33.0% | | | | | | | | |
COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY–3.2% | | | | | | | | |
QUALCOMM, Inc. | | | 201,630 | | | $ | 11,226,758 | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMPUTER SERVICES, SOFTWARE & SYSTEMS–19.3% | | | | | | | | |
ANSYS, Inc.(a) | | | 62,672 | | | | 3,955,230 | |
Citrix Systems, Inc.(a) | | | 105,570 | | | | 8,861,546 | |
Cognizant Technology Solutions Corp.–Class A(a) | | | 144,100 | | | | 8,646,000 | |
F5 Networks, Inc.(a) | | | 54,620 | | | | 5,437,967 | |
Google, Inc.–Class A(a) | | | 23,220 | | | | 13,469,225 | |
Informatica Corp.(a) | | | 58,260 | | | | 2,467,894 | |
Intuit, Inc. | | | 116,480 | | | | 6,913,088 | |
LinkedIn Corp.(a)(b) | | | 21,740 | | | | 2,310,310 | |
Oracle Corp. | | | 305,700 | | | | 9,079,290 | |
Salesforce.com, Inc.(a) | | | 15,250 | | | | 2,108,465 | |
TIBCO Software, Inc.(a) | | | 185,472 | | | | 5,549,322 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 68,798,337 | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY–9.0% | | | | | | | | |
Apple, Inc.(a) | | | 49,135 | | | | 28,694,840 | |
EMC Corp./MA(a) | | | 136,123 | | | | 3,488,833 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 32,183,673 | |
| | | | | | | | |
SEMICONDUCTORS & COMPONENT–1.5% | | | | | | | | |
Broadcom Corp.–Class A(a) | | | 74,394 | | | | 2,514,517 | |
Xilinx, Inc. | | | 88,570 | | | | 2,973,295 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 5,487,812 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 117,696,580 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER DISCRETIONARY–18.4% | | | | | | | | |
AUTO PARTS–0.7% | | | | | | | | |
BorgWarner, Inc.(a) | | | 36,986 | | | | 2,425,912 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CABLE TELEVISION SERVICES–2.0% | | | | | | | | |
Comcast Corp.–Class A | | | 221,620 | | | | 7,085,191 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CASINOS & GAMBLING–1.5% | | | | | | | | |
Las Vegas Sands Corp. | | | 119,710 | | | | 5,206,188 | |
| | | | | | | | |
COSMETICS–0.7% | | | | | | | | |
Estee Lauder Cos., Inc. (The)–Class A | | | 49,960 | | | | 2,703,835 | |
| | | | | | | | |
DIVERSIFIED RETAIL–1.7% | | | | | | | | |
Amazon.com, Inc.(a) | | | 14,494 | | | | 3,309,705 | |
Dollar General Corp.(a) | | | 52,842 | | | | 2,874,076 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 6,183,781 | |
| | | | | | | | |
ENTERTAINMENT–3.8% | | | | | | | | |
Walt Disney Co. (The) | | | 279,510 | | | | 13,556,235 | |
| | | | | | | | |
LEISURE TIME–1.0% | | | | | | | | |
priceline.com, Inc.(a) | | | 5,210 | | | | 3,462,149 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
RECREATIONAL VEHICLES & BOATS–0.7% | | | | | | | | |
Harley-Davidson, Inc. | | | 54,800 | | | $ | 2,506,004 | |
| | | | | | | | |
RESTAURANTS–2.1% | | | | | | | | |
Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc.–Class A(a) | | | 6,230 | | | | 2,367,089 | |
Starbucks Corp. | | | 98,745 | | | | 5,265,083 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 7,632,172 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TEXTILES, APPAREL & SHOES–4.2% | | | | | | | | |
Coach, Inc. | | | 97,850 | | | | 5,722,268 | |
PVH Corp. | | | 52,015 | | | | 4,046,247 | |
Ralph Lauren Corp. | | | 14,660 | | | | 2,053,280 | |
VF Corp. | | | 22,540 | | | | 3,007,963 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 14,829,758 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 65,591,225 | |
| | | | | | | | |
ENERGY–12.6% | | | | | | | | |
OIL WELL EQUIPMENT & SERVICES–9.2% | | | | | | | | |
FMC Technologies, Inc.(a) | | | 60,995 | | | | 2,392,834 | |
Halliburton Co. | | | 256,660 | | | | 7,286,578 | |
National Oilwell Varco, Inc. | | | 88,710 | | | | 5,716,472 | |
Oceaneering International, Inc. | | | 108,836 | | | | 5,208,891 | |
Schlumberger Ltd. | | | 190,545 | | | | 12,368,276 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 32,973,051 | |
| | | | | | | | |
OIL: CRUDE PRODUCERS–3.4% | | | | | | | | |
Anadarko Petroleum Corp. | | | 31,860 | | | | 2,109,132 | |
EOG Resources, Inc. | | | 47,615 | | | | 4,290,587 | |
Noble Energy, Inc. | | | 66,984 | | | | 5,681,583 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 12,081,302 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 45,054,353 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HEALTH CARE–11.8% | | | | | | | | |
BIOTECHNOLOGY–0.8% | | | | | | | | |
Biogen Idec, Inc.(a) | | | 18,900 | | | | 2,728,782 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HEALTH CARE MANAGEMENT SERVICES–2.8% | | | | | | | | |
UnitedHealth Group, Inc. | | | 174,262 | | | | 10,194,327 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HEALTH CARE SERVICES–1.8% | | | | | | | | |
Express Scripts Holding Co.(a) | | | 54,383 | | | | 3,036,203 | |
McKesson Corp. | | | 35,680 | | | | 3,345,000 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 6,381,203 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MEDICAL & DENTAL INSTRUMENTS & SUPPLIES–0.8% | | | | | | | | |
Stryker Corp. | | | 52,690 | | | | 2,903,219 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MEDICAL EQUIPMENT–2.4% | | | | | | | | |
Covidien PLC | | | 116,455 | | | | 6,230,343 | |
Illumina, Inc.(a)(b) | | | 61,055 | | | | 2,466,011 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 8,696,354 | |
| | | | | | | | |
3
| | |
LARGE CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
PHARMACEUTICALS–3.2% | | | | | | | | |
Allergan, Inc./United States | | | 64,715 | | | $ | 5,990,667 | |
Gilead Sciences, Inc.(a) | | | 54,360 | | | | 2,787,581 | |
Perrigo Co. | | | 21,600 | | | | 2,547,288 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 11,325,536 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 42,229,421 | |
| | | | | | | | |
PRODUCER DURABLES–10.8% | | | | | | | | |
AEROSPACE–1.6% | | | | | | | | |
Boeing Co. (The) | | | 79,040 | | | | 5,872,672 | |
| | | | | | | | |
DIVERSIFIED MANUFACTURING OPERATIONS–4.5% | | | | | | | | |
Danaher Corp. | | | 228,592 | | | | 11,905,071 | |
Dover Corp. | | | 75,840 | | | | 4,065,783 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 15,970,854 | |
| | | | | | | | |
SCIENTIFIC INSTRUMENTS: CONTROL & FILTER–2.2% | | | | | | | | |
Flowserve Corp. | | | 24,061 | | | | 2,761,000 | |
Rockwell Automation, Inc. | | | 37,015 | | | | 2,445,211 | |
Roper Industries, Inc. | | | 25,240 | | | | 2,488,159 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 7,694,370 | |
| | | | | | | | |
SCIENTIFIC INSTRUMENTS: ELECTRICAL–2.5% | | | | | | | | |
AMETEK, Inc. | | | 48,904 | | | | 2,440,799 | |
Emerson Electric Co. | | | 139,830 | | | | 6,513,281 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 8,954,080 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 38,491,976 | |
| | | | | | | | |
FINANCIAL SERVICES–4.4% | | | | | | | | |
ASSET MANAGEMENT & CUSTODIAN–0.9% | | | | | | | | |
Affiliated Managers Group, Inc.(a) | | | 27,780 | | | | 3,040,521 | |
| | | | | | | | |
DIVERSIFIED FINANCIAL SERVICES–1.5% | | | | | | | | |
Blackstone Group LP | | | 260,444 | | | | 3,404,003 | |
Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (The) | | | 21,585 | | | | 2,069,138 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 5,473,141 | |
| | | | | | | | |
FINANCIAL DATA & SYSTEMS–1.4% | | | | | | | | |
Visa, Inc.–Class A | | | 41,030 | | | | 5,072,539 | |
| | | | | | | | |
REAL ESTATE–0.6% | | | | | | | | |
CBRE Group, Inc.(a) | | | 122,232 | | | | 1,999,716 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 15,585,917 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MATERIALS & PROCESSING–4.2% | | | | | | | | |
COPPER–0.6% | | | | | | | | |
Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold, Inc. | | | 60,770 | | | | 2,070,434 | |
| | | | | | | | |
FERTILIZERS–1.4% | | | | | | | | |
Monsanto Co. | | | 61,654 | | | | 5,103,718 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
METAL FABRICATING–2.2% | | | | | | | | |
Precision Castparts Corp. | | | 46,260 | | | $ | 7,609,307 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 14,783,459 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER STAPLES–2.0% | | | | | | | | |
FOODS–1.0% | | | | | | | | |
Hershey Co. (The) | | | 48,320 | | | | 3,480,490 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TOBACCO–1.0% | | | | | | | | |
Philip Morris International, Inc. | | | 41,021 | | | | 3,579,492 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 7,059,982 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Common Stocks (cost $325,223,775) | | | | | | | 346,492,913 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | Principal Amount (000) | | | | |
SHORT-TERM INVESTMENTS–3.3% | | | | | | | | |
TIME DEPOSIT–3.3% | | | | | | | | |
State Street Time Deposit 0.01%, 7/02/12 (cost $11,960,077) | | $ | 11,960 | | | | 11,960,077 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Investments Before Security Lending Collateral for Securities Loaned–100.5% (cost $337,183,852) | | | | | | | 358,452,990 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | Shares | | | | |
INVESTMENTS OF CASH COLLATERAL FOR SECURITY LOANED–1.2% | | | | | | | | |
INVESTMENT COMPANIES–1.2% | | | | | | | | |
AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves–Class I, 0.20%(c) (cost $4,166,900) | | | 4,166,900 | | | | 4,166,900 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TOTAL INVESTMENTS–101.7% (cost $341,350,752) | | | | | | | 362,619,890 | |
Other assets less liabilities–(1.7)% | | | | | | | (6,088,090 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
NET ASSETS–100.0% | | | | | | $ | 356,531,800 | |
| | | | | | | | |
(a) | | Non-income producing security. |
(b) | | Represents entire or partial securities out on loan. See Note E for securities lending information. |
(c) | | Investment in affiliated money market mutual fund. The rate shown represents the 7-day yield as of period end. |
See notes to financial statements.
4
| | |
LARGE CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
STATEMENTOF ASSETS & LIABILITIES |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | |
ASSETS | | | | |
Investments in securities, at value | | | | |
Unaffiliated issuers (cost $337,183,852) | | $ | 358,452,990 | (a) |
Affiliated issuers (cost $4,166,900—including investment of cash collateral for securities loaned of $4,166,900) | | | 4,166,900 | |
Receivable for investment securities sold | | | 3,478,761 | |
Dividends and interest receivable | | | 247,209 | |
Receivable for capital stock sold | | | 59,243 | |
| | | | |
Total assets | | | 366,405,103 | |
| | | | |
LIABILITIES | | | | |
Payable for investment securities purchased | | | 4,830,409 | |
Payable for collateral received on securities loaned | | | 4,166,900 | |
Payable for capital stock redeemed | | | 507,148 | |
Advisory fee payable | | | 222,881 | |
Distribution fee payable | | | 40,240 | |
Administrative fee payable | | | 18,206 | |
Transfer Agent fee payable | | | 157 | |
Accrued expenses | | | 87,362 | |
| | | | |
Total liabilities | | | 9,873,303 | |
| | | | |
NET ASSETS | | $ | 356,531,800 | |
| | | | |
COMPOSITION OF NET ASSETS | | | | |
Capital stock, at par | | $ | 12,320 | |
Additional paid-in capital | | | 414,880,330 | |
Undistributed net investment income | | | 425,105 | |
Accumulated net realized loss on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | (80,055,093 | ) |
Net unrealized appreciation on investments | | | 21,269,138 | |
| | | | |
| | $ | 356,531,800 | |
| | | | |
Net Asset Value Per Share—1 billion shares of capital stock authorized, $.001 par value
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class | | Net Assets | | | Shares Outstanding | | | Net Asset Value | |
A | | $ | 163,397,353 | | | | 5,563,182 | | | $ | 29.37 | |
B | | $ | 193,134,447 | | | | 6,756,932 | | | $ | 28.58 | |
(a) | | Includes securities on loan with a value of $4,212,881 (see Note E). |
See notes to financial statements.
5
| | |
LARGE CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
STATEMENTOF OPERATIONS | | |
Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | |
INVESTMENT INCOME | | | | |
Dividends | | | | |
Unaffiliated issuers (net of foreign taxes withheld of $4,676) | | $ | 1,904,715 | |
Affiliated issuers | | | 2,861 | |
Interest | | | 496 | |
Securities lending income | | | 4,824 | |
| | | | |
| | | 1,912,896 | |
| | | | |
EXPENSES | | | | |
Advisory fee (see Note B) | | | 1,414,446 | |
Distribution fee—Class B | | | 254,823 | |
Transfer agency—Class A | | | 2,234 | |
Transfer agency—Class B | | | 2,629 | |
Custodian | | | 60,168 | |
Printing | | | 49,910 | |
Administrative | | | 29,297 | |
Legal | | | 18,908 | |
Audit | | | 18,397 | |
Directors’ fees | | | 1,959 | |
Miscellaneous | | | 5,911 | |
| | | | |
Total expenses | | | 1,858,682 | |
| | | | |
Net investment income | | | 54,214 | |
| | | | |
REALIZED AND UNREALIZED GAIN (LOSS) ON INVESTMENT TRANSACTIONS | | | | |
Net realized gain on: | | | | |
Investment transactions | | | 2,013,844 | |
Options written | | | 2,170,126 | |
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of: | | | | |
Investments | | | 30,992,664 | |
Options written | | | (1,244,948 | ) |
| | | | |
Net gain on investment transactions | | | 33,931,686 | |
| | | | |
NET INCREASE IN NET ASSETS FROM OPERATIONS | | $ | 33,985,900 | |
| | | | |
See notes to financial statements.
6
| | |
| | |
LARGE CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
STATEMENTOF CHANGESIN NET ASSETS | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | |
INCREASE (DECREASE) IN NET ASSETS FROM OPERATIONS | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income | | $ | 54,214 | | | $ | 779,137 | |
Net realized gain on investment transactions | | | 4,183,970 | | | | 25,829,747 | |
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of investments | | | 29,747,716 | | | | (38,119,585 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) in net assets from operations | | | 33,985,900 | | | | (11,510,701 | ) |
DIVIDENDS TO SHAREHOLDERS FROM | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income | | | | | | | | |
Class A | | | –0 | – | | | (618,044 | ) |
Class B | | | –0 | – | | | (187,529 | ) |
CAPITAL STOCK TRANSACTIONS | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (38,836,954 | ) | | | (50,797,734 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Total decrease | | | (4,851,054 | ) | | | (63,114,008 | ) |
NET ASSETS | | | | | | | | |
Beginning of period | | | 361,382,854 | | | | 424,496,862 | |
| | | | | | | | |
End of period (including undistributed net investment income of $425,105 and $370,891, respectively) | | $ | 356,531,800 | | | $ | 361,382,854 | |
| | | | | | | | |
See notes to financial statements.
7
| | |
LARGE CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
NOTE A: Significant Accounting Policies
The AllianceBernstein Large Cap Growth Portfolio (the “Portfolio”) is a series of AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund, Inc. (the “Fund”). The Portfolio’s investment objective is long-term growth of capital. Prior to February 1, 2006, the Portfolio’s investment objective was to seek growth of capital by pursuing aggressive investment policies. The Portfolio is diversified as defined under the Investment Company Act of 1940. The Fund was incorporated in the State of Maryland on November 17, 1987, as an open-end series investment company. The Fund offers thirteen separately managed pools of assets which have differing investment objectives and policies. The Portfolio offers Class A and Class B shares. Both classes of shares have identical voting, dividend, liquidating and other rights, except that Class B shares bear a distribution expense and have exclusive voting rights with respect to the Class B distribution plan.
The Portfolio offers and sells its shares only to separate accounts of certain life insurance companies for the purpose of funding variable annuity contracts and variable life insurance policies. Sales are made without a sales charge at the Portfolio’s net asset value per share.
The financial statements have been prepared in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“U.S. GAAP”) which require management to make certain estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities in the financial statements and amounts of income and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. The following is a summary of significant accounting policies followed by the Portfolio.
1. Security Valuation
Portfolio securities are valued at their current market value determined on the basis of market quotations or, if market quotations are not readily available or are deemed unreliable, at “fair value” as determined in accordance with procedures established by and under the general supervision of the Fund’s Board of Directors.
In general, the market value of securities which are readily available and deemed reliable are determined as follows: Securities listed on a national securities exchange (other than securities listed on the NASDAQ Stock Market, Inc. (“NASDAQ”)) or on a foreign securities exchange are valued at the last sale price at the close of the exchange or foreign securities exchange. If there has been no sale on such day, the securities are valued at the last traded price from the previous day. Securities listed on more than one exchange are valued by reference to the principal exchange on which the securities are traded; securities listed only on NASDAQ are valued in accordance with the NASDAQ Official Closing Price; listed or over the counter market (“OTC”) put or call options are valued at the mid level between the current bid and ask prices. If either a current bid or current ask price is unavailable, AllianceBernstein L.P. (the “Adviser”) will have discretion to determine the best valuation (e.g. last trade price in the case of listed options); open futures contracts are valued using the closing settlement price or, in the absence of such a price, the most recent quoted bid price. If there are no quotations available for the day of valuation, the last available closing settlement price is used; U.S. government securities and other debt instruments having 60 days or less remaining until maturity are valued at amortized cost if their original maturity was 60 days or less; or by amortizing their fair value as of the 61st day prior to maturity if their original term to maturity exceeded 60 days; fixed-income securities, including mortgage backed and asset backed securities, may be valued on the basis of prices provided by a pricing service or at a price obtained from one or more of the major broker/dealers. In cases where broker/dealer quotes are obtained, the Adviser may establish procedures whereby changes in market yields or spreads are used to adjust, on a daily basis, a recently obtained quoted price on a security. Swaps and other derivatives are valued daily, primarily using independent pricing services, independent pricing models using market inputs, as well as third party broker-dealers or counterparties.
Securities for which market quotations are not readily available (including restricted securities) or are deemed unreliable are valued at fair value. Factors considered in making this determination may include, but are not limited to, information obtained by contacting the issuer, analysts, analysis of the issuer’s financial statements or other available documents. In addition, the Portfolio may use fair value pricing for securities primarily traded in non-U.S. markets because most foreign markets close well before the Portfolio values its securities at 4:00 p.m., Eastern Time. The earlier close of these foreign markets gives rise to the possibility that significant events, including broad market moves, may have occurred in the interim and may materially affect the value of those securities. To account for this, the Portfolio may frequently value many of its foreign equity securities using fair value prices based on third party vendor modeling tools to the extent available.
8
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
2. Fair Value Measurements
In accordance with U.S. GAAP regarding fair value measurements, fair value is defined as the price that the Portfolio would receive to sell an asset or pay to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. The U.S. GAAP disclosure requirements establish a framework for measuring fair value, and a three-level hierarchy for fair value measurements based upon the transparency of inputs to the valuation of an asset or liability. Inputs may be observable or unobservable and refer broadly to the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability. Observable inputs reflect the assumptions market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability based on market data obtained from sources independent of the Portfolio. Unobservable inputs reflect the Portfolio’s own assumptions about the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability based on the best information available in the circumstances. Each investment is assigned a level based upon the observability of the inputs which are significant to the overall valuation. The three-tier hierarchy of inputs is summarized below.
| • | | Level 1—quoted prices in active markets for identical investments |
| • | | Level 2—other significant observable inputs (including quoted prices for similar investments, interest rates, prepayment speeds, credit risk, etc.) |
| • | | Level 3—significant unobservable inputs (including the Portfolio’s own assumptions in determining the fair value of investments) |
The following table summarizes the valuation of the Portfolio’s investments by the above fair value hierarchy levels as of June 30, 2012:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Level 1 | | | Level 2 | | | Level 3 | | | Total | |
Investments in Securities: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Assets: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Common Stocks* | | $ | 346,492,913 | | | $ | –0 | – | | $ | –0 | – | | $ | 346,492,913 | |
Short-Term Investments | | | –0 | – | | | 11,960,077 | | | | –0 | – | | | 11,960,077 | |
Investments of Cash Collateral for Security Loaned in Affiliated Money Market Fund | | | 4,166,900 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 4,166,900 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Investments in Securities | | | 350,659,813 | | | | 11,960,077 | | | | –0 | – | | | 362,619,890 | |
Other Financial Instruments** | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total | | $ | 350,659,813 | | | $ | 11,960,077 | | | $ | –0 | – | | $ | 362,619,890 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
* | | See Portfolio of Investments for sector classifications. |
** | | Other financial instruments are derivative instruments, such as futures, forwards and swap contracts, which are valued at the unrealized appreciation/depreciation on the instrument. |
3. Currency Translation
Assets and liabilities denominated in foreign currencies and commitments under forward currency exchange contracts are translated into U.S. dollars at the mean of the quoted bid and ask prices of such currencies against the U.S. dollar. Purchases and sales of portfolio securities are translated into U.S. dollars at the rates of exchange prevailing when such securities were acquired or sold. Income and expenses are translated into U.S. dollars at rates of exchange prevailing when accrued.
Net realized gain or loss on foreign currency transactions represents foreign exchange gains and losses from sales and maturities of foreign fixed income investments, foreign currency exchange contracts, holding of foreign currencies, currency gains or losses realized between the trade and settlement dates on foreign investment transactions, and the difference between the amounts of dividends, interest and foreign withholding taxes recorded on the Portfolio’s books and the U.S. dollar equivalent amounts actually received or paid. Net unrealized currency gains and losses from valuing foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities at period end exchange rates are reflected as a component of net unrealized appreciation or depreciation of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities.
4. Taxes
It is the Portfolio’s policy to meet the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code applicable to regulated investment companies and to distribute all of its investment company taxable income and net realized gains, if any, to shareholders. Therefore, no provisions for federal income or excise taxes are required. The Portfolio may be subject to taxes imposed by countries in
9
| | |
LARGE CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
which it invests. Such taxes are generally based on income and/or capital gains earned or repatriated. Taxes are accrued and applied to net investment income, net realized gains and net unrealized appreciation/depreciation as such income and/or gains are earned.
In accordance with U.S. GAAP requirements regarding accounting for uncertainties in income taxes, management has analyzed the Portfolio’s tax positions taken or expected to be taken on federal and state income tax returns for all open tax years (the current and the prior three tax years) and has concluded that no provision for income tax is required in the Portfolio’s financial statements.
5. Investment Income and Investment Transactions
Dividend income is recorded on the ex-dividend date or as soon as the Portfolio is informed of the dividend. Interest income is accrued daily. Investment transactions are accounted for on the date the securities are purchased or sold. Investment gains or losses are determined on the identified cost basis. The Portfolio amortizes premiums and accretes discounts as adjustments to interest income.
6. Class Allocations
All income earned and expenses incurred by the Portfolio are borne on a pro-rata basis by each outstanding class of shares, based on the proportionate interest in the Portfolio represented by the net assets of such class, except for class specific expenses which are allocated to the respective class. Expenses of the Fund are charged to each Portfolio in proportion to net assets. Realized and unrealized gains and losses are allocated among the various share classes based on respective net assets.
7. Dividends and Distributions
Dividends and distributions to shareholders, if any, are recorded on the ex-dividend date. Income dividends and capital gains distributions are determined in accordance with federal tax regulations and may differ from those determined in accordance with U.S. GAAP. To the extent these differences are permanent, such amounts are reclassified within the capital accounts based on their federal tax basis treatment; temporary differences do not require such reclassification.
NOTE B: Advisory Fee and Other Transactions with Affiliates
Under the terms of the investment advisory agreement, the Portfolio pays the Adviser an advisory fee at an annual rate of .75% of the first $2.5 billion, .65% of the next $2.5 billion and .60% in excess of $5 billion, of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets. The fee is accrued daily and paid monthly.
Pursuant to the investment advisory agreement, the Portfolio may reimburse the Adviser for certain legal and accounting services provided to the Portfolio by the Adviser. For the six months ended June 30, 2012, such fee amounted to $29,297.
Brokerage commissions paid on investment transactions for the six months ended June 30, 2012 amounted to $270,592, of which $0 and $0, respectively, was paid to Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. LLC and Sanford C. Bernstein Limited, affiliates of the Adviser.
The Portfolio compensates AllianceBernstein Investor Services, Inc. (“ABIS”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Adviser, under a Transfer Agency Agreement for providing personnel and facilities to perform transfer agency services for the Portfolio. Such compensation retained by ABIS amounted to $692 for the six months ended June 30, 2012.
NOTE C: Distribution Plan
The Portfolio has adopted a Distribution Plan (the “Plan”) for Class B shares pursuant to Rule 12b-1 under the Investment Company Act of 1940. Under the Plan, the Portfolio pays distribution and servicing fees to AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (the “Distributor”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Adviser, at an annual rate of up to .50% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The fees are accrued daily and paid monthly. The Board of Directors currently limits payments under the Plan to .25% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The Plan provides that the Distributor will use such payments in their entirety for distribution assistance and promotional activities.
The Portfolio is not obligated under the Plan to pay any distribution and servicing fees in excess of the amounts set forth above. The purpose of the payments to the Distributor under the Plan is to compensate the Distributor for its distribution services with respect to the sale of the Portfolio’s Class B shares. Since the Distributor’s compensation is not directly tied to its expenses, the amount of compensation received by it under the Plan during any year may be more or less than its actual expenses. For this reason, the Plan is characterized by the staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission as being of the “compensation” variety.
10
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
In the event that the Plan is terminated or not continued, no distribution or servicing fees (other than current amounts accrued but not yet paid) would be owed by the Portfolio to the Distributor.
The Plan also provides that the Adviser may use its own resources to finance the distribution of the Portfolio’s shares.
NOTE D: Investment Transactions
Purchases and sales of investment securities (excluding short-term investments) for the six months ended June 30, 2012 were as follows:
| | | | | | | | |
| | Purchases | | | Sales | |
Investment securities (excluding U.S. government securities) | | $ | 195,957,941 | | | $ | 239,159,930 | |
U.S. government securities | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
The cost of investments for federal income tax purposes was substantially the same as the cost for financial reporting purposes. Accordingly, gross unrealized appreciation and unrealized depreciation (excluding written options) are as follows:
| | | | |
Gross unrealized appreciation | | $ | 34,608,524 | |
Gross unrealized depreciation | | | (13,339,386 | ) |
| | | | |
Net unrealized appreciation | | $ | 21,269,138 | |
| | | | |
1. Derivative Financial Instruments
The Portfolio may use derivatives in an effort to earn income and enhance returns, to replace more traditional direct investments, to obtain exposure to otherwise inaccessible markets (collectively, “investment purposes”), or to hedge or adjust the risk profile of its portfolio.
The principal type of derivatives utilized by the Portfolio, as well as the methods in which they may be used are:
For hedging and investment purposes, the Portfolio may purchase and write (sell) put and call options on U.S. and foreign securities, including government securities, and foreign currencies that are traded on U.S. and foreign securities exchanges and over-the-counter markets. Among other things, the Portfolio may use options transactions for non-hedging purposes as a means of making direct investments in foreign currencies, as described below under “Currency Transactions” and may use options strategies involving the purchase and/or writing of various combinations of call and/or put options, for hedging and investment purposes.
The risk associated with purchasing an option is that the Portfolio pays a premium whether or not the option is exercised. Additionally, the Portfolio bears the risk of loss of the premium and change in market value should the counterparty not perform under the contract. Put and call options purchased are accounted for in the same manner as portfolio securities. The cost of securities acquired through the exercise of call options is increased by premiums paid. The proceeds from securities sold through the exercise of put options are decreased by the premiums paid.
When the Portfolio writes an option, the premium received by the Portfolio is recorded as a liability and is subsequently adjusted to the current market value of the option written. Premiums received from written options which expire unexercised are recorded by the Portfolio on the expiration date as realized gains from options written. The difference between the premium received and the amount paid on effecting a closing purchase transaction, including brokerage commissions, is also treated as a realized gain, or if the premium received is less than the amount paid for the closing purchase transaction, as a realized loss. If a call option is exercised, the premium received is added to the proceeds from the sale of the underlying security or currency in determining whether the Portfolio has realized a gain or loss. If a put option is exercised, the premium received reduces the cost basis of the security or currency purchased by the Portfolio. In writing an option, the Portfolio bears the market risk of an unfavorable change in the price of the security or currency underlying the written option. Exercise of an option written by the Portfolio could result in the Portfolio selling or buying a security or currency at a price different from the current market value.
During the six months ended June 30, 2012, the Portfolio held purchased options for hedging purposes. During the six months ended June 30, 2012, the Portfolio held written options for hedging purposes.
11
| | |
LARGE CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
For the six months ended June 30, 2012, the Portfolio had the following transactions in written options:
| | | | | | | | |
| | Number of Contracts | | | Premiums Received | |
Options written outstanding as of 12/31/11 | | | 515 | | | $ | 3,042,253 | |
Options written | | | 3,706 | | | | 391,736 | |
Options expired | | | (301 | ) | | | (72,088 | ) |
Options bought back | | | (988 | ) | | | (3,150,276 | ) |
Options exercised | | | (2,932 | ) | | | (211,625 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Options written outstanding as of 06/30/12 | | | –0 | – | | $ | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | |
Documentation governing the Portfolio’s OTC derivatives may contain provisions for early termination of such transaction in the event the net assets of the Portfolio decline below specific levels set forth in the documentation (“net asset contingent features”). If these levels are triggered, the Portfolio’s counterparty has the right to terminate such transaction and require the Portfolio to pay or receive a settlement amount in connection with the terminated transaction. As of June 30, 2012, the Portfolio had no OTC derivatives with contingent features in net liability positions.
At June 30, 2012, the Portfolio had entered into the following derivatives:
The effect of derivative instruments on the statement of operations for the six months ended June 30, 2012:
| | | | | | | | | | |
Derivative Type | | Location of Gain or (Loss) on Derivatives | | Realized Gain or (Loss) on Derivatives | | | Change in Unrealized Appreciation or (Depreciation) | |
Equity contracts | | Net realized gain (loss) on investment transactions; Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of investments | | $ | (4,524,730 | ) | | $ | 2,845,820 | |
Equity contracts | | Net realized gain (loss) on options written; Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of options written | | | 2,170,126 | | | | (1,244,948 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Total | | | | $ | (2,354,604 | ) | | $ | 1,600,872 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
For two months of the period, the average monthly cost of purchased options contracts was $5,596,296.
2. Currency Transactions
The Portfolio may invest in non-U.S. Dollar securities on a currency hedged or unhedged basis. The Portfolio may seek investment opportunities by taking long or short positions in currencies through the use of currency-related derivatives, including forward currency exchange contracts, futures and options on futures, swaps, and other options. The Portfolio may enter into transactions for investment opportunities when it anticipates that a foreign currency will appreciate or depreciate in value but securities denominated in that currency are not held by the Portfolio and do not present attractive investment opportunities. Such transactions may also be used when the Adviser believes that it may be more efficient than a direct investment in a foreign currency-denominated security. The Portfolio may also conduct currency exchange contracts on a spot basis (i.e., for cash at the spot rate prevailing in the currency exchange market for buying or selling currencies).
NOTE E: Securities Lending
The Portfolio may enter into securities lending transactions. Under the Portfolio’s securities lending program, all securities loans will be collateralized continually by cash. The Portfolio will be compensated for the loan from a portion of the net return from the income earned on cash collateral after a rebate is paid to the borrower (in some cases, this rebate may be a “negative rebate” or fee paid by the borrower to the Portfolio in connection with the loan), and payments for fees of the securities lending agent and for certain other administrative expenses. It is the policy of the Portfolio to receive collateral consisting of cash in an amount exceeding the value of the securities loaned. The Portfolio will have the right to call a loan and obtain the securities loaned at any time on notice to the borrower within the normal and customary settlement time for the securities. While the securities are on loan, the borrower is obligated to pay the Portfolio amounts equal to any income or
12
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
other distributions from the securities. The Portfolio will not have the right to vote any securities during the existence of a loan, but will have the right to regain ownership of loaned securities in order to exercise voting or other ownership rights. The lending agent has agreed to indemnify the Portfolio in the case of default of any securities borrower. Collateral received and securities loaned are marked to market daily to ensure that the securities loaned are secured by collateral. The lending agent will invest the cash collateral received in AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves, an eligible money market vehicle, in accordance with the investment restrictions of the Portfolio, and as approved by the Fund’s Board of Directors. The collateral received on securities loaned is recorded as an asset as well as a corresponding liability in the statement of assets and liabilities. When the Portfolio lends securities, its investment performance will continue to reflect changes in the value of the securities loaned. At June 30, 2012, the Portfolio had securities on loan with a value of $4,212,881 and had received cash collateral which has been invested into AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves of $4,166,900. The cash collateral will be adjusted on the next business day after period end to maintain the required collateral amount. The Portfolio earned securities lending income of $4,824 and $2,861 from the borrowers and AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves, respectively, for the six months ended June 30, 2012; these amounts are reflected in the statement of operations. A principal risk of lending portfolio securities is that the borrower will fail to return the loaned securities upon termination of the loan and that the collateral will not be sufficient to replace the loaned securities. A summary of the Portfolio’s transactions in shares of AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves for the six months ended June 30, 2012 is as follows:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Market Value December 31, 2011 (000) | | | Purchases at Cost (000) | | | Sales Proceeds (000) | | | Market Value June 30, 2012 (000) | | | Dividend Income (000) | |
$ | 1,525 | | | $ | 31,197 | | | $ | 28,555 | | | $ | 4,167 | | | $ | 3 | |
NOTE F: Capital Stock
Each class consists of 500,000,000 authorized shares. Transactions in capital shares for each class were as follows:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | SHARES | | | | | AMOUNT | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | | | | | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | |
Class A | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Shares sold | | | 48,742 | | | | 147,718 | | | | | $ | 1,433,337 | | | $ | 4,187,909 | |
Shares issued in reinvestment of dividends | | | –0 | – | | | 21,343 | | | | | | –0 | – | | | 618,044 | |
Shares redeemed | | | (689,596 | ) | | | (1,197,862 | ) | | | | | (20,474,907 | ) | | | (33,506,926 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (640,854 | ) | | | (1,028,801 | ) | | | | $ | (19,041,570 | ) | | $ | (28,700,973 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class B | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Shares sold | | | 220,040 | | | | 828,556 | | | | | $ | 6,320,377 | | | $ | 22,736,245 | |
Shares issued in reinvestment of dividends | | | –0 | – | | | 7,084 | | | | | | –0 | – | | | 187,529 | |
Shares redeemed | | | (903,015 | ) | | | (1,649,135 | ) | | | | | (26,115,761 | ) | | | (45,020,535 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (682,975 | ) | | | (813,495 | ) | | | | $ | (19,795,384 | ) | | $ | (22,096,761 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
NOTE G: Risks Involved in Investing in the Portfolio
Foreign Securities Risk—Investing in securities of foreign companies or foreign governments involves special risks which include changes in foreign currency exchange rates and the possibility of future political and economic developments which could adversely affect the value of such securities. Moreover, securities of many foreign companies or foreign governments and their markets may be less liquid and their prices more volatile than those of comparable U.S. companies or of the U.S. government.
Currency Risk—This is the risk that changes in foreign currency exchange rates may negatively affect the value of the Portfolio’s investments or reduce the returns of the Portfolio. For example, the value of the Portfolio’s investments in foreign currency-denominated securities or currencies may decrease if the U.S. Dollar is strong (i.e., gaining value relative to other currencies) and other currencies are weak (i.e., losing value relative to the U.S. Dollar). Currency markets are generally not as regulated as securities markets. Independent of the Portfolio’s investments denominated in foreign currencies, the Portfolio’s positions in various foreign currencies may cause the Portfolio to experience investment losses due to the changes in exchange rates and interest rates.
13
| | |
LARGE CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Focused Portfolio Risk—Investments in a limited number of companies may have more risk because changes in the value of a single security may have a more significant effect, either negative or positive, on the Portfolio’s NAV.
Derivatives Risk—The Portfolio may enter into derivative transactions such as forwards, options, futures and swaps. Derivatives may be illiquid, difficult to price, and leveraged so that small changes may produce disproportionate losses for the Portfolio, and subject to counterparty risk to a greater degree than more traditional investments. Derivatives may result in significant losses, including losses that are far greater than the value of the derivatives reflected in the statement of assets and liabilities.
Indemnification Risk—In the ordinary course of business, the Portfolio enters into contracts that contain a variety of indemnifications. The Portfolio’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown. However, the Portfolio has not had prior claims or losses pursuant to these indemnification provisions and expects the risk of loss thereunder to be remote. Therefore, the Portfolio has not accrued any liability in connection with these indemnification provisions.
NOTE H: Joint Credit Facility
A number of open-end mutual funds managed by the Adviser, including the Portfolio, participate in a $140 million revolving credit facility (the “Facility”) intended to provide short-term financing, if necessary, subject to certain restrictions in connection with abnormal redemption activity. Commitment fees related to the Facility are paid by the participating funds and are included in miscellaneous expenses in the statement of operations. The Portfolio did not utilize the Facility during the six months ended June 30, 2012.
NOTE I: Distributions to Shareholders
The tax character of distributions to be paid for the year ending December 31, 2012 will be determined at the end of the current fiscal year. The tax character of distributions paid during the fiscal years ended December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010 were as follows:
| | | | | | | | |
| | 2011 | | | 2010 | |
Distributions paid from: | | | | | | | | |
Ordinary income | | $ | 805,573 | | | $ | 1,551,902 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total taxable distributions | | | 805,573 | | | | 1,551,902 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total distributions paid | | $ | 805,573 | | | $ | 1,551,902 | |
| | | | | | | | |
As of December 31, 2011, the components of accumulated earnings/(deficit) on a tax basis were as follows:
| | | | |
Undistributed ordinary income | | $ | 757,963 | |
Accumulated capital and other losses | | | (84,349,734 | )(a) |
Unrealized appreciation/(depreciation) | | | (8,754,979 | )(b) |
| | | | |
Total accumulated earnings/(deficit) | | $ | (92,346,750 | ) |
| | | | |
(a) | | On December 31, 2011, the Portfolio had a net capital loss carryforward of $81,027,091. During the fiscal year, the Portfolio utilized $25,652,662 of capital loss carryforwards to offset current year net realized gains. The Portfolio also had $141,453,681 of capital loss carryforwards expire during the fiscal year. At December 31, 2011, the Portfolio had a post-October short-term capital loss deferral of $2,513,571 and a post-October long-term capital loss deferral of $809,072, which are deemed to arise on January 1, 2012. |
(b) | | The difference between book-basis and tax-basis unrealized appreciation/(depreciation) are attributable primarily to the tax deferral of losses on wash sales, the tax treatment of partnership investments, and the realization for tax purposes of gains/losses on certain derivative instruments. |
For tax purposes, net capital losses may be carried over to offset future capital gains, if any. Under the Regulated Investment Company Modernization Act of 2010, funds are permitted to carry forward capital losses incurred in taxable years beginning after December 22, 2010 for an indefinite period. These post-enactment capital losses must be utilized prior to the pre-enactment capital losses, which are subject to expiration. Post-enactment capital loss carryforwards will retain their character as either short-term or long-term capital losses rather than being considered short-term as under previous regulation.
14
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
As of December 31, 2011, the Portfolio had a net capital loss carryforward of $81,027,091 which will expire as follows:
| | | | | | | | | | |
Short-Term Amount | | | Long-Term Amount | | | Expiration | |
$ | 52,077,408 | | | | n/a | | | | 2016 | |
| 28,949,683 | | | | n/a | | | | 2017 | |
NOTE J: Recent Accounting Pronouncement
In December 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued an Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) related to disclosures about offsetting assets and liabilities in financial statements. The amendments in this update require an entity to disclose both gross and net information for derivatives and other financial instruments that are either offset in the statement of assets and liabilities or subject to an enforceable master netting arrangement or similar agreement. The ASU is effective during interim or annual reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2013. At this time, management is evaluating the implication of this ASU and its impact on the financial statements has not been determined.
NOTE K: Subsequent Events
Management has evaluated subsequent events for possible recognition or disclosure in the financial statements through the date the financial statements are issued. Management has determined that there are no material events that would require disclosure in the Portfolio’s financial statements through this date.
15
| | |
| | |
LARGE CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Selected Data For A Share Of Capital Stock Outstanding Throughout Each Period
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | CLASS A | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, | |
| | | 2011 | | | 2010 | | | 2009 | | | 2008 | | | 2007 | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | | | $26.86 | | | | $27.79 | | | | $25.36 | | | | $18.47 | | | | $30.61 | | | | $26.87 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Income From Investment Operations | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income (loss) (a) | | | .02 | | | | .09 | | | | .07 | | | | .10 | | | | .04 | | | | (.01 | ) |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | 2.49 | | | | (.93 | ) | | | 2.48 | | | | 6.82 | | | | (12.18 | ) | | | 3.75 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) in net asset value from operations | | | 2.51 | | | | (.84 | ) | | | 2.55 | | | | 6.92 | | | | (12.14 | ) | | | 3.74 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Less: Dividends | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Dividends from net investment income | | | –0 | – | | | (.09 | ) | | | (.12 | ) | | | (.03 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net asset value, end of period | | | $29.37 | | | | $26.86 | | | | $27.79 | | | | $25.36 | | | | $18.47 | | | | $30.61 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Return | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total investment return based on net asset value (b)* | | | 9.34 | % | | | (3.04 | )% | | | 10.10 | % | | | 37.52 | % | | | (39.66 | )% | | | 13.92 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Ratios/Supplemental Data | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net assets, end of period (000’s omitted) | | | $163,397 | | | | $166,654 | | | | $200,977 | | | | $211,940 | | | | $181,452 | | | | $395,655 | |
Ratio to average net assets of: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Expenses | | | .85 | %(c) | | | .84 | % | | | .85 | %(d) | | | .88 | % | | | .84 | % | | | .82 | % |
Net investment income (loss) | | | .16 | %(c) | | | .33 | % | | | .29 | %(d) | | | .47 | % | | | .17 | % | | | (.03 | )% |
Portfolio turnover rate | | | 54 | % | | | 89 | % | | | 105 | % | | | 97 | % | | | 89 | % | | | 92 | % |
See footnote summary on page 17.
16
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Selected Data For A Share Of Capital Stock Outstanding Throughout Each Period
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | CLASS B | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, | |
| | | 2011 | | | 2010 | | | 2009 | | | 2008 | | | 2007 | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | | | $26.17 | | | | $27.08 | | | | $24.72 | | | | $18.03 | | | | $29.96 | | | | $26.37 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Income From Investment Operations | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income (loss) (a) | | | (.01 | ) | | | .02 | | | | .01 | | | | .04 | | | | (.02 | ) | | | (.08 | ) |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | 2.42 | | | | (.91 | ) | | | 2.42 | | | | 6.65 | | | | (11.91 | ) | | | 3.67 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) in net asset value from operations | | | 2.41 | | | | (.89 | ) | | | 2.43 | | | | 6.69 | | | | (11.93 | ) | | | 3.59 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Less: Dividends | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Dividends from net investment income | | | –0 | – | | | (.02 | ) | | | (.07 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net asset value, end of period | | | $28.58 | | | | $26.17 | | | | $27.08 | | | | $24.72 | | | | $18.03 | | | | $29.96 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Return | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total investment return based on net asset value (b)* | | | 9.21 | % | | | (3.27 | )% | | | 9.83 | % | | | 37.10 | % | | | (39.82 | )% | | | 13.61 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Ratios/Supplemental Data | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net assets, end of period (000’s omitted) | | | $193,135 | | | | $194,729 | | | | $223,520 | | | | $233,460 | | | | $192,976 | | | | $393,537 | |
Ratio to average net assets of: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Expenses | | | 1.10 | %(c) | | | 1.09 | % | | | 1.10 | %(d) | | | 1.13 | % | | | 1.09 | % | | | 1.07 | % |
Net investment income (loss) | | | (.09 | )%(c) | | | .08 | % | | | .04 | %(d) | | | .22 | % | | | (.08 | )% | | | (.27 | )% |
Portfolio turnover rate | | | 54 | % | | | 89 | % | | | 105 | % | | | 97 | % | | | 89 | % | | | 92 | % |
(a) | | Based on average shares outstanding. |
(b) | | Total investment return is calculated assuming an initial investment made at the net asset value at the beginning of the period, reinvestment of all dividends and distributions at net asset value during the period, and redemption on the last day of the period. Total return does not reflect (i) insurance company’s separate account related expense charges and (ii) the deductions of taxes that a shareholder would pay on Portfolio distributions or the redemption of Portfolio shares. Total investment return calculated for a period of less than one year is not annualized. |
(d) | | The ratio includes expenses attributable to costs of proxy solicitation. |
* | | Includes the impact of proceeds received and credited to the Portfolio resulting from class action settlements, which enhanced the Portfolio’s performance for the six months ended June 30, 2012 and years ended December 31, 2011, December 31, 2010, December 31, 2009, December 31, 2008 and December 31, 2007 by 0.55%, 0.46%, 0.58%, 1.96%, 2.10% and 0.39%, respectively. |
See notes to financial statements.
17
| | |
| | |
LARGE CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
CONTINUANCE DISCLOSURE | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
INFORMATION REGARDING THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE PORTFOLIO’S ADVISORY AGREEMENT
The disinterested directors (the “directors”) of AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund, Inc. (the “Fund”) unanimously approved the continuance of the Fund’s Advisory Agreement with the Adviser in respect of AllianceBernstein Large Cap Growth Portfolio (the “Portfolio”) at a meeting held on May 1-3, 2012.
Prior to approval of the continuance of the Advisory Agreement, the directors had requested from the Adviser, and received and evaluated, extensive materials. They reviewed the proposed continuance of the Advisory Agreement with the Adviser and with experienced counsel who are independent of the Adviser, who advised on the relevant legal standards. The directors also reviewed an independent evaluation prepared by the Fund’s Senior Officer (who is also the Fund’s Independent Compliance Officer) of the reasonableness of the advisory fee in the Advisory Agreement, in which the Senior Officer concluded that the contractual fee for the Portfolio was reasonable. The directors also discussed the proposed continuance in private sessions with counsel and the Fund’s Senior Officer.
The directors considered their knowledge of the nature and quality of the services provided by the Adviser to the Portfolio gained from their experience as directors or trustees of most of the registered investment companies advised by the Adviser, their overall confidence in the Adviser’s integrity and competence they have gained from that experience, the Adviser’s initiative in identifying and raising potential issues with the directors and its responsiveness, frankness and attention to concerns raised by the directors in the past, including the Adviser’s willingness to consider and implement organizational and operational changes designed to improve investment results and the services provided to the AllianceBernstein Funds. The directors noted that they have four regular meetings each year, at each of which they receive presentations from the Adviser on the investment results of the Portfolio and review extensive materials and information presented by the Adviser.
The directors also considered all other factors they believed relevant, including the specific matters discussed below. In their deliberations, the directors did not identify any particular information that was all-important or controlling, and different directors may have attributed different weights to the various factors. The directors determined that the selection of the Adviser to manage the Portfolio and the overall arrangements between the Portfolio and the Adviser, as provided in the Advisory Agreement, including the advisory fee, were fair and reasonable in light of the services performed, expenses incurred and such other matters as the directors considered relevant in the exercise of their business judgment. The material factors and conclusions that formed the basis for the directors’ determinations included the following:
Nature, Extent and Quality of Services Provided
The directors considered the scope and quality of services provided by the Adviser under the Advisory Agreement, including the quality of the investment research capabilities of the Adviser and the other resources it has dedicated to performing services for the Portfolio. They also noted the professional experience and qualifications of the Portfolio’s portfolio management team and other senior personnel of the Adviser. The directors also considered that the Advisory Agreement provides that the Portfolio will reimburse the Adviser for the cost to it of providing certain clerical, accounting, administrative and other services provided at the Portfolio’s request by employees of the Adviser or its affiliates. Requests for these reimbursements are approved by the directors on a quarterly basis and, to the extent requested and paid, result in a higher rate of total compensation from the Portfolio to the Adviser than the fee rate stated in the Portfolio’s Advisory Agreement. The directors noted that the methodology used to determine the reimbursement amounts had been reviewed by an independent consultant retained by the Fund’s Senior Officer. The quality of administrative and other services, including the Adviser’s role in coordinating the activities of the Portfolio’s other service providers, also were considered. The directors concluded that, overall, they were satisfied with the nature, extent and quality of services provided to the Portfolio under the Advisory Agreement.
Costs of Services Provided and Profitability
The directors reviewed a schedule of the revenues, expenses and related notes indicating the profitability of the Portfolio to the Adviser for calendar years 2010 and 2011 that had been prepared with an expense allocation methodology arrived at in consultation with an independent consultant retained by the Fund’s Senior Officer. The directors reviewed the assumptions and methods of allocation used by the Adviser in preparing fund-specific profitability data and noted that there are a number of potentially acceptable allocation methodologies for information of this type. The directors noted that the profitability information reflected all revenues and expenses of the Adviser’s relationship with the Portfolio, including those relating to its subsidiaries which provide transfer agency, distribution and brokerage services to the Portfolio. The directors recognized that it is difficult to make comparisons of profitability of the Advisory Agreement with fund advisory contracts for unaffiliated funds because comparative information is not generally publicly available and is affected by numerous factors. The directors
18
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
focused on the profitability of the Adviser’s relationship with the Portfolio before taxes and distribution expenses. The directors concluded that they were satisfied that the Adviser’s level of profitability from its relationship with the Portfolio was not unreasonable.
Fall-Out Benefits
The directors considered the other benefits to the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationships with the Portfolio, including but not limited to benefits relating to soft dollar arrangements (whereby the Adviser receives brokerage and research services from brokers that execute transactions for certain clients, including the Portfolio); 12b-1 fees and sales charges received by the Fund’s principal underwriter (which is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Adviser) in respect of the Portfolio’s Class B shares; transfer agency fees paid by the Portfolio to a wholly owned subsidiary of the Adviser; and brokerage commissions paid by the Portfolio to brokers affiliated with the Adviser. The directors recognized that the Adviser’s profitability would be somewhat lower without these benefits. The directors also understood that the Adviser also might derive reputational and other benefits from its association with the Portfolio.
Investment Results
In addition to the information reviewed by the directors in connection with the meeting, the directors receive detailed performance information for the Portfolio at each regular Board meeting during the year. The directors noted that the Portfolio is a clone of another fund managed by the Adviser (the “Corresponding Fund”) and is managed to track the investment performance of its Corresponding Fund, although investment results may differ between the Portfolio and its Corresponding Fund due to differences in their expense ratios and other factors. At the May 2012 meeting, the directors reviewed information prepared by Lipper showing the performance of the Class A Shares of the Portfolio as compared with that of a group of similar funds selected by Lipper (the “Performance Group”) and as compared with that of a broader array of funds selected by Lipper (the “Performance Universe”), and information prepared by the Adviser showing performance of the Class A Shares as compared with the Russell 1000 Growth Index (the “Index”), in each case for the 1-, 3-, 5- and 10-year periods ended February 29, 2012 and (in the case of comparisons with the Index) the since inception period (June 1992 inception). The directors noted that the Portfolio was in the 5th quintile of the Performance Group and the Performance Universe for the 1- and 10-year periods, in the 4th quintile of the Performance Group and 5th quintile of the Performance Universe for the 3-year period, and in the 5th quintile of the Performance Group and 4th quintile of the Performance Universe for the 5-year period. The Portfolio outperformed the Index in the since inception period and lagged the Index in all other periods. The directors also reviewed performance information for periods ended March 31, 2012 (for which the data was not limited to Class A Shares), and noted that in the 3-month period the Portfolio had essentially matched the Lipper VA Large Cap Growth Funds Average and outperformed the Index.
The directors noted that they had discussed with the Adviser their concerns about the relative performance of the Portfolio. The directors took into account the Adviser’s recent restructuring of the Adviser’s research and portfolio management teams and investment process changes that are intended to improve the investment performance of its equity services.
Based on their review and their discussion with the Adviser of the reasons for the Portfolio’s performance, the directors retained confidence in the Adviser’s ability to manage the Portfolio.
Advisory Fees and Other Expenses
The directors considered the advisory fee rate paid by the Portfolio to the Adviser and information prepared by Lipper concerning advisory fee rates paid by other funds in the same Lipper category as the Portfolio at a common asset level. The directors recognized that it is difficult to make comparisons of advisory fees because there are variations in the services that are included in the fees paid by other funds.
The directors also considered the fees the Adviser charges non-fund clients pursuing a substantially similar investment style. For this purpose, they reviewed the relevant fee information from the Adviser’s Form ADV and the evaluation from the Fund’s Senior Officer. The directors noted that the institutional fee schedule started at a higher fee rate than the Portfolio’s starting fee rate, but had more breakpoints starting at lower asset levels. As a result, the application of the institutional fee schedule to the level of assets of the Portfolio would result in a lower fee rate than that being paid by the Portfolio. The directors noted that the Adviser may, in some cases, agree to fee rates with large institutional clients that are lower than those reviewed by the directors and that they had previously discussed with the Adviser its policies in respect of such arrangements. The directors also reviewed information that indicated that the Portfolio’s fee rate is higher than the sub-advisory fee rate earned by the Adviser for sub-advising a registered investment company with a similar investment style. The directors noted that the advisory fee schedule for the Portfolio is the same as that for its Corresponding Fund.
19
| | |
LARGE CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
CONTINUANCE DISCLOSURE | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
The Adviser reviewed with the directors the significantly greater scope of the services it provides to the Portfolio relative to institutional clients and sub-advised funds. The Adviser also noted that because mutual funds are constantly issuing and redeeming shares, they are more difficult to manage than an institutional account, where the assets tend to be relatively stable. In light of the substantial differences in services rendered by the Adviser to institutional clients as compared to funds such as the Portfolio, the directors considered these fee comparisons inapt and did not place significant weight on them in their deliberations.
The directors also considered the total expense ratio of the Class A shares of the Portfolio in comparison to the fees and expenses of funds within two comparison groups created by Lipper: an Expense Group and an Expense Universe. Lipper described an Expense Group as a representative sample of funds similar to the Portfolio and an Expense Universe as a broader group, consisting of all funds in the investment classification/objective with a similar load type as the Portfolio. The Class A expense ratio of the Portfolio was based on the Portfolio’s latest fiscal year. The directors noted that it was likely that the expense ratios of some of the other funds in the Portfolio’s Lipper category were lowered by waivers or reimbursements by those funds’ investment advisers, which in some cases might be voluntary or temporary. The directors view the expense ratio information as relevant to their evaluation of the Adviser’s services because the Adviser is responsible for coordinating services provided to the Portfolio by others.
The directors noted that, at the Portfolio’s current size, its contractual effective advisory fee rate of 75 basis points was the same as the Expense Group median. The directors noted that the administrative expense reimbursement was 2 basis points in the Portfolio’s latest fiscal year, and that as a result the rate of the compensation received by the Adviser pursuant to the Advisory Agreement was similar to the Expense Group median. The directors concluded that the Portfolio’s total expense ratio was acceptable, although they noted that it was higher than the Expense Group and the Expense Universe medians, and they asked the Adviser to consider measures to reduce it.
Economies of Scale
The directors noted that the advisory fee schedule for the Portfolio contains breakpoints that reduce the fee rates on assets above specified levels. The directors took into consideration prior presentations by an independent consultant on economies of scale in the mutual fund industry and for the AllianceBernstein Funds, and by the Adviser concerning certain of its views on economies of scale. The directors also had requested and received from the Adviser certain updates on economies of scale at the May 2012 meetings. The directors believe that economies of scale may be realized (if at all) by the Adviser across a variety of products and services, and not only in respect of a single fund. The directors noted that there is no established methodology for establishing breakpoints that give effect to the fund-specific services provided by a fund’s adviser and to the economies of scale that an adviser may realize in its overall mutual fund business or those components of it which directly or indirectly affect a fund’s operations. The directors observed that in the mutual fund industry as a whole, as well as among funds similar to the Portfolio, there is no uniformity or pattern in the fees and asset levels at which breakpoints (if any) apply. The directors also noted that the advisory agreements for many funds do not have breakpoints at all. Having taken these factors into account, the directors concluded that the Portfolio’s shareholders would benefit from a sharing of economies of scale in the event the Portfolio’s net assets exceed a breakpoint in the future.
20
| | |
| | |
LARGE CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
THE FOLLOWING IS NOT PART OF THE SHAREHOLDER REPORT OR THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
SUMMARY OF SENIOR OFFICER’S EVALUATION OF INVESTMENT ADVISORY AGREEMENT1
The following is a summary of the evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement between AllianceBernstein L.P. (the “Adviser”) and the AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund (the “Fund”), in respect of AllianceBernstein Large Cap Growth Portfolio (the “Portfolio”).2 The evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement was prepared by Philip L. Kirstein, the Senior Officer of the Fund, for the Directors of the Fund, as required by a September 2004 agreement between the Adviser and the New York State Attorney General (the “NYAG”). The Senior Officer’s evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement is not meant to diminish the responsibility or authority of the Board of Directors of the Fund to perform its duties pursuant to Section 15 of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “40 Act”) and applicable state law. The purpose of the summary is to provide shareholders with a synopsis of the independent evaluation of the reasonableness of the advisory fees proposed to be paid by the Portfolio which was provided to the Directors in connection with their review of the proposed approval of the continuance of the Investment Advisory Agreement. The Senior Officer’s evaluation considered the following factors:
| 1. | Advisory fees charged to institutional and other clients of the Adviser for like services; |
| 2. | Advisory fees charged by other mutual fund companies for like services; |
| 3. | Costs to the Adviser and its affiliates of supplying services pursuant to the advisory agreement, excluding any intra-corporate profit; |
| 4. | Profit margins of the Adviser and its affiliates from supplying such services; |
| 5. | Possible economies of scale as the Portfolio grows larger; and |
| 6. | Nature and quality of the Adviser’s services including the performance of the Portfolio. |
These factors, with the exception of the first factor, are generally referred to as the “Gartenberg factors,” which were articulated by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in 1982. Gartenberg v. Merrill Lynch Asset Management, Inc., 694 F. 2d 923 (2d Cir. 1982). The first factor is an additional factor required to be considered by the AoD. On March 30, 2010, the Supreme Court held the Gartenberg decision was correct in its basic formulation of what §36(b) requires: to face liability under §36(b), “an investment adviser must charge a fee that is so disproportionately large that it bears no reasonable relationship to the services rendered and could not have been the product of arm’s length bargaining.” Jones v. Harris Associates L.P., 130 S. Ct. 1418 (2010). In the Jones decision, the Court stated the Gartenberg approach fully incorporates the correct understanding of fiduciary duty within the context of section 36(b) and noted with approval that “Gartenberg insists that all relevant circumstances be taken into account” and “uses the range of fees that might result from arm’s-length bargaining as the benchmark for reviewing challenged fees.”3
PORTFOLIO ADVISORY FEES, NET ASSETS & EXPENSE RATIOS
The Adviser proposed that the Portfolio pay the advisory fee set forth in the table below for receiving the services to be provided pursuant to the Investment Advisory Agreement. The fee schedule below, implemented in January 2004 in consideration of the Adviser’s settlement with the NYAG in December 2003, is based on a master schedule that contemplates eight categories of funds with almost all funds in each category having the same advisory fee schedule.
| | | | | | | | |
Category | | Advisory Fee Based on % of Average Daily Net Assets | | Net Assets 3/31/12 ($MIL) | | | Portfolio |
Growth | | 75 bp on first $2.5 billion 65 bp on next $2.5 billion 60 bp on the balance | | $ | 396.9 | | | Large Cap Growth Portfolio |
1 | | The information in the fee summary was completed on April 19, 2012 and discussed with the Board of Directors on May 1-3, 2012. |
2 | | Future references to the Fund and the Portfolio do not include “AllianceBernstein.” References in the fee summary pertaining to performance and expense ratio rankings refer to the Class A shares of the Portfolio. |
3 | | Jones v. Harris at 1427. |
21
| | |
LARGE CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
The Adviser is reimbursed as specified in the Investment Advisory Agreement for certain clerical, legal, accounting, administrative and other services provided to the Portfolio. During the Portfolio’s most recently completed fiscal year, the Adviser received $61,194 (0.02% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets) for such services.
Set forth below are the Portfolio’s gross expense ratios for the most recently completed fiscal year:
| | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Total Expense Ratio | | | Fiscal Year | |
Large Cap Growth Portfolio | | | Class A 0.84 | % | | | December 31 | |
| | | Class B 1.09 | % | | | | |
I. ADVISORY FEES CHARGED TO INSTITUTIONAL AND OTHER CLIENTS
The advisory fees charged to investment companies which the Adviser manages and sponsors are normally higher than those charged to similar sized institutional accounts, including pension plans and sub-advised investment companies. The fee differential reflects, among other things, different services provided to such clients, and different liabilities assumed. Services provided by the Adviser to the Portfolio that are not provided to non-investment company clients and sub-advised investment companies include providing office space and personnel to serve as Fund Officers, who among other responsibilities make the certifications required under the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002, and coordinating with and monitoring the Portfolio’s third party service providers such as Fund counsel, auditors, custodians, transfer agents and pricing services. The accounting, administrative, legal and compliance requirements for the Portfolio are more costly than those for institutional assets due to the greater complexities and time required for investment companies, although as previously noted, the Adviser is reimbursed for providing such services. Also, retail mutual funds managed by the Adviser are widely held. Servicing the Portfolio’s investors is more time consuming and labor intensive compared to institutional clients since the Adviser needs to communicate with a more extensive network of financial intermediaries and shareholders. The Adviser also believes that it incurs substantial entrepreneurial risk when offering a new mutual fund, since establishing a new mutual fund requires a large upfront investment, and it may take a long time for the fund to achieve profitability since the fund must be priced to scale from inception in order to be competitive and assets are acquired one account at a time. In addition, managing the cash flow of an investment company may be more difficult than managing that of a stable pool of assets, such as an institutional account with little cash movement in either direction, particularly, if a fund is in net redemption and the Adviser is frequently forced to sell securities to raise cash for redemptions. However, managing a fund with positive cash flow may be easier at times than managing a stable pool of assets. In recent years, investment advisers have been sued by institutional clients and have suffered reputational damage both by the attendant publicity and outcomes other than complete victories. Accordingly, the legal and reputational risks associated with institutional accounts are greater than previously thought, although still not equal to those related to the mutual fund industry.
Notwithstanding the Adviser’s view that managing an investment company is not comparable to managing other institutional accounts because the services provided are different, the Supreme Court has indicated consideration should be given to the advisory fees charged to institutional accounts that have a substantially similar investment style as the Portfolio.4 In
4 | | The Supreme Court stated that “courts may give such comparisons the weight that they merit in light of the similarities and differences between the services that the clients in question require, but the courts must be wary of inapt comparisons.” Among the significant differences the Supreme Court noted that may exist between services provided to mutual funds and institutional accounts are “higher marketing costs.” Jones v. Harris at 1428. |
22
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
addition to the AllianceBernstein institutional fee schedule, set forth below is what would have been the effective advisory fee of the Portfolio had the AllianceBernstein institutional fee schedule been applicable to the Portfolio versus the Portfolio’s advisory fee based on March 31, 2012 net assets:5
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Net Assets 3/31/12 ($MIL) | | AllianceBernstein Institutional Fee Schedule | | Effective AB Inst. Adv. Fee | | | Portfolio Advisory Fee | |
Large Cap Growth Portfolio | | $396.9 | | Large Cap Growth Schedule 80 bp on first $25m 50 bp on the next $25m 40 bp on the next $50m 30 bp on the next $100m 25 bp on the balance Minimum account size $25m | | | 0.332 | % | | | 0.750 | % |
The Adviser also manages AllianceBernstein Large Cap Growth Fund, Inc., a retail mutual fund, which has a substantially similar investment style as the Portfolio. Set forth below is the fee schedule of Large Cap Growth Fund, Inc. and what would have been the effective advisory fee of the Portfolio had the fee schedule of the retail mutual fund been applicable to the Portfolio:6
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | AllianceBernstein Mutual Fund | | Fee Schedule | | ABMF Effective Fee | | | Portfolio Advisory Fee | |
Large Cap Growth Portfolio | | Large Cap Growth Fund, Inc. | | 0.75% on first $2.5 billion 0.65% on next $2.5 billion 0.60% on the balance | | | 0.750 | % | | | 0.750 | % |
The Adviser also manages and sponsors retail mutual funds, which are organized in jurisdictions outside the United States, generally Luxembourg and Japan, and sold to non-United States resident investors. The Adviser charges the fees set forth for American Growth Portfolio, which is a Luxembourg fund that has a somewhat similar investment style as the Portfolio.
| | | | |
Fund | | Fee7 | |
American Growth Portfolio Class A | | | 1.50 | % |
Class I (Institutional) | | | 0.70 | % |
The Adviser provides sub-advisory services to certain other investment companies managed by other fund families that have an investment style similar to that of the Portfolio. The Adviser charges the fees set forth below for the sub-advisory relationship that has a somewhat similar investment style as the Portfolio. Also shown is the Portfolio’s advisory fee and what would have been the effective advisory fee of the Portfolio had the fee schedules of the sub-advisory relationship been applicable to the Portfolio based on March 31, 2012 net assets.
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | | | Fee Schedule | | Effective Sub-Adv. Fee (%) | | | Portfolio Advisory Fee (%) | |
Large Cap Growth Portfolio | | Client # 1 | | 0.35% on the first $50 million 0.30% on the next $100 million 0.25% on the balance | | | 0.275% | | | | 0.750% | |
It is fair to note that the services the Adviser provides pursuant to sub-advisory agreements are generally confined to the services related to the investment process; in other words, they are not as comprehensive as the services provided to the Portfolio by the Adviser.
5 | | The Adviser has indicated that with respect to institutional accounts with assets greater than $300 million, it will negotiate a fee schedule. Discounts that are negotiated vary based upon each client relationship. |
6 | | The retail mutual fund was also affected by the settlement between the Adviser and the NYAG. As a result, the Portfolio has the same breakpoints in its advisory fee schedule as the retail mutual fund. |
7 | | It should be noted that Class A shares of the fund are charged an “all-in” fee, which includes investment advisory services and distribution related services, unlike Class I shares, whose fee is for only investment advisory services. |
23
| | |
LARGE CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
While it appears that the sub-advisory relationship is paying a lower fee than the Portfolio, it is difficult to evaluate the relevance of such a lower fee due to differences in terms of the services provided, risks involved and other competitive factors between the Portfolio and the sub-advisory relationship. There could be various business reasons why an investment adviser would be willing to provide a sub-advisory relationship investment related services at a different fee level than an investment company it is sponsoring where the investment adviser is providing all the services, not just investment management, generally required by a registered investment company.
II. MANAGEMENT FEES CHARGED BY OTHER MUTUAL FUND COMPANIES FOR LIKE SERVICES.
Lipper, Inc. (“Lipper”), an analytical service that is not affiliated with the Adviser, compared the fees charged to the Portfolio with fees charged to other investment companies for similar services offered by other investment advisers.8 Lipper’s analysis included the comparison of the Portfolio’s contractual management fee, estimated at the approximate current asset level of the Portfolio, to the median of the Portfolio’s Lipper Expense Group (“EG”) and the Portfolio’s contractual management fee ranking.9
Lipper describes an EG as a representative sample of comparable funds. Lipper’s standard methodology for screening funds to be included in an EG entails the consideration of several fund criteria, including fund type, investment classification/objective, load type and similar 12b-1/non-12b-1 service fees, asset (size) comparability, expense components and attributes. An EG will typically consist of seven to twenty funds.
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Contractual Management Fee10 | | | Lipper Exp. Group Median (%) | | | Rank | |
Large Cap Growth Portfolio | | | 0.750 | | | | 0.750 | | | | 5/14 | |
Lipper also analyzed the Portfolio’s most recently completed fiscal year total expense ratio in comparison to the Portfolio’s EG and Lipper Expense Universe (“EU”). The EU11 is a broader group compared to the EG, consisting of all funds that have the same investment classification/objective and load type as the subject Portfolio.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Expense Ratio (%)12 | | | Lipper Exp. Group Median (%) | | | Lipper Group Rank | | | Lipper Exp. Universe Median (%) | | | Lipper Universe Rank | |
Large Cap Growth Portfolio | | | 0.841 | | | | 0.825 | | | | 10/14 | | | | 0.793 | | | | 57/81 | |
Based on this analysis, the Portfolio has a more favorable ranking on a management fee basis than on a total expense ratio basis.
III. COSTS TO THE ADVISER AND ITS AFFILIATES OF SUPPLYING SERVICES PURSUANT TO THE ADVISORY FEE ARRANGEMENT, EXCLUDING ANY INTRA-CORPORATE PROFIT.
The Adviser utilizes two profitability reporting systems, which operate independently but are aligned with each other, to estimate the Adviser’s profitability in connection with investment advisory services provided to the Portfolio. The Senior Officer has retained a consultant to provide independent advice regarding the alignment of the two profitability systems as well as the methodologies and allocations utilized by both profitability systems.
8 | | The Supreme Court cautioned against accepting mutual fund fee comparisons without careful scrutiny since “these comparisons are problematic because these fees, like those challenged, may not be the product of the negotiations conducted at arm’s-length.” Jones v. Harris at 1429. |
9 | | The contractual management fee is calculated by Lipper using the Portfolio’s contractual management fee rate at a hypothetical asset level. The hypothetical asset level is based on the combined net assets of all classes of the Portfolio, rounded up to the next $25 million. Lipper’s total expense ratio information is based on the most recent annual report except as otherwise noted. A ranking of “1” would mean that the Portfolio had the lowest effective fee rate in the Lipper peer group. |
10 | | The contractual management fee does not reflect any expense reimbursements made by the Portfolio to the Adviser for certain clerical, legal, accounting, administrative and other services. In addition, the contractual management fee does not reflect any advisory fee waiver or expense cap that would effectively reduce the actual management fee. |
11 | | Except for asset (size) comparability, Lipper uses the same criteria for selecting an EG when selecting an EU. Unlike the EG, the EU allows for the same adviser to be represented by more than just one fund. |
12 | | Most recently completed fiscal year end Class A total expense ratio. |
24
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
IV. PROFIT MARGINS OF THE ADVISER AND ITS AFFILIATES FOR SUPPLYING SUCH SERVICES.
The Portfolio’s profitability information, prepared by the Adviser for the Board of Directors, was reviewed by the Senior Officer and the consultant. The Adviser’s profitability from providing investment advisory services to the Portfolio increased during calendar year 2011, relative to 2010.
In addition to the Adviser’s direct profits from managing the Portfolio, certain of the Adviser’s affiliates have business relationships with the Portfolio and may earn a profit from providing other services to the Portfolio. The courts have referred to this type of business opportunity as “fall-out benefits” to the Adviser and indicated that such benefits should be factored into the evaluation of the total relationship between the Portfolio and the Adviser. Neither case law nor common business practice precludes the Adviser’s affiliates from earning a reasonable profit on this type of relationship provided the affiliates’ charges and services are competitive. These affiliates provide transfer agent, distribution and brokerage related services to the Portfolio and receive transfer agent fees, Rule 12b-1 payments, and brokerage commissions. In addition, the Adviser benefits from soft dollar arrangements which offset expenses the Adviser would otherwise incur.
The Portfolio has adopted a distribution plan for Class B shares pursuant to Rule 12b-1 under the 40 Act. Under the distribution plan, the Portfolio pays distribution and servicing fees to its principal underwriter, AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (“ABI”), at an annual rate of up to 0.50% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The current annual rate that the Portfolio pays to ABI for 12b-1 fees is 0.25%. During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011, AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (“ABI”), the Portfolio’s distributor and an affiliate of the Adviser, received $535,505 in Rule 12b-1 fees.
During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011, the Adviser incurred distribution expenses in the amount of $1,605,724 in connection with activities primarily intended to result in the sale of the Portfolio’s Class B shares. This amount includes the 12b-1 fees paid by the Portfolio to the Adviser.
Financial intermediaries, such as insurers, market and sell shares of the Portfolio and typically receive compensation from ABI, the Advisers and/or the Portfolio for selling shares of the Portfolio. These financial intermediaries receive compensation in any or all of the following forms: 12b-1 fees, defrayal of costs for educational seminars and training, additional distribution support, recordkeeping and/or administrative services. Payments related to providing contract-holder recordkeeping and/or administrative services will generally not exceed 0.35% of the average daily net assets of the Portfolio attributable to the relevant intermediary over the year. With respect to the Fund, which includes the Portfolio and other Portfolios of the Fund not discussed in this summary, ABI paid approximately $500,000 in 2011.
The transfer agent of the Portfolio is AllianceBernstein Investor Services, Inc. (“ABIS”). During the most recently completed fiscal year, ABIS received a fee of $1,311 from the Portfolio.13
The Portfolio did not effect brokerage transactions through the Adviser’s affiliate, Sanford C. Bernstein & Co., LLC (“SCB & Co.”) nor its U.K. affiliate, Sanford C. Bernstein Limited (“SCB Ltd.”), collectively “SCB,” and pay commissions during the Portfolio’s most recently completed fiscal year. The Adviser represented that SCB’s profitability from business conducted in the future with the Portfolio would be comparable to the profitability of SCB’s dealings with other similar third party clients. In the ordinary course of business, SCB receives and pays liquidity rebates from electronic communications networks (“ECNs”) derived from trading for its clients, including the Portfolio. These credits and charges are not being passed onto any SCB client. The Adviser also receives certain soft dollar benefits from brokers that execute agency trades for the Portfolio and other clients. These soft dollar benefits reduce the Adviser’s cost of doing business and increase its profitability.
V. POSSIBLE ECONOMIES OF SCALE
The Adviser has indicated that economies of scale are being shared with shareholders through fee structures,14 subsidies and enhancement to services. Based on some of the professional literature that has considered economies of scale in the mutual fund industry, it is thought that to the extent economies of scale exist, they may more often exist across a fund family as opposed to a specific fund. This is because the costs incurred by the Adviser, such as investment research or technology for trading or compliance systems can be spread across a greater asset base as the fund family increases in size. It is also
13 | | The Fund, which includes the Portfolio and other Portfolios of the Fund paid ABIS a flat fee of $18,000 in 2010. |
14 | | Fee structures include fee reductions, pricing at scale and breakpoints in advisory fee schedules. |
25
| | |
LARGE CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
possible that as the level of services required to operate a successful investment company has increased over time, and advisory firms make such investments in their business to provide services, there may be a sharing of economies of scale without a reduction in advisory fees.
An independent consultant, retained by the Senior Officer, provided the Board of Directors information on the Adviser’s firm-wide average costs from 2005 through 2011 and potential economies of scale. The independent consultant noted that from 2005 through 2007 the Adviser experienced significant growth in assets under management (“AUM”). During this period, operating expenses increased, in part to keep up with growth, and in part reflecting market returns. However, from 2008 through the first quarter of 2009, AUM rapidly and significantly decreased. Some operating expenses, including base compensation and office space, adjusted more slowly during this period, resulting in an increase in average costs. Since 2009, AUM has moved within a range of $400 to $500 million ending 2011 with an average of $411 million in the fourth quarter. The independent consultant noted that changes in operating expenses reflect changes in business composition and business practices in response to changes in financial markets. Finally, the independent consultant concluded that the increase in average cost and the decline in net operating margin across the company since 2008 are inconsistent with the view that there are currently “economies of scale” to be shared with clients through lower fees.
In February 2008, the independent consultant provided the Board of Directors an update of the Deli15 study on advisory fees and various fund characteristics.16 The independent consultant first reiterated the results of his previous two dimensional comparison analysis (fund size and family size) with the Board of Directors.17 The independent consultant then discussed the results of the regression model that was utilized to study the effects of various factors on advisory fees. The regression model output indicated that the bulk of the variation in fees predicted were explained by various factors, but substantially by fund AUM, family AUM, index fund indicator and investment style. The independent consultant also compared the advisory fees of the AllianceBernstein Mutual Funds to similar funds managed by 19 other large asset managers, regardless of the fund size and each Adviser’s proportion of mutual fund assets to non-mutual fund assets.
VI. NATURE AND QUALITY OF THE ADVISER’S SERVICES, INCLUDING THE PERFORMANCE OF THE PORTFOLIO
With assets under management of approximately $419 billion as of March 31, 2012, the Adviser has the investment experience to manage and provide non-investment services (described in Section I) to the Portfolio.
The information prepared by Lipper shows the 1, 3, 5 and 10 year performance returns and rankings of the Portfolio18 relative to its Lipper Performance Group (“PG”) and Lipper Performance Universe (“PU”)19 for the periods ended February 29, 2012.20
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Fund | | | PG Median | | | PU Median | | | PG Rank | | | PU Rank | |
Large Cap Growth Portfolio | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
1 year | | | 1.90 | | | | 4.17 | | | | 5.03 | | | | 12/13 | | | | 84/96 | |
3 year | | | 23.09 | | | | 24.76 | | | | 25.31 | | | | 10/13 | | | | 73/91 | |
5 year | | | 2.80 | | | | 3.30 | | | | 3.63 | | | | 9/10 | | | | 63/83 | |
10 year | | | 3.08 | | | | 3.71 | | | | 3.97 | | | | 9/10 | | | | 56/64 | |
15 | | The Deli study, originally published in 2002 based on 1997 data and updated for the February 2008 Presentation, may be of diminished value due to the age of the data used in the presentation and the changes experienced in the industry over the last four years. |
16 | | As mentioned previously, the Supreme Court cautioned against accepting mutual fund fee comparisons without careful scrutiny since the fees may not be the product of negotiations conducted at arm’s length. See Jones V. Harris at 1429. |
17 | | The two dimensional analysis showed patterns of lower advisory fees for funds with larger asset sizes and funds from larger family sizes compared to funds with smaller asset sizes and funds from smaller family sizes, which according to the independent consultant is indicative of a sharing of economies of scale and scope. However, in less liquid and active markets, such is not the case, as the empirical analysis showed potential for diseconomies of scale in those markets. The empirical analysis also showed diminishing economies of scale and scope as funds surpassed a certain high level of assets. |
18 | | The performance rankings are for the Class A shares of the Portfolio. The Portfolio’s performance returns shown were provided by Lipper. |
19 | | The Portfolio’s PG/PU are not identical to the Portfolio’s EG/EU as the criteria for including/excluding a fund in/from a PG/PU is somewhat different from that of an EG/EU. |
20 | | Lipper investment classification/objective dictates the PG and PU throughout the life of the fund even if a fund had a different investment classification/objective at a different point in time. |
26
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Set forth below are the 1, 3, 5, 10 year and since inception performance returns of the Portfolio (in bold)21 versus its benchmarks.22 Portfolio and benchmark volatility and reward-to-variability ratio (“Sharpe Ratio”) information is also shown23
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Periods Ending February 29, 2012 Annualized Performance | |
| | 1 Year (%) | | | 3 Year (%) | | | 5 Year (%) | | | 10 Year (%) | | | Since Inception (%) | | | Annualized | | | Risk Period (Year) | |
| | | | | | Volatility (%) | | | Sharpe (%) | | |
Large Cap Growth Portfolio | | | 1.89 | | | | 23.09 | | | | 2.80 | | | | 3.08 | | | | 8.36 | | | | 17.46 | | | | 0.15 | | | | 10 | |
Russell 1000 Growth Index | | | 7.62 | | | | 27.51 | | | | 4.54 | | | | 4.30 | | | | 7.68 | | | | 16.34 | | | | 0.22 | | | | 10 | |
Inception Date: June 26, 1992 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CONCLUSION:
Based on the factors discussed above the Senior Officer’s conclusion is that the proposed advisory fee for the Portfolio is reasonable and within the range of what would have been negotiated at arm’s-length in light of all the surrounding circumstances. This conclusion in respect of the Portfolio is based on an evaluation of all of these factors and no single factor was dispositive.
Dated: May 25, 2012
21 | | The performance returns and risk measures shown in the table are for the Class A shares of the Portfolio. |
22 | | The Adviser provided Portfolio and benchmark performance return information for periods through February 29, 2012. |
23 | | Portfolio and benchmark volatility and Sharpe Ratio information was obtained through Lipper LANA, a database maintained by Lipper. Volatility is a statistical measure of the tendency of a market price or yield to vary over time. A Sharpe Ratio is a risk adjusted measure of return that divides a portfolio’s return in excess of the riskless return by the portfolio’s standard deviation. A portfolio with a greater volatility would be viewed as more risky than a portfolio with equivalent performance but lower volatility; for that reason, a greater return would be demanded for the more risky portfolio. A portfolio with a higher Sharpe Ratio would be viewed as better performing than a portfolio with a lower Sharpe Ratio. |
27
AllianceBernstein
Variable Products Series Fund, Inc.
| | |
![LOGO](https://capedge.com/proxy/N-CSRS/0001193125-12-366259/g374690g16n16.jpg) | | AllianceBernstein Real Estate Investment Portfolio |
Semi-Annual Report
![LOGO](https://capedge.com/proxy/N-CSRS/0001193125-12-366259/g374690g81g54.jpg)
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT
Investment Products Offered
| Ø | | Are Not Bank Guaranteed |
AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (ABI) is the distributor of the AllianceBernstein family of mutual funds. ABI is a member of FINRA and is an affiliate of AllianceBernstein L.P., the manager of the funds.
You may obtain a description of the Fund’s proxy voting policies and procedures, and information regarding how the Fund voted proxies relating to portfolio securities during the most recent 12-month period ended June 30, without charge. Simply visit AllianceBernstein’s website at www.alliancebernstein.com or go to the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (the “Commission”) website at www.sec.gov, or call AllianceBernstein at (800) 227-4618.
The Fund files its complete schedule of portfolio holdings with the Commission for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year on Form N-Q. The Fund’s Forms N-Q are available on the Commission’s website at www.sec.gov. The Fund’s Forms N-Q may also be reviewed and copied at the Commission’s Public Reference Room in Washington, DC; information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling (800) SEC-0330.
AllianceBernstein® and the AB Logo are registered trademarks and service marks used by permission of the owner, AllianceBernstein L.P.
| | |
| | |
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO |
FUND EXPENSES (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
As a shareholder of the Fund, you incur two types of costs: (1) transaction costs, including sales charges (loads) on purchase payments, contingent deferred sales charges on redemptions and (2) ongoing costs, including management fees; distribution (12b-1) fees; and other Fund expenses. This example is intended to help you understand your ongoing costs (in dollars) of investing in the Fund and to compare these costs with the ongoing costs of investing in other mutual funds.
The Example is based on an investment of $1,000 invested at the beginning of the period and held for the entire period as indicated below.
Actual Expenses
The table below provides information about actual account values and actual expenses. You may use the information in this line, together with the amount you invested, to estimate the expenses that you paid over the period. Simply divide your account value by $1,000 (for example, an $8,600 account value divided by $1,000 = 8.6), then multiply the result by the number in the first line under the heading entitled “Expenses Paid During Period” to estimate the expenses you paid on your account during this period. The estimate of expenses does not include fees or other expenses of any variable insurance product. If such expenses were included, the estimate of expenses you paid during the period would be higher and your ending account value would be lower.
Hypothetical Example for Comparison Purposes
The table below provides information about hypothetical account values and hypothetical expenses based on the Fund’s actual expense ratio and an assumed annual rate of return of 5% before expenses, which is not the Fund’s actual return. The hypothetical account values and expenses may not be used to estimate the actual ending account balance or expenses you paid for the period. You may use this information to compare the ongoing costs of investing in the Fund and other funds by comparing this 5% hypothetical example with the 5% hypothetical examples that appear in the shareholder reports of other funds. The estimate of expenses does not include fees or other expenses of any variable insurance product. If such expenses were included, the estimate of expenses you paid during the period would be higher and your ending account value would be lower.
Please note that the expenses shown in the table are meant to highlight your ongoing costs only and do not reflect any transactional costs, such as sales charges (loads), or contingent deferred sales charges on redemptions. Therefore, the second line of each class’ table is useful in comparing ongoing costs only, and will not help you determine the relative total costs of owning different funds. In addition, if these transactional costs were included, your costs would have been higher.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Beginning Account Value January 1, 2012 | | | Ending Account Value June 30, 2012 | | | Expenses Paid During Period* | | | Annualized Expense Ratio* | |
Class A | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Actual | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,152.90 | | | $ | 4.66 | | | | 0.87 | % |
Hypothetical (5% return before expenses) | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,020.54 | | | $ | 4.37 | | | | 0.87 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class B | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Actual | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,151.60 | | | $ | 5.99 | | | | 1.12 | % |
Hypothetical (5% return before expenses) | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,019.29 | | | $ | 5.62 | | | | 1.12 | % |
* | | Expenses are equal to each classes’ annualized expense ratios, multiplied by the average account value over the period, multiplied by 182/366 (to reflect the one-half year period). |
1
| | |
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO |
TEN LARGEST HOLDINGS* | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
COMPANY | | U.S. $ VALUE | | | PERCENT OF NET ASSETS | |
Simon Property Group, Inc. | | $ | 8,715,403 | | | | 10.7 | % |
American Tower Corp. | | | 5,104,828 | | | | 6.3 | |
Ventas, Inc. | | | 3,440,671 | | | | 4.2 | |
Equity Residential | | | 3,279,512 | | | | 4.0 | |
Boston Properties, Inc. | | | 2,855,441 | | | | 3.5 | |
Vornado Realty Trust | | | 2,766,301 | | | | 3.4 | |
Public Storage | | | 2,765,452 | | | | 3.4 | |
Weyerhaeuser Co. | | | 2,523,326 | | | | 3.1 | |
AvalonBay Communities, Inc. | | | 2,405,160 | | | | 2.9 | |
HCP, Inc. | | | 2,316,109 | | | | 2.8 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | $ | 36,172,203 | | | | 44.3 | % |
INDUSTRY DIVERSIFICATION**
June 30, 2012 (unaudited)
| | | | | | | | |
INDUSTRY | | U.S. $ VALUE | | | PERCENT OF TOTAL INVESTMENTS | |
Diversified/Specialty | | $ | 15,889,989 | | | | 19.5 | % |
Regional Mall | | | 11,966,147 | | | | 14.7 | |
Multi-Family | | | 10,293,103 | | | | 12.7 | |
Health Care | | | 9,582,022 | | | | 11.8 | |
Office | | | 8,125,742 | | | | 10.0 | |
Lodging | | | 8,077,736 | | | | 9.9 | |
Shopping Center/Other Retail | | | 6,463,256 | | | | 7.9 | |
Self Storage | | | 5,592,139 | | | | 6.9 | |
Industrial Warehouse Distribution | | | 2,985,287 | | | | 3.7 | |
Triple Net | | | 1,798,131 | | | | 2.2 | |
Student Housing | | | 598,098 | | | | 0.7 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Investments | | $ | 81,371,650 | | | | 100.0 | % |
** | | The Portfolio’s industry breakdown is expressed as a percentage of total investments (excluding security lending collateral) and may vary over time. |
Please note: The industry classifications presented herein are based on the industry categorization methodology of the Adviser.
2
| | |
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMMON STOCKS–99.7% | | | | | | | | |
EQUITY: OTHER–33.4% | | | | | | | | |
DIVERSIFIED/SPECIALTY–19.5% | | | | | |
American Tower Corp. | | | 73,020 | | | $ | 5,104,829 | |
Digital Realty Trust, Inc.(a) | | | 23,960 | | | | 1,798,677 | |
Duke Realty Corp. | | | 75,380 | | | | 1,103,563 | |
Lexington Realty Trust(a) | | | 95,900 | | | | 812,273 | |
Plum Creek Timber Co., Inc. | | | 20,150 | | | | 799,955 | |
Rayonier, Inc. | | | 21,850 | | | | 981,065 | |
Vornado Realty Trust | | | 32,940 | | | | 2,766,301 | |
Weyerhaeuser Co.(a) | | | 112,850 | | | | 2,523,326 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 15,889,989 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HEALTH CARE–11.7% | | | | | | | | |
HCP, Inc. | | | 52,460 | | | | 2,316,109 | |
Health Care REIT, Inc. | | | 36,961 | | | | 2,154,826 | |
LTC Properties, Inc. | | | 16,900 | | | | 613,132 | |
Omega Healthcare Investors, Inc. | | | 18,520 | | | | 416,700 | |
Senior Housing Properties Trust | | | 28,700 | | | | 640,584 | |
Ventas, Inc. | | | 54,510 | | | | 3,440,671 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 9,582,022 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TRIPLE NET–2.2% | | | | | | | | |
Entertainment Properties Trust | | | 5,050 | | | | 207,606 | |
National Retail Properties, Inc. | | | 29,350 | | | | 830,311 | |
Realty Income Corp.(a) | | | 18,200 | | | | 760,214 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,798,131 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 27,270,142 | |
| | | | | | | | |
RETAIL–22.6% | | | | | | | | |
REGIONAL MALL–14.7% | | | | | | | | |
CBL & Associates Properties, Inc.(a) | | | 26,932 | | | | 526,251 | |
General Growth Properties, Inc. | | | 80,780 | | | | 1,461,310 | |
Glimcher Realty Trust | | | 67,438 | | | | 689,216 | |
Macerich Co. (The)(a) | | | 9,720 | | | | 573,966 | |
Simon Property Group, Inc. | | | 55,990 | | | | 8,715,404 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 11,966,147 | |
| | | | | | | | |
SHOPPING CENTER/OTHER RETAIL–7.9% | | | | | | | | |
DDR Corp. | | | 49,573 | | | | 725,749 | |
Federal Realty Investment Trust | | | 11,200 | | | | 1,165,808 | |
Kimco Realty Corp. | | | 29,600 | | | | 563,288 | |
Regency Centers Corp. | | | 25,280 | | | | 1,202,570 | |
Retail Opportunity Investments Corp.(a) | | | 75,466 | | | | 910,120 | |
Tanger Factory Outlet Centers | | | 41,430 | | | | 1,327,831 | |
Weingarten Realty Investors | | | 21,560 | | | | 567,890 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 6,463,256 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 18,429,403 | |
| | | | | | | | |
RESIDENTIAL–20.2% | | | | | | | | |
MULTI-FAMILY–12.6% | | | | | | | | |
Associated Estates Realty Corp. | | | 12,590 | | | | 188,221 | |
AvalonBay Communities, Inc. | | | 17,000 | | | | 2,405,160 | |
BRE Properties, Inc. | | | 13,590 | | | | 679,772 | |
Camden Property Trust | | | 13,865 | | | | 938,245 | |
Equity Residential | | | 52,590 | | | | 3,279,512 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Essex Property Trust, Inc. | | | 6,050 | | | $ | 931,216 | |
Post Properties, Inc. | | | 9,690 | | | | 474,325 | |
UDR, Inc. | | | 54,050 | | | | 1,396,652 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 10,293,103 | |
| | | | | | | | |
SELF STORAGE–6.9% | | | | | | | | |
CubeSmart | | | 33,000 | | | | 385,110 | |
Extra Space Storage, Inc. | | | 44,971 | | | | 1,376,113 | |
Public Storage | | | 19,150 | | | | 2,765,452 | |
Sovran Self Storage, Inc. | | | 21,271 | | | | 1,065,464 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 5,592,139 | |
| | | | | | | | |
STUDENT HOUSING–0.7% | | | | | | | | |
Education Realty Trust, Inc. | | | 53,980 | | | | 598,098 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 16,483,340 | |
| | | | | | | | |
OFFICE–9.9% | | | | | | | | |
OFFICE–9.9% | | | | | | | | |
Boston Properties, Inc. | | | 26,349 | | | | 2,855,441 | |
Brandywine Realty Trust | | | 25,310 | | | | 312,325 | |
Corporate Office Properties Trust | | | 12,430 | | | | 292,229 | |
Douglas Emmett, Inc. | | | 54,340 | | | | 1,255,254 | |
Kilroy Realty Corp. | | | 24,584 | | | | 1,190,112 | |
Liberty Property Trust(a) | | | 9,240 | | | | 340,402 | |
Mack-Cali Realty Corp. | | | 15,290 | | | | 444,480 | |
PS Business Parks, Inc. | | | 3,140 | | | | 212,641 | |
SL Green Realty Corp. | | | 15,240 | | | | 1,222,858 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 8,125,742 | |
| | | | | | | | |
LODGING–9.9% | | | | | | | | |
LODGING–9.9% | | | | | | | | |
FelCor Lodging Trust, Inc.(b) | | | 222,105 | | | | 1,043,893 | |
Hospitality Properties Trust | | | 8,940 | | | | 221,444 | |
Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc. | | | 71,060 | | | | 1,124,169 | |
Intercontinental Hotels Group PLC | | | 34,900 | | | | 840,200 | |
LaSalle Hotel Properties(a) | | | 45,297 | | | | 1,319,955 | |
Pebblebrook Hotel Trust | | | 45,120 | | | | 1,051,747 | |
RLJ Lodging Trust | | | 18,850 | | | | 341,751 | |
Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide, Inc. | | | 7,780 | | | | 412,651 | |
Strategic Hotels & Resorts, Inc.(b) | | | 166,230 | | | | 1,073,846 | |
Sunstone Hotel Investors, Inc.(b) | | | 58,970 | | | | 648,080 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 8,077,736 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INDUSTRIALS–3.7% | | | | | | | | |
INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE DISTRIBUTION–3.7% | | | | | | | | |
EastGroup Properties, Inc. | | | 13,370 | | | | 712,621 | |
ProLogis, Inc. | | | 68,392 | | | | 2,272,666 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,985,287 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Investments Before Security Lending Collateral for Securities Loaned–99.7% (cost $66,682,883) | | | | | | $ | 81,371,650 | |
| | | | | | | | |
3
| | |
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
INVESTMENTS OF CASH COLLATERAL FOR SECURITY LOANED–5.3% | | | | | | | | |
INVESTMENT COMPANIES–5.3% | | | | | | | | |
AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves–Class I, 0.20%(c) (cost $4,293,767) | | | 4,293,767 | | | $ | 4,293,767 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TOTAL INVESTMENTS–105.0% (cost $70,976,650) | | | | | | | 85,665,417 | |
Other assets less liabilities–(5.0)% | | | | | | | (4,049,774 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
NET ASSETS–100.0% | | | | | | $ | 81,615,643 | |
| | | | | | | | |
(a) | | Represents entire or partial securities out on loan. See Note E for securities lending information. |
(b) | | Non-income producing security. |
(c) | | Investment in affiliated money market mutual fund. The rate shown represents the 7-day yield as of period end. |
Glossary:
REIT—Real Estate Investment Trust
See notes to financial statements.
4
| | |
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO |
STATEMENTOF ASSETS & LIABILITIES |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | |
ASSETS | | | | |
Investments in securities, at value | | | | |
Unaffiliated issuers (cost $66,682,883) | | $ | 81,371,650 | (a) |
Affiliated issuers (cost $4,293,767—including investment of cash collateral for securities loaned of $4,293,767) | | | 4,293,767 | |
Foreign currencies, at value (cost $7,330) | | | 7,473 | |
Receivable for investment securities sold | | | 3,392,555 | |
Dividends and interest receivable | | | 190,916 | |
Receivable for capital stock sold | | | 80,932 | |
| | | | |
Total assets | | | 89,337,293 | |
| | | | |
LIABILITIES | | | | |
Due to custodian | | | 149,600 | |
Payable for collateral received on securities loaned | | | 4,293,767 | |
Payable for investment securities purchased | | | 3,047,367 | |
Payable for capital stock redeemed | | | 111,627 | |
Advisory fee payable | | | 36,678 | |
Administrative fee payable | | | 15,935 | |
Distribution fee payable | | | 3,005 | |
Transfer Agent fee payable | | | 146 | |
Accrued expenses | | | 63,525 | |
| | | | |
Total liabilities | | | 7,721,650 | |
| | | | |
NET ASSETS | | $ | 81,615,643 | |
| | | | |
COMPOSITION OF NET ASSETS | | | | |
Capital stock, at par | | $ | 6,111 | |
Additional paid-in capital | | | 51,425,493 | |
Undistributed net investment income | | | 1,935,255 | |
Accumulated net realized gain on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | 13,559,874 | |
Net unrealized appreciation on investments and foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities | | | 14,688,910 | |
| | | | |
| | $ | 81,615,643 | |
| | | | |
Net Asset Value Per Share—1 billion shares of capital stock authorized, $.001 par value
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class | | Net Assets | | | Shares Outstanding | | | Net Asset Value | |
A | | $ | 66,842,769 | | | | 5,005,982 | | | $ | 13.35 | |
B | | $ | 14,772,874 | | | | 1,104,979 | | | $ | 13.37 | |
(a) | | Includes securities on loan with a value of $4,271,378 (see Note E). |
See notes to financial statements.
5
| | |
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO |
STATEMENTOF OPERATIONS | | |
Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | |
INVESTMENT INCOME | | | | |
Dividends | | | | |
Unaffiliated issuers | | $ | 1,247,695 | |
Affiliated issuers | | | 2,745 | |
Interest | | | 44 | |
Securities lending income | | | 3,404 | |
| | | | |
| | | 1,253,888 | |
| | | | |
EXPENSES | | | | |
Advisory fee (see Note B) | | | 221,202 | |
Distribution fee—Class B | | | 17,761 | |
Transfer agency—Class A | | | 918 | |
Transfer agency—Class B | | | 196 | |
Custodian | | | 44,226 | |
Administrative | | | 26,951 | |
Audit | | | 21,710 | |
Legal | | | 14,822 | |
Printing | | | 13,372 | |
Directors’ fees | | | 1,973 | |
Miscellaneous | | | 3,331 | |
| | | | |
Total expenses | | | 366,462 | |
| | | | |
Net investment income | | | 887,426 | |
| | | | |
REALIZED AND UNREALIZED GAIN (LOSS) ON INVESTMENT AND FOREIGN CURRENCY TRANSACTIONS | | | | |
Net realized gain (loss) on: | | | | |
Investment transactions | | | 4,319,233 | |
Foreign currency transactions | | | (2,027 | ) |
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of: | | | | |
Investments | | | 6,020,303 | |
Foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities | | | 224 | |
| | | | |
Net gain on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | 10,337,733 | |
| | | | |
NET INCREASE IN NET ASSETS FROM OPERATIONS | | $ | 11,225,159 | |
| | | | |
See notes to financial statements.
6
| | |
|
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO |
STATEMENTOF CHANGESIN NET ASSETS | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | |
INCREASE (DECREASE) IN NET ASSETS FROM OPERATIONS | | | | | |
Net investment income | | $ | 887,426 | | | $ | 663,371 | |
Net realized gain on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | 4,317,206 | | | | 10,132,203 | |
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities | | | 6,020,527 | | | | (4,144,270 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Net increase in net assets from operations | | | 11,225,159 | | | | 6,651,304 | |
DIVIDENDS AND DISTRIBUTIONS TO SHAREHOLDERS FROM | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income | | | | | | | | |
Class A | | | –0 | – | | | (926,394 | ) |
Class B | | | –0 | – | | | (175,422 | ) |
Net realized gain on investment transactions | | | | | | | | |
Class A | | | –0 | – | | | (6,988,236 | ) |
Class B | | | –0 | – | | | (1,581,076 | ) |
CAPITAL STOCK TRANSACTIONS | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (6,238,366 | ) | | | (1,323,767 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Total increase (decrease) | | | 4,986,793 | | | | (4,343,591 | ) |
NET ASSETS | | | | | | | | |
Beginning of period | | | 76,628,850 | | | | 80,972,441 | |
| | | | | | | | |
End of period (including undistributed net investment income of $1,935,255 and $1,047,829, respectively) | | $ | 81,615,643 | | | $ | 76,628,850 | |
| | | | | | | | |
See notes to financial statements.
7
| | |
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
NOTE A: Significant Accounting Policies
The AllianceBernstein Real Estate Investment Portfolio (the “Portfolio”) is a series of AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund, Inc. (the “Fund”). The Portfolio’s investment objective is total return from long-term growth of capital and income. The Portfolio is diversified as defined under the Investment Company Act of 1940. The Fund was incorporated in the State of Maryland on November 17, 1987, as an open-end series investment company. The Fund offers thirteen separately managed pools of assets which have differing investment objectives and policies. The Portfolio offers Class A and Class B shares. Both classes of shares have identical voting, dividend, liquidating and other rights, except that Class B shares bear a distribution expense and have exclusive voting rights with respect to the Class B distribution plan.
The Portfolio offers and sells its shares only to separate accounts of certain life insurance companies for the purpose of funding variable annuity contracts and variable life insurance policies. Sales are made without a sales charge at the Portfolio’s net asset value per share.
The financial statements have been prepared in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“U.S. GAAP”) which require management to make certain estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities in the financial statements and amounts of income and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. The following is a summary of significant accounting policies followed by the Portfolio.
1. Security Valuation
Portfolio securities are valued at their current market value determined on the basis of market quotations or, if market quotations are not readily available or are deemed unreliable, at “fair value” as determined in accordance with procedures established by and under the general supervision of the Fund’s Board of Directors.
In general, the market value of securities which are readily available and deemed reliable are determined as follows: Securities listed on a national securities exchange (other than securities listed on the NASDAQ Stock Market, Inc. (“NASDAQ”)) or on a foreign securities exchange are valued at the last sale price at the close of the exchange or foreign securities exchange. If there has been no sale on such day, the securities are valued at the last traded price from the previous day. Securities listed on more than one exchange are valued by reference to the principal exchange on which the securities are traded; securities listed only on NASDAQ are valued in accordance with the NASDAQ Official Closing Price; listed or over the counter market (“OTC”) put or call options are valued at the mid level between the current bid and ask prices. If either a current bid or current ask price is unavailable, AllianceBernstein L.P. (the “Adviser”) will have discretion to determine the best valuation (e.g. last trade price in the case of listed options); open futures contracts are valued using the closing settlement price or, in the absence of such a price, the most recent quoted bid price. If there are no quotations available for the day of valuation, the last available closing settlement price is used; U.S. government securities and other debt instruments having 60 days or less remaining until maturity are valued at amortized cost if their original maturity was 60 days or less; or by amortizing their fair value as of the 61st day prior to maturity if their original term to maturity exceeded 60 days; fixed-income securities, including mortgage backed and asset backed securities, may be valued on the basis of prices provided by a pricing service or at a price obtained from one or more of the major broker/dealers. In cases where broker/dealer quotes are obtained, the Adviser may establish procedures whereby changes in market yields or spreads are used to adjust, on a daily basis, a recently obtained quoted price on a security. Swaps and other derivatives are valued daily, primarily using independent pricing services, independent pricing models using market inputs, as well as third party broker-dealers or counterparties.
Securities for which market quotations are not readily available (including restricted securities) or are deemed unreliable are valued at fair value. Factors considered in making this determination may include, but are not limited to, information obtained by contacting the issuer, analysts, analysis of the issuer’s financial statements or other available documents. In addition, the Portfolio may use fair value pricing for securities primarily traded in non-U.S. markets because most foreign markets close well before the Portfolio values its securities at 4:00 p.m., Eastern Time. The earlier close of these foreign markets gives rise to the possibility that significant events, including broad market moves, may have occurred in the interim and may materially affect the value of those securities. To account for this, the Portfolio may frequently value many of its foreign equity securities using fair value prices based on third party vendor modeling tools to the extent available.
2. Fair Value Measurements
In accordance with U.S. GAAP regarding fair value measurements, fair value is defined as the price that the Portfolio would receive to sell an asset or pay to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement
8
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
date. The U.S. GAAP disclosure requirements establish a framework for measuring fair value, and a three-level hierarchy for fair value measurements based upon the transparency of inputs to the valuation of an asset or liability. Inputs may be observable or unobservable and refer broadly to the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability. Observable inputs reflect the assumptions market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability based on market data obtained from sources independent of the Portfolio. Unobservable inputs reflect the Portfolio’s own assumptions about the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability based on the best information available in the circumstances. Each investment is assigned a level based upon the observability of the inputs which are significant to the overall valuation. The three-tier hierarchy of inputs is summarized below.
| • | | Level 1—quoted prices in active markets for identical investments |
| • | | Level 2—other significant observable inputs (including quoted prices for similar investments, interest rates, prepayment speeds, credit risk, etc.) |
| • | | Level 3—significant unobservable inputs (including the Portfolio’s own assumptions in determining the fair value of investments) |
The following table summarizes the valuation of the Portfolio’s investments by the above fair value hierarchy levels as of June 30, 2012:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Level 1 | | | Level 2 | | | Level 3 | | | Total | |
Investments in Securities: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Assets: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Common Stocks: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Equity: Other | | $ | 27,270,142 | | | $ | –0 | – | | $ | –0 | – | | $ | 27,270,142 | |
Retail | | | 18,429,403 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 18,429,403 | |
Residential | | | 16,483,340 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 16,483,340 | |
Office | | | 8,125,742 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 8,125,742 | |
Lodging | | | 7,237,536 | | | | 840,200 | | | | –0 | – | | | 8,077,736 | |
Industrials | | | 2,985,287 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 2,985,287 | |
Investments of Cash Collateral for Security Loaned in Affiliated Money Market Fund | | | 4,293,767 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 4,293,767 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Investments in Securities | | | 84,825,217 | | | | 840,200 | | | | –0 | – | | | 85,665,417 | |
Other Financial Instruments*: | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
Total | | $ | 84,825,217 | | | $ | 840,200 | | | $ | –0 | – | | $ | 85,665,417 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
* | | Other financial instruments are derivative instruments, such as futures, forwards and swap contracts, which are valued at the unrealized appreciation/depreciation on the instrument. |
3. Currency Translation
Assets and liabilities denominated in foreign currencies and commitments under forward currency exchange contracts are translated into U.S. dollars at the mean of the quoted bid and ask prices of such currencies against the U.S. dollar. Purchases and sales of portfolio securities are translated into U.S. dollars at the rates of exchange prevailing when such securities were acquired or sold. Income and expenses are translated into U.S. dollars at rates of exchange prevailing when accrued.
Net realized gain or loss on foreign currency transactions represents foreign exchange gains and losses from sales and maturities of foreign fixed income investments, foreign currency exchange contracts, holding of foreign currencies, currency gains or losses realized between the trade and settlement dates on foreign investment transactions, and the difference between the amounts of dividends, interest and foreign withholding taxes recorded on the Portfolio’s books and the U.S. dollar equivalent amounts actually received or paid. Net unrealized currency gains and losses from valuing foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities at period end exchange rates are reflected as a component of net unrealized appreciation or depreciation of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities.
4. Taxes
It is the Portfolio’s policy to meet the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code applicable to regulated investment companies and to distribute all of its investment company taxable income and net realized gains, if any, to shareholders. Therefore, no provisions for federal income or excise taxes are required. The Portfolio may be subject to taxes imposed by countries in
9
| | |
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
which it invests. Such taxes are generally based on income and/or capital gains earned or repatriated. Taxes are accrued and applied to net investment income, net realized gains and net unrealized appreciation/depreciation as such income and/or gains are earned.
In accordance with U.S. GAAP requirements regarding accounting for uncertainties in income taxes, management has analyzed the Portfolio’s tax positions taken or expected to be taken on federal and state income tax returns for all open tax years (the current and the prior three tax years) and has concluded that no provision for income tax is required in the Portfolio’s financial statements.
5. Investment Income and Investment Transactions
Dividend income is recorded on the ex-dividend date or as soon as the Portfolio is informed of the dividend. Interest income is accrued daily. Investment transactions are accounted for on the date the securities are purchased or sold. Investment gains or losses are determined on the identified cost basis. The Portfolio amortizes premiums and accretes discounts as adjustments to interest income.
6. Class Allocations
All income earned and expenses incurred by the Portfolio are borne on a pro-rata basis by each outstanding class of shares, based on the proportionate interest in the Portfolio represented by the net assets of such class, except for class specific expenses which are allocated to the respective class. Expenses of the Fund are charged to each Portfolio in proportion to net assets. Realized and unrealized gains and losses are allocated among the various share classes based on respective net assets.
7. Dividends and Distributions
Dividends and distributions to shareholders, if any, are recorded on the ex-dividend date. Income dividends and capital gains distributions are determined in accordance with federal tax regulations and may differ from those determined in accordance with U.S. GAAP. To the extent these differences are permanent, such amounts are reclassified within the capital accounts based on their federal tax basis treatment; temporary differences do not require such reclassification.
NOTE B: Advisory Fee and Other Transactions with Affiliates
Under the terms of the investment advisory agreement, the Portfolio pays the Adviser an advisory fee at an annual rate of .55% of the first $2.5 billion, .45% of the next $2.5 billion and .40% in excess of $5 billion, of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets. The fee is accrued daily and paid monthly.
Pursuant to the investment advisory agreement, the Portfolio may reimburse the Adviser for certain legal and accounting services provided to the Portfolio by the Adviser. For the six months ended June 30, 2012, such fee amounted to $26,951.
Brokerage commissions paid on investment transactions for the six months ended June 30, 2012 amounted to $129,304, of which $0 and $70, respectively, was paid to Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. LLC and Sanford C. Bernstein Limited, affiliates of the Adviser.
The Portfolio compensates AllianceBernstein Investor Services, Inc. (“ABIS”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Adviser, under a Transfer Agency Agreement for providing personnel and facilities to perform transfer agency services for the Portfolio. Such compensation retained by ABIS amounted to $692 for the six months ended June 30, 2012.
NOTE C: Distribution Plan
The Portfolio has adopted a Distribution Plan (the “Plan”) for Class B shares pursuant to Rule 12b-1 under the Investment Company Act of 1940. Under the Plan, the Portfolio pays distribution and servicing fees to AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (the “Distributor”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Adviser, at an annual rate of up to .50% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The fees are accrued daily and paid monthly. The Board of Directors currently limits payments under the Plan to .25% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The Plan provides that the Distributor will use such payments in their entirety for distribution assistance and promotional activities.
The Portfolio is not obligated under the Plan to pay any distribution and servicing fees in excess of the amounts set forth above. The purpose of the payments to the Distributor under the Plan is to compensate the Distributor for its distribution services with respect to the sale of the Portfolio’s Class B shares. Since the Distributor’s compensation is not directly tied to its expenses, the amount of compensation received by it under the Plan during any year may be more or less than its actual expenses. For this reason, the Plan is characterized by the staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission as being of the “compensation” variety.
10
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
In the event that the Plan is terminated or not continued, no distribution or servicing fees (other than current amounts accrued but not yet paid) would be owed by the Portfolio to the Distributor.
The Plan also provides that the Adviser may use its own resources to finance the distribution of the Portfolio’s shares.
NOTE D: Investment Transactions
Purchases and sales of investment securities (excluding short-term investments) for the six months ended June 30, 2012 were as follows:
| | | | | | | | |
| | Purchases | | | Sales | |
Investment securities (excluding U.S. government securities) | | $ | 51,538,089 | | | $ | 56,526,525 | |
U.S. government securities | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
The cost of investments for federal income tax purposes was substantially the same as the cost for financial reporting purposes. Accordingly, gross unrealized appreciation and unrealized depreciation are as follows:
| | | | |
Gross unrealized appreciation | | $ | 14,780,909 | |
Gross unrealized depreciation | | | (92,142 | ) |
| | | | |
Net unrealized appreciation | | $ | 14,688,767 | |
| | | | |
1. Derivative Financial Instruments
The Portfolio may use derivatives in an effort to earn income and enhance returns, to replace more traditional direct investments, to obtain exposure to otherwise inaccessible markets (collectively, “investment purposes”), or to hedge or adjust the risk profile of its portfolio.
The Portfolio did not engage in derivatives transactions for the six months ended June 30, 2012.
2. Currency Transactions
The Portfolio may invest in non-U.S. Dollar securities on a currency hedged or unhedged basis. The Portfolio may seek investment opportunities by taking long or short positions in currencies through the use of currency-related derivatives, including forward currency exchange contracts, futures and options on futures, swaps, and other options. The Portfolio may enter into transactions for investment opportunities when it anticipates that a foreign currency will appreciate or depreciate in value but securities denominated in that currency are not held by the Portfolio and do not present attractive investment opportunities. Such transactions may also be used when the Adviser believes that it may be more efficient than a direct investment in a foreign currency-denominated security. The Portfolio may also conduct currency exchange contracts on a spot basis (i.e., for cash at the spot rate prevailing in the currency exchange market for buying or selling currencies).
NOTE E: Securities Lending
The Portfolio may enter into securities lending transactions. Under the Portfolio’s securities lending program, all securities loans will be collateralized continually by cash. The Portfolio will be compensated for the loan from a portion of the net return from the income earned on cash collateral after a rebate is paid to the borrower (in some cases, this rebate may be a “negative rebate” or fee paid by the borrower to the Portfolio in connection with the loan), and payments for fees of the securities lending agent and for certain other administrative expenses. It is the policy of the Portfolio to receive collateral consisting of cash in an amount exceeding the value of the securities loaned. The Portfolio will have the right to call a loan and obtain the securities loaned at any time on notice to the borrower within the normal and customary settlement time for the securities. While the securities are on loan, the borrower is obligated to pay the Portfolio amounts equal to any income or other distributions from the securities. The Portfolio will not have the right to vote any securities during the existence of a loan, but will have the right to regain ownership of loaned securities in order to exercise voting or other ownership rights. The lending agent has agreed to indemnify the Portfolio in the case of default of any securities borrower. Collateral received and securities loaned are marked to market daily to ensure that the securities loaned are secured by collateral. The lending agent will invest the cash collateral received in AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves, an eligible money market vehicle, in accordance with the investment restrictions of the Portfolio, and as approved by the Fund’s Board of Directors. The collateral received on securities loaned is recorded as an asset as well as a corresponding liability in the statement of assets and liabilities. When the Portfolio lends securities, its investment performance will continue to reflect changes in the value of the securities loaned. At June 30, 2012, the Portfolio had securities on loan with a value of $4,271,378 and had received cash collateral which has been invested into AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves of $4,293,767. The cash collateral will be
11
| | |
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
adjusted on the next business day after period end to maintain the required collateral amount. The Portfolio earned securities lending income of $3,404 and $2,745 from the borrowers and AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves, respectively, for the six months ended June 30, 2012; these amounts are reflected in the statement of operations. A principal risk of lending portfolio securities is that the borrower will fail to return the loaned securities upon termination of the loan and that the collateral will not be sufficient to replace the loaned securities. A summary of the Portfolio’s transactions in shares of AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves for the six months ended June 30, 2012 is as follows:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Market Value December 31, 2011 (000) | | Purchases at Cost (000) | | | Sales Proceeds (000) | | | Market Value June 30, 2012 (000) | | | Dividend Income (000) | |
$5,385 | | $ | 20,266 | | | $ | 21,357 | | | $ | 4,294 | | | $ | 3 | |
NOTE F: Capital Stock
Each class consists of 500,000,000 authorized shares. Transactions in capital shares for each class were as follows:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | SHARES | | | | | AMOUNT | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | | | | | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | |
Class A | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Shares sold | | | 233,330 | | | | 508,434 | | | | | $ | 2,946,828 | | | $ | 5,874,945 | |
Shares issued in reinvestment of dividends and distributions | | | –0 | – | | | 663,422 | | | | | | –0 | – | | | 7,914,630 | |
Shares redeemed | | | (677,455 | ) | | | (1,254,474 | ) | | | | | (8,439,803 | ) | | | (14,772,917 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (444,125 | ) | | | (82,618 | ) | | | | $ | (5,492,975 | ) | | $ | (983,342 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class B | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Shares sold | | | 101,553 | | | | 195,142 | | | | | $ | 1,305,661 | | | $ | 2,318,319 | |
Shares issued in reinvestment of dividends and distributions | | | –0 | – | | | 146,619 | | | | | | –0 | – | | | 1,756,498 | |
Shares redeemed | | | (162,924 | ) | | | (377,447 | ) | | | | | (2,051,052 | ) | | | (4,415,242 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (61,371 | ) | | | (35,686 | ) | | | | $ | (745,391 | ) | | $ | (340,425 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
NOTE G: Risks Involved in Investing in the Portfolio
Concentration of Risk—Although the Portfolio does not invest directly in real estate, it invests primarily in real estate equity securities and has a policy of concentration of its investments in the real estate industry. Therefore, an investment in the Portfolio is subject to certain risks associated with the direct ownership of real estate and with the real estate industry in general. To the extent that assets underlying the Portfolio’s investments are concentrated geographically, by property type or in certain other respects, the Portfolio may be subject to additional risks.
In addition, investing in Real Estate Investment Trusts (“REITs”) involves certain unique risks in addition to those risks associated with investing in the real estate industry in general. REITs are dependent upon management skills, are not diversified, and are subject to heavy cash flow dependency, default by borrowers and self-liquidation. REITs are also subject to the possibilities of failing to qualify for tax-free pass-through of income under the Code and failing to maintain their exemptions from registration under the 1940 Act. REITs (especially mortgage REITs) also are subject to interest rate risks.
Currency Risk—This is the risk that changes in foreign currency exchange rates may negatively affect the value of the Portfolio’s investments or reduce the returns of the Portfolio. For example, the value of the Portfolio’s investments in foreign currency-denominated securities or currencies may decrease if the U.S. Dollar is strong (i.e., gaining value relative to other currencies) and other currencies are weak (i.e., losing value relative to the U.S. Dollar). Currency markets are generally not as regulated as securities markets. Independent of the Portfolio’s investments denominated in foreign currencies, the Portfolio’s positions in various foreign currencies may cause the Portfolio to experience investment losses due to the changes in exchange rates and interest rates.
Derivatives Risk—The Portfolio may enter into derivative transactions such as forwards, options, futures and swaps. Derivatives may be illiquid, difficult to price, and leveraged so that small changes may produce disproportionate losses for the Portfolio, and subject to counterparty risk to a greater degree than more traditional investments. Derivatives may result in
12
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
significant losses, including losses that are far greater than the value of the derivatives reflected in the statement of assets and liabilities.
Indemnification Risk—In the ordinary course of business, the Portfolio enters into contracts that contain a variety of indemnifications. The Portfolio’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown. However, the Portfolio has not had prior claims or losses pursuant to these indemnification provisions and expects the risk of loss thereunder to be remote. Therefore, the Portfolio has not accrued any liability in connection with these indemnification provisions.
NOTE H: Joint Credit Facility
A number of open-end mutual funds managed by the Adviser, including the Portfolio, participate in a $140 million revolving credit facility (the “Facility”) intended to provide short-term financing, if necessary, subject to certain restrictions in connection with abnormal redemption activity. Commitment fees related to the Facility are paid by the participating funds and are included in miscellaneous expenses in the statement of operations. The Portfolio did not utilize the Facility during the six months ended June 30, 2012.
NOTE I: Distributions to Shareholders
The tax character of distributions to be paid for the year ending December 31, 2012 will be determined at the end of the current fiscal year. The tax character of distributions paid during the fiscal years ended December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010 were as follows:
| | | | | | | | |
| | 2011 | | | 2010 | |
Distributions paid from: | | | | | | | | |
Ordinary income | | $ | 1,768,593 | | | $ | 931,194 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Net long-term capital gains | | | 7,902,535 | | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | |
Total taxable distributions paid | | $ | 9,671,128 | | | $ | 931,194 | |
| | | | | | | | |
As of December 31, 2011, the components of accumulated earnings/(deficit) on a tax basis were as follows:
| | | | |
Undistributed ordinary income | | $ | 2,096,729 | |
Undistributed capital gains | | | 8,437,330 | |
Unrealized appreciation/(depreciation) | | | 8,424,821 | (a) |
| | | | |
Total accumulated earnings/(deficit) | | $ | 18,958,880 | |
| | | | |
(a) | | The difference between book-basis and tax-basis unrealized appreciation/(depreciation) is attributable primarily to the tax deferral of losses on wash sales. |
For tax purposes, net capital losses may be carried over to offset future capital gains, if any. Under the Regulated Investment Company Modernization Act of 2010, funds are permitted to carry forward capital losses incurred in taxable years beginning after December 22, 2010 for an indefinite period. These post-enactment capital losses must be utilized prior to the pre-enactment capital losses, which are subject to expiration. Post-enactment capital loss carryforwards will retain their character as either short-term or long-term capital losses rather than being considered short-term as under previous regulation. As of December 31, 2011, the Portfolio did not have any capital loss carryforwards.
NOTE J: Recent Accounting Pronouncement
In December 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued an Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) related to disclosures about offsetting assets and liabilities in financial statements. The amendments in this update require an entity to disclose both gross and net information for derivatives and other financial instruments that are either offset in the statement of assets and liabilities or subject to an enforceable master netting arrangement or similar agreement. The ASU is effective during interim or annual reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2013. At this time, management is evaluating the implication of this ASU and its impact on the financial statements has not been determined.
NOTE K: Subsequent Events
Management has evaluated subsequent events for possible recognition or disclosure in the financial statements through the date the financial statements are issued. Management has determined that there are no material events that would require disclosure in the Portfolio’s financial statements through this date.
13
| | |
|
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO |
FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Selected Data For A Share Of Capital Stock Outstanding Throughout Each Period
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | CLASS A | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, | |
| | | 2011 | | | 2010 | | | 2009 | | | 2008 | | | 2007 | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | | | $11.58 | | | | $12.02 | | | | $9.64 | | | | $7.86 | | | | $16.23 | | | | $22.83 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Income From Investment Operations | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income (a) | | | .14 | | | | .11 | | | | .23 | | | | .19 | | | | .26 | | | | .22 | |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | 1.63 | | | | 1.02 | | | | 2.30 | | | | 1.98 | | | | (4.38 | ) | | | (2.91 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) in net asset value from operations | | | 1.77 | | | | 1.13 | | | | 2.53 | | | | 2.17 | | | | (4.12 | ) | | | (2.69 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Less: Dividends and Distributions | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Dividends from net investment income | | | –0 | – | | | (.18 | ) | | | (.15 | ) | | | (.23 | ) | | | (.26 | ) | | | (.30 | ) |
Distributions from net realized gain on investment transactions | | | –0 | – | | | (1.39 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | (.16 | ) | | | (3.99 | ) | | | (3.61 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total dividends and distributions | | | –0 | – | | | (1.57 | ) | | | (.15 | ) | | | (.39 | ) | | | (4.25 | ) | | | (3.91 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net asset value, end of period | | | $13.35 | | | | $11.58 | | | | $12.02 | | | | $9.64 | | | | $7.86 | | | | $16.23 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Return | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total investment return based on net asset value (b) | | | 15.29 | % | | | 9.03 | %* | | | 26.34 | % | | | 29.46 | % | | | (35.68 | )% | | | (14.53 | )% |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Ratios/Supplemental Data | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net assets, end of period (000’s omitted) | | | $66,843 | | | | $63,093 | | | | $66,493 | | | | $38,317 | | | | $24,082 | | | | $50,015 | |
Ratio to average net assets of: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Expenses | | | .87 | %(c) | | | .88 | % | | | .87 | %(d) | | | 1.25 | % | | | 1.01 | % | | | .85 | % |
Net investment income | | | 2.25 | %(c) | | | .91 | % | | | 2.15 | %(d) | | | 2.50 | % | | | 2.13 | % | | | 1.09 | % |
Portfolio turnover rate | | | 64 | % | | | 114 | % | | | 132 | % | | | 94 | % | | | 46 | % | | | 51 | % |
See footnote summary on page 15.
14
| | |
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO |
FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Selected Data For A Share Of Capital Stock Outstanding Throughout Each Period
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | CLASS B | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, | |
| | | 2011 | | | 2010 | | | 2009 | | | 2008 | | | 2007 | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | | | $11.61 | | | | $12.05 | | | | $9.67 | | | | $7.86 | | | | $16.20 | | | | $22.80 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Income From Investment Operations | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income (a) | | | .13 | | | | .08 | | | | .20 | | | | .20 | | | | .22 | | | | .16 | |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | 1.63 | | | | 1.02 | | | | 2.31 | | | | 1.97 | | | | (4.37 | ) | | | (2.90 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) in net asset value from operations | | | 1.76 | | | | 1.10 | | | | 2.51 | | | | 2.17 | | | | (4.15 | ) | | | (2.74 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Less: Dividends and Distributions | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Dividends from net investment income | | | –0 | – | | | (.15 | ) | | | (.13 | ) | | | (.20 | ) | | | (.20 | ) | | | (.25 | ) |
Distributions from net realized gain on investment transactions | | | –0 | – | | | (1.39 | ) | | | –0 | – | | | (.16 | ) | | | (3.99 | ) | | | (3.61 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total dividends and distributions | | | –0 | – | | | (1.54 | ) | | | (.13 | ) | | | (.36 | ) | | | (4.19 | ) | | | (3.86 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net asset value, end of period | | | $13.37 | | | | $11.61 | | | | $12.05 | | | | $9.67 | | | | $7.86 | | | | $16.20 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Return | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total investment return based on net asset value (b) | | | 15.16 | % | | | 8.75 | %* | | | 26.05 | % | | | 29.22 | % | | | (35.82 | )% | | | (14.76 | )% |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Ratios/Supplemental Data | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net assets, end of period (000’s omitted) | | | $14,773 | | | | $13,536 | | | | $14,479 | | | | $12,517 | | | | $11,104 | | | | $22,281 | |
Ratio to average net assets of: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Expenses | | | 1.12 | %(c) | | | 1.13 | % | | | 1.13 | %(d) | | | 1.53 | % | | | 1.26 | % | | | 1.10 | % |
Net investment income | | | 2.01 | %(c) | | | .64 | % | | | 1.89 | %(d) | | | 2.67 | % | | | 1.83 | % | | | .80 | % |
Portfolio turnover rate | | | 64 | % | | | 114 | % | | | 132 | % | | | 94 | % | | | 46 | % | | | 51 | % |
(a) | | Based on average shares outstanding. |
(b) | | Total investment return is calculated assuming an initial investment made at the net asset value at the beginning of the period, reinvestment of all dividends and distributions at net asset value during the period, and redemption on the last day of the period. Total return does not reflect (i) insurance company’s separate account related expense charges and (ii) the deductions of taxes that a shareholder would pay on Portfolio distributions or the redemption of Portfolio shares. Total investment return calculated for a period of less than one year is not annualized. |
(d) | | The ratio includes expenses attributable to costs of proxy solicitation. |
* | | Includes the impact of proceeds received and credited to the Portfolio resulting from class action settlements, which enhanced the Portfolio’s performance for the year ended December 31, 2011 by 0.06%. |
See notes to financial statements.
15
| | |
| | |
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO |
CONTINUANCE DISCLOSURE | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
INFORMATION REGARDING THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE PORTFOLIO’S ADVISORY AGREEMENT
The disinterested directors (the “directors”) of AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund, Inc. (the “Fund”) unanimously approved the continuance of the Fund’s Advisory Agreement with the Adviser in respect of AllianceBernstein Real Estate Investment Portfolio (the “Portfolio”) at a meeting held on May 1-3, 2012.
Prior to approval of the continuance of the Advisory Agreement, the directors had requested from the Adviser, and received and evaluated, extensive materials. They reviewed the proposed continuance of the Advisory Agreement with the Adviser and with experienced counsel who are independent of the Adviser, who advised on the relevant legal standards. The directors also reviewed an independent evaluation prepared by the Fund’s Senior Officer (who is also the Fund’s Independent Compliance Officer) of the reasonableness of the advisory fee in the Advisory Agreement, in which the Senior Officer concluded that the contractual fee for the Portfolio was reasonable. The directors also discussed the proposed continuance in private sessions with counsel and the Fund’s Senior Officer.
The directors considered their knowledge of the nature and quality of the services provided by the Adviser to the Portfolio gained from their experience as directors or trustees of most of the registered investment companies advised by the Adviser, their overall confidence in the Adviser’s integrity and competence they have gained from that experience, the Adviser’s initiative in identifying and raising potential issues with the directors and its responsiveness, frankness and attention to concerns raised by the directors in the past, including the Adviser’s willingness to consider and implement organizational and operational changes designed to improve investment results and the services provided to the AllianceBernstein Funds. The directors noted that they have four regular meetings each year, at each of which they receive presentations from the Adviser on the investment results of the Portfolio and review extensive materials and information presented by the Adviser.
The directors also considered all other factors they believed relevant, including the specific matters discussed below. In their deliberations, the directors did not identify any particular information that was all-important or controlling, and different directors may have attributed different weights to the various factors. The directors determined that the selection of the Adviser to manage the Portfolio and the overall arrangements between the Portfolio and the Adviser, as provided in the Advisory Agreement, including the advisory fee, were fair and reasonable in light of the services performed, expenses incurred and such other matters as the directors considered relevant in the exercise of their business judgment. The material factors and conclusions that formed the basis for the directors’ determinations included the following:
Nature, Extent and Quality of Services Provided
The directors considered the scope and quality of services provided by the Adviser under the Advisory Agreement, including the quality of the investment research capabilities of the Adviser and the other resources it has dedicated to performing services for the Portfolio. They also noted the professional experience and qualifications of the Portfolio’s portfolio management team and other senior personnel of the Adviser. The directors also considered that the Advisory Agreement provides that the Portfolio will reimburse the Adviser for the cost to it of providing certain clerical, accounting, administrative and other services provided at the Portfolio’s request by employees of the Adviser or its affiliates. Requests for these reimbursements are approved by the directors on a quarterly basis and, to the extent requested and paid, result in a higher rate of total compensation from the Portfolio to the Adviser than the fee rate stated in the Portfolio’s Advisory Agreement. The directors noted that the methodology used to determine the reimbursement amounts had been reviewed by an independent consultant retained by the Fund’s Senior Officer. The quality of administrative and other services, including the Adviser’s role in coordinating the activities of the Portfolio’s other service providers, also were considered. The directors concluded that, overall, they were satisfied with the nature, extent and quality of services provided to the Portfolio under the Advisory Agreement.
Costs of Services Provided and Profitability
The directors reviewed a schedule of the revenues, expenses and related notes indicating the profitability of the Portfolio to the Adviser for calendar years 2010 and 2011 that had been prepared with an expense allocation methodology arrived at in consultation with an independent consultant retained by the Fund’s Senior Officer. The directors reviewed the assumptions and methods of allocation used by the Adviser in preparing fund-specific profitability data and noted that there are a number of potentially acceptable allocation methodologies for information of this type. The directors noted that the profitability information reflected all revenues and expenses of the Adviser’s relationship with the Portfolio, including those relating to its subsidiaries which provide transfer agency, distribution and brokerage services to the Portfolio. The directors recognized that it is difficult to make comparisons of profitability of the Advisory Agreement with fund advisory contracts for unaffiliated funds because comparative information is not generally publicly available and is affected by numerous factors. The directors focused on the profitability of the Adviser’s relationship with the Portfolio before taxes and distribution expenses. The direc-
16
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
tors concluded that they were satisfied that the Adviser’s level of profitability from its relationship with the Portfolio was not unreasonable.
Fall-Out Benefits
The directors considered the other benefits to the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationships with the Portfolio, including but not limited to benefits relating to soft dollar arrangements (whereby the Adviser receives brokerage and research services from brokers that execute transactions for certain clients, including the Portfolio); 12b-1 fees and sales charges received by the Fund’s principal underwriter (which is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Adviser) in respect of the Portfolio’s Class B shares; transfer agency fees paid by the Portfolio to a wholly owned subsidiary of the Adviser; and brokerage commissions paid by the Portfolio to brokers affiliated with the Adviser. The directors recognized that the Adviser’s profitability would be somewhat lower without these benefits. The directors also understood that the Adviser also might derive reputational and other benefits from its association with the Portfolio.
Investment Results
In addition to the information reviewed by the directors in connection with the meeting, the directors receive detailed performance information for the Portfolio at each regular Board meeting during the year. At the May 2012 meeting, the directors reviewed information prepared by Lipper showing the performance of the Class A Shares of the Portfolio as compared with that of a group of similar funds selected by Lipper (the “Performance Group”) and as compared with that of a broader array of funds selected by Lipper (the “Performance Universe”), and information prepared by the Adviser showing performance of the Class A Shares as compared with the Financial Times Stock Exchange (FTSE) National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts (NAREIT) Equity REIT Index (the “FTSE NAREIT Equity REIT Index”) and the Standard & Poor’s 500 Stock Index (the “S&P 500 Stock Index”), in each case for the 1-, 3-, 5- and 10-year periods ended February 29, 2012 and (in the case of comparisons with the indices) the since inception period (January 1997 inception). The directors noted that the Portfolio was in the 4th quintile of the Performance Group and 5th quintile of the Performance Universe for the 1-year period, in the 3rd quintile of the Performance Group and 4th quintile of the Performance Universe for the 3-year period, in the 3rd quintile of the Performance Group and the Performance Universe for the 5-year period, and in the 2nd quintile of the Performance Group and 3rd quintile of the Performance Universe for the 10-year period. The Portfolio lagged the FTSE NAREIT Equity REIT Index in the 3-year period but outperformed that index in all other periods. The Portfolio lagged the S&P 500 Stock Index in the 5-year period and outperformed that index in all other periods. The directors also reviewed performance information for periods ended March 31, 2012 (for which the data was not limited to Class A Shares), and noted that in the 3-month period the Portfolio had outperformed the Lipper VA Real Estate Funds Average and the FTSE NAREIT Equity REIT Index but lagged the S&P 500 Index. Based on their review and their discussion with the Adviser of the reasons for the Portfolio’s recent performance, the directors concluded that the Portfolio’s performance was satisfactory.
Advisory Fees and Other Expenses
The directors considered the advisory fee rate paid by the Portfolio to the Adviser and information prepared by Lipper concerning advisory fee rates paid by other funds in the same Lipper category as the Portfolio at a common asset level. The directors recognized that it is difficult to make comparisons of advisory fees because there are variations in the services that are included in the fees paid by other funds.
The directors also considered the fees the Adviser charges non-fund clients pursuing a substantially similar investment style. For this purpose, they reviewed the relevant fee information from the Adviser’s Form ADV and the evaluation from the Fund’s Senior Officer. The directors noted that the institutional fee schedule started at a higher fee rate than the Portfolio’s starting fee rate, but had more breakpoints starting at lower asset levels. Applying the institutional fee schedule to the level of assets of the Portfolio would result in a higher fee rate than that being paid by the Portfolio prior to taking account of the administrative expense reimbursements to the Adviser. The directors noted that adding the administrative expense reimbursement to the Adviser resulted in a lower rate of total compensation to the Adviser under the institutional fee schedule. The directors noted that the Adviser may, in some cases, agree to fee rates with large institutional clients that are lower than those reviewed by the directors and that they had previously discussed with the Adviser its policies in respect of such arrangements.
The Adviser reviewed with the directors the significantly greater scope of the services it provides to the Portfolio relative to institutional clients. The Adviser also noted that because mutual funds are constantly issuing and redeeming shares, they are more difficult to manage than an institutional account, where the assets tend to be relatively stable. In light of the substantial
17
| | |
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO |
CONTINUANCE DISCLOSURE | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
differences in services rendered by the Adviser to institutional clients as compared to funds such as the Portfolio, the directors considered these fee comparisons inapt and did not place significant weight on them in their deliberations.
The directors also considered the total expense ratio of the Class A shares of the Portfolio in comparison to the fees and expenses of funds within two comparison groups created by Lipper: an Expense Group and an Expense Universe. Lipper described an Expense Group as a representative sample of funds comparable to the Portfolio and an Expense Universe as a broader group, consisting of all funds in the investment classification/objective with a similar load type as the Portfolio. The Class A expense ratio of the Portfolio was based on the Portfolio’s latest fiscal year. The directors noted that it was likely that the expense ratios of some of the other funds in the Portfolio’s Lipper category were lowered by waivers or reimbursements by those funds’ investment advisers, which in some cases might be voluntary or temporary. The directors view the expense ratio information as relevant to their evaluation of the Adviser’s services because the Adviser is responsible for coordinating services provided to the Portfolio by others.
The directors noted that, at the Portfolio’s current size, its contractual effective advisory fee rate of 55 basis points, plus the 8 basis point impact of the administrative expense reimbursement in the latest fiscal year, was lower than the Expense Group median. The directors also noted that the Portfolio’s total expense ratio was lower than the Expense Group median and essentially the same as the Expense Universe median. The directors concluded that the Portfolio’s expense ratio was satisfactory.
Economies of Scale
The directors noted that the advisory fee schedule for the Portfolio contains breakpoints that reduce the fee rates on assets above specified levels. The directors took into consideration prior presentations by an independent consultant on economies of scale in the mutual fund industry and for the AllianceBernstein Funds, and by the Adviser concerning certain of its views on economies of scale. The directors also had requested and received from the Adviser certain updates on economies of scale at the May 2012 meetings. The directors believe that economies of scale may be realized (if at all) by the Adviser across a variety of products and services, and not only in respect of a single fund. The directors noted that there is no established methodology for establishing breakpoints that give effect to the fund-specific services provided by a fund’s adviser and to the economies of scale that an adviser may realize in its overall mutual fund business or those components of it which directly or indirectly affect a fund’s operations. The directors observed that in the mutual fund industry as a whole, as well as among funds similar to the Portfolio, there is no uniformity or pattern in the fees and asset levels at which breakpoints (if any) apply. The directors also noted that the advisory agreements for many funds do not have breakpoints at all. Having taken these factors into account, the directors concluded that the Portfolio’s shareholders would benefit from a sharing of economies of scale in the event the Portfolio’s net assets exceed a breakpoint in the future.
18
| | |
| | |
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
THE FOLLOWING IS NOT PART OF THE SHAREHOLDER REPORT OR THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
SUMMARY OF SENIOR OFFICER’S EVALUATION OF INVESTMENT ADVISORY AGREEMENT1
The following is a summary of the evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement between AllianceBernstein L.P. (the “Adviser”) and the AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund (the “Fund”), in respect of AllianceBernstein Real Estate Investment Portfolio (the “Portfolio”).2 The evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement was prepared by Philip L. Kirstein, the Senior Officer of the Fund, for the Directors of the Fund, as required by a September 2004 agreement between the Adviser and the New York State Attorney General (the “NYAG”). The Senior Officer’s evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement is not meant to diminish the responsibility or authority of the Board of Directors of the Fund to perform its duties pursuant to Section 15 of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “40 Act”) and applicable state law. The purpose of the summary is to provide shareholders with a synopsis of the independent evaluation of the reasonableness of the advisory fees proposed to be paid by the Portfolio which was provided to the Directors in connection with their review of the proposed approval of the continuance of the Investment Advisory Agreement. The Senior Officer’s evaluation considered the following factors:
| 1. | Advisory fees charged to institutional and other clients of the Adviser for like services; |
| 2. | Advisory fees charged by other mutual fund companies for like services; |
| 3. | Costs to the Adviser and its affiliates of supplying services pursuant to the advisory agreement, excluding any intra-corporate profit; |
| 4. | Profit margins of the Adviser and its affiliates from supplying such services; |
| 5. | Possible economies of scale as the Portfolio grows larger; and |
| 6. | Nature and quality of the Adviser’s services including the performance of the Portfolio. |
These factors, with the exception of the first factor, are generally referred to as the “Gartenberg factors,” which were articulated by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in 1982. Gartenberg v. Merrill Lynch Asset Management, Inc., 694 F. 2d 923 (2d Cir. 1982). The first factor is an additional factor required to be considered by the AoD. On March 30, 2010, the Supreme Court held the Gartenberg decision was correct in its basic formulation of what §36(b) requires: to face liability under §36(b), “an investment adviser must charge a fee that is so disproportionately large that it bears no reasonable relationship to the services rendered and could not have been the product of arm’s length bargaining.” Jones v. Harris Associates L.P., 130 S. Ct. 1418 (2010). In the Jones decision, the Court stated the Gartenberg approach fully incorporates the correct understanding of fiduciary duty within the context of section 36(b) and noted with approval that “Gartenberg insists that all relevant circumstances be taken into account” and “uses the range of fees that might result from arm’s-length bargaining as the benchmark for reviewing challenged fees.”3
PORTFOLIO ADVISORY FEES, NET ASSETS & EXPENSE RATIOS
The Adviser proposed that the Portfolio pay the advisory fee set forth in the table below for receiving the services to be provided pursuant to the Investment Advisory Agreement. The fee schedule below, implemented in January 2004 in consideration of the Adviser’s settlement with the NYAG in December 2003, is based on a master schedule that contemplates eight categories of funds with almost all funds in each category having the same advisory fee schedule.
| | | | | | | | |
Category | | Advisory Fee Based on % of Average Daily Net Assets | | Net Assets 3/31/12 ($MIL) | | | Portfolio |
Value | | 55 bp on first $2.5 billion 45 bp on next $2.5 billion 40 bp on the balance | | $ | 82.7 | | | Real Estate Investment Portfolio |
1 | | The information in the fee summary was completed on April 19, 2012 and discussed with the Board of Directors on May 1-3, 2012. |
2 | | Future references to the Fund and the Portfolio do not include “AllianceBernstein.” References in the fee summary pertaining to performance and expense ratio rankings refer to the Class A shares of the Portfolio. |
3 | | Jones v. Harris at 1427. |
19
| | |
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
The Adviser is reimbursed as specified in the Investment Advisory Agreement for certain clerical, legal, accounting, administrative and other services provided to the Portfolio. During the Portfolio’s most recently completed fiscal year, the Adviser received $59,827 (0.08% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets) for such services.
Set forth below are the Portfolio’s total expense ratios for the most recently completed fiscal year:
| | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Total Expense Ratio | | Fiscal Year | |
Real Estate Investment Portfolio | | Class A 0.88%
Class B 1.13% | | | December 31 | |
I. ADVISORY FEES CHARGED TO INSTITUTIONAL AND OTHER CLIENTS
The advisory fees charged to investment companies which the Adviser manages and sponsors are normally higher than those charged to similar sized institutional accounts, including pension plans and sub-advised investment companies. The fee differential reflects, among other things, different services provided to such clients, and different liabilities assumed. Services provided by the Adviser to the Portfolio that are not provided to non-investment company clients and sub-advised investment companies include providing office space and personnel to serve as Fund Officers, who among other responsibilities make the certifications required under the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002, and coordinating with and monitoring the Portfolio’s third party service providers such as Fund counsel, auditors, custodians, transfer agents and pricing services. The accounting, administrative, legal and compliance requirements for the Portfolio are more costly than those for institutional assets due to the greater complexities and time required for investment companies, although as previously noted, the Adviser is reimbursed for providing such services. Also, retail mutual funds managed by the Adviser are widely held. Servicing the Portfolio’s investors is more time consuming and labor intensive compared to institutional clients since the Adviser needs to communicate with a more extensive network of financial intermediaries and shareholders. The Adviser also believes that it incurs substantial entrepreneurial risk when offering a new mutual fund, since establishing a new mutual fund requires a large upfront investment, and it may take a long time for the fund to achieve profitability since the fund must be priced to scale from inception in order to be competitive and assets are acquired one account at a time. In addition, managing the cash flow of an investment company may be more difficult than managing that of a stable pool of assets, such as an institutional account with little cash movement in either direction, particularly, if a fund is in net redemption and the Adviser is frequently forced to sell securities to raise cash for redemptions. However, managing a fund with positive cash flow may be easier at times than managing a stable pool of assets. In recent years, investment advisers have been sued by institutional clients and have suffered reputational damage both by the attendant publicity and outcomes other than complete victories. Accordingly, the legal and reputational risks associated with institutional accounts are greater than previously thought, although still not equal to those related to the mutual fund industry.
Notwithstanding the Adviser’s view that managing an investment company is not comparable to managing other institutional accounts because the services provided are different, the Supreme Court has indicated consideration should be given to the advisory fees charged to institutional accounts that have a substantially similar investment style as the Portfolio.4 In addition to the AllianceBernstein institutional fee schedule, set forth below is what would have been the effective advisory fee of the Portfolio had the AllianceBernstein institutional fee schedule been applicable to the Portfolio versus the Portfolio’s advisory fee based on March 31, 2012 net assets:5
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Net Assets 3/31/12 ($MIL) | | AllianceBernstein Institutional Fee Schedule | | Effective AB Inst. Adv. Fee | | | Portfolio Advisory Fee | |
Real Estate Investment Portfolio | | $82.7 | | U.S. REIT Strategy Schedule
70 bp on first $25m
60 bp on next $25m
50 on the balance
Minimum account size $25m | | | 0.595 | % | | | 0.550 | % |
4 | | The Supreme Court stated that “courts may give such comparisons the weight that they merit in light of the similarities and differences between the services that the clients in question require, but the courts must be wary of inapt comparisons.” Among the significant differences the Supreme Court noted that may exist between services provided to mutual funds and institutional accounts are “higher marketing costs.” Jones v. Harris at 1428. |
5 | | The Adviser has indicated that with respect to institutional accounts with assets greater than $300 million, it will negotiate a fee schedule. Discounts that are negotiated vary based upon each client relationship. |
20
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
The Adviser also manages AllianceBernstein Global Real Estate Investment Fund, Inc. (“Global Real Estate Investment Fund, Inc.), a retail mutual fund, which has a substantially somewhat investment style as the Portfolio. Set forth below is the fee schedule of Global Real Estate Investment Fund, Inc.6 and what would have been the effective advisory fee of the Portfolio had the fee schedule of the retail mutual fund been applicable to the Portfolio:7
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | AllianceBernstein Mutual Fund | | Fee Schedule | | ABMF Effective Fee | | | Portfolio Advisory Fee | |
Real Estate Investment Portfolio | | Global Real Estate Investment Fund, Inc. | | 0.55% on first $2.5 billion 0.45% on next $2.5 billion 0.40% on the balance | | | 0.550% | | | | 0.550% | |
The Adviser also manages and sponsors retail mutual funds, which are organized in jurisdictions outside the United States, generally Luxembourg and Japan, and sold to non-United States resident investors. The Adviser charges the following fees for the Luxembourg fund that has a somewhat similar investment style as the Portfolio.8
| | | | |
Fund | | Fee9 | |
Global Real Estate Securities Portfolio | | | | |
Class A | | | 1.75 | % |
Class I (Institutional) | | | 0.95 | % |
The Adviser represented that it does not sub-advise any registered investment company with a substantially similar investment style as the Portfolio.
II. MANAGEMENT FEES CHARGED BY OTHER MUTUAL FUND COMPANIES FOR LIKE SERVICES.
Lipper, Inc. (“Lipper”), an analytical service that is not affiliated with the Adviser, compared the fees charged to the Portfolio with fees charged to other investment companies for similar services offered by other investment advisers.10 Lipper’s analysis included the comparison of the Portfolio’s contractual management fee, estimated at the approximate current asset level of the Portfolio, to the median of the Portfolio’s Lipper Expense Group (“EG”) and the Portfolio’s contractual management fee ranking.11
Lipper describes an EG as a representative sample of comparable funds. Lipper’s standard methodology for screening funds to be included in an EG entails the consideration of several fund criteria, including fund type, investment classification/objective, load type and similar 12b-1/non-12b-1 service fees, asset (size) comparability, expense components and attributes. An EG will typically consist of seven to twenty funds.
6 | | The Portfolio’s investment guidelines are more restrictive than that of AllianceBernstein Global Real Estate Investment Fund, Inc. The Portfolio primarily invests in equity securities of U.S. real estate investment trusts (“REITS”) and other U.S. real estate industry companies, in contrast to the AllianceBernstein Global Real Estate Investment Fund, Inc., which may invest in equities of non-U.S. REITS and other non-U.S. real estate industry companies. |
7 | | The retail mutual fund was also affected by the settlement between the Adviser and the NYAG. As a result, the Portfolio has the same breakpoints in its advisory fee schedule as the retail mutual fund. |
8 | | The Portfolio’s investment guidelines are more restrictive than that of the Luxembourg fund. The Portfolio primarily invests in equity securities of U.S. real estate investment trusts (“REITS”) and other U.S. real estate industry companies, in contrast to the Luxembourg fund, which may invest in equities of non-U.S. REITS and other non-U.S. real estate industry companies. |
9 | | Class A shares of the funds are charged an “all-in” fee, which includes investment advisory services and distribution related services, unlike Class I shares, whose fee is for only investment advisory services. |
10 | | The Supreme Court cautioned against accepting mutual fund fee comparisons without careful scrutiny since “these comparisons are problematic because these fees, like those challenged, may not be the product of the negotiations conducted at arm’s-length.” Jones v. Harris at 1429. |
11 | | The contractual management fee is calculated by Lipper using the Portfolio’s contractual management fee rate at a hypothetical asset level. The hypothetical asset level is based on the combined net assets of all classes of the Portfolio, rounded up to the next $25 million. Lipper’s total expense ratio information is based on the most recent annual report except as otherwise noted. A ranking of “1” would mean that the Portfolio had the lowest effective fee rate in the Lipper peer group. |
21
| | |
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Contractual Management Fee12 | | Lipper Exp. Group Median (%) | | Rank | |
Real Estate Investment Portfolio | | 0.550 | | 0.830 | | | 1/15 | |
Lipper also analyzed the Portfolio’s most recently completed fiscal year total expense ratio in comparison to the Portfolio’s EG and Lipper Expense Universe (“EU”). The EU13 is a broader group compared to the EG, consisting of all funds that have the same investment classification/objective and load type as the subject Portfolio.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Expense Ratio (%)14 | | Lipper Exp. Group Median (%) | | Lipper Group Rank | | | Lipper Exp. Universe Median (%) | | | Lipper Universe Rank | |
Real Estate Investment Portfolio | | 0.877 | | 0.880 | | | 7/15 | | | | 0.879 | | | | 12/24 | |
Based on this analysis, the Portfolio has a more favorable ranking on a management fee basis than it does on a total expense ratio basis.
III. COSTS TO THE ADVISER AND ITS AFFILIATES OF SUPPLYING SERVICES PURSUANT TO THE ADVISORY FEE ARRANGEMENT, EXCLUDING ANY INTRA-CORPORATE PROFIT.
The Adviser utilizes two profitability reporting systems, which operate independently but are aligned with each other, to estimate the Adviser’s profitability in connection with investment advisory services provided to the Portfolio. The Senior Officer has retained a consultant to provide independent advice regarding the alignment of the two profitability systems as well as the methodologies and allocations utilized by both profitability systems.
IV. PROFIT MARGINS OF THE ADVISER AND ITS AFFILIATES FOR SUPPLYING SUCH SERVICES.
The Portfolio’s profitability information, prepared by the Adviser for the Board of Directors, was reviewed by the Senior Officer and the consultant. The Adviser’s profitability from providing investment advisory services to the Portfolio decreased during calendar year 2011, relative to 2010.
In addition to the Adviser’s direct profits from managing the Portfolio, certain of the Adviser’s affiliates have business relationships with the Portfolio and may earn a profit from providing other services to the Portfolio. The courts have referred to this type of business opportunity as “fall-out benefits” to the Adviser and indicated that such benefits should be factored into the evaluation of the total relationship between the Portfolio and the Adviser. Neither case law nor common business practice precludes the Adviser’s affiliates from earning a reasonable profit on this type of relationship provided the affiliates’ charges and services are competitive. These affiliates provide transfer agent, distribution and brokerage related services to the Portfolio and receive transfer agent fees, Rule 12b-1 payments, and brokerage commissions. In addition, the Adviser benefits from soft dollar arrangements which offset expenses the Adviser would otherwise incur.
The Portfolio has adopted a distribution plan for Class B shares pursuant to Rule 12b-1 under the 40 Act. Under the distribution plan, the Portfolio pays distribution and servicing fees to its principal underwriter, AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (“ABI”), at an annual rate of up to 0.50% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The current annual rate that the Portfolio pays to ABI for 12b-1 fees is 0.25%. During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011, AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (“ABI”), the Portfolio’s distributor and an affiliate of the Adviser, received $35,303 in Rule 12b-1 fees.
During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011, the Adviser incurred distribution expenses in the amount of $127,727 in connection with activities primarily intended to result in the sale of the Portfolio’s Class B shares. This amount includes the 12b-1 fees paid by the Portfolio to the Adviser.
12 | | The contractual management fee does not reflect any expense reimbursements made by the Portfolio to the Adviser for certain clerical, legal, accounting, administrative and other services. |
13 | | Except for asset (size) comparability, Lipper uses the same criteria for selecting an EG when selecting an EU. Unlike the EG, the EU allows for the same adviser to be represented by more than just one fund. |
14 | | Most recently completed fiscal year end Class A total expense ratio. |
22
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Financial intermediaries, such as insurers, market and sell shares of the Portfolio and typically receive compensation from ABI, the Advisers and/or the Portfolio for selling shares of the Portfolio. These financial intermediaries receive compensation in any or all of the following forms: 12b-1 fees, defrayal of costs for educational seminars and training, additional distribution support, recordkeeping and/or administrative services. Payments related to providing contract-holder recordkeeping and/or administrative services will generally not exceed 0.35% of the average daily net assets of the Portfolio attributable to the relevant intermediary over the year. With respect to the Fund, which includes the Portfolio and other Portfolios of the Fund not discussed in this summary, ABI paid approximately $500,000 in 2011.
The transfer agent of the Portfolio is AllianceBernstein Investor Services, Inc. (“ABIS”). During the most recently completed fiscal year, ABIS received a fee of $1,310 from the Portfolio.15
The Portfolio effected brokerage transactions through the Adviser’s affiliate, Sanford C. Bernstein & Co., LLC (“SCB & Co.”) and/or its U.K. affiliate, Sanford C. Bernstein Limited (“SCB Ltd.”), collectively “SCB,” and paid commissions during the Portfolio’s most recently completed fiscal year. The Adviser represented that SCB’s profitability from business conducted with the Portfolio is comparable to the profitability of SCB’s dealings with other similar third party clients. In the ordinary course of business, SCB receives and pays liquidity rebates from electronic communications networks (“ECNs”) derived from trading for its clients, including the Portfolio. These credits and charges are not being passed onto any SCB client. The Adviser also receives certain soft dollar benefits from brokers that execute agency trades for the Portfolio and other clients. These soft dollar benefits reduce the Adviser’s cost of doing business and increase its profitability.
V. POSSIBLE ECONOMIES OF SCALE
The Adviser has indicated that economies of scale are being shared with shareholders through fee structures,16 subsidies and enhancement to services. Based on some of the professional literature that has considered economies of scale in the mutual fund industry, it is thought that to the extent economies of scale exist, they may more often exist across a fund family as opposed to a specific fund. This is because the costs incurred by the Adviser, such as investment research or technology for trading or compliance systems can be spread across a greater asset base as the fund family increases in size. It is also possible that as the level of services required to operate a successful investment company has increased over time, and advisory firms make such investments in their business to provide services, there may be a sharing of economies of scale without a reduction in advisory fees.
An independent consultant, retained by the Senior Officer, provided the Board of Directors information on the Adviser’s firm-wide average costs from 2005 through 2011 and potential economies of scale. The independent consultant noted that from 2005 through 2007 the Adviser experienced significant growth in assets under management (“AUM”). During this period, operating expenses increased, in part to keep up with growth, and in part reflecting market returns. However, from 2008 through the first quarter of 2009, AUM rapidly and significantly decreased. Some operating expenses, including base compensation and office space, adjusted more slowly during this period, resulting in an increase in average costs. Since 2009, AUM has moved within a range of $400 to $500 million ending 2011 with an average of $411 million in the fourth quarter. The independent consultant noted that changes in operating expenses reflect changes in business composition and business practices in response to changes in financial markets. Finally, the independent consultant concluded that the increase in average cost and the decline in net operating margin across the company since 2008 are inconsistent with the view that there are currently “economies of scale” to be shared with clients through lower fees.
In February 2008, the independent consultant provided the Board of Directors an update of the Deli17 study on advisory fees and various fund characteristics.18 The independent consultant first reiterated the results of his previous two dimensional
15 | | The Fund, which includes the Portfolio and other Portfolios of the Fund paid ABIS a flat fee of $18,000 in 2010. |
16 | | Fee structures include fee reductions, pricing at scale and breakpoints in advisory fee schedules. |
17 | | The Deli study, originally published in 2002 based on 1997 data and updated for the February 2008 Presentation, may be of diminished value due to the age of the data used in the presentation and the changes experienced in the industry over the last four years. |
18 | | As mentioned previously, the Supreme Court cautioned against accepting mutual fund fee comparisons without careful scrutiny since the fees may not be the product of negotiations conducted at arm’s length. See Jones V. Harris at 1429. |
23
| | |
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
comparison analysis (fund size and family size) with the Board of Directors.19 The independent consultant then discussed the results of the regression model that was utilized to study the effects of various factors on advisory fees. The regression model output indicated that the bulk of the variation in fees predicted were explained by various factors, but substantially by fund AUM, family AUM, index fund indicator and investment style. The independent consultant also compared the advisory fees of the AllianceBernstein Mutual Funds to similar funds managed by 19 other large asset managers, regardless of the fund size and each Adviser’s proportion of mutual fund assets to non-mutual fund assets.
VI. NATURE AND QUALITY OF THE ADVISER’S SERVICES, INCLUDING THE PERFORMANCE OF THE PORTFOLIO
With assets under management of approximately $419 billion as of March 31, 2012, the Adviser has the investment experience to manage and provide non-investment services (described in Section I) to the Portfolio.
The information prepared by Lipper shows the 1, 3, 5 and 10 year performance returns and rankings of the Portfolio20 relative to its Lipper Performance Group (“PG”) and Lipper Performance Universe (“PU”)21 for the periods ended February 29, 2012.22
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Fund | | | PG Median | | | PU Median | | | PG Rank | | | PU Rank | |
Real Estate Investment Portfolio | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
1 year | | | –1.29 | | | | 3.49 | | | | 4.14 | | | | 11/15 | | | | 20/24 | |
3 year | | | 37.39 | | | | 37.01 | | | | 39.88 | | | | 7/14 | | | | 14/23 | |
5 year | | | –2.05 | | | | –2.64 | | | | –1.88 | | | | 6/12 | | | | 12/21 | |
10 year | | | 10.67 | | | | 9.93 | | | | 10.40 | | | | 3/8 | | | | 5/11 | |
Set forth below are the 1, 3, 5, 10 year and since inception performance returns of the Portfolio (in bold)23 versus its benchmarks.24 Portfolio and benchmark volatility and reward-to-variability ratio (“Sharpe Ratio”) information is also shown.25
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Periods Ending February 29, 2012 Annualized Performance | |
| | 1 Year (%) | | | 3 Year (%) | | | 5 Year (%) | | | 10 Year (%) | | | Since Inception (%) | | | Annualized | | | Risk Period (Year) | |
| | | | | | | Volatility (%) | | | Sharpe (%) | | |
Real Estate Investment Portfolio | | | 7.92 | | | | 41.53 | | | | –0.29 | | | | 11.66 | | | | 9.70 | | | | 24.97 | | | | 0.46 | | | | 10 | |
FTSE NAREIT Equity REIT Index26 | | | 4.80 | | | | 41.85 | | | | –1.53 | | | | 10.55 | | | | 9.16 | | | | 25.66 | | | | 0.45 | | | | 10 | |
S&P 500 Stock Index | | | 5.12 | | | | 25.56 | | | | 1.58 | | | | 4.17 | | | | 5.85 | | | | N/A | | | | N/A | | | | 10 | |
Inception Date: January 9, 1997 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
19 | | The two dimensional analysis showed patterns of lower advisory fees for funds with larger asset sizes and funds from larger family sizes compared to funds with smaller asset sizes and funds from smaller family sizes, which according to the independent consultant is indicative of a sharing of economies of scale and scope. However, in less liquid and active markets, such is not the case, as the empirical analysis showed potential for diseconomies of scale in those markets. The empirical analysis also showed diminishing economies of scale and scope as funds surpassed a certain high level of assets. |
20 | | The performance rankings are for the Class A shares of the Portfolio. The Portfolio’s performance returns shown were provided by Lipper. |
21 | | The Portfolio’s PG/PU are identical to the Portfolio’s respective EG/EU. |
22 | | Lipper investment classification/objective dictates the PG and PU throughout the life of the fund even if a fund had a different investment classification/objective at a different point in time. |
23 | | The performance returns and risk measures shown in the table are for the Class A shares of the Portfolio. |
24 | | The Adviser provided Portfolio and benchmark performance return information for periods through February 29, 2012. |
25 | | Portfolio and benchmark volatility and Sharpe Ratio information was obtained through Lipper LANA, a database maintained by Lipper. Volatility is a statistical measure of the tendency of a market price or yield to vary over time. A Sharpe Ratio is a risk adjusted measure of return that divides a portfolio’s return in excess of the riskless return by the portfolio’s standard deviation. A portfolio with a greater volatility would be viewed as more risky than a portfolio with equivalent performance but lower volatility; for that reason, a greater return would be demanded for the more risky portfolio. A portfolio with a higher Sharpe Ratio would be viewed as better performing than a portfolio with a lower Sharpe Ratio. |
26 | | Benchmark since inception date is the nearest month end after the Portfolio’s inception date. |
24
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
CONCLUSION:
Based on the factors discussed above the Senior Officer’s conclusion is that the proposed advisory fee for the Portfolio is reasonable and within the range of what would have been negotiated at arm’s-length in light of all the surrounding circumstances. This conclusion in respect of the Portfolio is based on an evaluation of all of these factors and no single factor was dispositive.
Dated: May 25, 2012
25
AllianceBernstein
Variable Products Series Fund, Inc.
| | |
![LOGO](https://capedge.com/proxy/N-CSRS/0001193125-12-366259/g374708g16n16.jpg) | | AllianceBernstein Small Cap Growth Portfolio |
Semi-Annual Report
![LOGO](https://capedge.com/proxy/N-CSRS/0001193125-12-366259/g374708g81g54.jpg)
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT
Investment Products Offered
| Ø | | Are Not Bank Guaranteed |
AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (ABI) is the distributor of the AllianceBernstein family of mutual funds. ABI is a member of FINRA and is an affiliate of AllianceBernstein L.P., the manager of the funds.
You may obtain a description of the Fund’s proxy voting policies and procedures, and information regarding how the Fund voted proxies relating to portfolio securities during the most recent 12-month period ended June 30, without charge. Simply visit AllianceBernstein’s website at www.alliancebernstein.com or go to the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (the “Commission”) website at www.sec.gov, or call AllianceBernstein at (800) 227-4618.
The Fund files its complete schedule of portfolio holdings with the Commission for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year on Form N-Q. The Fund’s Forms N-Q are available on the Commission’s website at www.sec.gov. The Fund’s Forms N-Q may also be reviewed and copied at the Commission’s Public Reference Room in Washington, DC; information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling (800) SEC-0330.
AllianceBernstein® and the AB Logo are registered trademarks and service marks used by permission of the owner, AllianceBernstein L.P.
| | |
| | |
SMALL CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
FUND EXPENSES (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
As a shareholder of the Fund, you incur two types of costs: (1) transaction costs, including sales charges (loads) on purchase payments, contingent deferred sales charges on redemptions and (2) ongoing costs, including management fees; distribution (12b-1) fees; and other Fund expenses. This example is intended to help you understand your ongoing costs (in dollars) of investing in the Fund and to compare these costs with the ongoing costs of investing in other mutual funds.
The Example is based on an investment of $1,000 invested at the beginning of the period and held for the entire period as indicated below.
Actual Expenses
The table below provides information about actual account values and actual expenses. You may use the information in this line, together with the amount you invested, to estimate the expenses that you paid over the period. Simply divide your account value by $1,000 (for example, an $8,600 account value divided by $1,000 = 8.6), then multiply the result by the number in the first line under the heading entitled “Expenses Paid During Period” to estimate the expenses you paid on your account during this period. The estimate of expenses does not include fees or other expenses of any variable insurance product. If such expenses were included, the estimate of expenses you paid during the period would be higher and your ending account value would be lower.
Hypothetical Example for Comparison Purposes
The table below provides information about hypothetical account values and hypothetical expenses based on the Fund’s actual expense ratio and an assumed annual rate of return of 5% before expenses, which is not the Fund’s actual return. The hypothetical account values and expenses may not be used to estimate the actual ending account balance or expenses you paid for the period. You may use this information to compare the ongoing costs of investing in the Fund and other funds by comparing this 5% hypothetical example with the 5% hypothetical examples that appear in the shareholder reports of other funds. The estimate of expenses does not include fees or other expenses of any variable insurance product. If such expenses were included, the estimate of expenses you paid during the period would be higher and your ending account value would be lower.
Please note that the expenses shown in the table are meant to highlight your ongoing costs only and do not reflect any transactional costs, such as sales charges (loads), or contingent deferred sales charges on redemptions. Therefore, the second line of each class’ table is useful in comparing ongoing costs only, and will not help you determine the relative total costs of owning different funds. In addition, if these transactional costs were included, your costs would have been higher.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Beginning Account Value January 1, 2012 | | | Ending Account Value June 30, 2012 | | | Expenses Paid During Period* | | | Annualized Expense Ratio* | |
Class A | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Actual | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,117.00 | | | $ | 6.21 | | | | 1.18 | % |
Hypothetical (5% return before expenses) | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,019.00 | | | $ | 5.92 | | | | 1.18 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class B | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Actual | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,115.60 | | | $ | 7.57 | | | | 1.44 | % |
Hypothetical (5% return before expenses) | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,017.70 | | | $ | 7.22 | | | | 1.44 | % |
* | | Expenses are equal to each classes’ annualized expense ratios, multiplied by the average account value over the period, multiplied by 182/366 (to reflect the one-half year period). |
1
| | |
SMALL CAP GROWTH FUND | | |
TEN LARGEST HOLDINGS* | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
COMPANY | | U.S. $ VALUE | | | PERCENT OF NET ASSETS | |
Life Time Fitness, Inc. | | $ | 986,477 | | | | 1.8 | % |
CoStar Group, Inc. | | | 981,383 | | | | 1.7 | |
DealerTrack Holdings, Inc. | | | 962,346 | | | | 1.7 | |
Akorn, Inc. | | | 959,242 | | | | 1.7 | |
Aspen Technology, Inc. | | | 934,079 | | | | 1.7 | |
Cadence Design Systems, Inc. | | | 846,670 | | | | 1.5 | |
Grand Canyon Education, Inc. | | | 836,616 | | | | 1.5 | |
TrueBlue, Inc. | | | 828,149 | | | | 1.5 | |
SXC Health Solutions Corp. | | | 824,534 | | | | 1.5 | |
Hibbett Sports, Inc. | | | 793,801 | | | | 1.4 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | $ | 8,953,297 | | | | 16.0 | % |
SECTOR DIVERSIFICATION**
June 30, 2012 (unaudited)
| | | | | | | | |
SECTOR | | U.S. $ VALUE | | | PERCENT OF TOTAL INVESTMENTS | |
Industrials | | $ | 13,413,312 | | | | 23.6 | % |
Information Technology | | | 13,129,363 | | | | 23.1 | |
Consumer Discretionary | | | 10,862,229 | | | | 19.1 | |
Health Care | | | 10,469,018 | | | | 18.4 | |
Energy | | | 3,805,070 | | | | 6.7 | |
Financials | | | 2,504,489 | | | | 4.4 | |
Materials | | | 574,560 | | | | 1.0 | |
Consumer Staples | | | 412,370 | | | | 0.7 | |
Short-Term Investments | | | 1,742,200 | | | | 3.0 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Investments | | $ | 56,912,611 | | | | 100.0 | % |
** | | The Portfolio’s sector breakdown is expressed as a percentage of total investments (excluding security lending collateral) and may vary over time. |
Please note: The sector classifications presented herein are based on the Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS) which was developed by Morgan Stanley Capital International and Standard & Poor’s. The components are divided into sector, industry group, and industry sub-indices as classified by the GICS for each of the market capitalization indices in the broad market. These sector classifications are broadly defined. The “Portfolio of Investments” section of the report reflects more specific industry information and is consistent with the investment restrictions discussed in the Fund’s prospectus.
2
| | |
SMALL CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMMON STOCKS–98.3% | | | | | | | | |
INDUSTRIALS–23.9% | | | | | | | | |
AEROSPACE & DEFENSE–2.0% | | | | | | | | |
Hexcel Corp.(a) | | | 29,940 | | | $ | 772,152 | |
Keyw Holding Corp. (The)(a)(b) | | | 37,993 | | | | 381,450 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,153,602 | |
| | | | | | | | |
BUILDING PRODUCTS–0.7% | | | | | | | | |
Simpson Manufacturing Co., Inc. | | | 14,024 | | | | 413,848 | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMMERCIAL SERVICES & SUPPLIES–1.2% | | | | | | | | |
Interface, Inc. | | | 48,210 | | | | 657,102 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSTRUCTION & ENGINEERING–1.3% | | | | | | | | |
Dycom Industries, Inc.(a) | | | 37,971 | | | | 706,640 | |
| | | | | | | | |
ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT–1.1% | | | | | | | | |
AMETEK, Inc. | | | 4,300 | | | | 214,613 | |
Thermon Group Holdings, Inc.(a)(b) | | | 19,548 | | | | 404,839 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 619,452 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INDUSTRIAL CONGLOMERATES–0.6% | | | | | | | | |
Carlisle Cos., Inc. | | | 6,420 | | | | 340,389 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MACHINERY–9.9% | | | | | | | | |
Actuant Corp.–Class A | | | 22,900 | | | | 621,964 | |
Chart Industries, Inc.(a) | | | 8,370 | | | | 575,521 | |
Gardner Denver, Inc. | | | 8,100 | | | | 428,571 | |
IDEX Corp. | | | 17,455 | | | | 680,396 | |
Lincoln Electric Holdings, Inc. | | | 13,720 | | | | 600,799 | |
Middleby Corp.(a) | | | 7,260 | | | | 723,169 | |
RBC Bearings, Inc.(a) | | | 13,129 | | | | 621,002 | |
Robbins & Myers, Inc. | | | 13,465 | | | | 563,106 | |
Valmont Industries, Inc. | | | 6,031 | | | | 729,570 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 5,544,098 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MARINE–1.2% | | | | | | | | |
Kirby Corp.(a) | | | 13,833 | | | | 651,258 | |
| | | | | | | | |
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES–3.5% | | | | | | | | |
Advisory Board Co. (The)(a) | | | 12,260 | | | | 607,974 | |
RPX Corp.(a) | | | 39,109 | | | | 561,214 | |
TrueBlue, Inc.(a) | | | 53,498 | | | | 828,149 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,997,337 | |
| | | | | | | | |
ROAD & RAIL–1.0% | | | | | | | | |
Genesee & Wyoming, Inc.–Class A(a) | | | 10,700 | | | | 565,388 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TRADING COMPANIES & DISTRIBUTORS–1.4% | | | | | | | | |
United Rentals, Inc.(a) | | | 22,450 | | | | 764,198 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 13,413,312 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY–23.4% | | | | | | | | |
COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT–2.1% | | | | | | | | |
Aruba Networks, Inc.(a)(b) | | | 8,710 | | | | 131,085 | |
Ciena Corp.(a)(b) | | | 31,232 | | | | 511,268 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Netgear, Inc.(a) | | | 16,270 | | | $ | 561,478 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,203,831 | |
| | | | | | | | |
ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT, INSTRUMENTS & COMPONENTS–0.5% | | | | | | | | |
Audience, Inc.(a)(b) | | | 14,150 | | | | 272,812 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INTERNET SOFTWARE & SERVICES–4.3% | | | | | | | | |
Bazaarvoice, Inc.(a)(b) | | | 14,796 | | | | 269,287 | |
CoStar Group, Inc.(a) | | | 12,086 | | | | 981,383 | |
DealerTrack Holdings, Inc.(a) | | | 31,961 | | | | 962,346 | |
ExactTarget, Inc.(a)(b) | | | 8,744 | | | | 191,144 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,404,160 | |
| | | | | | | | |
IT SERVICES–1.0% | | | | | | | | |
ServiceSource International, Inc.(a)(b) | | | 39,065 | | | | 541,050 | |
| | | | | | | | |
SEMICONDUCTORS & SEMICONDUCTOR EQUIPMENT–6.1% | | | | | | | | |
Entegris, Inc.(a) | | | 32,427 | | | | 276,926 | |
Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc.(a) | | | 39,399 | | | | 555,526 | |
Mellanox Technologies Ltd.(a)(b) | | | 10,230 | | | | 724,693 | |
Semtech Corp.(a) | | | 29,490 | | | | 717,197 | |
Teradyne, Inc.(a) | | | 41,560 | | | | 584,334 | |
Veeco Instruments, Inc.(a)(b) | | | 16,520 | | | | 567,627 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 3,426,303 | |
| | | | | | | | |
SOFTWARE–9.4% | | | | | | | | |
Aspen Technology, Inc.(a) | | | 40,349 | | | | 934,079 | |
Cadence Design Systems, Inc.(a) | | | 77,040 | | | | 846,670 | |
Fortinet, Inc.(a) | | | 24,983 | | | | 580,105 | |
Informatica Corp.(a) | | | 2,440 | | | | 103,359 | |
MICROS Systems, Inc.(a) | | | 14,314 | | | | 732,877 | |
QLIK Technologies, Inc.(a) | | | 30,544 | | | | 675,633 | |
ServiceNow, Inc.(a) | | | 3,573 | | | | 87,896 | |
SolarWinds, Inc.(a) | | | 16,430 | | | | 715,691 | |
Synchronoss Technologies, Inc.(a) | | | 12,809 | | | | 236,582 | |
TIBCO Software, Inc.(a) | | | 12,310 | | | | 368,315 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 5,281,207 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 13,129,363 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER DISCRETIONARY–19.4% | | | | | | | | |
DISTRIBUTORS–0.9% | | | | | | | | |
LKQ Corp.(a) | | | 15,650 | | | | 522,710 | |
| | | | | | | | |
DIVERSIFIED CONSUMER SERVICES–1.5% | | | | | | | | |
Grand Canyon Education, Inc.(a) | | | 39,953 | | | | 836,616 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HOTELS, RESTAURANTS & LEISURE–4.6% | | | | | | | | |
BJ’s Restaurants, Inc.(a) | | | 10,605 | | | | 402,990 | |
Life Time Fitness, Inc.(a) | | | 21,210 | | | | 986,477 | |
Orient-Express Hotels Ltd.–Class A(a) | | | 58,070 | | | | 486,046 | |
3
| | |
SMALL CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
Panera Bread Co.–Class A(a) | | | 5,070 | | | $ | 706,961 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,582,474 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HOUSEHOLD DURABLES–0.8% | | | | | | | | |
Skullcandy, Inc.(a)(b) | | | 32,052 | | | | 453,536 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MEDIA–1.9% | | | | | | | | |
National CineMedia, Inc. | | | 39,790 | | | | 603,614 | |
Pandora Media, Inc.(a)(b) | | | 40,770 | | | | 443,170 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,046,784 | |
| | | | | | | | |
SPECIALTY RETAIL–9.7% | | | | | | | | |
Cabela’s, Inc.(a) | | | 14,515 | | | | 548,812 | |
Dick’s Sporting Goods, Inc. | | | 14,910 | | | | 715,680 | |
Francesca’s Holdings Corp.(a) | | | 27,828 | | | | 751,634 | |
Hibbett Sports, Inc.(a) | | | 13,755 | | | | 793,801 | |
Select Comfort Corp.(a) | | | 32,120 | | | | 671,951 | |
Ulta Salon Cosmetics & Fragrance, Inc. | | | 5,500 | | | | 513,590 | |
Vitamin Shoppe, Inc.(a) | | | 12,440 | | | | 683,329 | |
Zumiez, Inc.(a) | | | 18,720 | | | | 741,312 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 5,420,109 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 10,862,229 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HEALTH CARE–18.6% | | | | | | | | |
BIOTECHNOLOGY–6.0% | | | | | | | | |
Achillion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.(a)(b) | | | 28,680 | | | | 177,816 | |
Amarin Corp. PLC (ADR)(a)(b) | | | 22,710 | | | | 328,387 | |
Ariad Pharmaceuticals, Inc.(a) | | | 28,360 | | | | 488,076 | |
Arqule, Inc.(a) | | | 45,787 | | | | 271,517 | |
Cepheid, Inc.(a) | | | 16,842 | | | | 753,679 | |
Ironwood Pharmaceuticals, Inc.(a) | | | 25,637 | | | | 353,278 | |
Onyx Pharmaceuticals, Inc.(a) | | | 4,910 | | | | 326,269 | |
Pharmacyclics, Inc.(a)(b) | | | 6,990 | | | | 381,724 | |
Synageva BioPharma Corp.(a)(b) | | | 2,895 | | | | 117,421 | |
TESARO, Inc.(a) | | | 11,590 | | | | 162,144 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 3,360,311 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HEALTH CARE EQUIPMENT & SUPPLIES–3.7% | | | | | | | | |
HeartWare International, Inc.(a)(b) | | | 2,490 | | | | 221,112 | |
NxStage Medical, Inc.(a) | | | 33,212 | | | | 556,633 | |
Sirona Dental Systems, Inc.(a) | | | 13,424 | | | | 604,214 | |
Volcano Corp.(a) | | | 23,884 | | | | 684,277 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,066,236 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS & SERVICES–3.4% | | | | | | | | |
AMERIGROUP Corp.(a) | | | 11,377 | | | | 749,858 | |
HMS Holdings Corp.(a) | | | 15,185 | | | | 505,813 | |
Mednax, Inc.(a) | | | 9,717 | | | | 666,003 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,921,674 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HEALTH CARE TECHNOLOGY–1.4% | | | | | | | | |
SXC Health Solutions Corp.(a)(b) | | | 8,311 | | | | 824,534 | |
| | | | | | | | |
PHARMACEUTICALS–4.1% | | | | | | | | |
Akorn, Inc.(a) | | | 60,827 | | | | 959,242 | |
MAP Pharmaceuticals, Inc.(a)(b) | | | 18,600 | | | | 278,628 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Optimer Pharmaceuticals, Inc.(a)(b) | | | 20,746 | | | $ | 321,978 | |
Questcor Pharmaceuticals, Inc.(a)(b) | | | 13,832 | | | | 736,415 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,296,263 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 10,469,018 | |
| | | | | | | | |
ENERGY–6.8% | | | | | | | | |
ENERGY EQUIPMENT & SERVICES–4.0% | | | | | | | | |
Dril-Quip, Inc.(a) | | | 6,420 | | | | 421,088 | |
Forum Energy Technologies, Inc.(a)(b) | | | 10,530 | | | | 207,336 | |
Oceaneering International, Inc. | | | 12,845 | | | | 614,762 | |
Oil States International, Inc.(a) | | | 8,687 | | | | 575,079 | |
Superior Energy Services, Inc.(a) | | | 21,047 | | | | 425,781 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,244,046 | |
| | | | | | | | |
OIL, GAS & CONSUMABLE FUELS–2.8% | | | | | | | | |
Laredo Petroleum Holdings, Inc.(a) | | | 15,400 | | | | 320,320 | |
Matador Resources Co.(a) | | | 39,130 | | | | 420,256 | |
Oasis Petroleum, Inc.(a) | | | 19,535 | | | | 472,356 | |
SM Energy Co. | | | 7,088 | | | | 348,092 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,561,024 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 3,805,070 | |
| | | | | | | | |
FINANCIALS–4.5% | | | | | | | | |
CAPITAL MARKETS–2.3% | | | | | | | | |
Affiliated Managers Group, Inc.(a) | | | 6,600 | | | | 722,370 | |
Stifel Financial Corp.(a) | | | 18,116 | | | | 559,784 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,282,154 | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMMERCIAL BANKS–2.2% | | | | | | | | |
Iberiabank Corp. | | | 11,689 | | | | 589,710 | |
Signature Bank/New York NY(a) | | | 10,376 | | | | 632,625 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,222,335 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,504,489 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MATERIALS–1.0% | | | | | | | | |
CHEMICALS–1.0% | | | | | | | | |
PolyOne Corp. | | | 42,000 | | | | 574,560 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER STAPLES–0.7% | | | | | | | | |
FOOD & STAPLES RETAILING–0.7% | | | | | | | | |
Chefs’ Warehouse, Inc. (The)(a) | | | 22,846 | | | | 412,370 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Common Stocks (cost $47,691,936) | | | | | | | 55,170,411 | |
| | | | | | | | |
4
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Principal Amount (000) | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
SHORT-TERM INVESTMENTS–3.1% | | | | | | | | |
TIME DEPOSIT–3.1% | | | | | | | | |
State Street Time Deposit 0.01%, 7/02/12 (cost $1,742,200) | | $ | 1,742 | | | $ | 1,742,200 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Investments Before Security Lending Collateral for Securities Loaned–101.4% (cost $49,434,136) | | | | | | | 56,912,611 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
INVESTMENTS OF CASH COLLATERAL FOR SECURITY LOANED–14.0% | | | | | | | | |
INVESTMENT COMPANIES–14.0% | | | | | | | | |
AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves–Class I, 0.20%(c) (cost $7,851,529) | | | 7,851,529 | | | $ | 7,851,529 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TOTAL INVESTMENTS–115.4% (cost $57,285,665) | | | | | | | 64,764,140 | |
Other assets less liabilities–(15.4)% | | | | | | | (8,642,367 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
NET ASSETS–100.0% | | | | | | $ | 56,121,773 | |
| | | | | | | | |
(a) | | Non-income producing security. |
(b) | | Represents entire or partial securities out on loan. See Note E for securities lending information. |
(c) | | Investment in affiliated money market mutual fund. The rate shown represents the 7-day yield as of period end. |
Glossary:
ADR—American Depositary Receipt
See notes to financial statements.
5
| | |
SMALL CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
STATEMENTOF ASSETS & LIABILITIES |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | |
ASSETS | | | | |
Investments in securities, at value | | | | |
Unaffiliated issuers (cost $49,434,136) | | $ | 56,912,611 | (a) |
Affiliated issuers (cost $7,851,529—including investment of cash collateral for securities loaned of $7,851,529) | | | 7,851,529 | |
Receivable for investment securities sold | | | 499,829 | |
Receivable for capital stock sold | | | 32,720 | |
Dividends and interest receivable | | | 18,433 | |
| | | | |
Total assets | | | 65,315,122 | |
| | | | |
LIABILITIES | | | | |
Payable for collateral received on securities loaned | | | 7,851,529 | |
Payable for investment securities purchased | | | 1,187,404 | |
Advisory fee payable | | | 34,121 | |
Payable for capital stock redeemed | | | 23,856 | |
Administrative fee payable | | | 15,521 | |
Distribution fee payable | | | 6,036 | |
Transfer Agent fee payable | | | 129 | |
Accrued expenses | | | 74,753 | |
| | | | |
Total liabilities | | | 9,193,349 | |
| | | | |
NET ASSETS | | $ | 56,121,773 | |
| | | | |
COMPOSITION OF NET ASSETS | | | | |
Capital stock, at par | | $ | 2,988 | |
Additional paid-in capital | | | 39,488,925 | |
Accumulated net investment loss | | | (343,649 | ) |
Accumulated net realized gain on investment transactions | | | 9,495,034 | |
Net unrealized appreciation on investments | | | 7,478,475 | |
| | | | |
| | $ | 56,121,773 | |
| | | | |
Net Asset Value Per Share—1 billion shares of capital stock authorized, $.001 par value
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class | | Net Assets | | | Shares Outstanding | | | Net Asset Value | |
A | | $ | 26,301,641 | | | | 1,378,123 | | | $ | 19.09 | |
B | | $ | 29,820,132 | | | | 1,609,625 | | | $ | 18.53 | |
(a) | | Includes securities on loan with a value of $7,951,228 (see Note E). |
See notes to financial statements.
6
| | |
SMALL CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
STATEMENTOF OPERATIONS |
Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | |
INVESTMENT INCOME | | | | |
Dividends | | | | |
Unaffiliated issuers | | $ | 77,516 | |
Affiliated issuers | | | 3,362 | |
Interest | | | 61 | |
Securities lending income | | | 27,040 | |
| | | | |
| | | 107,979 | |
| | | | |
EXPENSES | | | | |
Advisory fee (see Note B) | | | 236,332 | |
Distribution fee—Class B | | | 37,517 | |
Transfer agency—Class A | | | 864 | |
Transfer agency—Class B | | | 803 | |
Custodian | | | 55,172 | |
Administrative | | | 26,450 | |
Audit | | | 18,303 | |
Printing | | | 17,654 | |
Legal | | | 15,226 | |
Directors’ fees | | | 1,943 | |
Miscellaneous | | | 1,865 | |
| | | | |
Total expenses | | | 412,129 | |
| | | | |
Net investment loss | | | (304,150 | ) |
| | | | |
REALIZED AND UNREALIZED GAIN (LOSS) ON INVESTMENT TRANSACTIONS | | | | |
Net realized gain on investment transactions | | | 8,528,003 | |
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of investments | | | (539,869 | ) |
| | | | |
Net gain on investment transactions | | | 7,988,134 | |
| | | | |
NET INCREASE IN NET ASSETS FROM OPERATIONS | | $ | 7,683,984 | |
| | | | |
See notes to financial statements.
7
| | |
| | |
SMALL CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
STATEMENTOF CHANGESIN NET ASSETS | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | |
INCREASE (DECREASE) IN NET ASSETS FROM OPERATIONS | | | | | | | | |
Net investment loss | | $ | (304,150 | ) | | $ | (591,207 | ) |
Net realized gain on investment transactions | | | 8,528,003 | | | | 10,043,475 | |
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of investments | | | (539,869 | ) | | | (7,045,161 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Net increase in net assets from operations | | | 7,683,984 | | | | 2,407,107 | |
CAPITAL STOCK TRANSACTIONS | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (10,596,243 | ) | | | (1,519,142 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Total increase (decrease) | | | (2,912,259 | ) | | | 887,965 | |
NET ASSETS | | | | | | | | |
Beginning of period | | | 59,034,032 | | | | 58,146,067 | |
| | | | | | | | |
End of period (including accumulated net investment loss of ($343,649) and ($39,499), respectively) | | $ | 56,121,773 | | | $ | 59,034,032 | |
| | | | | | | | |
See notes to financial statements.
8
| | |
SMALL CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
NOTE A: Significant Accounting Policies
The AllianceBernstein Small Cap Growth Portfolio (the “Portfolio”) is a series of AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund, Inc. (the “Fund”). The Portfolio’s investment objective is long-term growth of capital. The Portfolio is diversified as defined under the Investment Company Act of 1940. The Fund was incorporated in the State of Maryland on November 17, 1987, as an open-end series investment company. The Fund offers thirteen separately managed pools of assets which have differing investment objectives and policies. The Portfolio offers Class A and Class B shares. Both classes of shares have identical voting, dividend, liquidating and other rights, except that Class B shares bear a distribution expense and have exclusive voting rights with respect to the Class B distribution plan.
The Portfolio offers and sells its shares only to separate accounts of certain life insurance companies for the purpose of funding variable annuity contracts and variable life insurance policies. Sales are made without a sales charge at the Portfolio’s net asset value per share.
The financial statements have been prepared in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“U.S. GAAP”) which require management to make certain estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities in the financial statements and amounts of income and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. The following is a summary of significant accounting policies followed by the Portfolio.
1. Security Valuation
Portfolio securities are valued at their current market value determined on the basis of market quotations or, if market quotations are not readily available or are deemed unreliable, at “fair value” as determined in accordance with procedures established by and under the general supervision of the Fund’s Board of Directors.
In general, the market value of securities which are readily available and deemed reliable are determined as follows: Securities listed on a national securities exchange (other than securities listed on the NASDAQ Stock Market, Inc. (“NASDAQ”)) or on a foreign securities exchange are valued at the last sale price at the close of the exchange or foreign securities exchange. If there has been no sale on such day, the securities are valued at the last traded price from the previous day. Securities listed on more than one exchange are valued by reference to the principal exchange on which the securities are traded; securities listed only on NASDAQ are valued in accordance with the NASDAQ Official Closing Price; listed or over the counter market (“OTC”) put or call options are valued at the mid level between the current bid and ask prices. If either a current bid or current ask price is unavailable, AllianceBernstein L.P. (the “Adviser”) will have discretion to determine the best valuation (e.g. last trade price in the case of listed options); open futures contracts are valued using the closing settlement price or, in the absence of such a price, the most recent quoted bid price. If there are no quotations available for the day of valuation, the last available closing settlement price is used; U.S. government securities and other debt instruments having 60 days or less remaining until maturity are valued at amortized cost if their original maturity was 60 days or less; or by amortizing their fair value as of the 61st day prior to maturity if their original term to maturity exceeded 60 days; fixed-income securities, including mortgage backed and asset backed securities, may be valued on the basis of prices provided by a pricing service or at a price obtained from one or more of the major broker/dealers. In cases where broker/dealer quotes are obtained, the Adviser may establish procedures whereby changes in market yields or spreads are used to adjust, on a daily basis, a recently obtained quoted price on a security. Swaps and other derivatives are valued daily, primarily using independent pricing services, independent pricing models using market inputs, as well as third party broker-dealers or counterparties.
Securities for which market quotations are not readily available (including restricted securities) or are deemed unreliable are valued at fair value. Factors considered in making this determination may include, but are not limited to, information obtained by contacting the issuer, analysts, analysis of the issuer’s financial statements or other available documents. In addition, the Portfolio may use fair value pricing for securities primarily traded in non-U.S. markets because most foreign markets close well before the Portfolio values its securities at 4:00 p.m., Eastern Time. The earlier close of these foreign markets gives rise to the possibility that significant events, including broad market moves, may have occurred in the interim and may materially affect the value of those securities. To account for this, the Portfolio may frequently value many of its foreign equity securities using fair value prices based on third party vendor modeling tools to the extent available.
2. Fair Value Measurements
In accordance with U.S. GAAP regarding fair value measurements, fair value is defined as the price that the Portfolio would receive to sell an asset or pay to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. The U.S. GAAP disclosure requirements establish a framework for measuring fair value, and a three-level hierarchy for
9
| | |
SMALL CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
fair value measurements based upon the transparency of inputs to the valuation of an asset or liability. Inputs may be observable or unobservable and refer broadly to the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability. Observable inputs reflect the assumptions market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability based on market data obtained from sources independent of the Portfolio. Unobservable inputs reflect the Portfolio’s own assumptions about the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability based on the best information available in the circumstances. Each investment is assigned a level based upon the observability of the inputs which are significant to the overall valuation. The three-tier hierarchy of inputs is summarized below.
| • | | Level 1—quoted prices in active markets for identical investments |
| • | | Level 2—other significant observable inputs (including quoted prices for similar investments, interest rates, prepayment speeds, credit risk, etc.) |
| • | | Level 3—significant unobservable inputs (including the Portfolio’s own assumptions in determining the fair value of investments) |
The following table summarizes the valuation of the Portfolio’s investments by the above fair value hierarchy levels as of June 30, 2012:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Level 1 | | | Level 2 | | | Level 3 | | | Total | |
Investments in Securities: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Assets | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Common Stocks* | | $ | 55,170,411 | | | $ | –0 | – | | $ | –0 | – | | $ | 55,170,411 | |
Short-Term Investments | | | –0 | – | | | 1,742,200 | | | | –0 | – | | | 1,742,200 | |
Investments of Cash Collateral for Security Loaned in Affiliated Money Market Fund | | | 7,851,529 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 7,851,529 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Investments in Securities | | | 63,021,940 | | | | 1,742,200 | | | | –0 | – | | | 64,764,140 | |
Other Financial Instruments** | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total | | $ | 63,021,940 | | | $ | 1,742,200 | | | $ | –0 | – | | $ | 64,764,140 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
* | | See Portfolio of Investments for sector classifications. |
** | | Other financial instruments are derivative instruments, such as futures, forwards and swap contracts, which are valued at the unrealized appreciation/depreciation on the instrument. |
3. Currency Translation
Assets and liabilities denominated in foreign currencies and commitments under forward currency exchange contracts are translated into U.S. dollars at the mean of the quoted bid and ask prices of such currencies against the U.S. dollar. Purchases and sales of portfolio securities are translated into U.S. dollars at the rates of exchange prevailing when such securities were acquired or sold. Income and expenses are translated into U.S. dollars at rates of exchange prevailing when accrued.
Net realized gain or loss on foreign currency transactions represents foreign exchange gains and losses from sales and maturities of foreign fixed income investments, foreign currency exchange contracts, holding of foreign currencies, currency gains or losses realized between the trade and settlement dates on foreign investment transactions, and the difference between the amounts of dividends, interest and foreign withholding taxes recorded on the Portfolio’s books and the U.S. dollar equivalent amounts actually received or paid. Net unrealized currency gains and losses from valuing foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities at period end exchange rates are reflected as a component of net unrealized appreciation or depreciation of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities.
4. Taxes
It is the Portfolio’s policy to meet the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code applicable to regulated investment companies and to distribute all of its investment company taxable income and net realized gains, if any, to shareholders. Therefore, no provisions for federal income or excise taxes are required. The Portfolio may be subject to taxes imposed by countries in which it invests. Such taxes are generally based on income and/or capital gains earned or repatriated. Taxes are accrued and applied to net investment income, net realized gains and net unrealized appreciation/depreciation as such income and/or gains are earned.
In accordance with U.S. GAAP requirements regarding accounting for uncertainties in income taxes, management has analyzed the Portfolio’s tax positions taken or expected to be taken on federal and state income tax returns for all open tax years
10
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
(the current and the prior three tax years) and has concluded that no provision for income tax is required in the Portfolio’s financial statements.
5. Investment Income and Investment Transactions
Dividend income is recorded on the ex-dividend date or as soon as the Portfolio is informed of the dividend. Interest income is accrued daily. Investment transactions are accounted for on the date the securities are purchased or sold. Investment gains or losses are determined on the identified cost basis. The Portfolio amortizes premiums and accretes discounts as adjustments to interest income.
6. Class Allocations
All income earned and expenses incurred by the Portfolio are borne on a pro-rata basis by each outstanding class of shares, based on the proportionate interest in the Portfolio represented by the net assets of such class, except for class specific expenses which are allocated to the respective class. Expenses of the Fund are charged to each Portfolio in proportion to net assets. Realized and unrealized gains and losses are allocated among the various share classes based on respective net assets.
7. Dividends and Distributions
Dividends and distributions to shareholders, if any, are recorded on the ex-dividend date. Income dividends and capital gains distributions are determined in accordance with federal tax regulations and may differ from those determined in accordance with U.S. GAAP. To the extent these differences are permanent, such amounts are reclassified within the capital accounts based on their federal tax basis treatment; temporary differences do not require such reclassification.
NOTE B: Advisory Fee and Other Transactions with Affiliates
Under the terms of the investment advisory agreement, the Portfolio pays the Adviser an advisory fee at an annual rate of .75% of the first $2.5 billion, .65% of the next $2.5 billion and .60% in excess of $5 billion, of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets. The fee is accrued daily and paid monthly.
Pursuant to the investment advisory agreement, the Portfolio may reimburse the Adviser for certain legal and accounting services provided to the Portfolio by the Adviser. For the six months ended June 30, 2012, such fee amounted to $26,450.
Brokerage commissions paid on investment transactions for the six months ended June 30, 2012 amounted to $64,266, of which $12 and $0, respectively, was paid to Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. LLC and Sanford C. Bernstein Limited, affiliates of the Adviser.
The Portfolio compensates AllianceBernstein Investor Services, Inc. (“ABIS”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Adviser, under a Transfer Agency Agreement for providing personnel and facilities to perform transfer agency services for the Portfolio. Such compensation retained by ABIS amounted to $692 for the six months ended June 30, 2012.
NOTE C: Distribution Plan
The Portfolio has adopted a Distribution Plan (the “Plan”) for Class B shares pursuant to Rule 12b-1 under the Investment Company Act of 1940. Under the Plan, the Portfolio pays distribution and servicing fees to AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (the “Distributor”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Adviser, at an annual rate of up to .50% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The fees are accrued daily and paid monthly. The Board of Directors currently limits payments under the Plan to .25% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The Plan provides that the Distributor will use such payments in their entirety for distribution assistance and promotional activities.
The Portfolio is not obligated under the Plan to pay any distribution and servicing fees in excess of the amounts set forth above. The purpose of the payments to the Distributor under the Plan is to compensate the Distributor for its distribution services with respect to the sale of the Portfolio’s Class B shares. Since the Distributor’s compensation is not directly tied to its expenses, the amount of compensation received by it under the Plan during any year may be more or less than its actual expenses. For this reason, the Plan is characterized by the staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission as being of the “compensation” variety.
In the event that the Plan is terminated or not continued, no distribution or servicing fees (other than current amounts accrued but not yet paid) would be owed by the Portfolio to the Distributor.
The Plan also provides that the Adviser may use its own resources to finance the distribution of the Portfolio’s shares.
11
| | |
SMALL CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
NOTE D: Investment Transactions
Purchases and sales of investment securities (excluding short-term investments) for the six months ended June 30, 2012 were as follows:
| | | | | | | | |
| | Purchases | | | Sales | |
Investment securities (excluding U.S. government securities) | | $ | 39,309,886 | | | $ | 50,209,181 | |
U.S. government securities | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
The cost of investments for federal income tax purposes was substantially the same as the cost for financial reporting purposes. Accordingly, gross unrealized appreciation and unrealized depreciation are as follows:
| | | | |
Gross unrealized appreciation | | $ | 8,684,840 | |
Gross unrealized depreciation | | | (1,206,365 | ) |
| | | | |
Net unrealized appreciation | | $ | 7,478,475 | |
| | | | |
1. Derivative Financial Instruments
The Portfolio may use derivatives in an effort to earn income and enhance returns, to replace more traditional direct investments, to obtain exposure to otherwise inaccessible markets (collectively, “investment purposes”), or to hedge or adjust the risk profile of its portfolio.
The Portfolio did not engage in derivatives transactions for the six months ended June 30, 2012.
2. Currency Transactions
The Portfolio may invest in non-U.S. Dollar securities on a currency hedged or unhedged basis. The Portfolio may seek investment opportunities by taking long or short positions in currencies through the use of currency-related derivatives, including forward currency exchange contracts, futures and options on futures, swaps, and other options. The Portfolio may enter into transactions for investment opportunities when it anticipates that a foreign currency will appreciate or depreciate in value but securities denominated in that currency are not held by the Portfolio and do not present attractive investment opportunities. Such transactions may also be used when the Adviser believes that it may be more efficient than a direct investment in a foreign currency-denominated security. The Portfolio may also conduct currency exchange contracts on a spot basis (i.e., for cash at the spot rate prevailing in the currency exchange market for buying or selling currencies).
NOTE E: Securities Lending
The Portfolio may enter into securities lending transactions. Under the Portfolio’s securities lending program, all securities loans will be collateralized continually by cash. The Portfolio will be compensated for the loan from a portion of the net return from the income earned on cash collateral after a rebate is paid to the borrower (in some cases, this rebate may be a “negative rebate” or fee paid by the borrower to the Portfolio in connection with the loan), and payments for fees of the securities lending agent and for certain other administrative expenses. It is the policy of the Portfolio to receive collateral consisting of cash in an amount exceeding the value of the securities loaned. The Portfolio will have the right to call a loan and obtain the securities loaned at any time on notice to the borrower within the normal and customary settlement time for the securities. While the securities are on loan, the borrower is obligated to pay the Portfolio amounts equal to any income or other distributions from the securities. The Portfolio will not have the right to vote any securities during the existence of a loan, but will have the right to regain ownership of loaned securities in order to exercise voting or other ownership rights. The lending agent has agreed to indemnify the Portfolio in the case of default of any securities borrower. Collateral received and securities loaned are marked to market daily to ensure that the securities loaned are secured by collateral. The lending agent will invest the cash collateral received in AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves, an eligible money market vehicle, in accordance with the investment restrictions of the Portfolio, and as approved by the Fund’s Board of Directors. The collateral received on securities loaned is recorded as an asset as well as a corresponding liability in the statement of assets and liabilities. When the Portfolio lends securities, its investment performance will continue to reflect changes in the value of the securities loaned. At June 30, 2012, the Portfolio had securities on loan with a value of $7,951,228 and had received cash collateral which has been invested into AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves of $7,851,529. The cash collateral will be adjusted on the next business day after period end to maintain the required collateral amount. The Portfolio earned securities lending income of $27,040 and $3,362 from the borrowers and AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves, respectively, for the six months ended June 30, 2012; these amounts are reflected in the statement of operations. A principal risk of lending portfolio securities is that the borrower will fail to return the loaned securities upon termination of the loan and that the
12
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
collateral will not be sufficient to replace the loaned securities. A summary of the Portfolio’s transactions in shares of AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves for the six months ended June 30, 2012 is as follows:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Market Value December 31, 2011 (000) | | | Purchases at Cost (000) | | | Sales Proceeds (000) | | | Market Value June 30, 2012 (000) | | | Dividend Income (000) | |
$ | 3,132 | | | $ | 21,957 | | | $ | 17,237 | | | $ | 7,852 | | | $ | 3 | |
NOTE F: Capital Stock
Each class consists of 500,000,000 authorized shares. Transactions in capital shares for each class were as follows:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | SHARES | | | | | AMOUNT | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | | | | | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | |
Class A | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Shares sold | | | 797,829 | | | | 410,931 | | | | | $ | 15,089,723 | | | $ | 7,025,095 | |
Shares redeemed | | | (1,138,670 | ) | | | (466,036 | ) | | | | | (22,085,158 | ) | | | (7,929,210 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (340,841 | ) | | | (55,105 | ) | | | | $ | (6,995,435 | ) | | $ | (904,115 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class B | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Shares sold | | | 378,621 | | | | 714,890 | | | | | $ | 6,919,582 | | | $ | 12,042,216 | |
Shares redeemed | | | (555,333 | ) | | | (756,058 | ) | | | | | (10,520,390 | ) | | | (12,657,243 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (176,712 | ) | | | (41,168 | ) | | | | $ | (3,600,808 | ) | | $ | (615,027 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
NOTE G: Risks Involved in Investing in the Portfolio
Foreign Securities Risk—Investing in securities of foreign companies or foreign governments involves special risks which include changes in foreign currency exchange rates and the possibility of future political and economic developments which could adversely affect the value of such securities. Moreover, securities of many foreign companies or foreign governments and their markets may be less liquid and their prices more volatile than those of comparable U.S. companies or of the U.S. government.
Currency Risk—This is the risk that changes in foreign currency exchange rates may negatively affect the value of the Portfolio’s investments or reduce the returns of the Portfolio. For example, the value of the Portfolio’s investments in foreign currency-denominated securities or currencies may decrease if the U.S. Dollar is strong (i.e., gaining value relative to other currencies) and other currencies are weak (i.e., losing value relative to the U.S. Dollar). Currency markets are generally not as regulated as securities markets. Independent of the Portfolio’s investments denominated in foreign currencies, the Portfolio’s positions in various foreign currencies may cause the Portfolio to experience investment losses due to the changes in exchange rates and interest rates.
Derivatives Risk—The Portfolio may enter into derivative transactions such as forwards, options, futures and swaps. Derivatives may be illiquid, difficult to price, and leveraged so that small changes may produce disproportionate losses for the Portfolio, and subject to counterparty risk to a greater degree than more traditional investments. Derivatives may result in significant losses, including losses that are far greater than the value of the derivatives reflected in the statement of assets and liabilities.
Indemnification Risk—In the ordinary course of business, the Portfolio enters into contracts that contain a variety of indemnifications. The Portfolio’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown. However, the Portfolio has not had prior claims or losses pursuant to these indemnification provisions and expects the risk of loss thereunder to be remote. Therefore, the Portfolio has not accrued any liability in connection with these indemnification provisions.
NOTE H: Joint Credit Facility
A number of open-end mutual funds managed by the Adviser, including the Portfolio, participate in a $140 million revolving credit facility (the “Facility”) intended to provide short-term financing, if necessary, subject to certain restrictions in connection with abnormal redemption activity. Commitment fees related to the Facility are paid by the participating funds and are included in miscellaneous expenses in the statement of operations. The Portfolio did not utilize the Facility during the six months ended June 30, 2012.
13
| | |
SMALL CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
NOTE I: Components of Accumulated Earnings (Deficit)
As of December 31, 2011, the components of accumulated earnings/(deficit) on a tax basis were as follows:
| | | | |
Undistributed capital gains | | $ | 2,186,574 | |
Accumulated capital and other losses | | | (36,340 | )(a) |
Unrealized appreciation/(depreciation) | | | 6,795,641 | (b) |
| | | | |
Total accumulated earnings/(deficit) | | $ | 8,945,875 | |
| | | | |
(a) | | During the fiscal year, the Portfolio utilized $7,770,663 of capital loss carryforwards to offset current year net realized gains. At December 31, 2011, the Portfolio had a qualified late-year loss deferral of $36,340, which is deemed to arise on January 1, 2012. |
(b) | | The differences between book-basis and tax-basis unrealized appreciation/(depreciation) are attributable primarily to the tax deferral of losses on wash sales and the tax treatment of passive foreign investment companies (PFICs). |
For tax purposes, net capital losses may be carried over to offset future capital gains, if any. Under the Regulated Investment Company Modernization Act of 2010, funds are permitted to carry forward capital losses incurred in taxable years beginning after December 22, 2010 for an indefinite period. These post-enactment capital losses must be utilized prior to the pre-enactment capital losses, which are subject to expiration. Post-enactment capital loss carryforwards will retain their character as either short-term or long-term capital losses rather than being considered short-term as under previous regulation. As of December 31, 2011, the Portfolio did not have any capital loss carryforwards.
NOTE J: Recent Accounting Pronouncement
In December 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued an Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) related to disclosures about offsetting assets and liabilities in financial statements. The amendments in this update require an entity to disclose both gross and net information for derivatives and other financial instruments that are either offset in the statement of assets and liabilities or subject to an enforceable master netting arrangement or similar agreement. The ASU is effective during interim or annual reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2013. At this time, management is evaluating the implication of this ASU and its impact on the financial statements has not been determined.
NOTE K: Subsequent Events
Management has evaluated subsequent events for possible recognition or disclosure in the financial statements through the date the financial statements are issued. Management has determined that there are no material events that would require disclosure in the Portfolio’s financial statements through this date.
14
| | |
| | |
SMALL CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO |
FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Selected Data For A Share Of Capital Stock Outstanding Throughout Each Period
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | CLASS A | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, | |
| | | 2011 | | | 2010 | | | 2009 | | | 2008 | | | 2007 | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | | | $17.09 | | | | $16.36 | | | | $11.95 | | | | $8.43 | | | | $15.48 | | | | $13.57 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Income From Investment Operations | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net investment loss (a) | | | (.08 | ) | | | (.15 | ) | | | (.13 | ) | | | (.13 | ) | | | (.13 | ) | | | (.12 | ) |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investment transactions | | | 2.08 | | | | .88 | | | | 4.54 | | | | 3.65 | | | | (6.92 | ) | | | 2.03 | |
Contributions from Adviser | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | .00 | (b) | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) in net asset value from operations | | | 2.00 | | | | .73 | | | | 4.41 | | | | 3.52 | | | | (7.05 | ) | | | 1.91 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net asset value, end of period | | | $19.09 | | | | $17.09 | | | | $16.36 | | | | $11.95 | | | | $8.43 | | | | $15.48 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Return | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total investment return based on net asset value (c) | | | 11.70 | % | | | 4.46 | %* | | | 36.90 | %* | | | 41.76 | %* | | | (45.54 | )%* | | | 14.08 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Ratios/Supplemental Data | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net assets, end of period (000’s omitted) | | | $26,302 | | | | $29,369 | | | | $29,018 | | | | $22,876 | | | | $18,003 | | | | $39,867 | |
Ratio to average net assets of: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Expenses | | | 1.18 | %(d) | | | 1.18 | % | | | 1.37 | %(e) | | | 1.62 | % | | | 1.32 | % | | | 1.20 | % |
Net investment loss | | | (.84 | )%(d) | | | (.85 | )% | | | (1.00 | )%(e) | | | (1.33 | )% | | | (1.02 | )% | | | (.81 | )% |
Portfolio turnover rate | | | 63 | % | | | 92 | % | | | 95 | % | | | 106 | % | | | 129 | % | | | 88 | % |
See footnote summary on page 17.
15
| | |
SMALL CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Selected Data For A Share Of Capital Stock Outstanding Throughout Each Period
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | CLASS B | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, | |
| | | 2011 | | | 2010 | | | 2009 | | | 2008 | | | 2007 | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | | | $16.61 | | | | $15.94 | | | | $11.67 | | | | $8.26 | | | | $15.19 | | | | $13.36 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Income From Investment Operations | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net investment loss (a) | | | (.10 | ) | | | (.19 | ) | | | (.16 | ) | | | (.15 | ) | | | (.15 | ) | | | (.15 | ) |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investment transactions | | | 2.02 | | | | .86 | | | | 4.43 | | | | 3.56 | | | | (6.78 | ) | | | 1.98 | |
Contributions from Adviser | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | .00 | (b) | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) in net asset value from operations | | | 1.92 | | | | .67 | | | | 4.27 | | | | 3.41 | | | | (6.93 | ) | | | 1.83 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net asset value, end of period | | | $18.53 | | | | $16.61 | | | | $15.94 | | | | $11.67 | | | | $8.26 | | | | $15.19 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Return | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total investment return based on net asset value (c) | | | 11.56 | % | | | 4.20 | %* | | | 36.59 | %* | | | 41.28 | %* | | | (45.62 | )%* | | | 13.70 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Ratios/Supplemental Data | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net assets, end of period (000’s omitted) | | | $29,820 | | | | $29,665 | | | | $29,128 | | | | $14,796 | | | | $11,111 | | | | $24,937 | |
Ratio to average net assets of: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Expenses | | | 1.44 | %(d) | | | 1.43 | % | | | 1.62 | %(e) | | | 1.87 | % | | | 1.60 | % | | | 1.44 | % |
Net investment loss | | | (1.10 | )%(d) | | | (1.11 | )% | | | (1.23 | )%(e) | | | (1.58 | )% | | | (1.29 | )% | | | (1.05 | )% |
Portfolio turnover rate | | | 63 | % | | | 92 | % | | | 95 | % | | | 106 | % | | | 129 | % | | | 88 | % |
See footnote summary on page 17.
16
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
(a) | | Based on average shares outstanding. |
(b) | | Amount is less than $.005. |
(c) | | Total investment return is calculated assuming an initial investment made at the net asset value at the beginning of the period, reinvestment of all dividends and distributions at net asset value during the period, and redemption on the last day of the period. Total return does not reflect (i) insurance company’s separate account related expense charges and (ii) the deductions of taxes that a shareholder would pay on Portfolio distributions or the redemption of Portfolio shares. Total investment return calculated for a period of less than one year is not annualized. |
(e) | | The ratio includes expenses attributable to costs of proxy solicitation. |
* | | Includes the impact of proceeds received and credited to the Portfolio resulting from class action settlements, which enhanced the Portfolio’s performance for the years ended December 31, 2011, December 31, 2010, December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008 by 0.09%, 0.05%, 0.28% and 0.40%, respectively. |
See notes to financial statements.
17
| | |
| | |
SMALL CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
CONTINUANCE DISCLOSURE | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
INFORMATION REGARDING THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE PORTFOLIO’S ADVISORY AGREEMENT
The disinterested directors (the “directors”) of AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund, Inc. (the “Fund”) unanimously approved the continuance of the Fund’s Advisory Agreement with the Adviser in respect of AllianceBernstein Small Cap Growth Portfolio (the “Portfolio”) at a meeting held on May 1-3, 2012.
Prior to approval of the continuance of the Advisory Agreement, the directors had requested from the Adviser, and received and evaluated, extensive materials. They reviewed the proposed continuance of the Advisory Agreement with the Adviser and with experienced counsel who are independent of the Adviser, who advised on the relevant legal standards. The directors also reviewed an independent evaluation prepared by the Fund’s Senior Officer (who is also the Fund’s Independent Compliance Officer) of the reasonableness of the advisory fee in the Advisory Agreement, in which the Senior Officer concluded that the contractual fee for the Portfolio was reasonable. The directors also discussed the proposed continuance in private sessions with counsel and the Fund’s Senior Officer.
The directors considered their knowledge of the nature and quality of the services provided by the Adviser to the Portfolio gained from their experience as directors or trustees of most of the registered investment companies advised by the Adviser, their overall confidence in the Adviser’s integrity and competence they have gained from that experience, the Adviser’s initiative in identifying and raising potential issues with the directors and its responsiveness, frankness and attention to concerns raised by the directors in the past, including the Adviser’s willingness to consider and implement organizational and operational changes designed to improve investment results and the services provided to the AllianceBernstein Funds. The directors noted that they have four regular meetings each year, at each of which they receive presentations from the Adviser on the investment results of the Portfolio and review extensive materials and information presented by the Adviser.
The directors also considered all other factors they believed relevant, including the specific matters discussed below. In their deliberations, the directors did not identify any particular information that was all-important or controlling, and different directors may have attributed different weights to the various factors. The directors determined that the selection of the Adviser to manage the Portfolio and the overall arrangements between the Portfolio and the Adviser, as provided in the Advisory Agreement, including the advisory fee, were fair and reasonable in light of the services performed, expenses incurred and such other matters as the directors considered relevant in the exercise of their business judgment. The material factors and conclusions that formed the basis for the directors’ determinations included the following:
Nature, Extent and Quality of Services Provided
The directors considered the scope and quality of services provided by the Adviser under the Advisory Agreement, including the quality of the investment research capabilities of the Adviser and the other resources it has dedicated to performing services for the Portfolio. They also noted the professional experience and qualifications of the Portfolio’s portfolio management team and other senior personnel of the Adviser. The directors also considered that the Advisory Agreement provides that the Portfolio will reimburse the Adviser for the cost to it of providing certain clerical, accounting, administrative and other services provided at the Portfolio’s request by employees of the Adviser or its affiliates. Requests for these reimbursements are approved by the directors on a quarterly basis and, to the extent requested and paid, result in a higher rate of total compensation from the Portfolio to the Adviser than the fee rate stated in the Portfolio’s Advisory Agreement. The directors noted that the methodology used to determine the reimbursement amounts had been reviewed by an independent consultant retained by the Fund’s Senior Officer. The quality of administrative and other services, including the Adviser’s role in coordinating the activities of the Portfolio’s other service providers, also were considered. The directors concluded that, overall, they were satisfied with the nature, extent and quality of services provided to the Portfolio under the Advisory Agreement.
Costs of Services Provided and Profitability
The directors reviewed a schedule of the revenues, expenses and related notes indicating the profitability of the Portfolio to the Adviser for calendar years 2010 and 2011 that had been prepared with an expense allocation methodology arrived at in consultation with an independent consultant retained by the Fund’s Senior Officer. The directors reviewed the assumptions and methods of allocation used by the Adviser in preparing fund-specific profitability data and noted that there are a number of potentially acceptable allocation methodologies for information of this type. The directors noted that the profitability information reflected all revenues and expenses of the Adviser’s relationship with the Portfolio, including those relating to its subsidiaries which provide transfer agency, distribution and brokerage services to the Portfolio. The directors recognized that it is difficult to make comparisons of profitability of the Advisory Agreement with fund advisory contracts for unaffiliated funds because comparative information is not generally publicly available and is affected by numerous factors. The directors focused on the profitability of the Adviser’s relationship with the Portfolio before taxes and distribution expenses. The
18
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
directors concluded that they were satisfied that the Adviser’s level of profitability from its relationship with the Portfolio was not unreasonable.
Fall-Out Benefits
The directors considered the other benefits to the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationships with the Portfolio, including but not limited to benefits relating to soft dollar arrangements (whereby the Adviser receives brokerage and research services from brokers that execute transactions for certain clients, including the Portfolio); 12b-1 fees and sales charges received by the Fund’s principal underwriter (which is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Adviser) in respect of the Portfolio’s Class B shares; transfer agency fees paid by the Portfolio to a wholly owned subsidiary of the Adviser; and brokerage commissions paid by the Portfolio to brokers affiliated with the Adviser. The directors recognized that the Adviser’s profitability would be somewhat lower without these benefits. The directors also understood that the Adviser also might derive reputational and other benefits from its association with the Portfolio.
Investment Results
In addition to the information reviewed by the directors in connection with the meeting, the directors receive detailed performance information for the Portfolio at each regular Board meeting during the year. The directors noted that the Portfolio is a clone of another fund managed by the Adviser (the “Corresponding Fund”) and is managed to track the investment performance of its Corresponding Fund, although investment results may differ between the Portfolio and its Corresponding Fund due to differences in their expense ratios and other factors. At the May 2012 meeting, the directors reviewed information prepared by Lipper showing the performance of the Class A Shares of the Portfolio as compared with that of a group of similar funds selected by Lipper (the “Performance Group”) and as compared with that of a broader array of funds selected by Lipper (the “Performance Universe”), and information prepared by the Adviser showing performance of the Class A Shares as compared with the Russell 2000 Growth Index (the “Index”), in each case for the 1-, 3-, 5- and 10-year periods ended February 29, 2012 and (in the case of comparisons with the Index) the since inception period (August 1996 inception). The directors noted that the Portfolio was in the 1st quintile of the Performance Group and the Performance Universe for the 1-, 3- and 5-year periods, and in the 2nd quintile of the Performance Group and the Performance Universe for the 10-year period. The Portfolio outperformed the Index in all periods. The directors also reviewed performance information for periods ended March 31, 2012 (for which the data was not limited to Class A Shares), and noted that in the 3-month period the Portfolio had outperformed the Lipper VA Small Cap Growth Funds Average and the Index. Based on their review, the directors concluded that the Portfolio’s relative performance over time had been satisfactory.
Advisory Fees and Other Expenses
The directors considered the advisory fee rate paid by the Portfolio to the Adviser and information prepared by Lipper concerning advisory fee rates paid by other funds in the same Lipper category as the Portfolio at a common asset level. The directors recognized that it is difficult to make comparisons of advisory fees because there are variations in the services that are included in the fees paid by other funds.
The directors also considered the fees the Adviser charges non-fund clients pursuing a substantially similar investment style. For this purpose, they reviewed the relevant fee information from the Adviser’s Form ADV and the evaluation from the Fund’s Senior Officer. The directors noted that the institutional fee schedule started at a higher fee rate than the Portfolio’s starting fee rate, but had more breakpoints starting at lower asset levels. Applying the institutional fee schedule to the level of assets of the Portfolio would result in a higher fee rate than that being paid by the Portfolio (including the impact of the expense reimbursement to the Adviser pursuant to the Advisory Agreement). The directors noted that the Adviser may, in some cases, agree to fee rates with large institutional clients that are lower than those reviewed by the directors and that they had previously discussed with the Adviser its policies in respect of such arrangements. The directors also reviewed information that indicated that the Portfolio’s fee rate is higher than the sub-advisory fee rate earned by the Adviser for sub-advising certain registered investment companies with a similar investment style. The directors noted that the advisory fee schedule for the Portfolio is the same as that for its Corresponding Fund.
The Adviser reviewed with the directors the significantly greater scope of the services it provides to the Portfolio relative to institutional clients and sub-advised funds. The Adviser also noted that because mutual funds are constantly issuing and redeeming shares, they are more difficult to manage than an institutional account, where the assets tend to be relatively stable. In light of the substantial differences in services rendered by the Adviser to institutional clients as compared to funds such as the Portfolio, the directors considered these fee comparisons inapt and did not place significant weight on them in their deliberations.
19
| | |
SMALL CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
CONTINUANCE DISCLOSURE | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
The directors noted that the Portfolio may invest in shares of exchange-traded funds (“ETFs”). The directors noted that ETFs pay advisory fees pursuant to their advisory contracts, and that the Adviser had provided, and they had reviewed, information about the expense ratio of the relevant ETFs. The directors concluded, based on the Adviser’s explanation of how it opportunistically uses ETFs when they represent the least expense way to obtain desired exposures for a fund or to temporarily “equitize” cash inflows pending purchases of underlying securities, that the advisory fee for the Portfolio would be paid for services that would be in addition to, rather than duplicative of, the services to be provided under the advisory contracts of the ETFs.
The directors also considered the total expense ratio of the Class A shares of the Portfolio in comparison to the fees and expenses of funds within two comparison groups created by Lipper: an Expense Group and an Expense Universe. Lipper described an Expense Group as a representative sample of funds similar to the Portfolio and an Expense Universe as a broader group, consisting of all funds in the investment classification/objective with a similar load type as the Portfolio. The Class A expense ratio of the Portfolio was based on the Portfolio’s latest fiscal year. The directors noted that it was likely that the expense ratios of some of the other funds in the Portfolio’s Lipper category were lowered by waivers or reimbursements by those funds’ investment advisers, which in some cases might be voluntary or temporary. The directors view the expense ratio information as relevant to their evaluation of the Adviser’s services because the Adviser is responsible for coordinating services provided to the Portfolio by others.
The directors noted that, at the Portfolio’s current size, its contractual effective advisory fee rate of 75 basis points was lower than the Expense Group median. The directors noted that the administrative expense reimbursement was 10 basis points in the Portfolio’s latest fiscal year, and that as a result the rate of total compensation received by the Adviser from the Portfolio pursuant to the Advisory Agreement was the same as the Expense Group median. The directors concluded that the Portfolio’s total expense ratio was acceptable, although they noted that it was higher than the Expense Group and the Expense Universe medians, and they asked the Adviser to consider measures to reduce it.
Economies of Scale
The directors noted that the advisory fee schedule for the Portfolio contains breakpoints that reduce the fee rates on assets above specified levels. The directors took into consideration prior presentations by an independent consultant on economies of scale in the mutual fund industry and for the AllianceBernstein Funds, and by the Adviser concerning certain of its views on economies of scale. The directors also had requested and received from the Adviser certain updates on economies of scale at the May 2012 meetings. The directors believe that economies of scale may be realized (if at all) by the Adviser across a variety of products and services, and not only in respect of a single fund. The directors noted that there is no established methodology for establishing breakpoints that give effect to the fund-specific services provided by a fund’s adviser and to the economies of scale that an adviser may realize in its overall mutual fund business or those components of it which directly or indirectly affect a fund’s operations. The directors observed that in the mutual fund industry as a whole, as well as among funds similar to the Portfolio, there is no uniformity or pattern in the fees and asset levels at which breakpoints (if any) apply. The directors also noted that the advisory agreements for many funds do not have breakpoints at all. Having taken these factors into account, the directors concluded that the Portfolio’s shareholders would benefit from a sharing of economies of scale in the event the Portfolio’s net assets exceed a breakpoint in the future.
20
| | |
| | |
SMALL CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
THE FOLLOWING IS NOT PART OF THE SHAREHOLDER REPORT OR THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
SUMMARY OF SENIOR OFFICER’S EVALUATION OF INVESTMENT ADVISORY AGREEMENT1
The following is a summary of the evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement between AllianceBernstein L.P. (the “Adviser”) and the AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund (the “Fund”), in respect of AllianceBernstein Small Cap Growth Portfolio (the “Portfolio”).2 The evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement was prepared by Philip L. Kirstein, the Senior Officer of the Fund, for the Directors of the Fund, as required by a September 2004 agreement between the Adviser and the New York State Attorney General (the “NYAG”). The Senior Officer’s evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement is not meant to diminish the responsibility or authority of the Board of Directors of the Fund to perform its duties pursuant to Section 15 of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “40 Act”) and applicable state law. The purpose of the summary is to provide shareholders with a synopsis of the independent evaluation of the reasonableness of the advisory fees proposed to be paid by the Portfolio which was provided to the Directors in connection with their review of the proposed approval of the continuance of the Investment Advisory Agreement. The Senior Officer’s evaluation considered the following factors:
| 1. | Advisory fees charged to institutional and other clients of the Adviser for like services; |
| 2. | Advisory fees charged by other mutual fund companies for like services; |
| 3. | Costs to the Adviser and its affiliates of supplying services pursuant to the advisory agreement, excluding any intra-corporate profit; |
| 4. | Profit margins of the Adviser and its affiliates from supplying such services; |
| 5. | Possible economies of scale as the Portfolio grows larger; and |
| 6. | Nature and quality of the Adviser’s services including the performance of the Portfolio. |
These factors, with the exception of the first factor, are generally referred to as the “Gartenberg factors,” which were articulated by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in 1982. Gartenberg v. Merrill Lynch Asset Management, Inc., 694 F. 2d 923 (2d Cir. 1982). The first factor is an additional factor required to be considered by the AoD. On March 30, 2010, the Supreme Court held the Gartenberg decision was correct in its basic formulation of what §36(b) requires: to face liability under §36(b), “an investment adviser must charge a fee that is so disproportionately large that it bears no reasonable relationship to the services rendered and could not have been the product of arm’s length bargaining.” Jones v. Harris Associates L.P., 130 S. Ct. 1418 (2010). In the Jones decision, the Court stated the Gartenberg approach fully incorporates the correct understanding of fiduciary duty within the context of section 36(b) and noted with approval that “Gartenberg insists that all relevant circumstances be taken into account” and “uses the range of fees that might result from arm’s-length bargaining as the benchmark for reviewing challenged fees.”3
PORTFOLIO ADVISORY FEES, NET ASSETS & EXPENSE RATIOS
The Adviser proposed that the Portfolio pay the advisory fee set forth in the table below for receiving the services to be provided pursuant to the Investment Advisory Agreement. The fee schedule below, implemented in January 2004 in consideration of the Adviser’s settlement with the NYAG in December 2003, is based on a master schedule that contemplates eight categories of funds with almost all funds in each category having the same advisory fee schedule.
| | | | | | | | |
Category | | Advisory Fee Based on % of Average Daily Net Assets | | Net Assets 3/31/12 ($MIL) | | | Portfolio |
Growth | | 75 bp on first $2.5 billion 65 bp on next $2.5 billion 60 bp on the balance | | $ | 73.9 | | | Small Cap Growth Portfolio |
1 | | The information in the fee summary was completed on April 19, 2012 and discussed with the Board of Directors on May 1-3, 2012. |
2 | | Future references to the Fund and the Portfolio do not include “AllianceBernstein.” References in the fee summary pertaining to performance and expense ratio rankings refer to the Class A shares of the Portfolio. |
3 | | Jones v. Harris at 1427. |
21
| | |
SMALL CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
The Adviser is reimbursed as specified in the Investment Advisory Agreement for certain clerical, legal, accounting, administrative and other services provided to the Portfolio. During the Portfolio’s most recently completed fiscal year, the Adviser received $60,013 (0.10% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets) for such services.
Set forth below are the Portfolio’s total expense ratios for the most recently completed fiscal year:
| | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Total Expense Ratio | | Fiscal Year |
Small Cap Growth Portfolio | | | | Class A 1.18 | % | | | | December 31 | |
| | | | Class B 1.43 | % | | | | | |
I. ADVISORY FEES CHARGED TO INSTITUTIONAL AND OTHER CLIENTS
The advisory fees charged to investment companies which the Adviser manages and sponsors are normally higher than those charged to similar sized institutional accounts, including pension plans and sub-advised investment companies. The fee differential reflects, among other things, different services provided to such clients, and different liabilities assumed. Services provided by the Adviser to the Portfolio that are not provided to non-investment company clients and sub-advised investment companies include providing office space and personnel to serve as Fund Officers, who among other responsibilities make the certifications required under the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002, and coordinating with and monitoring the Portfolio’s third party service providers such as Fund counsel, auditors, custodians, transfer agents and pricing services. The accounting, administrative, legal and compliance requirements for the Portfolio are more costly than those for institutional assets due to the greater complexities and time required for investment companies, although as previously noted, the Adviser is reimbursed for providing such services. Also, retail mutual funds managed by the Adviser are widely held. Servicing the Portfolio’s investors is more time consuming and labor intensive compared to institutional clients since the Adviser needs to communicate with a more extensive network of financial intermediaries and shareholders. The Adviser also believes that it incurs substantial entrepreneurial risk when offering a new mutual fund, since establishing a new mutual fund requires a large upfront investment, and it may take a long time for the fund to achieve profitability since the fund must be priced to scale from inception in order to be competitive and assets are acquired one account at a time. In addition, managing the cash flow of an investment company may be more difficult than managing that of a stable pool of assets, such as an institutional account with little cash movement in either direction, particularly, if a fund is in net redemption and the Adviser is frequently forced to sell securities to raise cash for redemptions. However, managing a fund with positive cash flow may be easier at times than managing a stable pool of assets. In recent years, investment advisers have been sued by institutional clients and have suffered reputational damage both by the attendant publicity and outcomes other than complete victories. Accordingly, the legal and reputational risks associated with institutional accounts are greater than previously thought, although still not equal to those related to the mutual fund industry.
Notwithstanding the Adviser’s view that managing an investment company is not comparable to managing other institutional accounts because the services provided are different, the Supreme Court has indicated consideration should be given to the advisory fees charged to institutional accounts that have a substantially similar investment style as the Portfolio.4 In addition to the AllianceBernstein institutional fee schedule, set forth below is what would have been the effective advisory fee of the Portfolio had the AllianceBernstein institutional fee schedule been applicable to the Portfolio versus the Portfolio’s advisory fee based on March 31, 2012 net assets:5
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Net Assets 3/31/12 ($MIL) | | AllianceBernstein Institutional Fee Schedule | | Effective AB Inst. Adv. Fee | | | Portfolio Advisory Fee | |
Small Cap Growth Portfolio | | $73.9 | | Small Cap Growth Schedule 100 bp on first $50m 85 bp on the next $50m 75 bp on the balance Minimum account size $25m | | | 0.951 | % | | | 0.750 | % |
4 | | The Supreme Court stated that “courts may give such comparisons the weight that they merit in light of the similarities and differences between the services that the clients in question require, but the courts must be wary of inapt comparisons.” Among the significant differences the Supreme Court noted that may exist between services provided to mutual funds and institutional accounts are “higher marketing costs.” Jones v. Harris at 1428. |
5 | | The Adviser has indicated that with respect to institutional accounts with assets greater than $300 million, it will negotiate a fee schedule. Discounts that are negotiated vary based upon each client relationship. |
22
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
The Adviser also manages AllianceBernstein Cap Fund, Inc.—Small Cap Growth Portfolio (“Cap Fund, Inc.—Small Cap Growth Portfolio”), a retail mutual fund, which has a substantially similar investment style as the Portfolio. Set forth below is the fee schedule of Cap Fund, Inc.—Small Cap Growth Portfolio and what would have been the effective advisory fee of the Portfolio had the fee schedule of the retail mutual fund been applicable to the Portfolio:6
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | AllianceBernstein Mutual Fund | | Fee Schedule | | ABMF Effective Fee | | | Portfolio Advisory Fee | |
Small-Cap Growth Portfolio7 | | Cap Fund, Inc.—Small Cap Growth Portfolio | | 0.75% on first $2.5 billion 0.65% on next $2.5 billion 0.60% on the balance | | | 0.750% | | | | 0.750% | |
The Adviser provides sub-advisory services to certain other investment companies managed by other fund families that have an investment style similar to that of the Portfolio. The Adviser charges the fees set forth below for the sub-advisory relationships that have a somewhat similar investment style as the Portfolio. Also shown are the Portfolio’s advisory fee and what would have been the effective advisory fees of the Portfolio had the fee schedules of the sub-advisory relationships been applicable to the Portfolio based on March 31, 2012 net assets.
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Fund | | Sub-Advised Fund | | Sub-Advised Fund Fee Schedule | | Sub-advised Fund Eff. Mgmt. Fee (%) | | | Portfolio Adv. Fee (%) | |
Small Cap Growth Portfolio | | Client #18,9 | | 0.60% on first $1 billion 0.55% on next $500 million 0.50% on next $500 million 0.45% on next $500 million 0.40% on the balance | | | 0.600 | | | | 0.750 | |
| | | | |
| | Client #2 | | 0.65% on 1st $25 million 0.60% on next $75 million 0.55% on the balance | | | 0.617 | | | | 0.750 | |
It is fair to note that the services the Adviser provides pursuant to sub-advisory agreements are generally confined to the services related to the investment process; in other words, they are not as comprehensive as the services provided to the Portfolio by the Adviser. In addition, to the extent that certain of these sub-advisory relationships are with affiliates of the Adviser, the fee schedules may not reflect arm’s length bargaining or negotiations.
While it appears that the sub-advisory relationships are paying a lower fee than the Portfolio, it is difficult to evaluate the relevance of such lower fees due to differences in terms of the services provided, risks involved and other competitive factors between the Portfolio and the sub-advisory relationships. There could be various business reasons why an investment adviser would be willing to provide a sub-advisory relationship investment related services at a different fee level than an investment company it is sponsoring where the investment adviser is providing all the services, not just investment management, generally required by a registered investment company.
6 | | The retail mutual fund was also affected by the settlement between the Adviser and the NYAG. As a result, the Portfolio has the same breakpoints in its advisory fee schedule as the retail mutual fund. |
7 | | The advisory fee of AllianceBernstein Cap Fund, Inc.—Small Cap Growth Portfolio is based on the mutual fund’s net assets at the end of each quarter and is paid to the Adviser quarterly, in contrast to the Portfolio, whose advisory fee is based on the Portfolio’s average daily net assets and is paid on a monthly basis. |
8 | | The client is an affiliate of the Adviser. |
9 | | Assets are aggregated with other accounts of the client for purposes of calculating the investment advisory fee. |
23
| | |
SMALL CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
II. MANAGEMENT FEES CHARGED BY OTHER MUTUAL FUND COMPANIES FOR LIKE SERVICES.
Lipper, Inc. (“Lipper”), an analytical service that is not affiliated with the Adviser, compared the fees charged to the Portfolio with fees charged to other investment companies for similar services offered by other investment advisers.10 Lipper’s analysis included the comparison of the Portfolio’s contractual management fee, estimated at the approximate current asset level of the Portfolio, to the median of the Portfolio’s Lipper Expense Group (“EG”) and the Portfolio’s contractual management fee ranking.11
Lipper describes an EG as a representative sample of comparable funds. Lipper’s standard methodology for screening funds to be included in an EG entails the consideration of several fund criteria, including fund type, investment classification/objective, load type and similar 12b-1/non-12b-1 service fees, asset (size) comparability, expense components and attributes. An EG will typically consist of seven to twenty funds.
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Contractual Management Fee12 | | | Lipper Exp. Group Median (%) | | | Rank | |
Small Cap Growth Portfolio | | | 0.750 | | | | 0.850 | | | | 3/13 | |
Lipper also analyzed the Portfolio’s most recently completed fiscal year total expense ratio in comparison to the Portfolio’s EG and Lipper Expense Universe (“EU”). The EU13 is a broader group compared to the EG, consisting of all funds that have the same investment classification/objective and load type as the subject Portfolio.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Expense Ratio (%)14 | | | Lipper Exp. Group Median (%) | | | Lipper Group Rank | | | Lipper Exp. Universe Median (%) | | | Lipper Universe Rank | |
Small Cap Growth Portfolio | | | 1.178 | | | | 1.000 | | | | 12/13 | | | | 0.964 | | | | 37/38 | |
Based on this analysis, the Portfolio has a more favorable ranking on a management fee basis than on a total expense ratio basis.
III. COSTS TO THE ADVISER AND ITS AFFILIATES OF SUPPLYING SERVICES PURSUANT TO THE ADVISORY FEE ARRANGEMENT, EXCLUDING ANY INTRA-CORPORATE PROFIT.
The Adviser utilizes two profitability reporting systems, which operate independently but are aligned with each other, to estimate the Adviser’s profitability in connection with investment advisory services provided to the Portfolio. The Senior Officer has retained a consultant to provide independent advice regarding the alignment of the two profitability systems as well as the methodologies and allocations utilized by both profitability systems.
IV. PROFIT MARGINS OF THE ADVISER AND ITS AFFILIATES FOR SUPPLYING SUCH SERVICES.
The Portfolio’s profitability information, prepared by the Adviser for the Board of Directors, was reviewed by the Senior Officer and the consultant. The Adviser’s profitability from providing investment advisory services to the Portfolio increased during calendar year 2011, relative to 2010.
10 | | The Supreme Court cautioned against accepting mutual fund fee comparisons without careful scrutiny since “these comparisons are problematic because these fees, like those challenged, may not be the product of the negotiations conducted at arm’s-length.” Jones v. Harris at 1429. |
11 | | The contractual management fee is calculated by Lipper using the Portfolio’s contractual management fee rate at a hypothetical asset level. The hypothetical asset level is based on the combined net assets of all classes of the Portfolio, rounded up to the next $25 million. Lipper’s total expense ratio information is based on the most recent annual report except as otherwise noted. A ranking of “1” would mean that the Portfolio had the lowest effective fee rate in the Lipper peer group. |
12 | | The contractual management fee does not reflect any expense reimbursements made by the Portfolio to the Adviser for certain clerical, legal, accounting, administrative and other services. |
13 | | Except for asset (size) comparability, Lipper uses the same criteria for selecting an EG when selecting an EU. Unlike the EG, the EU allows for the same adviser to be represented by more than just one fund. |
14 | | Most recently completed fiscal year end Class A total expense ratio. |
24
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
In addition to the Adviser’s direct profits from managing the Portfolio, certain of the Adviser’s affiliates have business relationships with the Portfolio and may earn a profit from providing other services to the Portfolio. The courts have referred to this type of business opportunity as “fall-out benefits” to the Adviser and indicated that such benefits should be factored into the evaluation of the total relationship between the Portfolio and the Adviser. Neither case law nor common business practice precludes the Adviser’s affiliates from earning a reasonable profit on this type of relationship provided the affiliates’ charges and services are competitive. These affiliates provide transfer agent, distribution and brokerage related services to the Portfolio and receive transfer agent fees, Rule 12b-1 payments, and brokerage commissions. In addition, the Adviser benefits from soft dollar arrangements which offset expenses the Adviser would otherwise incur.
The Portfolio has adopted a distribution plan for Class B shares pursuant to Rule 12b-1 under the 40 Act. Under the distribution plan, the Portfolio pays distribution and servicing fees to its principal underwriter, AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (“ABI”), at an annual rate of up to 0.50% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The current annual rate that the Portfolio pays to ABI for 12b-1 fees is 0.25%. During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011, AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (“ABI”), the Portfolio’s distributor and an affiliate of the Adviser, received $76,454 in Rule 12b-1 fees.
During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011, the Adviser incurred distribution expenses in the amount of $387,183 in connection with activities primarily intended to result in the sale of the Portfolio’s Class B shares. This amount includes the 12b-1 fees paid by the Portfolio to the Adviser.
Financial intermediaries, such as insurers, market and sell shares of the Portfolio and typically receive compensation from ABI, the Advisers and/or the Portfolio for selling shares of the Portfolio. These financial intermediaries receive compensation in any or all of the following forms: 12b-1 fees, defrayal of costs for educational seminars and training, additional distribution support, recordkeeping and/or administrative services. Payments related to providing contract-holder recordkeeping and/or administrative services will generally not exceed 0.35% of the average daily net assets of the Portfolio attributable to the relevant intermediary over the year. With respect to the Fund, which includes the Portfolio and other Portfolios of the Fund not discussed in this summary, ABI paid approximately $500,000 in 2011.
The transfer agent of the Portfolio is AllianceBernstein Investor Services, Inc. (“ABIS”). During the most recently completed fiscal year, ABIS received a fee of $1,310 from the Portfolio.15
The Portfolio effected brokerage transactions through the Adviser’s affiliate, Sanford C. Bernstein & Co., LLC (“SCB & Co.”) and/or its U.K. affiliate, Sanford C. Bernstein Limited (“SCB Ltd.”), collectively “SCB,” and paid commissions during the Portfolio’s most recently completed fiscal year. The Adviser represented that SCB’s profitability from business conducted with the Portfolio is comparable to the profitability of SCB’s dealings with other similar third party clients. In the ordinary course of business, SCB receives and pays liquidity rebates from electronic communications networks (“ECNs”) derived from trading for its clients, including the Portfolio. These credits and charges are not being passed onto any SCB client. The Adviser also receives certain soft dollar benefits from brokers that execute agency trades for the Portfolio and other clients. These soft dollar benefits reduce the Adviser’s cost of doing business and increase its profitability.
V. POSSIBLE ECONOMIES OF SCALE
The Adviser has indicated that economies of scale are being shared with shareholders through fee structures,16 subsidies and enhancement to services. Based on some of the professional literature that has considered economies of scale in the mutual fund industry, it is thought that to the extent economies of scale exist, they may more often exist across a fund family as opposed to a specific fund. This is because the costs incurred by the Adviser, such as investment research or technology for trading or compliance systems can be spread across a greater asset base as the fund family increases in size. It is also possible that as the level of services required to operate a successful investment company has increased over time, and advisory firms make such investments in their business to provide services, there may be a sharing of economies of scale without a reduction in advisory fees.
15 | | The Fund, which includes the Portfolio and other Portfolios of the Fund paid ABIS a flat fee of $18,000 in 2010. |
16 | | Fee structures include fee reductions, pricing at scale and breakpoints in advisory fee schedules. |
25
| | |
SMALL CAP GROWTH PORTFOLIO | | |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
An independent consultant, retained by the Senior Officer, provided the Board of Directors information on the Adviser’s firm-wide average costs from 2005 through 2011 and potential economies of scale. The independent consultant noted that from 2005 through 2007 the Adviser experienced significant growth in assets under management (“AUM”). During this period, operating expenses increased, in part to keep up with growth, and in part reflecting market returns. However, from 2008 through the first quarter of 2009, AUM rapidly and significantly decreased. Some operating expenses, including base compensation and office space, adjusted more slowly during this period, resulting in an increase in average costs. Since 2009, AUM has moved within a range of $400 to $500 million ending 2011 with an average of $411 million in the fourth quarter. The independent consultant noted that changes in operating expenses reflect changes in business composition and business practices in response to changes in financial markets. Finally, the independent consultant concluded that the increase in average cost and the decline in net operating margin across the company since 2008 are inconsistent with the view that there are currently “economies of scale” to be shared with clients through lower fees.
In February 2008, the independent consultant provided the Board of Directors an update of the Deli17 study on advisory fees and various fund characteristics.18 The independent consultant first reiterated the results of his previous two dimensional comparison analysis (fund size and family size) with the Board of Directors.19 The independent consultant then discussed the results of the regression model that was utilized to study the effects of various factors on advisory fees. The regression model output indicated that the bulk of the variation in fees predicted were explained by various factors, but substantially by fund AUM, family AUM, index fund indicator and investment style. The independent consultant also compared the advisory fees of the AllianceBernstein Mutual Funds to similar funds managed by 19 other large asset managers, regardless of the fund size and each Adviser’s proportion of mutual fund assets to non-mutual fund assets.
VI. NATURE AND QUALITY OF THE ADVISER’S SERVICES, INCLUDING THE PERFORMANCE OF THE PORTFOLIO
With assets under management of approximately $419 billion as of March 31, 2012, the Adviser has the investment experience to manage and provide non-investment services (described in Section I) to the Portfolio.
The information prepared by Lipper shows the 1, 3, 5 and 10 year performance returns and rankings of the Portfolio20 relative to its Lipper Performance Group (“PG”) and Lipper Performance Universe (“PU”)21 for the periods ended February 29, 2012.22
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Fund | | | PG Median | | | PU Median | | | PG Rank | | | PU Rank | |
Small Cap Growth Portfolio | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
1 year | | | 10.28 | | | | 1.67 | | | | 3.06 | | | | 1/13 | | | | 2/43 | |
3 year | | | 38.31 | | | | 29.67 | | | | 30.12 | | | | 1/13 | | | | 3/40 | |
5 year | | | 6.86 | | | | 4.68 | | | | 4.00 | | | | 1/10 | | | | 2/36 | |
10 year | | | 7.84 | | | | 5.75 | | | | 6.73 | | | | 2/9 | | | | 7/29 | |
17 | | The Deli study, originally published in 2002 based on 1997 data and updated for the February 2008 Presentation, may be of diminished value due to the age of the data used in the presentation and the changes experienced in the industry over the last four years. |
18 | | As mentioned previously, the Supreme Court cautioned against accepting mutual fund fee comparisons without careful scrutiny since the fees may not be the product of negotiations conducted at arm’s length. See Jones V. Harris at 1429. |
19 | | The two dimensional analysis showed patterns of lower advisory fees for funds with larger asset sizes and funds from larger family sizes compared to funds with smaller asset sizes and funds from smaller family sizes, which according to the independent consultant is indicative of a sharing of economies of scale and scope. However, in less liquid and active markets, such is not the case, as the empirical analysis showed potential for diseconomies of scale in those markets. The empirical analysis also showed diminishing economies of scale and scope as funds surpassed a certain high level of assets. |
20 | | The performance rankings are for the Class A shares of the Portfolio. The Portfolio’s performance returns shown were provided by Lipper. |
21 | | The Portfolio’s PG is identical to the Portfolio’s respective EG. The Portfolio’s PU is not identical to the Portfolio’s EU as the criteria for including/excluding a fund from a PU is somewhat different from that of an EU. |
22 | | The current Lipper investment classification/objective dictates the PG and PU throughout the life of the fund even if a fund had a different investment classification/objective at a different point in time. |
26
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Set forth below are the 1, 3, 5, 10 year and since inception performance returns of the Portfolio (in bold)23 versus its benchmark.24 Portfolio and benchmark volatility and reward-to-variability ratio (“Sharpe Ratio”) information is also shown.25
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Periods Ending February 29, 2011 Annualized Performance | |
| | 1 Year (%) | | | 3 Year (%) | | | 5 Year (%) | | | 10 Year (%) | | | Since Inception (%) | | | Annualized | | | Risk Period (Year) | |
| | | | | | Volatility (%) | | | Sharpe (%) | | |
Small Cap Growth Portfolio | | | 10.28 | | | | 38.31 | | | | 6.86 | | | | 7.84 | | | | 5.33 | | | | 22.19 | | | | 0.37 | | | | 10 | |
Russell 2000 Growth Index | | | 2.38 | | | | 31.21 | | | | 3.93 | | | | 6.67 | | | | 5.06 | | | | 20.87 | | | | 0.37 | | | | 10 | |
Inception Date: August 5, 1996 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CONCLUSION:
Based on the factors discussed above the Senior Officer’s conclusion is that the proposed advisory fee for the Portfolio is reasonable and within the range of what would have been negotiated at arm’s-length in light of all the surrounding circumstances. This conclusion in respect of the Portfolio is based on an evaluation of all of these factors and no single factor was dispositive.
Dated: May 25, 2012
23 | | The performance returns and risk measures shown in the table are for the Class A shares of the Portfolio. |
24 | | The Adviser provided Portfolio and benchmark performance return information for periods through February 29, 2012. |
25 | | Portfolio and benchmark volatility and Sharpe Ratio information was obtained through Lipper LANA, a database maintained by Lipper. Volatility is a statistical measure of the tendency of a market price or yield to vary over time. A Sharpe Ratio is a risk adjusted measure of return that divides a portfolio’s return in excess of the riskless return by the portfolio’s standard deviation. A portfolio with a greater volatility would be viewed as more risky than a portfolio with equivalent performance but lower volatility; for that reason, a greater return would be demanded for the more risky portfolio. A portfolio with a higher Sharpe Ratio would be viewed as better performing than a portfolio with a lower Sharpe Ratio. |
27
AllianceBernstein
Variable Products Series Fund, Inc.
| | |
![LOGO](https://capedge.com/proxy/N-CSRS/0001193125-12-366259/g374698g16n16.jpg) | | AllianceBernstein Small/Mid Cap Value Portfolio |
Semi-Annual Report
![LOGO](https://capedge.com/proxy/N-CSRS/0001193125-12-366259/g374698g81g54.jpg)
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT
Investment Products Offered
| Ø | | Are Not Bank Guaranteed |
AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (ABI) is the distributor of the AllianceBernstein family of mutual funds. ABI is a member of FINRA and is an affiliate of AllianceBernstein L.P., the manager of the funds.
You may obtain a description of the Fund’s proxy voting policies and procedures, and information regarding how the Fund voted proxies relating to portfolio securities during the most recent 12-month period ended June 30, without charge. Simply visit AllianceBernstein’s website at www.alliancebernstein.com or go to the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (the “Commission”) website at www.sec.gov, or call AllianceBernstein at (800) 227-4618.
The Fund files its complete schedule of portfolio holdings with the Commission for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year on Form N-Q. The Fund’s Forms N-Q are available on the Commission’s website at www.sec.gov. The Fund’s Forms N-Q may also be reviewed and copied at the Commission’s Public Reference Room in Washington, DC; information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling (800) SEC-0330.
AllianceBernstein® and the AB Logo are registered trademarks and service marks used by permission of the owner, AllianceBernstein L.P.
| | |
| | |
SMALL/MID CAP VALUE PORTFOLIO |
FUND EXPENSES (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
As a shareholder of the Fund, you incur two types of costs: (1) transaction costs, including sales charges (loads) on purchase payments, contingent deferred sales charges on redemptions and (2) ongoing costs, including management fees; distribution (12b-1) fees; and other Fund expenses. This example is intended to help you understand your ongoing costs (in dollars) of investing in the Fund and to compare these costs with the ongoing costs of investing in other mutual funds.
The Example is based on an investment of $1,000 invested at the beginning of the period and held for the entire period as indicated below.
Actual Expenses
The table below provides information about actual account values and actual expenses. You may use the information in this line, together with the amount you invested, to estimate the expenses that you paid over the period. Simply divide your account value by $1,000 (for example, an $8,600 account value divided by $1,000 = 8.6), then multiply the result by the number in the first line under the heading entitled “Expenses Paid During Period” to estimate the expenses you paid on your account during this period. The estimate of expenses does not include fees or other expenses of any variable insurance product. If such expenses were included, the estimate of expenses you paid during the period would be higher and your ending account value would be lower.
Hypothetical Example for Comparison Purposes
The table below provides information about hypothetical account values and hypothetical expenses based on the Fund’s actual expense ratio and an assumed annual rate of return of 5% before expenses, which is not the Fund’s actual return. The hypothetical account values and expenses may not be used to estimate the actual ending account balance or expenses you paid for the period. You may use this information to compare the ongoing costs of investing in the Fund and other funds by comparing this 5% hypothetical example with the 5% hypothetical examples that appear in the shareholder reports of other funds. The estimate of expenses does not include fees or other expenses of any variable insurance product. If such expenses were included, the estimate of expenses you paid during the period would be higher and your ending account value would be lower.
Please note that the expenses shown in the table are meant to highlight your ongoing costs only and do not reflect any transactional costs, such as sales charges (loads), or contingent deferred sales charges on redemptions. Therefore, the second line of each class’ table is useful in comparing ongoing costs only, and will not help you determine the relative total costs of owning different funds. In addition, if these transactional costs were included, your costs would have been higher.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Beginning Account Value January 1, 2012 | | | Ending Account Value June 30, 2012 | | | Expenses Paid During Period* | | | Annualized Expense Ratio* | |
Class A | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Actual | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,069.20 | | | $ | 4.27 | | | | 0.83 | % |
Hypothetical (5% return before expenses) | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,020.74 | | | $ | 4.17 | | | | 0.83 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class B | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Actual | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,067.60 | | | $ | 5.55 | | | | 1.08 | % |
Hypothetical (5% return before expenses) | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,019.49 | | | $ | 5.42 | | | | 1.08 | % |
* | | Expenses are equal to each classes’ annualized expense ratios, multiplied by the average account value over the period, multiplied by 182/366 (to reflect the one-half year period). |
1
| | |
SMALL/MID CAP VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
TEN LARGEST HOLDINGS* | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
COMPANY | | U.S. $ VALUE | | | PERCENT OF NET ASSETS | |
PNM Resources, Inc. | | $ | 6,972,654 | | | | 1.4 | % |
LifePoint Hospitals, Inc. | | | 6,861,486 | | | | 1.4 | |
NV Energy, Inc. | | | 6,757,049 | | | | 1.4 | |
Constellation Brands, Inc.—Class A | | | 6,747,005 | | | | 1.4 | |
UGI Corp. | | | 6,729,758 | | | | 1.4 | |
Atmos Energy Corp. | | | 6,587,899 | | | | 1.4 | |
Fidelity National Financial, Inc.—Class A | | | 6,512,576 | | | | 1.4 | |
Zions Bancorporation | | | 6,505,506 | | | | 1.4 | |
Torchmark Corp. | | | 6,494,158 | | | | 1.4 | |
Aspen Insurance Holdings Ltd. | | | 6,492,674 | | | | 1.3 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | $ | 66,660,765 | | | | 13.9 | % |
SECTOR DIVERSIFICATION**
June 30, 2012 (unaudited)
| | | | | | | | |
SECTOR | | U.S. $ VALUE | | | PERCENT OF TOTAL INVESTMENTS | |
Financials | | $ | 152,978,244 | | | | 32.4 | % |
Information Technology | | | 77,081,199 | | | | 16.3 | |
Consumer Discretionary | | | 69,645,613 | | | | 14.7 | |
Industrials | | | 49,251,408 | | | | 10.4 | |
Utilities | | | 38,874,234 | | | | 8.2 | |
Energy | | | 30,806,227 | | | | 6.5 | |
Consumer Staples | | | 21,378,565 | | | | 4.5 | |
Health Care | | | 16,851,084 | | | | 3.6 | |
Materials | | | 15,175,027 | | | | 3.2 | |
Short-Term Investments | | | 1,066,029 | | | | 0.2 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Investments | | $ | 473,107,630 | | | | 100.0 | % |
** | | The Portfolio’s sector breakdown is expressed as a percentage of total investments (excluding security lending collateral) and may vary over time. |
Please note: The sector classifications presented herein are based on the Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS) which was developed by Morgan Stanley Capital International and Standard & Poor’s. The components are divided into sector, industry group, and industry sub-indices as classified by the GICS for each of the market capitalization indices in the broad market. These sector classifications are broadly defined. The “Portfolio of Investments” section of the report reflects more specific industry information and is consistent with the investment restrictions discussed in the Fund’s prospectus.
2
| | |
SMALL/MID CAP VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMMON STOCKS–98.3% | | | | | | | | |
FINANCIALS–31.8% | | | | | | | | |
CAPITAL MARKETS–1.3% | | | | | | | | |
Legg Mason, Inc. | | | 227,840 | | | $ | 6,008,141 | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMMERCIAL BANKS–10.3% | | | | | |
Associated Banc-Corp | | | 439,710 | | | | 5,799,775 | |
CapitalSource, Inc. | | | 957,670 | | | | 6,435,543 | |
Comerica, Inc. | | | 208,610 | | | | 6,406,413 | |
First Niagara Financial Group, Inc. | | | 691,590 | | | | 5,290,664 | |
Huntington Bancshares, Inc./OH | | | 991,590 | | | | 6,346,176 | |
Popular, Inc.(a) | | | 218,261 | | | | 3,625,310 | |
Susquehanna Bancshares, Inc. | | | 577,654 | | | | 5,949,836 | |
Webster Financial Corp. | | | 142,040 | | | | 3,076,586 | |
Zions Bancorporation | | | 334,990 | | | | 6,505,506 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 49,435,809 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INSURANCE–9.9% | | | | | | | | |
Amtrust Financial Services, Inc.(b) | | | 145,580 | | | | 4,325,182 | |
Aspen Insurance Holdings Ltd. | | | 224,660 | | | | 6,492,674 | |
Endurance Specialty Holdings Ltd. | | | 166,940 | | | | 6,397,141 | |
Fidelity National Financial, Inc.–Class A | | | 338,140 | | | | 6,512,576 | |
Platinum Underwriters Holdings Ltd. | | | 164,130 | | | | 6,253,353 | |
Reinsurance Group of America, Inc.–Class A | | | 117,160 | | | | 6,234,084 | |
Torchmark Corp. | | | 128,470 | | | | 6,494,158 | |
Unum Group | | | 260,920 | | | | 4,991,400 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 47,700,568 | |
| | | | | | | | |
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUSTS (REITs)–9.4% | | | | | | | | |
BioMed Realty Trust, Inc. | | | 341,800 | | | | 6,384,824 | |
BRE Properties, Inc. | | | 105,110 | | | | 5,257,602 | |
Camden Property Trust | | | 78,860 | | | | 5,336,456 | |
DiamondRock Hospitality Co. | | | 426,780 | | | | 4,353,156 | |
Entertainment Properties Trust | | | 144,290 | | | | 5,931,762 | |
Glimcher Realty Trust | | | 554,660 | | | | 5,668,625 | |
Home Properties, Inc. | | | 61,700 | | | | 3,785,912 | |
Mid-America Apartment Communities, Inc. | | | 82,400 | | | | 5,622,976 | |
Plum Creek Timber Co., Inc. | | | 74,580 | | | | 2,960,826 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 45,302,139 | |
| | | | | | | | |
THRIFTS & MORTGAGE FINANCE–0.9% | | | | | | | | |
Washington Federal, Inc. | | | 268,300 | | | | 4,531,587 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 152,978,244 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY–16.0% | | | | | | | | |
COMPUTERS & PERIPHERALS–0.6% | | | | | | | | |
NCR Corp.(a) | | | 135,160 | | | | 3,072,187 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT, INSTRUMENTS & COMPONENTS–8.0% | | | | | | | | |
Anixter International, Inc. | | | 50,620 | | | $ | 2,685,391 | |
Arrow Electronics, Inc.(a) | | | 167,690 | | | | 5,501,909 | |
AU Optronics Corp. (Sponsored ADR) | | | 1,039,032 | | | | 4,176,909 | |
Avnet, Inc.(a) | | | 183,620 | | | | 5,666,513 | |
Flextronics International Ltd.(a) | | | 671,360 | | | | 4,162,432 | |
Ingram Micro, Inc.–Class A(a) | | | 214,600 | | | | 3,749,062 | |
Insight Enterprises, Inc.(a) | | | 211,560 | | | | 3,560,555 | |
TTM Technologies, Inc.(a) | | | 496,872 | | | | 4,675,565 | |
Vishay Intertechnology, Inc.(a) | | | 442,910 | | | | 4,176,641 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 38,354,977 | |
| | | | | | | | |
IT SERVICES–2.3% | | | | | | | | |
Amdocs Ltd.(a) | | | 203,140 | | | | 6,037,321 | |
Convergys Corp. | | | 354,310 | | | | 5,233,158 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 11,270,479 | |
| | | | | | | | |
SEMICONDUCTORS & SEMICONDUCTOR EQUIPMENT–5.1% | | | | | | | | |
Amkor Technology, Inc.(a) (b) | | | 734,510 | | | | 3,584,409 | |
Entegris, Inc.(a) | | | 639,420 | | | | 5,460,647 | |
Lam Research Corp.(a) (b) | | | 141,010 | | | | 5,321,717 | |
Micron Technology, Inc.(a) | | | 827,710 | | | | 5,222,850 | |
MKS Instruments, Inc. | | | 165,708 | | | | 4,793,933 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 24,383,556 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 77,081,199 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER DISCRETIONARY–14.5% | | | | | | | | |
AUTO COMPONENTS–2.4% | | | | | | | | |
Dana Holding Corp. | | | 211,890 | | | | 2,714,311 | |
Lear Corp. | | | 135,920 | | | | 5,128,261 | |
TRW Automotive Holdings Corp.(a) | | | 100,060 | | | | 3,678,206 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 11,520,778 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HOTELS, RESTAURANTS & LEISURE–2.4% | | | | | | | | |
MGM Resorts International(a) | | | 523,400 | | | | 5,841,144 | |
Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. | | | 223,490 | | | | 5,817,445 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 11,658,589 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HOUSEHOLD DURABLES–3.3% | | | | | |
Meritage Homes Corp.(a) | | | 132,910 | | | | 4,510,965 | |
Newell Rubbermaid, Inc. | | | 338,600 | | | | 6,142,204 | |
NVR, Inc.(a) | | | 6,315 | | | | 5,367,750 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 16,020,919 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MEDIA–1.1% | | | | | | | | |
Gannett Co., Inc. | | | 342,140 | | | | 5,039,722 | |
| | | | | | | | |
SPECIALTY RETAIL–4.4% | | | | | | | | |
ANN, Inc.(a) | | | 227,451 | | | | 5,797,726 | |
Childrens Place Retail Stores, Inc. (The)(a) | | | 123,030 | | | | 6,130,585 | |
Express, Inc.(a) | | | 156,910 | | | | 2,851,055 | |
3
| | |
SMALL/MID CAP VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
Men’s Wearhouse, Inc. (The) | | | 123,100 | | | $ | 3,464,034 | |
Office Depot, Inc.(a) | | | 1,360,860 | | | | 2,939,457 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 21,182,857 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TEXTILES, APPAREL & LUXURY GOODS–0.9% | | | | | | | | |
Jones Group, Inc. (The) | | | 441,710 | | | | 4,222,748 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 69,645,613 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INDUSTRIALS–10.3% | | | | | | | | |
BUILDING PRODUCTS–1.2% | | | | | | | | |
Fortune Brands Home & Security, Inc.(a) | | | 262,020 | | | | 5,835,185 | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMMERCIAL SERVICES & SUPPLIES–1.1% | | | | | | | | |
Avery Dennison Corp. | | | 189,450 | | | | 5,179,563 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSTRUCTION & ENGINEERING–0.7% | | | | | | | | |
Tutor Perini Corp.(a) | | | 249,460 | | | | 3,160,658 | |
| | | | | | | | |
ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT–1.8% | | | | | |
EnerSys(a) | | | 87,670 | | | | 3,074,587 | |
General Cable Corp.(a) | | | 205,520 | | | | 5,331,189 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 8,405,776 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MACHINERY–1.3% | | | | | | | | |
Sauer-Danfoss, Inc. | | | 66,848 | | | | 2,335,001 | |
Timken Co. | | | 87,500 | | | | 4,006,625 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 6,341,626 | |
| | | | | | | | |
ROAD & RAIL–2.5% | | | | | | | | |
Avis Budget Group, Inc.(a) | | | 287,910 | | | | 4,376,232 | |
Con-way, Inc. | | | 130,426 | | | | 4,709,683 | |
Hertz Global Holdings, Inc.(a) | | | 230,020 | | | | 2,944,256 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 12,030,171 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TRADING COMPANIES & DISTRIBUTORS–1.7% | | | | | | | | |
Aircastle Ltd. | | | 463,290 | | | | 5,582,644 | |
WESCO International, Inc.(a) | | | 47,190 | | | | 2,715,785 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 8,298,429 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 49,251,408 | |
| | | | | | | | |
UTILITIES–8.1% | | | | | | | | |
ELECTRIC UTILITIES–5.3% | | | | | | | | |
Great Plains Energy, Inc. | | | 251,220 | | | | 5,378,620 | |
NV Energy, Inc. | | | 384,360 | | | | 6,757,049 | |
PNM Resources, Inc. | | | 356,840 | | | | 6,972,654 | |
Portland General Electric Co. | | | 241,870 | | | | 6,448,254 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 25,556,577 | |
| | | | | | | | |
GAS UTILITIES–2.8% | | | | | | | | |
Atmos Energy Corp. | | | 187,850 | | | | 6,587,899 | |
UGI Corp. | | | 228,670 | | | | 6,729,758 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 13,317,657 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 38,874,234 | |
| | | | | | | | |
ENERGY–6.4% | | | | | | | | |
ENERGY EQUIPMENT & SERVICES–2.0% | | | | | | | | |
Bristow Group, Inc. | | | 120,160 | | | | 4,886,907 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Helmerich & Payne, Inc. | | | 105,110 | | | $ | 4,570,183 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 9,457,090 | |
| | | | | | | | |
OIL, GAS & CONSUMABLE FUELS–4.4% | | | | | | | | |
Plains Exploration & Production Co.(a) | | | 115,530 | | | | 4,064,345 | |
Stone Energy Corp.(a) | | | 118,430 | | | | 3,001,016 | |
Teekay Corp. | | | 154,680 | | | | 4,529,030 | |
Tesoro Corp.(a) | | | 201,190 | | | | 5,021,703 | |
Western Refining, Inc.(b) | | | 212,530 | | | | 4,733,043 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 21,349,137 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 30,806,227 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER STAPLES–4.5% | | | | | |
BEVERAGES–1.4% | | | | | | | | |
Constellation Brands, Inc.–Class A(a) | | | 249,335 | | | | 6,747,005 | |
| | | | | | | | |
FOOD PRODUCTS–3.1% | | | | | | | | |
Dean Foods Co.(a) | | | 251,180 | | | | 4,277,595 | |
Dole Food Co., Inc.(a) (b) | | | 465,550 | | | | 4,087,529 | |
Tyson Foods, Inc.–Class A | | | 332,790 | | | | 6,266,436 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 14,631,560 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 21,378,565 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HEALTH CARE–3.5% | | | | | | | | |
HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS & SERVICES–3.5% | | | | | | | | |
Coventry Health Care, Inc. | | | 179,710 | | | | 5,712,981 | |
Health Net, Inc.(a) | | | 176,210 | | | | 4,276,617 | |
LifePoint Hospitals, Inc.(a) | | | 167,435 | | | | 6,861,486 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 16,851,084 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MATERIALS–3.2% | | | | | | | | |
CHEMICALS–0.7% | | | | | | | | |
Ferro Corp.(a) | | | 689,230 | | | | 3,308,304 | |
| | | | | | | | |
METALS & MINING–2.5% | | | | | | | | |
Commercial Metals Co. | | | 339,090 | | | | 4,286,098 | |
Reliance Steel & Aluminum Co. | | | 81,745 | | | | 4,128,122 | |
Steel Dynamics, Inc. | | | 293,830 | | | | 3,452,503 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 11,866,723 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 15,175,027 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Common Stocks (cost $456,285,344) | | | | | | | 472,041,601 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | Principal Amount (000) | | | | |
SHORT-TERM INVESTMENTS–0.2% | | | | | | | | |
TIME DEPOSIT–0.2% | | | | | | | | |
State Street Time Deposit 0.01%, 7/02/12 (cost $1,066,029) | | $ | 1,066 | | | | 1,066,029 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Investments Before Security Lending Collateral for Securities Loaned–98.5% (cost $457,351,373) | | | | | | | 473,107,630 | |
| | | | | | | | |
4
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Principal Amount (000) | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
INVESTMENTS OF CASH COLLATERAL FOR SECURITY LOANED–3.1% | | | | | | | | |
INVESTMENT COMPANIES–3.1% | | | | | | | | |
AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves–Class I, 0.20%(c) (cost $15,041,488) | | $ | 15,041,488 | | | $ | 15,041,488 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TOTAL INVESTMENTS–101.6% (cost $472,392,861) | | | | | | | 488,149,118 | |
Other assets less liabilities–(1.6)% | | | | | | | (7,682,984 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
NET ASSETS–100.0% | | | | | | $ | 480,466,134 | |
| | | | | | | | |
(a) | | Non-income producing security. |
(b) | | Represents entire or partial securities out on loan. See Note E for securities lending information. |
(c) | | Investment in affiliated money market mutual fund. The rate shown represents the 7-day yield as of period end. |
Glossary:
ADR—American Depositary Receipt
See notes to financial statements.
5
| | |
SMALL/MID CAP VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
STATEMENT OF ASSETS & LIABILITIES |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | |
ASSETS | | | | |
Investments in securities, at value | | | | |
Unaffiliated issuers (cost $457,351,373) | | $ | 473,107,630 | (a) |
Affiliated issuers (cost $15,041,488—including investment of cash collateral for securities loaned of $15,041,488) | | | 15,041,488 | |
Receivable for investment securities sold | | | 8,601,944 | |
Dividends and interest receivable | | | 710,067 | |
Receivable for capital stock sold | | | 71,007 | |
| | | | |
Total assets | | | 497,532,136 | |
| | | | |
LIABILITIES | | | | |
Payable for collateral received on securities loaned | | | 15,041,488 | |
Payable for capital stock redeemed | | | 930,782 | |
Payable for investment securities purchased | | | 587,168 | |
Advisory fee payable | | | 295,345 | |
Distribution fee payable | | | 67,027 | |
Administrative fee payable | | | 18,093 | |
Transfer Agent fee payable | | | 206 | |
Accrued expenses | | | 125,893 | |
| | | | |
Total liabilities | | | 17,066,002 | |
| | | | |
NET ASSETS | | $ | 480,466,134 | |
| | | | |
COMPOSITION OF NET ASSETS | | | | |
Capital stock, at par | | $ | 29,196 | |
Additional paid-in capital | | | 426,419,602 | |
Undistributed net investment income | | | 3,649,075 | |
Accumulated net realized gain on investment transactions | | | 34,612,004 | |
Net unrealized appreciation on investments | | | 15,756,257 | |
| | | | |
| | $ | 480,466,134 | |
| | | | |
Net Asset Value Per Share—1 billion shares of capital stock authorized, $.001 par value
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class | | Net Assets | | | Shares Outstanding | | | Net Asset Value | |
A | | $ | 153,363,492 | | | | 9,277,339 | | | $ | 16.53 | |
B | | $ | 327,102,642 | | | | 19,918,790 | | | $ | 16.42 | |
(a) | | Includes securities on loan with a value of $14,966,267 (see Note E). |
See notes to financial statements.
6
| | |
SMALL/MID CAP VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
STATEMENTOF OPERATIONS | | |
Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | |
INVESTMENT INCOME | | | | |
Dividends | | | | |
Unaffiliated issuers | | $ | 3,984,102 | |
Affiliated issuers | | | 15,736 | |
Interest | | | 255 | |
Securities lending income | | | 37,800 | |
| | | | |
| | | 4,037,893 | |
| | | | |
EXPENSES | | | | |
Advisory fee (see Note B) | | | 1,879,662 | |
Distribution fee—Class B | | | 428,151 | |
Transfer agency—Class A | | | 844 | |
Transfer agency—Class B | | | 1,815 | |
Custodian | | | 69,180 | |
Printing | | | 48,180 | |
Administrative | | | 28,959 | |
Legal | | | 20,793 | |
Audit | | | 20,685 | |
Directors’ fees | | | 1,968 | |
Miscellaneous | | | 8,376 | |
| | | | |
Total expenses | | | 2,508,613 | |
| | | | |
Net investment income | | | 1,529,280 | |
| | | | |
REALIZED AND UNREALIZED GAIN ON INVESTMENT TRANSACTIONS | | | | |
Net realized gain on investment transactions | | | 21,734,646 | |
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of investments | | | 9,163,006 | |
| | | | |
Net gain on investment transactions | | | 30,897,652 | |
| | | | |
NET INCREASE IN NET ASSETS FROM OPERATIONS | | $ | 32,426,932 | |
| | | | |
See notes to financial statements.
7
| | |
| | |
SMALL/MID CAP VALUE PORTFOLIO |
STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN NET ASSETS | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | |
INCREASE (DECREASE) IN NET ASSETS FROM OPERATIONS | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income | | $ | 1,529,280 | | | $ | 1,989,004 | |
Net realized gain on investment transactions | | | 21,734,646 | | | | 46,512,102 | |
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of investments | | | 9,163,006 | | | | (91,150,959 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) in net assets from operations | | | 32,426,932 | | | | (42,649,853 | ) |
DIVIDENDS TO SHAREHOLDERS FROM | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income | | | | | | | | |
Class A | | | –0 | – | | | (823,225 | ) |
Class B | | | –0 | – | | | (889,880 | ) |
CAPITAL STOCK TRANSACTIONS | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (27,859,411 | ) | | | (32,242,359 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Total increase (decrease) | | | 4,567,521 | | | | (76,605,317 | ) |
NET ASSETS | | | | | | | | |
Beginning of period | | | 475,898,613 | | | | 552,503,930 | |
| | | | | | | | |
End of period (including undistributed net investment income of $3,649,075 and $2,119,795, respectively) | | $ | 480,466,134 | | | $ | 475,898,613 | |
| | | | | | | | |
See notes to financial statements.
8
| | |
SMALL/MID CAP VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
NOTESTO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
NOTE A: Significant Accounting Policies
The AllianceBernstein Small/Mid Cap Value Portfolio (the “Portfolio”) is a series of AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund, Inc. (the “Fund”). The Portfolio’s investment objective is long-term growth of capital. The Portfolio is diversified as defined under the Investment Company Act of 1940. The Fund was incorporated in the State of Maryland on November 17, 1987, as an open-end series investment company. The Fund offers thirteen separately managed pools of assets which have differing investment objectives and policies. The Portfolio offers Class A and Class B shares. Both classes of shares have identical voting, dividend, liquidating and other rights, except that Class B shares bear a distribution expense and have exclusive voting rights with respect to the Class B distribution plan.
The Portfolio offers and sells its shares only to separate accounts of certain life insurance companies for the purpose of funding variable annuity contracts and variable life insurance policies. Sales are made without a sales charge at the Portfolio’s net asset value per share.
The financial statements have been prepared in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“U.S. GAAP”) which require management to make certain estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities in the financial statements and amounts of income and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. The following is a summary of significant accounting policies followed by the Portfolio.
1. Security Valuation
Portfolio securities are valued at their current market value determined on the basis of market quotations or, if market quotations are not readily available or are deemed unreliable, at “fair value” as determined in accordance with procedures established by and under the general supervision of the Fund’s Board of Directors.
In general, the market value of securities which are readily available and deemed reliable are determined as follows: Securities listed on a national securities exchange (other than securities listed on the NASDAQ Stock Market, Inc. (“NASDAQ”)) or on a foreign securities exchange are valued at the last sale price at the close of the exchange or foreign securities exchange. If there has been no sale on such day, the securities are valued at the last traded price from the previous day. Securities listed on more than one exchange are valued by reference to the principal exchange on which the securities are traded; securities listed only on NASDAQ are valued in accordance with the NASDAQ Official Closing Price; listed or over the counter market (“OTC”) put or call options are valued at the mid level between the current bid and ask prices. If either a current bid or current ask price is unavailable, AllianceBernstein L.P. (the “Adviser”) will have discretion to determine the best valuation (e.g. last trade price in the case of listed options); open futures contracts are valued using the closing settlement price or, in the absence of such a price, the most recent quoted bid price. If there are no quotations available for the day of valuation, the last available closing settlement price is used; U.S. government securities and other debt instruments having 60 days or less remaining until maturity are valued at amortized cost if their original maturity was 60 days or less; or by amortizing their fair value as of the 61st day prior to maturity if their original term to maturity exceeded 60 days; fixed-income securities, including mortgage backed and asset backed securities, may be valued on the basis of prices provided by a pricing service or at a price obtained from one or more of the major broker/dealers. In cases where broker/dealer quotes are obtained, the Adviser may establish procedures whereby changes in market yields or spreads are used to adjust, on a daily basis, a recently obtained quoted price on a security. Swaps and other derivatives are valued daily, primarily using independent pricing services, independent pricing models using market inputs, as well as third party broker-dealers or counterparties.
Securities for which market quotations are not readily available (including restricted securities) or are deemed unreliable are valued at fair value. Factors considered in making this determination may include, but are not limited to, information obtained by contacting the issuer, analysts, analysis of the issuer’s financial statements or other available documents. In addition, the Portfolio may use fair value pricing for securities primarily traded in non-U.S. markets because most foreign markets close well before the Portfolio values its securities at 4:00 p.m., Eastern Time. The earlier close of these foreign markets gives rise to the possibility that significant events, including broad market moves, may have occurred in the interim and may materially affect the value of those securities. To account for this, the Portfolio may frequently value many of its foreign equity securities using fair value prices based on third party vendor modeling tools to the extent available.
2. Fair Value Measurements
In accordance with U.S. GAAP regarding fair value measurements, fair value is defined as the price that the Portfolio would receive to sell an asset or pay to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. The U.S. GAAP disclosure requirements establish a framework for measuring fair value, and a three-level hierarchy for
9
| | |
SMALL/MID CAP VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
NOTESTO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
fair value measurements based upon the transparency of inputs to the valuation of an asset or liability. Inputs may be observable or unobservable and refer broadly to the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability. Observable inputs reflect the assumptions market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability based on market data obtained from sources independent of the Portfolio. Unobservable inputs reflect the Portfolio’s own assumptions about the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability based on the best information available in the circumstances. Each investment is assigned a level based upon the observability of the inputs which are significant to the overall valuation. The three-tier hierarchy of inputs is summarized below.
| • | | Level 1—quoted prices in active markets for identical investments |
| • | | Level 2—other significant observable inputs (including quoted prices for similar investments, interest rates, prepayment speeds, credit risk, etc.) |
| • | | Level 3—significant unobservable inputs (including the Portfolio’s own assumptions in determining the fair value of investments) |
The following table summarizes the valuation of the Portfolio’s investments by the above fair value hierarchy levels as of June 30, 2012:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Level 1 | | | Level 2 | | | Level 3 | | | Total | |
Investments in Securities: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Assets: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Common Stocks* | | $ | 472,041,601 | | | $ | –0 | – | | $ | –0 | – | | $ | 472,041,601 | |
Short-Term Investments | | | –0 | – | | | 1,066,029 | | | | –0 | – | | | 1,066,029 | |
Investments of Cash Collateral for Security Loaned in Affiliated Money Market Fund | | | 15,041,488 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 15,041,488 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Investments in Securities | | | 487,083,089 | | | | 1,066,029 | | | | –0 | – | | | 488,149,118 | |
Other Financial Instruments** | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total | | $ | 487,083,089 | | | $ | 1,066,029 | | | $ | –0 | – | | $ | 488,149,118 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
* | | See Portfolio of Investments for sector classifications. |
** | | Other financial instruments are derivative instruments, such as futures, forwards and swap contracts, which are valued at the unrealized appreciation/depreciation on the instrument. |
3. Currency Translation
Assets and liabilities denominated in foreign currencies and commitments under forward currency exchange contracts are translated into U.S. dollars at the mean of the quoted bid and ask prices of such currencies against the U.S. dollar. Purchases and sales of portfolio securities are translated into U.S. dollars at the rates of exchange prevailing when such securities were acquired or sold. Income and expenses are translated into U.S. dollars at rates of exchange prevailing when accrued.
Net realized gain or loss on foreign currency transactions represents foreign exchange gains and losses from sales and maturities of foreign fixed income investments, foreign currency exchange contracts, holding of foreign currencies, currency gains or losses realized between the trade and settlement dates on foreign investment transactions, and the difference between the amounts of dividends, interest and foreign withholding taxes recorded on the Portfolio’s books and the U.S. dollar equivalent amounts actually received or paid. Net unrealized currency gains and losses from valuing foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities at period end exchange rates are reflected as a component of net unrealized appreciation or depreciation of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities.
4. Taxes
It is the Portfolio’s policy to meet the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code applicable to regulated investment companies and to distribute all of its investment company taxable income and net realized gains, if any, to shareholders. Therefore, no provisions for federal income or excise taxes are required. The Portfolio may be subject to taxes imposed by countries in which it invests. Such taxes are generally based on income and/or capital gains earned or repatriated. Taxes are accrued and applied to net investment income, net realized gains and net unrealized appreciation/depreciation as such income and/or gains are earned.
In accordance with U.S. GAAP requirements regarding accounting for uncertainties in income taxes, management has analyzed the Portfolio’s tax positions taken or expected to be taken on federal and state income tax returns for all open tax years
10
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
(the current and the prior three tax years) and has concluded that no provision for income tax is required in the Portfolio’s financial statements.
5. Investment Income and Investment Transactions
Dividend income is recorded on the ex-dividend date or as soon as the Portfolio is informed of the dividend. Interest income is accrued daily. Investment transactions are accounted for on the date the securities are purchased or sold. Investment gains or losses are determined on the identified cost basis. The Portfolio amortizes premiums and accretes discounts as adjustments to interest income.
6. Class Allocations
All income earned and expenses incurred by the Portfolio are borne on a pro-rata basis by each outstanding class of shares, based on the proportionate interest in the Portfolio represented by the net assets of such class, except for class specific expenses which are allocated to the respective class. Expenses of the Fund are charged to each Portfolio in proportion to net assets. Realized and unrealized gains and losses are allocated among the various share classes based on respective net assets.
7. Dividends and Distributions
Dividends and distributions to shareholders, if any, are recorded on the ex-dividend date. Income dividends and capital gains distributions are determined in accordance with federal tax regulations and may differ from those determined in accordance with U.S. GAAP. To the extent these differences are permanent, such amounts are reclassified within the capital accounts based on their federal tax basis treatment; temporary differences do not require such reclassification.
NOTE B: Advisory Fee and Other Transactions with Affiliates
Under the terms of the investment advisory agreement, the Portfolio pays the Adviser an advisory fee at an annual rate of .75% of the first $2.5 billion, .65% of the next $2.5 billion and .60% in excess of $5 billion, of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets. The fee is accrued daily and paid monthly. The Adviser has agreed to waive its fees and bear certain expenses to the extent necessary to limit total operating expenses on an annual basis to 1.20% and 1.45% of daily average net assets for Class A and Class B shares, respectively (the “Expense Caps”). The Expense Caps extend through May 1, 2013 and then may be extended by the Adviser for additional one year terms. For the six months ended June 30, 2012, there were no expenses waived by the Adviser.
Pursuant to the investment advisory agreement, the Portfolio may reimburse the Adviser for certain legal and accounting services provided to the Portfolio by the Adviser. For the six months ended June 30, 2012, such fee amounted to $28,959.
Brokerage commissions paid on investment transactions for the six months ended June 30, 2012 amounted to $423,570, of which $0 and $0, respectively, was paid to Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. LLC and Sanford C. Bernstein Limited, affiliates of the Adviser.
The Portfolio compensates AllianceBernstein Investor Services, Inc. (“ABIS”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Adviser, under a Transfer Agency Agreement for providing personnel and facilities to perform transfer agency services for the Portfolio. Such compensation retained by ABIS amounted to $692 for the six months ended June 30, 2012.
NOTE C: Distribution Plan
The Portfolio has adopted a Distribution Plan (the “Plan”) for Class B shares pursuant to Rule 12b-1 under the Investment Company Act of 1940. Under the Plan, the Portfolio pays distribution and servicing fees to AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (the “Distributor”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Adviser, at an annual rate of up to .50% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The fees are accrued daily and paid monthly. The Board of Directors currently limits payments under the Plan to .25% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The Plan provides that the Distributor will use such payments in their entirety for distribution assistance and promotional activities.
The Portfolio is not obligated under the Plan to pay any distribution and servicing fees in excess of the amounts set forth above. The purpose of the payments to the Distributor under the Plan is to compensate the Distributor for its distribution services with respect to the sale of the Portfolio’s Class B shares. Since the Distributor’s compensation is not directly tied to its expenses, the amount of compensation received by it under the Plan during any year may be more or less than its actual expenses. For this reason, the Plan is characterized by the staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission as being of the “compensation” variety.
In the event that the Plan is terminated or not continued, no distribution or servicing fees (other than current amounts accrued but not yet paid) would be owed by the Portfolio to the Distributor.
The Plan also provides that the Adviser may use its own resources to finance the distribution of the Portfolio’s shares.
11
| | |
SMALL/MID CAP VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
NOTESTO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
NOTE D: Investment Transactions
Purchases and sales of investment securities (excluding short-term investments) for the six months ended June 30, 2012 were as follows:
| | | | | | | | |
| | Purchases | | | Sales | |
Investment securities (excluding U.S. government securities) | | $ | 135,670,842 | | | $ | 164,681,061 | |
U.S. government securities | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
The cost of investments for federal income tax purposes was substantially the same as the cost for financial reporting purposes. Accordingly, gross unrealized appreciation and unrealized depreciation are as follows:
| | | | |
Gross unrealized appreciation | | $ | 50,508,087 | |
Gross unrealized depreciation | | | (34,751,830 | ) |
| | | | |
Net unrealized appreciation | | $ | 15,756,257 | |
| | | | |
1. Derivative Financial Instruments
The Portfolio may use derivatives in an effort to earn income and enhance returns, to replace more traditional direct investments, to obtain exposure to otherwise inaccessible markets (collectively, “investment purposes”), or to hedge or adjust the risk profile of its portfolio.
The Portfolio did not engage in derivatives transactions for the six months ended June 30, 2012.
2. Currency Transactions
The Portfolio may invest in non-U.S. Dollar securities on a currency hedged or unhedged basis. The Portfolio may seek investment opportunities by taking long or short positions in currencies through the use of currency-related derivatives, including forward currency exchange contracts, futures and options on futures, swaps, and other options. The Portfolio may enter into transactions for investment opportunities when it anticipates that a foreign currency will appreciate or depreciate in value but securities denominated in that currency are not held by the Portfolio and do not present attractive investment opportunities. Such transactions may also be used when the Adviser believes that it may be more efficient than a direct investment in a foreign currency-denominated security. The Portfolio may also conduct currency exchange contracts on a spot basis (i.e., for cash at the spot rate prevailing in the currency exchange market for buying or selling currencies).
NOTE E: Securities Lending
The Portfolio may enter into securities lending transactions. Under the Portfolio’s securities lending program, all securities loans will be collateralized continually by cash. The Portfolio will be compensated for the loan from a portion of the net return from the income earned on cash collateral after a rebate is paid to the borrower (in some cases, this rebate may be a “negative rebate” or fee paid by the borrower to the Portfolio in connection with the loan), and payments for fees of the securities lending agent and for certain other administrative expenses. It is the policy of the Portfolio to receive collateral consisting of cash in an amount exceeding the value of the securities loaned. The Portfolio will have the right to call a loan and obtain the securities loaned at any time on notice to the borrower within the normal and customary settlement time for the securities. While the securities are on loan, the borrower is obligated to pay the Portfolio amounts equal to any income or other distributions from the securities. The Portfolio will not have the right to vote any securities during the existence of a loan, but will have the right to regain ownership of loaned securities in order to exercise voting or other ownership rights. The lending agent has agreed to indemnify the Portfolio in the case of default of any securities borrower. Collateral received and securities loaned are marked to market daily to ensure that the securities loaned are secured by collateral. The lending agent will invest the cash collateral received in AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves, an eligible money market vehicle, in accordance with the investment restrictions of the Portfolio, and as approved by the Fund’s Board of Directors. The collateral received on securities loaned is recorded as an asset as well as a corresponding liability in the statement of assets and liabilities. When the Portfolio lends securities, its investment performance will continue to reflect changes in the value of the securities loaned. At June 30, 2012, the Portfolio had securities on loan with a value of $14,966,267 and had received cash collateral which has been invested into AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves of $15,041,488. The cash collateral will be adjusted on the next business day after period end to maintain the required collateral amount. The Portfolio earned securities lending income of $37,800 and $15,736 from the borrowers and AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves, respectively, for the six months ended June 30, 2012; these amounts are reflected in the statement of operations. A principal risk of lending portfolio securities is that the borrower will fail to return the loaned securities upon termination of the loan and that the
12
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
collateral will not be sufficient to replace the loaned securities. A summary of the Portfolio’s transactions in shares of AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves for the six months ended June 30, 2012 is as follows:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Market Value December 31, 2011 (000) | | | Purchases at Cost (000) | | | Sales Proceeds (000) | | | Market Value June 30, 2012 (000) | | | Dividend Income (000) | |
$ | 6,296 | | | $ | 89,410 | | | $ | 80,665 | | | $ | 15,041 | | | $ | 16 | |
NOTE F: Capital Stock
Each class consists of 500,000,000 authorized shares. Transactions in capital shares for each class were as follows:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | SHARES | | | | | AMOUNT | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | | | | | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | |
Class A | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Shares sold | | | 705,321 | | | | 1,808,898 | | | | | $ | 11,840,291 | | | $ | 28,932,137 | |
Shares issued in reinvestment of dividends | | | –0 | – | | | 45,183 | | | | | | –0 | – | | | 823,225 | |
Shares redeemed | | | (1,244,431 | ) | | | (2,306,794 | ) | | | | | (20,742,492 | ) | | | (37,671,553 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (539,110 | ) | | | (452,713 | ) | | | | $ | (8,902,201 | ) | | $ | (7,916,191 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class B | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Shares sold | | | 1,171,631 | | | | 3,680,845 | | | | | $ | 19,617,129 | | | $ | 58,747,359 | |
Shares issued in reinvestment of dividends | | | –0 | – | | | 49,029 | | | | | | –0 | – | | | 889,880 | |
Shares redeemed | | | (2,333,869 | ) | | | (5,085,538 | ) | | | | | (38,574,339 | ) | | | (83,963,407 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (1,162,238 | ) | | | (1,355,664 | ) | | | | $ | (18,957,210 | ) | | $ | (24,326,168 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
NOTE G: Risks Involved in Investing in the Portfolio
Foreign Securities Risk—Investing in securities of foreign companies or foreign governments involves special risks which include changes in foreign currency exchange rates and the possibility of future political and economic developments which could adversely affect the value of such securities. Moreover, securities of many foreign companies or foreign governments and their markets may be less liquid and their prices more volatile than those of comparable U.S. companies or of the U.S. government.
Currency Risk—This is the risk that changes in foreign currency exchange rates may negatively affect the value of the Portfolio’s investments or reduce the returns of the Portfolio. For example, the value of the Portfolio’s investments in foreign currency-denominated securities or currencies may decrease if the U.S. Dollar is strong (i.e., gaining value relative to other currencies) and other currencies are weak (i.e., losing value relative to the U.S. Dollar). Currency markets are generally not as regulated as securities markets. Independent of the Portfolio’s investments denominated in foreign currencies, the Portfolio’s positions in various foreign currencies may cause the Portfolio to experience investment losses due to the changes in exchange rates and interest rates.
Derivatives Risk—The Portfolio may enter into derivative transactions such as forwards, options, futures and swaps. Derivatives may be illiquid, difficult to price, and leveraged so that small changes may produce disproportionate losses for the Portfolio, and subject to counterparty risk to a greater degree than more traditional investments. Derivatives may result in significant losses, including losses that are far greater than the value of the derivatives reflected in the statement of assets and liabilities.
Indemnification Risk—In the ordinary course of business, the Portfolio enters into contracts that contain a variety of indemnifications. The Portfolio’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown. However, the Portfolio has not had prior claims or losses pursuant to these indemnification provisions and expects the risk of loss thereunder to be remote. Therefore, the Portfolio has not accrued any liability in connection with these indemnification provisions.
NOTE H: Joint Credit Facility
A number of open-end mutual funds managed by the Adviser, including the Portfolio, participate in a $140 million revolving credit facility (the “Facility”) intended to provide short-term financing, if necessary, subject to certain restrictions in connection with abnormal redemption activity. Commitment fees related to the Facility are paid by the participating funds and
13
| | |
SMALL/MID CAP VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
NOTESTO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
are included in miscellaneous expenses in the statement of operations. The Portfolio did not utilize the Facility during the six months ended June 30, 2012.
NOTE I: Distributions to Shareholders
The tax character of distributions to be paid for the year ending December 31, 2012 will be determined at the end of the current fiscal year. The tax character of distributions paid during the fiscal years ended December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010 were as follows:
| | | | | | | | |
| | 2011 | | | 2010 | |
Distributions paid from: | | | | | | | | |
Ordinary income | | $ | 1,713,105 | | | $ | 1,579,109 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total taxable distributions | | | 1,713,105 | | | | 1,579,109 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total distributions paid | | $ | 1,713,105 | | | $ | 1,579,109 | |
| | | | | | | | |
As of December 31, 2011, the components of accumulated earnings/(deficit) on a tax basis were as follows:
| | | | |
Undistributed ordinary income | | $ | 2,119,796 | |
Undistributed capital gains | | | 15,686,666 | (a) |
Unrealized appreciation/(depreciation) | | | 3,783,943 | (b) |
| | | | |
Total accumulated earnings/(deficit) | | $ | 21,590,405 | |
| | | | |
(a) | | During the fiscal year, the Portfolio utilized $31,292,682 of capital loss carryforwards to offset current year net realized gains. |
(b) | | The difference between book-basis and tax-basis unrealized appreciation/(depreciation) is attributable primarily to the tax deferral of losses on wash sales. |
For tax purposes, net capital losses may be carried over to offset future capital gains, if any. Under the Regulated Investment Company Modernization Act of 2010, funds are permitted to carry forward capital losses incurred in taxable years beginning after December 22, 2010 for an indefinite period. These post-enactment capital losses must be utilized prior to the pre-enactment capital losses, which are subject to expiration. Post-enactment capital loss carryforwards will retain their character as either short-term or long-term capital losses rather than being considered short-term as under previous regulation. As of December 31, 2011, the Portfolio did not have any capital loss carryforwards.
NOTE J: Recent Accounting Pronouncement
In December 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued an Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) related to disclosures about offsetting assets and liabilities in financial statements. The amendments in this update require an entity to disclose both gross and net information for derivatives and other financial instruments that are either offset in the statement of assets and liabilities or subject to an enforceable master netting arrangement or similar agreement. The ASU is effective during interim or annual reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2013. At this time, management is evaluating the implication of this ASU and its impact on the financial statements has not been determined.
NOTE K: Subsequent Events
Management has evaluated subsequent events for possible recognition or disclosure in the financial statements through the date the financial statements are issued. Management has determined that there are no material events that would require disclosure in the Portfolio’s financial statements through this date.
14
| | |
| | |
SMALL/MID CAP VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Selected Data For A Share Of Capital Stock Outstanding Throughout Each Period
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Class A | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, | |
| | 2011 | | | 2010 | | | 2009 | | | 2008 | | | 2007 | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | | | $15.46 | | | | $16.95 | | | | $13.41 | | | | $9.92 | | | | $17.11 | | | | $18.08 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Income From Investment Operations | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income (a) | | | .07 | | | | .09 | | | | .08 | | | | .08 | | | | .13 | | | | .11 | |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investment transactions | | | 1.00 | | | | (1.50 | ) | | | 3.52 | | | | 4.01 | | | | (5.63 | ) | | | .36 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) in net asset value from operations | | | 1.07 | | | | (1.41 | ) | | | 3.60 | | | | 4.09 | | | | (5.50 | ) | | | .47 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Less: Dividends and Distributions | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Dividends from net investment income | | | –0 | – | | | (.08 | ) | | | (.06 | ) | | | (.12 | ) | | | (.11 | ) | | | (.17 | ) |
Distributions from net realized gain on investment transactions | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | (.48 | ) | | | (1.58 | ) | | | (1.27 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total dividends and distributions | | | –0 | – | | | (.08 | ) | | | (.06 | ) | | | (.60 | ) | | | (1.69 | ) | | | (1.44 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net asset value, end of period | | | $16.53 | | | | $15.46 | | | | $16.95 | | | | $13.41 | | | | $9.92 | | | | $17.11 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Return | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total investment return based on net asset value (b) | | | 6.92 | % | | | (8.39 | )% | | | 26.91 | % | | | 42.86 | % | | | (35.58 | )% | | | 1.71 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Ratios/Supplemental Data | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net assets, end of period (000’s omitted) | | | $153,363 | | | | $151,754 | | | | $174,068 | | | | $134,291 | | | | $99,957 | | | | $146,350 | |
Ratio to average net assets of: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Expenses | | | .83 | %(c) | | | .83 | % | | | .84 | %(d) | | | .87 | % | | | .86 | % | | | .83 | % |
Net investment income | | | .78 | %(c) | | | .56 | % | | | .56 | %(d) | | | .70 | % | | | .95 | % | | | .59 | % |
Portfolio turnover rate | | | 28 | % | | | 70 | % | | | 54 | % | | | 58 | % | | | 49 | % | | | 32 | % |
See footnote summary on page 16.
15
| | |
SMALL/MID CAP VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Selected Data For A Share Of Capital Stock Outstanding Throughout Each Period
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Class B | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, | |
| | | 2011 | | | 2010 | | | 2009 | | | 2008 | | | 2007 | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | | | $15.38 | | | | $16.87 | | | | $13.36 | | | | $9.87 | | | | $17.03 | | | | $18.00 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Income From Investment Operations | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income (a) | | | .04 | | | | .05 | | | | .05 | | | | .05 | | | | .10 | | | | .07 | |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investment transactions | | | 1.00 | | | | (1.50 | ) | | | 3.50 | | | | 4.01 | | | | (5.61 | ) | | | .37 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) in net asset value from operations | | | 1.04 | | | | (1.45 | ) | | | 3.55 | | | | 4.06 | | | | (5.51 | ) | | | .44 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Less: Dividends and Distributions | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Dividends from net investment income | | | –0 | – | | | (.04 | ) | | | (.04 | ) | | | (.09 | ) | | | (.07 | ) | | | (.14 | ) |
Distributions from net realized gain on investment transactions | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | (.48 | ) | | | (1.58 | ) | | | (1.27 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total dividends and distributions | | | –0 | – | | | (.04 | ) | | | (.04 | ) | | | (.57 | ) | | | (1.65 | ) | | | (1.41 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net asset value, end of period | | | $16.42 | | | | $15.38 | | | | $16.87 | | | | $13.36 | | | | $9.87 | | | | $17.03 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Return | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total investment return based on net asset value (b) | | | 6.76 | % | | | (8.62 | )% | | | 26.59 | % | | | 42.66 | % | | | (35.75 | )% | | | 1.53 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Ratios/Supplemental Data | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net assets, end of period (000’s omitted) | | | $327,103 | | | | $324,145 | | | | $378,436 | | | | $264,635 | | | | $202,997 | | | | $294,664 | |
Ratio to average net assets of: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Expenses | | | 1.08 | %(c) | | | 1.08 | % | | | 1.09 | %(d) | | | 1.12 | % | | | 1.11 | % | | | 1.08 | % |
Net investment income | | | .53 | %(c) | | | .31 | % | | | .31 | %(d) | | | .42 | % | | | .72 | % | | | .35 | % |
Portfolio turnover rate | | | 28 | % | | | 70 | % | | | 54 | % | | | 58 | % | | | 49 | % | | | 32 | % |
(a) | | Based on average shares outstanding. |
(b) | | Total investment return is calculated assuming an initial investment made at the net asset value at the beginning of the period, reinvestment of all dividends and distributions at net asset value during the period, and redemption on the last day of the period. Total return does not reflect (i) insurance company’s separate account related expense charges and (ii) the deductions of taxes that a shareholder would pay on Portfolio distributions or the redemption of Portfolio shares. Total investment return calculated for a period of less than one year is not annualized. |
(d) | | The ratio includes expenses attributable to costs of proxy solicitation. |
See notes to financial statements.
16
| | |
| | |
SMALL/MID CAP VALUE PORTFOLIO |
CONTINUANCE DISCLOSURE | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
INFORMATION REGARDING THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE PORTFOLIO’S ADVISORY AGREEMENT
The disinterested directors (the “directors”) of AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund, Inc. (the “Fund”) unanimously approved the continuance of the Fund’s Advisory Agreement with the Adviser in respect of AllianceBernstein Small/Mid Cap Value Portfolio (the “Portfolio”) at a meeting held on May 1-3, 2012.
Prior to approval of the continuance of the Advisory Agreement, the directors had requested from the Adviser, and received and evaluated, extensive materials. They reviewed the proposed continuance of the Advisory Agreement with the Adviser and with experienced counsel who are independent of the Adviser, who advised on the relevant legal standards. The directors also reviewed an independent evaluation prepared by the Fund’s Senior Officer (who is also the Fund’s Independent Compliance Officer) of the reasonableness of the advisory fee in the Advisory Agreement, in which the Senior Officer concluded that the contractual fee for the Portfolio was reasonable. The directors also discussed the proposed continuance in private sessions with counsel and the Fund’s Senior Officer.
The directors considered their knowledge of the nature and quality of the services provided by the Adviser to the Portfolio gained from their experience as directors or trustees of most of the registered investment companies advised by the Adviser, their overall confidence in the Adviser’s integrity and competence they have gained from that experience, the Adviser’s initiative in identifying and raising potential issues with the directors and its responsiveness, frankness and attention to concerns raised by the directors in the past, including the Adviser’s willingness to consider and implement organizational and operational changes designed to improve investment results and the services provided to the AllianceBernstein Funds. The directors noted that they have four regular meetings each year, at each of which they receive presentations from the Adviser on the investment results of the Portfolio and review extensive materials and information presented by the Adviser.
The directors also considered all other factors they believed relevant, including the specific matters discussed below. In their deliberations, the directors did not identify any particular information that was all-important or controlling, and different directors may have attributed different weights to the various factors. The directors determined that the selection of the Adviser to manage the Portfolio and the overall arrangements between the Portfolio and the Adviser, as provided in the Advisory Agreement, including the advisory fee, were fair and reasonable in light of the services performed, expenses incurred and such other matters as the directors considered relevant in the exercise of their business judgment. The material factors and conclusions that formed the basis for the directors’ determinations included the following:
Nature, Extent and Quality of Services Provided
The directors considered the scope and quality of services provided by the Adviser under the Advisory Agreement, including the quality of the investment research capabilities of the Adviser and the other resources it has dedicated to performing services for the Portfolio. They also noted the professional experience and qualifications of the Portfolio’s portfolio management team and other senior personnel of the Adviser. The directors also considered that the Advisory Agreement provides that the Portfolio will reimburse the Adviser for the cost to it of providing certain clerical, accounting, administrative and other services provided at the Portfolio’s request by employees of the Adviser or its affiliates. Requests for these reimbursements are approved by the directors on a quarterly basis and, to the extent requested and paid, result in a higher rate of total compensation from the Portfolio to the Adviser than the fee rate stated in the Portfolio’s Advisory Agreement. The directors noted that the methodology used to determine the reimbursement amounts had been reviewed by an independent consultant retained by the Fund’s Senior Officer. The quality of administrative and other services, including the Adviser’s role in coordinating the activities of the Portfolio’s other service providers, also were considered. The directors concluded that, overall, they were satisfied with the nature, extent and quality of services provided to the Portfolio under the Advisory Agreement.
Costs of Services Provided and Profitability
The directors reviewed a schedule of the revenues, expenses and related notes indicating the profitability of the Portfolio to the Adviser for calendar years 2010 and 2011 that had been prepared with an expense allocation methodology arrived at in consultation with an independent consultant retained by the Fund’s Senior Officer. The directors reviewed the assumptions and methods of allocation used by the Adviser in preparing fund-specific profitability data and noted that there are a number of potentially acceptable allocation methodologies for information of this type. The directors noted that the profitability information reflected all revenues and expenses of the Adviser’s relationship with the Portfolio, including those relating to its subsidiaries which provide transfer agency, distribution and brokerage services to the Portfolio. The directors recognized that it is difficult to make comparisons of profitability of the Advisory Agreement with fund advisory contracts for unaffiliated funds because comparative information is not generally publicly available and is affected by numerous factors. The directors
17
| | |
SMALL/MID CAP VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
CONTINUANCE DISCLOSURE | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
focused on the profitability of the Adviser’s relationship with the Portfolio before taxes and distribution expenses. The directors concluded that they were satisfied that the Adviser’s level of profitability from its relationship with the Portfolio was not unreasonable.
Fall-Out Benefits
The directors considered the other benefits to the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationships with the Portfolio, including but not limited to benefits relating to soft dollar arrangements (whereby the Adviser receives brokerage and research services from brokers that execute transactions for certain clients, including the Portfolio); 12b-1 fees and sales charges received by the Fund’s principal underwriter (which is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Adviser) in respect of the Portfolio’s Class B shares; transfer agency fees paid by the Portfolio to a wholly owned subsidiary of the Adviser; and brokerage commissions paid by the Portfolio to brokers affiliated with the Adviser. The directors recognized that the Adviser’s profitability would be somewhat lower without these benefits. The directors also understood that the Adviser also might derive reputational and other benefits from its association with the Portfolio.
Investment Results
In addition to the information reviewed by the directors in connection with the meeting, the directors receive detailed performance information for the Portfolio at each regular Board meeting during the year. The directors noted that the Portfolio is a clone of another fund managed by the Adviser (the “Corresponding Fund”) and is managed to track the investment performance of its Corresponding Fund, although investment results may differ between the Portfolio and its Corresponding Fund due to differences in their expense ratios and other factors. At the May 2012 meeting, the directors reviewed information prepared by Lipper showing the performance of the Class A Shares of the Portfolio as compared with that of a group of similar funds selected by Lipper (the “Performance Group”) and as compared with that of a broader array of funds selected by Lipper (the “Performance Universe”), and information prepared by the Adviser showing performance of the Class A Shares as compared with the Russell 2500 Value Index and the Russell 2500 Index, in each case for the 1-, 3- and 5-year periods ended February 29, 2012 and (in the case of comparisons with the indices) the since inception period (May 2001 inception). The directors noted that the Portfolio was in the 5th quintile of the Performance Group and the Performance Universe for the 1-year period, in the 1st quintile of the Performance Group and 2nd quintile of the Performance Universe for the 3-year period, in the 2nd quintile of the Performance Group and 1st quintile of the Performance Universe for the 5-year period, and 2nd out of 3 of the Performance Group and in the 2nd quintile of the Performance Universe for the 10-year period. The Portfolio lagged the indices in the 1-year period and outperformed them in all other periods. The directors also reviewed performance information for periods ended March 31, 2012, and noted that in the 3-month period the Portfolio had outperformed the Lipper VA Mid-Cap Value Funds Average and both indices. Based on their review and their discussion with the Adviser of the reasons for the Portfolio’s recent performance, the directors concluded that the Portfolio’s performance was satisfactory.
Advisory Fees and Other Expenses
The directors considered the advisory fee rate paid by the Portfolio to the Adviser and information prepared by Lipper concerning advisory fee rates paid by other funds in the same Lipper category as the Portfolio at a common asset level. The directors recognized that it is difficult to make comparisons of advisory fees because there are variations in the services that are included in the fees paid by other funds.
The directors also considered the fees the Adviser charges non-fund clients pursuing a substantially similar investment style. For this purpose, they reviewed the relevant fee information from the Adviser’s Form ADV and the evaluation from the Fund’s Senior Officer. The directors noted that the institutional fee schedule started at a higher fee rate than the Portfolio’s starting fee rate, but had more breakpoints starting at lower asset levels. As a result, the application of the institutional fee schedule to the level of assets of the Portfolio would result in a lower fee rate lower than that being paid by the Portfolio. The directors noted that the Adviser may, in some cases, agree to fee rates with large institutional clients that are lower than those reviewed by the directors and that they had previously discussed with the Adviser its policies in respect of such arrangements. The directors also reviewed information that indicated that the Portfolio’s fee rate is higher than the sub-advisory fee rate earned by the Adviser for sub-advising certain registered investment companies with a similar investment style. The directors noted that the advisory fee schedule for the Portfolio is the same as that for its Corresponding Fund.
The Adviser reviewed with the directors the significantly greater scope of the services it provides to the Portfolio relative to institutional clients and sub-advised funds. The Adviser also noted that because mutual funds are constantly issuing and redeeming shares, they are more difficult to manage than an institutional account, where the assets tend to be relatively
18
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
stable. In light of the substantial differences in services rendered by the Adviser to institutional clients as compared to funds such as the Portfolio, the directors considered these fee comparisons inapt and did not place significant weight on them in their deliberations.
The directors also considered the total expense ratio of the Class A shares of the Portfolio in comparison to the fees and expenses of funds within two comparison groups created by Lipper: an Expense Group and an Expense Universe. Lipper described an Expense Group as a representative sample of funds similar to the Portfolio and an Expense Universe as a broader group, consisting of all funds in the investment classification/objective with a similar load type as the Portfolio. The directors noted that because of the small number of funds in the Portfolio’s Lipper category, Lipper had expanded the Expense Group of the Fund to include peers that had a similar (but not the same) Lipper investment objective/classification. The Expense Universe for the Portfolio had also been expanded by Lipper pursuant to Lipper’s standard guidelines. The Class A expense ratio of the Portfolio was based on the Portfolio’s latest fiscal year expense ratio. The directors noted that it was likely that the expense ratios of some of the other funds in the Portfolio’s Lipper category were lowered by waivers or reimbursements by those funds’ investment advisers, which in some cases might be voluntary or temporary. The directors view the expense ratio information as relevant to their evaluation of the Adviser’s services because the Adviser is responsible for coordinating services provided to the Portfolio by others.
The directors noted that, at the Portfolio’s current size, its contractual effective advisory fee rate of 75 basis points, plus the 1 basis point impact of the administrative expense reimbursement in the latest fiscal year, was lower than the Expense Group median. The directors also noted that the Portfolio’s total expense ratio, which had been capped by the Adviser (although the expense ratio was currently lower than the cap), was lower than the Expense Group and the Expense Universe medians. The directors concluded that the Portfolio’s expense ratio was satisfactory.
Economies of Scale
The directors noted that the advisory fee schedule for the Portfolio contains breakpoints that reduce the fee rates on assets above specified levels. The directors took into consideration prior presentations by an independent consultant on economies of scale in the mutual fund industry and for the AllianceBernstein Funds, and by the Adviser concerning certain of its views on economies of scale. The directors also had requested and received from the Adviser certain updates on economies of scale at the May 2012 meetings. The directors believe that economies of scale may be realized (if at all) by the Adviser across a variety of products and services, and not only in respect of a single fund. The directors noted that there is no established methodology for establishing breakpoints that give effect to the fund-specific services provided by a fund’s adviser and to the economies of scale that an adviser may realize in its overall mutual fund business or those components of it which directly or indirectly affect a fund’s operations. The directors observed that in the mutual fund industry as a whole, as well as among funds similar to the Portfolio, there is no uniformity or pattern in the fees and asset levels at which breakpoints (if any) apply. The directors also noted that the advisory agreements for many funds do not have breakpoints at all. Having taken these factors into account, the directors concluded that the Portfolio’s shareholders would benefit from a sharing of economies of scale in the event the Portfolio’s net assets exceed a breakpoint in the future.
19
| | |
| | |
SMALL/MID CAP VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
SENIOR OFFICER’S EVALUATION | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
THE FOLLOWING IS NOT PART OF THE SHAREHOLDER REPORT OR THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
SUMMARY OF SENIOR OFFICER’S EVALUATION OF INVESTMENT ADVISORY AGREEMENT1
The following is a summary of the evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement between AllianceBernstein L.P. (the “Adviser”) and the AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund (the “Fund”), in respect of AllianceBernstein Small/Mid Cap Value Portfolio (the “Portfolio”).2 The evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement was prepared by Philip L. Kirstein, the Senior Officer of the Fund, for the Directors of the Fund, as required by a September 2004 agreement between the Adviser and the New York State Attorney General (the “NYAG”). The Senior Officer’s evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement is not meant to diminish the responsibility or authority of the Board of Directors of the Fund to perform its duties pursuant to Section 15 of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “40 Act”) and applicable state law. The purpose of the summary is to provide shareholders with a synopsis of the independent evaluation of the reasonableness of the advisory fees proposed to be paid by the Portfolio which was provided to the Directors in connection with their review of the proposed approval of the continuance of the Investment Advisory Agreement. The Senior Officer’s evaluation considered the following factors:
| 1. | Advisory fees charged to institutional and other clients of the Adviser for like services; |
| 2. | Advisory fees charged by other mutual fund companies for like services; |
| 3. | Costs to the Adviser and its affiliates of supplying services pursuant to the advisory agreement, excluding any intra-corporate profit; |
| 4. | Profit margins of the Adviser and its affiliates from supplying such services; |
| 5. | Possible economies of scale as the Portfolio grows larger; and |
| 6. | Nature and quality of the Adviser’s services including the performance of the Portfolio. |
These factors, with the exception of the first factor, are generally referred to as the “Gartenberg factors,” which were articulated by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in 1982. Gartenberg v. Merrill Lynch Asset Management, Inc., 694 F. 2d 923 (2d Cir. 1982). The first factor is an additional factor required to be considered by the AoD. On March 30, 2010, the Supreme Court held the Gartenberg decision was correct in its basic formulation of what §36(b) requires: to face liability under §36(b), “an investment adviser must charge a fee that is so disproportionately large that it bears no reasonable relationship to the services rendered and could not have been the product of arm’s length bargaining.” Jones v. Harris Associates L.P., 130 S. Ct. 1418 (2010). In the Jones decision, the Court stated the Gartenberg approach fully incorporates the correct understanding of fiduciary duty within the context of section 36(b) and noted with approval that “Gartenberg insists that all relevant circumstances be taken into account” and “uses the range of fees that might result from arm’s-length bargaining as the benchmark for reviewing challenged fees.”3
PORTFOLIO ADVISORY FEES, NET ASSETS & EXPENSE RATIOS
The Adviser proposed that the Portfolio pay the advisory fee set forth in the table below for receiving the services to be provided pursuant to the Investment Advisory Agreement. The fee schedule below, implemented in January 2004 in consideration of the Adviser’s settlement with the NYAG in December 2003, is based on a master schedule that contemplates eight categories of funds with almost all funds in each category having the same advisory fee schedule.
| | | | | | | | |
Category | | Advisory Fee Based on % of Average Daily Net Assets | | Net Assets 3/31/12 ($MIL) | | | Portfolio |
Specialty | | 75 bp on first $2.5 billion 65 bp on next $2.5 billion 60 bp on the balance | | $ | 530.9 | | | Small/Mid Cap Value Portfolio |
The Adviser is reimbursed as specified in the Investment Advisory Agreement for certain clerical, legal, accounting, administrative and other services provided to the Portfolio. During the Portfolio’s most recently completed fiscal year, the Adviser received $60,494 (0.01% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets) for such services.
1 | | The information in the fee summary was completed on April 19, 2012 and discussed with the Board of Directors on May 1-3, 2012. |
2 | | Future references to the Fund and the Portfolio do not include “AllianceBernstein.” References in the fee summary pertaining to performance and expense ratio rankings refer to the Class A shares of the Portfolio. |
3 | | Jones v. Harris at 1427. |
20
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
The Adviser has agreed to waive that portion of its management fees and/or reimburse the Portfolio for that portion of its total operating expenses to the degree necessary to limit the Portfolio’s expense ratios to the amounts set forth below for the Portfolio’s fiscal year. The waiver is terminable by the Adviser on May 1st of each year upon at least 60 days written notice. It should be noted that the Portfolio was operating below its expense caps for the most recent fiscal year; accordingly the expense limitation undertaking of the Portfolio was of no effect. In addition, set forth below are the gross expense ratios of the Portfolio for the most recently completed fiscal year:
| | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Expense Cap Pursuant to Expense Limitation Undertaking | | Gross Expense Ratio | | | Fiscal Year End |
Small/Mid Cap Value Portfolio | | Class A 1.20% Class B 1.45% | |
| 0.83%
1.08% |
| | December 31 |
I. ADVISORY FEES CHARGED TO INSTITUTIONAL AND OTHER CLIENTS
The advisory fees charged to investment companies which the Adviser manages and sponsors are normally higher than those charged to similar sized institutional accounts, including pension plans and sub-advised investment companies. The fee differential reflects, among other things, different services provided to such clients, and different liabilities assumed. Services provided by the Adviser to the Portfolio that are not provided to non-investment company clients and sub-advised investment companies include providing office space and personnel to serve as Fund Officers, who among other responsibilities make the certifications required under the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002, and coordinating with and monitoring the Portfolio’s third party service providers such as Fund counsel, auditors, custodians, transfer agents and pricing services. The accounting, administrative, legal and compliance requirements for the Portfolio are more costly than those for institutional assets due to the greater complexities and time required for investment companies, although as previously noted, the Adviser is reimbursed for providing such services. Also, retail mutual funds managed by the Adviser are widely held. Servicing the Portfolio’s investors is more time consuming and labor intensive compared to institutional clients since the Adviser needs to communicate with a more extensive network of financial intermediaries and shareholders. The Adviser also believes that it incurs substantial entrepreneurial risk when offering a new mutual fund, since establishing a new mutual fund requires a large upfront investment, and it may take a long time for the fund to achieve profitability since the fund must be priced to scale from inception in order to be competitive and assets are acquired one account at a time. In addition, managing the cash flow of an investment company may be more difficult than managing that of a stable pool of assets, such as an institutional account with little cash movement in either direction, particularly, if a fund is in net redemption and the Adviser is frequently forced to sell securities to raise cash for redemptions. However, managing a fund with positive cash flow may be easier at times than managing a stable pool of assets. In recent years, investment advisers have been sued by institutional clients and have suffered reputational damage both by the attendant publicity and outcomes other than complete victories. Accordingly, the legal and reputational risks associated with institutional accounts are greater than previously thought, although still not equal to those related to the mutual fund industry.
Notwithstanding the Adviser’s view that managing an investment company is not comparable to managing other institutional accounts because the services provided are different, the Supreme Court has indicated consideration should be given to the advisory fees charged to institutional accounts that have a substantially similar investment style as the Portfolio.4 In addition to the AllianceBernstein institutional fee schedule, set forth below is what would have been the effective advisory fee of the Portfolio had the AllianceBernstein institutional fee schedule been applicable to the Portfolio versus the Portfolio’s advisory fee based on March 31, 2012 net assets:5
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Net Assets 3/31/12 ($MIL) | | AllianceBernstein Institutional Fee Schedule | | Effective AB Inst. Adv. Fee | | | Portfolio Advisory Fee | |
Small/Mid Cap Value Portfolio | | $530.9 | | Small & Mid Cap Value Schedule 95 bp on first $25m 75 bp on the next $25m 65 bp on the next $50m 55 bp on the balance Minimum account size $25m | | | 0.588 | % | | | 0.750 | % |
4 | | The Supreme Court stated that “courts may give such comparisons the weight that they merit in light of the similarities and differences between the services that the clients in question require, but the courts must be wary of inapt comparisons.” Among the significant differences the Supreme Court noted that may exist between services provided to mutual funds and institutional accounts are “higher marketing costs.” Jones v. Harris at 1428. |
5 | | The Adviser has indicated that with respect to institutional accounts with assets greater than $300 million, it will negotiate a fee schedule. Discounts that are negotiated vary based upon each client relationship. |
21
| | |
SMALL/MID CAP VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
SENIOR OFFICER’S EVALUATION | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
The Adviser also manages AllianceBernstein Small/Mid Cap Value Fund, Inc. (“Small/Mid Cap Value Fund, Inc.”), a retail mutual fund, which has a substantially similar investment style as the Portfolio. Set forth below is the fee schedule of Small/Mid Cap Value Fund, Inc., and what would have been the effective advisory fee of the Portfolio had the fee schedule of the retail mutual fund been applicable to the Portfolio:6
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | AllianceBernstein Mutual Fund | | Fee Schedule | | ABMF Effective Fee | | | Portfolio Advisory Fee | |
Small/Mid Cap Value Portfolio | | Small/Mid Cap Value Fund, Inc. | | 0.75% on first $2.5 billion 0.65% on next $2.5 billion 0.60% on the balance | | | 0.750% | | | | 0.750% | |
The Adviser provides sub-advisory services to certain other investment companies managed by other fund families that have an investment style similar to that of the Portfolio. The Adviser charges the fees set forth below for the sub-advisory relationships that have a somewhat similar investment style as the Portfolio. Also shown are the Portfolio’s advisory fee and what would have been the effective advisory fees of the Portfolio had the fee schedules of the sub-advisory relationships been applicable to the Portfolio based on March 31, 2012 net assets.
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | | | Fee Schedule | | Effective Sub-Adv. Fee(%) | | | Portfolio Advisory Fee(%) | |
Small/Mid Cap Value Portfolio | | Client #1 | | 0.50% on the first $250 million 0.40% on the balance | | | 0.474% | | | | 0.750% | |
| | Client #2 | | 0.95% on the first $10 million 0.75% on the next $40 million 0.65% on the next $50 million 0.55% on the balance | | | 0.588% | | | | 0.750% | |
| | Client #3 | | 0.61% on the first $150 million 0.50% on the balance | | | 0.531% | | | | 0.750% | |
It is fair to note that the services the Adviser provides pursuant to sub-advisory agreements are generally confined to the services related to the investment process; in other words, they are not as comprehensive as the services provided to the Portfolio by the Adviser.
While it appears that the sub-advisory relationships are paying a lower fee than the Portfolio, it is difficult to evaluate the relevance of such lower fees due to differences in terms of the services provided, risks involved and other competitive factors between the Portfolio and the sub-advisory relationships. There could be various business reasons why an investment adviser would be willing to provide a sub-advisory relationship investment related services at a different feel level than an investment company it is sponsoring where the investment adviser is providing all the services, not just investment management generally required by a registered investment company.
II. MANAGEMENT FEES CHARGED BY OTHER MUTUAL FUND COMPANIES FOR LIKE SERVICES.
Lipper, Inc. (“Lipper”), an analytical service that is not affiliated with the Adviser, compared the fees charged to the Portfolio with fees charged to other investment companies for similar services offered by other investment advisers.7 Lipper’s analysis included the comparison of the Portfolio’s contractual management fee, estimated at the approximate current asset level of the Portfolio, to the median of the Portfolio’s Lipper Expense Group (“EG”) and the Portfolio’s contractual management fee ranking.8
6 | | The retail mutual fund was also affected by the settlement between the Adviser and the NYAG. As a result, the Portfolio has the same breakpoints in its advisory fee schedule as the retail mutual fund. |
7 | | The Supreme Court cautioned against accepting mutual fund fee comparisons without careful scrutiny since “these comparisons are problematic because these fees, like those challenged, may not be the product of the negotiations conducted at arm’s-length.” Jones v. Harris at 1429. |
8 | | The contractual management fee is calculated by Lipper using the Portfolio’s contractual management fee rate at a hypothetical asset level. The hypothetical asset level is based on the combined net assets of all classes of the Portfolio, rounded up to the next $25 million. Lipper’s total expense ratio information is based on the most recent annual report except as otherwise noted. A ranking of “1” would mean that the Portfolio had the lowest effective fee rate in the Lipper peer group. |
22
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Lipper describes an EG as a representative sample of comparable funds. Lipper’s standard methodology for screening funds to be included in an EG entails the consideration of several fund criteria, including fund type, investment classification/objective, load type and similar 12b-1/non-12b-1 service fees, asset (size) comparability, expense components and attributes. An EG will typically consist of seven to twenty funds. The Portfolio’s original EG had an insufficient number of peers. Consequently, Lipper expanded the Portfolio’s EG to include peers that have similar but not the same Lipper investment classification/objective.9
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Contractual Management Fee10 | | | Lipper Exp. Group Median (%) | | | Rank | |
Small/Mid Cap Value Portfolio | | | 0.750 | | | | 0.795 | | | | 5/15 | |
Because Lipper had expanded the EG of the Portfolio, under Lipper’s standard guidelines, the Lipper Expense Universe (“EU”) was also expanded to include the universes of those peers that had a similar but not the same Lipper investment classification/objective.11 A “normal” EU will include funds that have the same investment classification/objective as the subject Portfolio.12
Set forth below is a comparison of the Portfolio’s total expense ratio and the medians of the Portfolio’s EG and EU. The Portfolio’s total expense ratio ranking is also shown in the table below.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Expense Ratio (%)13 | | | Lipper Exp. Group Median (%) | | | Lipper Group Rank | | | Lipper Exp. Universe Median (%) | | | Lipper Universe Rank | |
Small/Mid Cap Value Portfolio | | | 0.830 | | | | 0.868 | | | | 6/15 | | | | 0.872 | | | | 24/62 | |
Based on this analysis, the Portfolio has a more favorable ranking on a management fee basis than on a total expense ratio basis.
III. COSTS TO THE ADVISER AND ITS AFFILIATES OF SUPPLYING SERVICES PURSUANT TO THE ADVISORY FEE ARRANGEMENT, EXCLUDING ANY INTRA-CORPORATE PROFIT.
The Adviser utilizes two profitability reporting systems, which operate independently but are aligned with each other, to estimate the Adviser’s profitability in connection with investment advisory services provided to the Portfolio. The Senior Officer has retained a consultant to provide independent advice regarding the alignment of the two profitability systems as well as the methodologies and allocations utilized by both profitability systems.
IV. PROFIT MARGINS OF THE ADVISER AND ITS AFFILIATES FOR SUPPLYING SUCH SERVICES.
The Portfolio’s profitability information, prepared by the Adviser for the Board of Directors, was reviewed by the Senior Officer and the consultant. The Adviser’s profitability from providing investment advisory services to the Portfolio decreased slightly during calendar year 2011, relative to 2010.
In addition to the Adviser’s direct profits from managing the Portfolio, certain of the Adviser’s affiliates have business relationships with the Portfolio and may earn a profit from providing other services to the Portfolio. The courts have referred to this type of business opportunity as “fall-out benefits” to the Adviser and indicated that such benefits should be factored into the evaluation of the total relationship between the Portfolio and the Adviser. Neither case law nor common business practice precludes the Adviser’s affiliates from earning a reasonable profit on this type of relationship provided the affiliates’ charges and services are competitive. These affiliates provide transfer agent, distribution and brokerage related services to the Portfolio and receive transfer agent fees, Rule 12b-1 payments, and brokerage commissions. In addition, the Adviser benefits from soft dollar arrangements which offset expenses the Adviser would otherwise incur.
9 | | The Portfolio’s EG includes the Portfolio, five other VIP Mid-Cap Value funds (“MCVE”) and nine VIP Mid-Cap Growth funds (“MCGE”). |
10 | | The contractual management fee does not reflect any expense reimbursements made by the Portfolio to the Adviser for certain clerical, legal, accounting, administrative and other services. In addition, the contractual management fee does not reflect any advisory fee waiver or expense cap that would effectively reduce the actual management fee. |
11 | | Except for asset (size) comparability, Lipper uses the same criteria for selecting an EG peer when selecting an EU peer. Unlike the EG, the EU allows for the same adviser to be represented by more than just one fund. |
12 | | The Portfolio’s EU includes the Portfolio, EG and all other VIP MCVE and VIP MCGE funds, excluding outliers. |
13 | | Most recently completed fiscal year end Class A total expense ratio. |
23
| | |
SMALL/MID CAP VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
SENIOR OFFICER’S EVALUATION | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
The Portfolio has adopted a distribution plan for Class B shares pursuant to Rule 12b-1 under the 40 Act. Under the distribution plan, the Portfolio pays distribution and servicing fees to its principal underwriter, AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (“ABI”), at an annual rate of up to 0.50% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The current annual rate that the Portfolio pays to ABI for 12b-1 fees is 0.25%. During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011, AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (“ABI”), the Portfolio’s distributor and an affiliate of the Adviser, received $866,747 in Rule 12b-1 fees.
During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011, the Adviser incurred distribution expenses in the amount of $2,187,077 in connection with activities primarily intended to result in the sale of the Portfolio’s Class B shares. This amount includes the 12b-1 fees paid by the Portfolio to the Adviser.
Financial intermediaries, such as insurers, market and sell shares of the Portfolio and typically receive compensation from ABI, the Advisers and/or the Portfolio for selling shares of the Portfolio. These financial intermediaries receive compensation in any or all of the following forms: 12b-1 fees, defrayal of costs for educational seminars and training, additional distribution support, recordkeeping and/or administrative services. Payments related to providing contract-holder recordkeeping and/or administrative services will generally not exceed 0.35% of the average daily net assets of the Portfolio attributable to the relevant intermediary over the year. With respect to the Fund, which includes the Portfolio and other Portfolios of the Fund not discussed in this summary, ABI paid approximately $500,000 in 2011.
The transfer agent of the Portfolio is AllianceBernstein Investor Services, Inc. (“ABIS”). During the most recently completed fiscal year, ABIS received a fee of $1,310 from the Portfolio.14
The Portfolio did not effect brokerage transactions and pay commissions through the Adviser’s affiliate, Sanford C. Bernstein & Co., LLC (“SCB & Co.”) nor its U.K. affiliate, Sanford C. Bernstein Limited (“SCB Ltd.”), collectively “SCB,” during the Portfolio’s most recently completed fiscal year. The Adviser represented that SCB’s profitability from business conducted in the future with the Portfolio would be comparable to the profitability of SCB’s dealings with other similar third party clients. In the ordinary course of business, SCB receives and pays liquidity rebates from electronic communications networks (“ECNs”) derived from trading for its clients, including the Portfolio. These credits and charges are not being passed onto any SCB client. The Adviser also receives certain soft dollar benefits from brokers that execute agency trades for the Portfolio and other clients. These soft dollar benefits reduce the Adviser’s cost of doing business and increase its profitability.
V. POSSIBLE ECONOMIES OF SCALE
The Adviser has indicated that economies of scale are being shared with shareholders through fee structures,15 subsidies and enhancement to services. Based on some of the professional literature that has considered economies of scale in the mutual fund industry, it is thought that to the extent economies of scale exist, they may more often exist across a fund family as opposed to a specific fund. This is because the costs incurred by the Adviser, such as investment research or technology for trading or compliance systems can be spread across a greater asset base as the fund family increases in size. It is also possible that as the level of services required to operate a successful investment company has increased over time, and advisory firms make such investments in their business to provide services, there may be a sharing of economies of scale without a reduction in advisory fees.
An independent consultant, retained by the Senior Officer, provided the Board of Directors information on the Adviser’s firm-wide average costs from 2005 through 2011 and potential economies of scale. The independent consultant noted that from 2005 through 2007 the Adviser experienced significant growth in assets under management (“AUM”). During this period, operating expenses increased, in part to keep up with growth, and in part reflecting market returns. However, from 2008 through the first quarter of 2009, AUM rapidly and significantly decreased. Some operating expenses, including base compensation and office space, adjusted more slowly during this period, resulting in an increase in average costs. Since 2009, AUM has moved within a range of $400 to $500 million ending 2011 with an average of $411 million in the fourth quarter. The independent consultant noted that changes in operating expenses reflect changes in business composition and business practices in response to changes in financial markets. Finally, the independent consultant concluded that the increase in average cost and the decline in net operating margin across the company since 2008 are inconsistent with the view that there are currently “economies of scale” to be shared with clients through lower fees.
14 | | The Fund, which includes the Portfolio and other Portfolios of the Fund paid ABIS a flat fee of $18,000 in 2010. |
15 | | Fee structures include fee reductions, pricing at scale and breakpoints in advisory fee schedules. |
24
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
In February 2008, the independent consultant provided the Board of Directors an update of the Deli16 study on advisory fees and various fund characteristics.17 The independent consultant first reiterated the results of his previous two dimensional comparison analysis (fund size and family size) with the Board of Directors.18 The independent consultant then discussed the results of the regression model that was utilized to study the effects of various factors on advisory fees. The regression model output indicated that the bulk of the variation in fees predicted were explained by various factors, but substantially by fund AUM, family AUM, index fund indicator and investment style. The independent consultant also compared the advisory fees of the AllianceBernstein Mutual Funds to similar funds managed by 19 other large asset managers, regardless of the fund size and each Adviser’s proportion of mutual fund assets to non-mutual fund assets.
VI. NATURE AND QUALITY OF THE ADVISER’S SERVICES, INCLUDING THE PERFORMANCE OF THE PORTFOLIO
With assets under management of approximately $419 billion as of March 31, 2012, the Adviser has the investment experience to manage and provide non-investment services (described in Section I) to the Portfolio.
The information prepared by Lipper shows the 1, 3, 5 and 10 year performance returns and rankings of the Portfolio19 relative to its Lipper Performance Group (“PG”) and Lipper Performance Universe (“PU”)20 for the periods ended February 29, 2012.21
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Fund | | | PG Median | | | PU Median | | | PG Rank | | | PU Rank | |
Small/Mid Cap Value Portfolio | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
1 year | | | –3.99 | | | | –1.52 | | | | –1.32 | | | | 6/6 | | | | 21/21 | |
3 year | | | 32.69 | | | | 27.34 | | | | 30.15 | | | | 1/5 | | | | 4/19 | |
5 year | | | 2.98 | | | | 2.80 | | | | 0.80 | | | | 2/5 | | | | 2/15 | |
10 year | | | 8.36 | | | | 8.36 | | | | 7.04 | | | | 2/3 | | | | 3/11 | |
Set forth below are the 1, 3, 5, 10 year and since inception performance returns of the Portfolio (in bold)22 versus its benchmarks.23 Portfolio and benchmark volatility and reward-to-variability ratio (“Sharpe Ratio”) information is also shown.24
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | 1 Year (%) | | | 3 Year (%) | | | 5 Year (%) | | | 10 Year (%) | | | Since Inception (%) | | | Annualized | | | Risk Period (Year) | |
| | | | | | Volatility (%) | | | Sharpe (%) | | |
Small/Mid Cap Value Portfolio | | – | 3.99 | | | | 32.69 | | | | 2.98 | | | | 8.36 | | | | 9.25 | | | | 21.13 | | | | 0.40 | | | | 0.40 | |
Russell 2500 Value Index | | – | 0.80 | | | | 29.59 | | | | 0.70 | | | | 7.83 | | | | 7.92 | | | | 19.41 | | | | 0.39 | | | | 0.39 | |
Russell 2500 Index | | | 1.45 | | | | 31.28 | | | | 2.79 | | | | 7.98 | | | | 7.10 | | | | N/A | | | | N/A | | | | N/A | |
Inception Date: May 2, 2001 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
16 | | The Deli study, originally published in 2002 based on 1997 data and updated for the February 2008 Presentation, may be of diminished value due to the age of the data used in the presentation and the changes experienced in the industry over the last four years. |
17 | | As mentioned previously, the Supreme Court cautioned against accepting mutual fund fee comparisons without careful scrutiny since the fees may not be the product of negotiations conducted at arm’s length. See Jones V. Harris at 1429. |
18 | | The two dimensional analysis showed patterns of lower advisory fees for funds with larger asset sizes and funds from larger family sizes compared to funds with smaller asset sizes and funds from smaller family sizes, which according to the independent consultant is indicative of a sharing of economies of scale and scope. However, in less liquid and active markets, such is not the case, as the empirical analysis showed potential for diseconomies of scale in those markets. The empirical analysis also showed diminishing economies of scale and scope as funds surpassed a certain high level of assets. |
19 | | The performance rankings are for the Class A shares of the Portfolio. The Portfolio’s performance returns shown were provided by Lipper. |
20 | | The Portfolio’s PG/PU are not identical to the Portfolio’s respective EG/EU as the criteria for including/excluding a fund in/from a PG/PU is somewhat different from that of an EG/EU. |
21 | | Lipper investment classification/objective dictates the PG and PU throughout the life of the fund even if a fund had a different investment classification/objective at a different point in time. |
22 | | The performance returns and risk measures shown in the table are for the Class A shares of the Portfolio. |
23 | | The Adviser provided Portfolio and benchmark performance return information for periods through February 29, 2012. |
24 | | Portfolio and benchmark volatility and Sharpe Ratio information was obtained through Lipper LANA, a database maintained by Lipper. Volatility is a statistical measure of the tendency of a market price or yield to vary over time. A Sharpe Ratio is a risk adjusted measure of return that divides a portfolio’s return in excess of the riskless return by the portfolio’s standard deviation. A portfolio with a greater volatility would be viewed as more risky than a portfolio with equivalent performance but lower volatility; for that reason, a greater return would be demanded for the more risky portfolio. A portfolio with a higher Sharpe Ratio would be viewed as better performing than a portfolio with a lower Sharpe Ratio. |
25
| | |
SMALL/MID CAP VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
SENIOR OFFICER’S EVALUATION | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
CONCLUSION:
Based on the factors discussed above the Senior Officer’s conclusion is that the proposed advisory fee for the Portfolio is reasonable and within the range of what would have been negotiated at arm’s-length in light of all the surrounding circumstances. This conclusion in respect of the Portfolio is based on an evaluation of all of these factors and no single factor was dispositive.
Dated: May 25, 2012
26
AllianceBernstein
Variable Products Series Fund, Inc.
| | |
![LOGO](https://capedge.com/proxy/N-CSRS/0001193125-12-366259/g374702g16n16.jpg) | | AllianceBernstein Value Portfolio |
Semi-Annual Report
![LOGO](https://capedge.com/proxy/N-CSRS/0001193125-12-366259/g374702g81g54.jpg)
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT
Investment Products Offered
| Ø | | Are Not Bank Guaranteed |
AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (ABI) is the distributor of the AllianceBernstein family of mutual funds. ABI is a member of FINRA and is an affiliate of AllianceBernstein L.P., the manager of the funds.
You may obtain a description of the Fund’s proxy voting policies and procedures, and information regarding how the Fund voted proxies relating to portfolio securities during the most recent 12-month period ended June 30, without charge. Simply visit AllianceBernstein’s website at www.alliancebernstein.com or go to the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (the “Commission”) website at www.sec.gov, or call AllianceBernstein at (800) 227-4618.
The Fund files its complete schedule of portfolio holdings with the Commission for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year on Form N-Q. The Fund’s Forms N-Q are available on the Commission’s website at www.sec.gov. The Fund’s Forms N-Q may also be reviewed and copied at the Commission’s Public Reference Room in Washington, DC; information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling (800) SEC-0330.
AllianceBernstein® and the AB Logo are registered trademarks and service marks used by permission of the owner, AllianceBernstein L.P.
| | |
| | |
VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
FUND EXPENSES (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
As a shareholder of the Fund, you incur two types of costs: (1) transaction costs, including sales charges (loads) on purchase payments, contingent deferred sales charges on redemptions and (2) ongoing costs, including management fees; distribution (12b-1) fees; and other Fund expenses. This example is intended to help you understand your ongoing costs (in dollars) of investing in the Fund and to compare these costs with the ongoing costs of investing in other mutual funds.
The Example is based on an investment of $1,000 invested at the beginning of the period and held for the entire period as indicated below.
Actual Expenses
The table below provides information about actual account values and actual expenses. You may use the information in this line, together with the amount you invested, to estimate the expenses that you paid over the period. Simply divide your account value by $1,000 (for example, an $8,600 account value divided by $1,000 = 8.6), then multiply the result by the number in the first line under the heading entitled “Expenses Paid During Period” to estimate the expenses you paid on your account during this period. The estimate of expenses does not include fees or other expenses of any variable insurance product. If such expenses were included, the estimate of expenses you paid during the period would be higher and your ending account value would be lower.
Hypothetical Example for Comparison Purposes
The table below provides information about hypothetical account values and hypothetical expenses based on the Fund’s actual expense ratio and an assumed annual rate of return of 5% before expenses, which is not the Fund’s actual return. The hypothetical account values and expenses may not be used to estimate the actual ending account balance or expenses you paid for the period. You may use this information to compare the ongoing costs of investing in the Fund and other funds by comparing this 5% hypothetical example with the 5% hypothetical examples that appear in the shareholder reports of other funds. The estimate of expenses does not include fees or other expenses of any variable insurance product. If such expenses were included, the estimate of expenses you paid during the period would be higher and your ending account value would be lower.
Please note that the expenses shown in the table are meant to highlight your ongoing costs only and do not reflect any transactional costs, such as sales charges (loads), or contingent deferred sales charges on redemptions. Therefore, the second line of each classes’ table is useful in comparing ongoing costs only, and will not help you determine the relative total costs of owning different funds. In addition, if these transactional costs were included, your costs would have been higher.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Beginning Account Value January 1, 2012 | | | Ending Account Value June 30, 2012 | | | Expenses Paid During Period* | | | Annualized Expense Ratio* | |
Class A | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Actual | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,068.30 | | | $ | 3.75 | | | | 0.73 | % |
Hypothetical (5% return before expenses) | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,021.23 | | | $ | 3.67 | | | | 0.73 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class B | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Actual | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,067.90 | | | $ | 5.04 | | | | 0.98 | % |
Hypothetical (5% return before expenses) | | $ | 1,000 | | | $ | 1,019.99 | | | $ | 4.92 | | | | 0.98 | % |
* | | Expenses are equal to each classes’ annualized expense ratios, multiplied by the average account value over the period, multiplied by 182/366 (to reflect the one-half year period). |
1
| | |
VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
TEN LARGEST HOLDINGS* | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
COMPANY | | U.S. $ VALUE | | | PERCENT OF NET ASSETS | |
Exxon Mobil Corp. | | $ | 9,660,853 | | | | 5.9 | % |
Pfizer, Inc. | | | 6,525,100 | | | | 4.0 | |
Johnson & Johnson | | | 5,654,772 | | | | 3.4 | |
General Electric Co. | | | 5,553,860 | | | | 3.4 | |
Wells Fargo & Co. | | | 5,474,128 | | | | 3.3 | |
Citigroup, Inc. | | | 4,407,528 | | | | 2.7 | |
Merck & Co., Inc. | | | 4,354,525 | | | | 2.6 | |
JPMorgan Chase & Co. | | | 3,976,749 | | | | 2.4 | |
Chevron Corp. | | | 3,956,250 | | | | 2.4 | |
AT&T, Inc. | | | 3,701,508 | | | | 2.3 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | $ | 53,265,273 | | | | 32.4 | % |
SECTOR DIVERSIFICATION**
June 30, 2012 (unaudited)
| | | | | | | | |
SECTOR | | U.S. $ VALUE | | | PERCENT OF TOTAL INVESTMENTS | |
Health Care | | $ | 29,702,368 | | | | 18.1 | % |
Financials | | | 27,144,957 | | | | 16.6 | |
Consumer Discretionary | | | 26,017,238 | | | | 15.9 | |
Energy | | | 23,741,506 | | | | 14.5 | |
Information Technology | | | 17,109,997 | | | | 10.4 | |
Consumer Staples | | | 14,489,792 | | | | 8.8 | |
Industrials | | | 8,493,902 | | | | 5.2 | |
Utilities | | | 8,470,964 | | | | 5.2 | |
Telecommunication Services | | | 6,765,932 | | | | 4.1 | |
Materials | | | 1,933,896 | | | | 1.2 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Investments | | $ | 163,870,552 | | | | 100.0 | % |
** | | The Portfolio’s sector breakdown is expressed as a percentage of total investments (excluding security lending collateral) and may vary over time. |
Please note: The sector classifications presented herein are based on the Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS) which was developed by Morgan Stanley Capital International and Standard & Poor’s. The components are divided into sector, industry group, and industry sub-indices as classified by the GICS for each of the market capitalization indices in the broad market. These sector classifications are broadly defined. The “Portfolio of Investments” section of the report reflects more specific industry information and is consistent with the investment restrictions discussed in the Fund’s prospectus.
2
| | |
VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMMON STOCKS–99.7% | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
HEALTH CARE–18.1% | | | | | | | | |
BIOTECHNOLOGY–1.4% | | | | | | | | |
Gilead Sciences, Inc.(a) | | | 33,100 | | | $ | 1,697,368 | |
Vertex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.(a) | | | 9,900 | | | | 553,608 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,250,976 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS & SERVICES–4.5% | | | | | | | | |
Aetna, Inc. | | | 12,200 | | | | 472,994 | |
Health Net, Inc.(a) | | | 28,800 | | | | 698,976 | |
UnitedHealth Group, Inc. | | | 52,500 | | | | 3,071,250 | |
WellPoint, Inc. | | | 48,500 | | | | 3,093,815 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 7,337,035 | |
| | | | | | | | |
PHARMACEUTICALS–12.2% | | | | | | | | |
AstraZeneca PLC (Sponsored ADR) | | | 60,200 | | | | 2,693,950 | |
Johnson & Johnson | | | 83,700 | | | | 5,654,772 | |
Merck & Co., Inc. | | | 104,300 | | | | 4,354,525 | |
Pfizer, Inc. | | | 283,700 | | | | 6,525,100 | |
Roche Holding AG (Sponsored ADR) | | | 20,500 | | | | 886,010 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 20,114,357 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 29,702,368 | |
| | | | | | | | |
FINANCIALS–16.5% | | | | | | | | |
CAPITAL MARKETS–0.9% | | | | | | | | |
State Street Corp. | | | 31,900 | | | | 1,424,016 | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMMERCIAL BANKS–5.9% | | | | | | | | |
BB&T Corp. | | | 15,100 | | | | 465,835 | |
CIT Group, Inc.(a) | | | 76,900 | | | | 2,740,716 | |
KeyCorp | | | 24,700 | | | | 191,178 | |
PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. | | | 10,200 | | | | 623,322 | |
Regions Financial Corp. | | | 36,700 | | | | 247,725 | |
Wells Fargo & Co. | | | 163,700 | | | | 5,474,128 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 9,742,904 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER FINANCE–0.3% | | | | | | | | |
Discover Financial Services | | | 12,800 | | | | 442,624 | |
| | | | | | | | |
DIVERSIFIED FINANCIAL SERVICES–7.2% | | | | | | | | |
Bank of America Corp. | | | 239,100 | | | | 1,955,838 | |
Citigroup, Inc. | | | 160,800 | | | | 4,407,528 | |
JPMorgan Chase & Co. | | | 111,300 | | | | 3,976,749 | |
Leucadia National Corp. | | | 23,400 | | | | 497,718 | |
Moody’s Corp. | | | 26,900 | | | | 983,195 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 11,821,028 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INSURANCE–2.2% | | | | | | | | |
Berkshire Hathaway, Inc.(a) | | | 11,900 | | | | 991,627 | |
Chubb Corp. (The) | | | 15,500 | | | | 1,128,710 | |
Reinsurance Group of America, Inc.–Class A | | | 17,600 | | | | 936,496 | |
Travelers Cos., Inc. (The) | | | 10,300 | | | | 657,552 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 3,714,385 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 27,144,957 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER DISCRETIONARY–15.8% | | | | | | | | |
AUTO COMPONENTS–1.7% | | | | | | | | |
Lear Corp. | | | 32,600 | | | $ | 1,229,998 | |
Magna International, Inc.–Class A | | | 19,400 | | | | 765,524 | |
TRW Automotive Holdings Corp.(a) | | | 22,200 | | | | 816,072 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,811,594 | |
| | | | | | | | |
AUTOMOBILES–1.8% | | | | | | | | |
Ford Motor Co. | | | 121,900 | | | | 1,169,021 | |
General Motors Co.(a) | | | 89,700 | | | | 1,768,884 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,937,905 | |
| | | | | | | | |
DIVERSIFIED CONSUMER SERVICES–0.9% | | | | | | | | |
Apollo Group, Inc.–Class A(a) | | | 39,200 | | | | 1,418,648 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HOTELS, RESTAURANTS & LEISURE–1.1% | | | | | | | | |
MGM Resorts International(a) | | | 161,300 | | | | 1,800,108 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HOUSEHOLD DURABLES–1.3% | | | | | | | | |
Newell Rubbermaid, Inc. | | | 77,800 | | | | 1,411,292 | |
NVR, Inc.(a) | | | 850 | | | | 722,500 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,133,792 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MEDIA–6.6% | | | | | | | | |
CBS Corp.–Class B | | | 49,000 | | | | 1,606,220 | |
DIRECTV(a) | | | 26,100 | | | | 1,274,202 | |
Gannett Co., Inc. | | | 97,300 | | | | 1,433,229 | |
McGraw-Hill Cos., Inc. (The) | | | 20,300 | | | | 913,500 | |
News Corp.–Class A | | | 64,400 | | | | 1,435,476 | |
Time Warner Cable, Inc.–Class A | | | 29,000 | | | | 2,380,900 | |
Viacom, Inc.–Class B | | | 38,800 | | | | 1,824,376 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 10,867,903 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MULTILINE RETAIL–0.9% | | | | | | | | |
Macy’s, Inc. | | | 45,300 | | | | 1,556,055 | |
| | | | | | | | |
SPECIALTY RETAIL–1.5% | | | | | | | | |
GameStop Corp.–Class A(b) | | | 24,700 | | | | 453,492 | |
Home Depot, Inc. (The) | | | 15,900 | | | | 842,541 | |
Lowe’s Cos., Inc. | | | 34,500 | | | | 981,180 | |
Staples, Inc. | | | 16,400 | | | | 214,020 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,491,233 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 26,017,238 | |
| | | | | | | | |
ENERGY–14.4% | | | | | | | | |
ENERGY EQUIPMENT & SERVICES–1.7% | | | | | | | | |
Helmerich & Payne, Inc. | | | 31,000 | | | | 1,347,880 | |
Transocean Ltd./Switzerland | | | 32,500 | | | | 1,453,725 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 2,801,605 | |
| | | | | | | | |
OIL, GAS & CONSUMABLE FUELS–12.7% | | | | | | | | |
Anadarko Petroleum Corp. | | | 11,700 | | | | 774,540 | |
BP PLC (Sponsored ADR) | | | 61,400 | | | | 2,489,156 | |
3
| | |
VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
PORTFOLIOOF INVESTMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
Chevron Corp. | | | 37,500 | | | $ | 3,956,250 | |
Devon Energy Corp. | | | 10,100 | | | | 585,699 | |
Exxon Mobil Corp. | | | 112,900 | | | | 9,660,853 | |
Marathon Oil Corp. | | | 49,500 | | | | 1,265,715 | |
Marathon Petroleum Corp. | | | 39,900 | | | | 1,792,308 | |
Valero Energy Corp. | | | 17,200 | | | | 415,380 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 20,939,901 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 23,741,506 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY–10.4% | | | | | | | | |
COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT–2.2% | | | | | | | | |
Cisco Systems, Inc. | | | 183,200 | | | | 3,145,544 | |
Motorola Solutions, Inc. | | | 8,100 | | | | 389,691 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 3,535,235 | |
| | | | | | | | |
COMPUTERS & PERIPHERALS–2.1% | | | | | | | | |
Dell, Inc.(a) | | | 11,100 | | | | 138,972 | |
Hewlett-Packard Co. | | | 167,300 | | | | 3,364,403 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 3,503,375 | |
| | | | | | | | |
IT SERVICES–0.6% | | | | | | | | |
Visa, Inc.–Class A | | | 8,500 | | | | 1,050,855 | |
| | | | | | | | |
SEMICONDUCTORS & SEMICONDUCTOR EQUIPMENT–5.3% | | | | | | | | |
Advanced Semiconductor Engineering, Inc. (ADR) | | | 95,435 | | | | 388,420 | |
Applied Materials, Inc. | | | 185,900 | | | | 2,130,414 | |
Intel Corp. | | | 135,000 | | | | 3,597,750 | |
Lam Research Corp.(a) | | | 31,600 | | | | 1,192,584 | |
Micron Technology, Inc.(a) | | | 230,000 | | | | 1,451,300 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 8,760,468 | |
| | | | | | | | |
SOFTWARE–0.2% | | | | | | | | |
CA, Inc. | | | 9,600 | | | | 260,064 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 17,109,997 | |
| | | | | | | | |
CONSUMER STAPLES–8.8% | | | | | | | | |
FOOD & STAPLES RETAILING–2.6% | | | | | | | | |
CVS Caremark Corp. | | | 36,000 | | | | 1,682,280 | |
Kroger Co. (The) | | | 109,200 | | | | 2,532,348 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 4,214,628 | |
| | | | | | | | |
FOOD PRODUCTS–0.7% | | | | | | | | |
Archer-Daniels-Midland Co. | | | 18,100 | | | | 534,312 | |
Tyson Foods, Inc.–Class A | | | 37,500 | | | | 706,125 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,240,437 | |
| | | | | | | | |
HOUSEHOLD PRODUCTS–2.2% | | | | | | | | |
Procter & Gamble Co. (The) | | | 57,900 | | | | 3,546,375 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TOBACCO–3.3% | | | | | | | | |
Altria Group, Inc. | | | 70,600 | | | | 2,439,230 | |
Lorillard, Inc. | | | 20,000 | | | | 2,639,000 | |
Philip Morris International, Inc. | | | 4,700 | | | | 410,122 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 5,488,352 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 14,489,792 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
INDUSTRIALS–5.2% | | | | | | | | |
AEROSPACE & DEFENSE–0.7% | | | | | | | | |
General Dynamics Corp. | | | 9,600 | | | $ | 633,216 | |
Northrop Grumman Corp. | | | 6,700 | | | | 427,393 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,060,609 | |
| | | | | | | | |
AIRLINES–0.8% | | | | | | | | |
Delta Air Lines, Inc.(a) | | | 120,675 | | | | 1,321,391 | |
| | | | | | | | |
BUILDING PRODUCTS–0.3% | | | | | | | | |
Fortune Brands Home & Security, Inc.(a) | | | 25,058 | | | | 558,042 | |
| | | | | | | | |
INDUSTRIAL CONGLOMERATES–3.4% | | | | | | | | |
General Electric Co. | | | 266,500 | | | | 5,553,860 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 8,493,902 | |
| | | | | | | | |
UTILITIES–5.2% | | | | | | | | |
ELECTRIC UTILITIES–3.3% | | | | | | | | |
American Electric Power Co., Inc. | | | 35,400 | | | | 1,412,460 | |
Edison International | | | 31,100 | | | | 1,436,820 | |
Great Plains Energy, Inc. | | | 47,600 | | | | 1,019,116 | |
NV Energy, Inc. | | | 89,400 | | | | 1,571,652 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 5,440,048 | |
| | | | | | | | |
GAS UTILITIES–0.7% | | | | | | | | |
Atmos Energy Corp. | | | 32,000 | | | | 1,122,240 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MULTI-UTILITIES–1.2% | | | | | | | | |
CenterPoint Energy, Inc. | | | 55,600 | | | | 1,149,252 | |
DTE Energy Co. | | | 12,800 | | | | 759,424 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,908,676 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 8,470,964 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES–4.1% | | | | | | | | |
DIVERSIFIED TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES–4.1% | | | | | | | | |
AT&T, Inc. | | | 103,800 | | | | 3,701,508 | |
CenturyLink, Inc. | | | 77,600 | | | | 3,064,424 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 6,765,932 | |
| | | | | | | | |
MATERIALS–1.2% | | | | | | | | |
CHEMICALS–1.2% | | | | | | | | |
LyondellBasell Industries NV | | | 38,800 | | | | 1,562,476 | |
PPG Industries, Inc. | | | 3,500 | | | | 371,420 | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | 1,933,896 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Common Stocks (cost $153,415,763) | | | | | | | 163,870,552 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total Investments Before Security Lending Collateral for Securities Loaned–99.7% (cost $153,415,763) | | | | | | | 163,870,552 | |
| | | | | | | | |
4
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
Company | | Shares | | | U.S. $ Value | |
| | | | | | | | |
INVESTMENTS OF CASH COLLATERAL FOR SECURITY LOANED–0.3% | | | | | | | | |
INVESTMENT COMPANIES–0.3% | | | | | | | | |
AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves–Class I, 0.20%(c) (cost $450,775) | | | 450,775 | | | $ | 450,775 | |
| | | | | | | | |
TOTAL INVESTMENTS–100.0% (cost $153,866,538) | | | | | | | 164,321,327 | |
Other assets less liabilities–0.0% | | | | | | | 7,574 | |
| | | | | | | | |
NET ASSETS–100.0% | | | | | | $ | 164,328,901 | |
| | | | | | | | |
(a) | | Non-income producing security. |
(b) | | Represents entire or partial securities out on loan. See Note E for securities lending information. |
(c) | | Investment in affiliated money market mutual fund. The rate shown represents the 7-day yield as of period end. |
Glossary:
ADR—American Depositary Receipt
See notes to financial statements.
5
| | |
VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
STATEMENTOF ASSETS & LIABILITIES |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | |
ASSETS | | | | |
Investments in securities, at value | | | | |
Unaffiliated issuers (cost $153,415,763) | | $ | 163,870,552 | (a) |
Affiliated issuers (cost $450,775—including investment of cash collateral for securities loaned of $450,775) | | | 450,775 | |
Receivable for investment securities sold | | | 1,067,975 | |
Dividends and interest receivable | | | 241,671 | |
Receivable for capital stock sold | | | 100 | |
| | | | |
Total assets | | | 165,631,073 | |
| | | | |
LIABILITIES | | | | |
Due to custodian | | | 280,228 | |
Payable for collateral received on securities loaned | | | 450,775 | |
Payable for capital stock redeemed | | | 198,880 | |
Payable for investment securities purchased | | | 162,484 | |
Advisory fee payable | | | 74,952 | |
Distribution fee payable | | | 33,767 | |
Administrative fee payable | | | 15,757 | |
Transfer Agent fee payable | | | 172 | |
Accrued expenses | | | 85,157 | |
| | | | |
Total liabilities | | | 1,302,172 | |
| | | | |
NET ASSETS | | $ | 164,328,901 | |
| | | | |
COMPOSITION OF NET ASSETS | | | | |
Capital stock, at par | | $ | 16,583 | |
Additional paid-in capital | | | 225,693,933 | |
Undistributed net investment income | | | 4,270,950 | |
Accumulated net realized loss on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | (76,107,354 | ) |
Net unrealized appreciation on investments | | | 10,454,789 | |
| | | | |
| | $ | 164,328,901 | |
| | | | |
Net Asset Value Per Share—1 billion shares of capital stock authorized, $.001 par value
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class | | Net Assets | | | Shares Outstanding | | | Net Asset Value | |
A | | $ | 1,462,650 | | | | 146,087 | | | $ | 10.01 | |
B | | $ | 162,866,251 | | | | 16,436,539 | | | $ | 9.91 | |
(a) | | Includes securities on loan with a value of $453,492 (see Note E). |
See notes to financial statements.
6
| | |
VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
STATEMENTOF OPERATIONS | | |
Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | |
INVESTMENT INCOME | | | | |
Dividends | | | | |
Unaffiliated issuers (net of foreign taxes withheld of $10,338) | | $ | 2,277,119 | |
Affiliated issuers | | | 931 | |
Interest | | | 64 | |
Securities lending income | | | 6,949 | |
| | | | |
| | | 2,285,063 | |
| | | | |
EXPENSES | | | | |
Advisory fee (see Note B) | | | 480,488 | |
Distribution fee—Class B | | | 216,494 | |
Transfer agency—Class A | | | 16 | |
Transfer agency—Class B | | | 1,891 | |
Custodian | | | 50,636 | |
Printing | | | 40,228 | |
Administrative | | | 26,873 | |
Audit | | | 18,378 | |
Legal | | | 15,785 | |
Directors’ fees | | | 1,913 | |
Miscellaneous | | | 3,660 | |
| | | | |
Total expenses | | | 856,362 | |
| | | | |
Net investment income | | | 1,428,701 | |
| | | | |
REALIZED AND UNREALIZED GAIN ON INVESTMENT AND FOREIGN CURRENCY TRANSACTIONS | | | | |
Net realized gain on: | | | | |
Investment transactions | | | 4,662,666 | |
Foreign currency transactions | | | 5 | |
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of investments | | | 5,678,002 | |
| | | | |
Net gain on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | 10,340,673 | |
| | | | |
NET INCREASE IN NET ASSETS FROM OPERATIONS | | $ | 11,769,374 | |
| | | | |
See notes to financial statements.
7
| | |
| | |
VALUE PORTFOLIO |
STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN NET ASSETS | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
| | | | | | | | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | |
INCREASE (DECREASE) IN NET ASSETS FROM OPERATIONS | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income | | $ | 1,428,701 | | | $ | 2,936,048 | |
Net realized gain on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | 4,662,671 | | | | 14,523,560 | |
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation of investments | | | 5,678,002 | | | | (23,741,895 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) in net assets from operations | | | 11,769,374 | | | | (6,282,287 | ) |
DIVIDENDS TO SHAREHOLDERS FROM | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income | | | | | | | | |
Class A | | | –0 | – | | | (22,448 | ) |
Class B | | | –0 | – | | | (2,297,210 | ) |
CAPITAL STOCK TRANSACTIONS | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (24,140,240 | ) | | | (28,927,020 | ) |
| | | | | | | | |
Total decrease | | | (12,370,866 | ) | | | (37,528,965 | ) |
NET ASSETS | | | | | | | | |
Beginning of period | | | 176,699,767 | | | | 214,228,732 | |
| | | | | | | | |
End of period (including undistributed net investment income of $4,270,950 and $2,842,249, respectively) | | $ | 164,328,901 | | | $ | 176,699,767 | |
| | | | | | | | |
See notes to financial statements.
8
| | |
VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
NOTE A: Significant Accounting Policies
The AllianceBernstein Value Portfolio (the “Portfolio”) is a series of AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund, Inc. (the “Fund”). The Portfolio’s investment objective is long-term growth of capital. The Portfolio is diversified as defined under the Investment Company Act of 1940. The Fund was incorporated in the State of Maryland on November 17, 1987, as an open-end series investment company. The Fund offers thirteen separately managed pools of assets which have differing investment objectives and policies. The Portfolio offers Class A and Class B shares. Both classes of shares have identical voting, dividend, liquidating and other rights, except that Class B shares bear a distribution expense and have exclusive voting rights with respect to the Class B distribution plan.
The Portfolio offers and sells its shares only to separate accounts of certain life insurance companies for the purpose of funding variable annuity contracts and variable life insurance policies. Sales are made without a sales charge at the Portfolio’s net asset value per share.
The financial statements have been prepared in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“U.S. GAAP”) which require management to make certain estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities in the financial statements and amounts of income and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. The following is a summary of significant accounting policies followed by the Portfolio.
1. Security Valuation
Portfolio securities are valued at their current market value determined on the basis of market quotations or, if market quotations are not readily available or are deemed unreliable, at “fair value” as determined in accordance with procedures established by and under the general supervision of the Fund’s Board of Directors.
In general, the market value of securities which are readily available and deemed reliable are determined as follows: Securities listed on a national securities exchange (other than securities listed on the NASDAQ Stock Market, Inc. (“NASDAQ”)) or on a foreign securities exchange are valued at the last sale price at the close of the exchange or foreign securities exchange. If there has been no sale on such day, the securities are valued at the last traded price from the previous day. Securities listed on more than one exchange are valued by reference to the principal exchange on which the securities are traded; securities listed only on NASDAQ are valued in accordance with the NASDAQ Official Closing Price; listed or over the counter market (“OTC”) put or call options are valued at the mid level between the current bid and ask prices. If either a current bid or current ask price is unavailable, AllianceBernstein L.P. (the “Adviser”) will have discretion to determine the best valuation (e.g. last trade price in the case of listed options); open futures contracts are valued using the closing settlement price or, in the absence of such a price, the most recent quoted bid price. If there are no quotations available for the day of valuation, the last available closing settlement price is used; U.S. government securities and other debt instruments having 60 days or less remaining until maturity are valued at amortized cost if their original maturity was 60 days or less; or by amortizing their fair value as of the 61st day prior to maturity if their original term to maturity exceeded 60 days; fixed-income securities, including mortgage backed and asset backed securities, may be valued on the basis of prices provided by a pricing service or at a price obtained from one or more of the major broker/dealers. In cases where broker/dealer quotes are obtained, the Adviser may establish procedures whereby changes in market yields or spreads are used to adjust, on a daily basis, a recently obtained quoted price on a security. Swaps and other derivatives are valued daily, primarily using independent pricing services, independent pricing models using market inputs, as well as third party broker-dealers or counterparties.
Securities for which market quotations are not readily available (including restricted securities) or are deemed unreliable are valued at fair value. Factors considered in making this determination may include, but are not limited to, information obtained by contacting the issuer, analysts, analysis of the issuer’s financial statements or other available documents. In addition, the Portfolio may use fair value pricing for securities primarily traded in non-U.S. markets because most foreign markets close well before the Portfolio values its securities at 4:00 p.m., Eastern Time. The earlier close of these foreign markets gives rise to the possibility that significant events, including broad market moves, may have occurred in the interim and may materially affect the value of those securities. To account for this, the Portfolio may frequently value many of its foreign equity securities using fair value prices based on third party vendor modeling tools to the extent available.
2. Fair Value Measurements
In accordance with U.S. GAAP regarding fair value measurements, fair value is defined as the price that the Portfolio would receive to sell an asset or pay to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement
9
| | |
VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
date. The U.S. GAAP disclosure requirements establish a framework for measuring fair value, and a three-level hierarchy for fair value measurements based upon the transparency of inputs to the valuation of an asset or liability. Inputs may be observable or unobservable and refer broadly to the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability. Observable inputs reflect the assumptions market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability based on market data obtained from sources independent of the Portfolio. Unobservable inputs reflect the Portfolio’s own assumptions about the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability based on the best information available in the circumstances. Each investment is assigned a level based upon the observability of the inputs which are significant to the overall valuation. The three-tier hierarchy of inputs is summarized below.
| • | | Level 1—quoted prices in active markets for identical investments |
| • | | Level 2—other significant observable inputs (including quoted prices for similar investments, interest rates, prepayment speeds, credit risk, etc.) |
| • | | Level 3—significant unobservable inputs (including the Portfolio’s own assumptions in determining the fair value of investments) |
The following table summarizes the valuation of the Portfolio’s investments by the above fair value hierarchy levels as of June 30, 2012:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Level 1 | | | Level 2 | | | Level 3 | | | Total | |
Investments in Securities: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Assets: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Common Stocks: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Health Care | | $ | 28,816,358 | | | $ | 886,010 | | | $ | –0 | – | | $ | 29,702,368 | |
Financials | | | 27,144,957 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 27,144,957 | |
Consumer Discretionary | | | 26,017,238 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 26,017,238 | |
Energy | | | 23,741,506 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 23,741,506 | |
Information Technology | | | 17,109,997 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 17,109,997 | |
Consumer Staples | | | 14,489,792 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 14,489,792 | |
Industrials | | | 8,493,902 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 8,493,902 | |
Utilities | | | 8,470,964 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 8,470,964 | |
Telecommunication Services | | | 6,765,932 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 6,765,932 | |
Materials | | | 1,933,896 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 1,933,896 | |
Investments of Cash Collateral for Security Loaned in Affiliated Money Market Fund | | | 450,775 | | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | 450,775 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Investments in Securities | | | 163,435,317 | | | | 886,010 | | | | –0 | – | | | 164,321,327 | |
Other Financial Instruments* | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total | | $ | 163,435,317 | | | $ | 886,010 | | | $ | –0 | – | | $ | 164,321,327 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
* | | Other financial instruments are derivative instruments, such as futures, forwards and swap contracts, which are valued at the unrealized appreciation/depreciation on the instrument. |
3. Currency Translation
Assets and liabilities denominated in foreign currencies and commitments under forward currency exchange contracts are translated into U.S. dollars at the mean of the quoted bid and ask prices of such currencies against the U.S. dollar. Purchases and sales of portfolio securities are translated into U.S. dollars at the rates of exchange prevailing when such securities were acquired or sold. Income and expenses are translated into U.S. dollars at rates of exchange prevailing when accrued.
Net realized gain or loss on foreign currency transactions represents foreign exchange gains and losses from sales and maturities of foreign fixed income investments, foreign currency exchange contracts, holding of foreign currencies, currency gains or losses realized between the trade and settlement dates on foreign investment transactions, and the difference between the amounts of dividends, interest and foreign withholding taxes recorded on the Portfolio’s books and the U.S. dollar equivalent amounts actually received or paid. Net unrealized currency gains and losses from valuing foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities at period end exchange rates are reflected as a component of net unrealized appreciation or depreciation of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities.
10
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
4. Taxes
It is the Portfolio’s policy to meet the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code applicable to regulated investment companies and to distribute all of its investment company taxable income and net realized gains, if any, to shareholders. Therefore, no provisions for federal income or excise taxes are required. The Portfolio may be subject to taxes imposed by countries in which it invests. Such taxes are generally based on income and/or capital gains earned or repatriated. Taxes are accrued and applied to net investment income, net realized gains and net unrealized appreciation/depreciation as such income and/or gains are earned.
In accordance with U.S. GAAP requirements regarding accounting for uncertainties in income taxes, management has analyzed the Portfolio’s tax positions taken or expected to be taken on federal and state income tax returns for all open tax years (the current and the prior three tax years) and has concluded that no provision for income tax is required in the Portfolio’s financial statements.
5. Investment Income and Investment Transactions
Dividend income is recorded on the ex-dividend date or as soon as the Portfolio is informed of the dividend. Interest income is accrued daily. Investment transactions are accounted for on the date the securities are purchased or sold. Investment gains or losses are determined on the identified cost basis. The Portfolio amortizes premiums and accretes discounts as adjustments to interest income.
6. Class Allocations
All income earned and expenses incurred by the Portfolio are borne on a pro-rata basis by each outstanding class of shares, based on the proportionate interest in the Portfolio represented by the net assets of such class, except for class specific expenses which are allocated to the respective class. Expenses of the Fund are charged to each Portfolio in proportion to net assets. Realized and unrealized gains and losses are allocated among the various share classes based on respective net assets.
7. Dividends and Distributions
Dividends and distributions to shareholders, if any, are recorded on the ex-dividend date. Income dividends and capital gains distributions are determined in accordance with federal tax regulations and may differ from those determined in accordance with U.S. GAAP. To the extent these differences are permanent, such amounts are reclassified within the capital accounts based on their federal tax basis treatment; temporary differences do not require such reclassification.
NOTE B: Advisory Fee and Other Transactions with Affiliates
Under the terms of the investment advisory agreement, the Portfolio pays the Adviser an advisory fee at an annual rate of .55% of the first $2.5 billion, .45% of the next $2.5 billion and .40% in excess of $5 billion, of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets. The fee is accrued daily and paid monthly. The Adviser has agreed to waive its fees and bear certain expenses to the extent necessary to limit total operating expenses on an annual basis to 1.20% and 1.45% of daily average net assets for Class A and Class B shares, respectively (the “Expense Caps”). The Expense Caps extend through May 1, 2013 and then may be extended by the Adviser for additional one year terms. For the six months ended June 30, 2012, there was no such reimbursement.
Pursuant to the investment advisory agreement, the Portfolio may reimburse the Adviser for certain legal and accounting services provided to the Portfolio by the Adviser. For the six months ended June 30, 2012, such fee amounted to $26,873.
Brokerage commissions paid on investment transactions for the six months ended June 30, 2012 amounted to $79,874, of which $0 and $0, respectively, was paid to Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. LLC and Sanford C. Bernstein Limited, affiliates of the Adviser.
The Portfolio compensates AllianceBernstein Investor Services, Inc. (“ABIS”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Adviser, under a Transfer Agency Agreement for providing personnel and facilities to perform transfer agency services for the Portfolio. Such compensation retained by ABIS amounted to $692 for the six months ended June 30, 2012.
NOTE C: Distribution Plan
The Portfolio has adopted a Distribution Plan (the “Plan”) for Class B shares pursuant to Rule 12b-1 under the Investment Company Act of 1940. Under the Plan, the Portfolio pays distribution and servicing fees to AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (the “Distributor”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Adviser, at an annual rate of up to .50% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The fees are accrued daily and paid monthly. The Board of Directors currently limits payments under the Plan to .25% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The Plan provides that the Distributor will use such payments in their entirety for distribution assistance and promotional activities.
11
| | |
VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
The Portfolio is not obligated under the Plan to pay any distribution and servicing fees in excess of the amounts set forth above. The purpose of the payments to the Distributor under the Plan is to compensate the Distributor for its distribution services with respect to the sale of the Portfolio’s Class B shares. Since the Distributor’s compensation is not directly tied to its expenses, the amount of compensation received by it under the Plan during any year may be more or less than its actual expenses. For this reason, the Plan is characterized by the staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission as being of the “compensation” variety.
In the event that the Plan is terminated or not continued, no distribution or servicing fees (other than current amounts accrued but not yet paid) would be owed by the Portfolio to the Distributor.
The Plan also provides that the Adviser may use its own resources to finance the distribution of the Portfolio’s shares.
NOTE D: Investment Transactions
Purchases and sales of investment securities (excluding short-term investments) for the six months ended June 30, 2012 were as follows:
| | | | | | | | |
| | Purchases | | | Sales | |
Investment securities (excluding U.S. government securities) | | $ | 31,648,963 | | | $ | 53,661,231 | |
U.S. government securities | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – |
The cost of investments for federal income tax purposes was substantially the same as the cost for financial reporting purposes. Accordingly, gross unrealized appreciation and unrealized depreciation are as follows:
| | | | |
Gross unrealized appreciation | | $ | 19,229,803 | |
Gross unrealized depreciation | | | (8,775,014 | ) |
| | | | |
Net unrealized appreciation | | $ | 10,454,789 | |
| | | | |
1. Derivative Financial Instruments
The Portfolio may use derivatives in an effort to earn income and enhance returns, to replace more traditional direct investments, to obtain exposure to otherwise inaccessible markets (collectively, “investment purposes”), or to hedge or adjust the risk profile of its portfolio.
The Portfolio did not engage in derivatives transactions for the six months ended June 30, 2012.
2. Currency Transactions
The Portfolio may invest in non-U.S. Dollar securities on a currency hedged or unhedged basis. The Portfolio may seek investment opportunities by taking long or short positions in currencies through the use of currency-related derivatives, including forward currency exchange contracts, futures and options on futures, swaps, and other options. The Portfolio may enter into transactions for investment opportunities when it anticipates that a foreign currency will appreciate or depreciate in value but securities denominated in that currency are not held by the Portfolio and do not present attractive investment opportunities. Such transactions may also be used when the Adviser believes that it may be more efficient than a direct investment in a foreign currency-denominated security. The Portfolio may also conduct currency exchange contracts on a spot basis (i.e., for cash at the spot rate prevailing in the currency exchange market for buying or selling currencies).
NOTE E: Securities Lending
The Portfolio may enter into securities lending transactions. Under the Portfolio’s securities lending program, all securities loans will be collateralized continually by cash. The Portfolio will be compensated for the loan from a portion of the net return from the income earned on cash collateral after a rebate is paid to the borrower (in some cases, this rebate may be a “negative rebate” or fee paid by the borrower to the Portfolio in connection with the loan), and payments for fees of the securities lending agent and for certain other administrative expenses. It is the policy of the Portfolio to receive collateral consisting of cash in an amount exceeding the value of the securities loaned. The Portfolio will have the right to call a loan and obtain the securities loaned at any time on notice to the borrower within the normal and customary settlement time for the securities. While the securities are on loan, the borrower is obligated to pay the Portfolio amounts equal to any income or other distributions from the securities. The Portfolio will not have the right to vote any securities during the existence of a loan, but will have the right to regain ownership of loaned securities in order to exercise voting or other ownership rights. The lending agent has agreed to indemnify the Portfolio in the case of default of any securities borrower. Collateral received and securities loaned are marked to market daily to ensure that the securities loaned are secured by collateral. The lending
12
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
agent will invest the cash collateral received in AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves, an eligible money market vehicle, in accordance with the investment restrictions of the Portfolio, and as approved by the Fund’s Board of Directors. The collateral received on securities loaned is recorded as an asset as well as a corresponding liability in the statement of assets and liabilities. When the Portfolio lends securities, its investment performance will continue to reflect changes in the value of the securities loaned. At June 30, 2012, the Portfolio had securities on loan with a value of $453,492 and had received cash collateral which has been invested into AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves of $450,775. The cash collateral will be adjusted on the next business day after period end to maintain the required collateral amount. The Portfolio earned securities lending income of $6,949 and $931 from the borrowers and AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves, respectively, for the six months ended June 30, 2012; these amounts are reflected in the statement of operations. A principal risk of lending portfolio securities is that the borrower will fail to return the loaned securities upon termination of the loan and that the collateral will not be sufficient to replace the loaned securities. A summary of the Portfolio’s transactions in shares of AllianceBernstein Exchange Reserves for the six months ended June 30, 2012 is as follows:
| | | | | | | | | | |
Market Value December 31, 2011 (000) | | | Purchases
at Cost
(000) | | Sales
Proceeds
(000) | | Market Value
June 30, 2012
(000) | | Dividend
Income
(000) |
| $–0– | | | $5,849 | | $5,398 | | $451 | | $1 |
NOTE F: Capital Stock
Each class consists of 500,000,000 authorized shares. Transactions in capital shares for each class were as follows:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | SHARES | | | | | AMOUNT | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | | | | | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | |
Class A | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Shares sold | | | 2,055 | | | | 13,481 | | | | | $ | 20,865 | | | $ | 124,573 | |
Shares issued in reinvestment of dividends | | | –0 | – | | | 2,126 | | | | | | –0 | – | | | 22,448 | |
Shares redeemed | | | (17,878 | ) | | | (27,172 | ) | | | | | (183,359 | ) | | | (267,901 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (15,823 | ) | | | (11,565 | ) | | | | $ | (162,494 | ) | | $ | (120,880 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Class B | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Shares sold | | | 92,606 | | | | 1,007,484 | | | | | $ | 929,681 | | | $ | 9,274,516 | |
Shares issued in reinvestment of dividends | | | –0 | – | | | 219,199 | | | | | | –0 | – | | | 2,297,210 | |
Shares redeemed | | | (2,525,056 | ) | | | (4,153,579 | ) | | | | | (24,907,427 | ) | | | (40,377,866 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net decrease | | | (2,432,450 | ) | | | (2,926,896 | ) | | | | $ | (23,977,746 | ) | | $ | (28,806,140 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
NOTE G: Risks Involved in Investing in the Portfolio
Foreign Securities Risk—Investing in securities of foreign companies or foreign governments involves special risks which include changes in foreign currency exchange rates and the possibility of future political and economic developments which could adversely affect the value of such securities. Moreover, securities of many foreign companies or foreign governments and their markets may be less liquid and their prices more volatile than those of comparable U.S. companies or of the U.S. government.
Currency Risk—This is the risk that changes in foreign currency exchange rates may negatively affect the value of the Portfolio’s investments or reduce the returns of the Portfolio. For example, the value of the Portfolio’s investments in foreign currency-denominated securities or currencies may decrease if the U.S. Dollar is strong (i.e., gaining value relative to other currencies) and other currencies are weak (i.e., losing value relative to the U.S. Dollar). Currency markets are generally not as regulated as securities markets. Independent of the Portfolio’s investments denominated in foreign currencies, the Portfolio’s positions in various foreign currencies may cause the Portfolio to experience investment losses due to the changes in exchange rates and interest rates.
Derivatives Risk—The Portfolio may enter into derivative transactions such as forwards, options, futures and swaps. Derivatives may be illiquid, difficult to price, and leveraged so that small changes may produce disproportionate losses for the Portfolio, and subject to counterparty risk to a greater degree than more traditional investments. Derivatives may result in significant losses, including losses that are far greater than the value of the derivatives reflected in the statement of assets and liabilities.
13
| | |
VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Indemnification Risk—In the ordinary course of business, the Portfolio enters into contracts that contain a variety of indemnifications. The Portfolio’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown. However, the Portfolio has not had prior claims or losses pursuant to these indemnification provisions and expects the risk of loss thereunder to be remote. Therefore, the Portfolio has not accrued any liability in connection with these indemnification provisions.
NOTE H: Joint Credit Facility
A number of open-end mutual funds managed by the Adviser, including the Portfolio, participate in a $140 million revolving credit facility (the “Facility”) intended to provide short-term financing, if necessary, subject to certain restrictions in connection with abnormal redemption activity. Commitment fees related to the Facility are paid by the participating funds and are included in miscellaneous expenses in the statement of operations. The Portfolio did not utilize the Facility during the six months ended June 30, 2012.
NOTE I: Distributions to Shareholders
The tax character of distributions to be paid for the year ending December 31, 2012 will be determined at the end of the current fiscal year. The tax character of distributions paid during the fiscal years ended December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010 were as follows:
| | | | | | | | |
| | 2011 | | | 2010 | |
Distributions paid from: | | | | | | | | |
Ordinary income | | $ | 2,319,658 | | | $ | 3,624,876 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total taxable distributions | | | 2,319,658 | | | | 3,624,876 | |
| | | | | | | | |
Total distributions paid | | $ | 2,319,658 | | | $ | 3,624,876 | |
| | | | | | | | |
As of December 31, 2011, the components of accumulated earnings/(deficit) on a tax basis were as follows:
| | | | |
Undistributed ordinary income | | $ | 2,817,577 | |
Accumulated capital and other losses | | | (80,512,963 | )(a) |
Unrealized appreciation/(depreciation) | | | 4,544,397 | (b) |
| | | | |
Total accumulated earnings/(deficit) | | $ | (73,150,989 | ) |
| | | | |
(a) | | On December 31, 2011, the Portfolio had a net capital loss carryforward of $79,970,146. During the fiscal year, the Portfolio utilized $14,964,977 of capital loss carryforwards to offset current year net realized gains. At December 31, 2011, the Portfolio had a post-October short-term capital loss deferral of $542,817, which is deemed to arise on January 1, 2012. |
(b) | | The differences between book-basis and tax-basis unrealized appreciation/(depreciation) are attributable primarily to the tax deferral of losses on wash sales and return of capital distributions received from underlying securities. |
For tax purposes, net capital losses may be carried over to offset future capital gains, if any. Under the Regulated Investment Company Modernization Act of 2010, funds are permitted to carry forward capital losses incurred in taxable years beginning after December 22, 2010 for an indefinite period. These post-enactment capital losses must be utilized prior to the pre-enactment capital losses, which are subject to expiration. Post-enactment capital loss carryforwards will retain their character as either short-term or long-term capital losses rather than being considered short-term as under previous regulation.
As of December 31, 2011, the Portfolio had a net capital loss carryforward of $79,970,146 which will expire as follows:
| | | | | | |
SHORT-TERM AMOUNT | | LONG-TERM AMOUNT | | EXPIRATION | |
$ 79,970,146 | | n/a | | | 2017 | |
NOTE J: Recent Accounting Pronouncement
In December 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued an Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) related to disclosures about offsetting assets and liabilities in financial statements. The amendments in this update require an entity to disclose both gross and net information for derivatives and other financial instruments that are either offset in the statement of assets and liabilities or subject to an enforceable master netting arrangement or similar agreement. The ASU is effective during interim or annual reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2013. At this time, management is evaluating the implication of this ASU and its impact on the financial statements has not been determined.
14
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
NOTE K: Subsequent Events
Management has evaluated subsequent events for possible recognition or disclosure in the financial statements through the date the financial statements are issued. Management has determined that there are no material events that would require disclosure in the Portfolio’s financial statements through this date.
15
| | |
| | |
VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Selected Data For A Share Of Capital Stock Outstanding Throughout Each Period
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | CLASS A | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, | |
| | | 2011 | | | 2010 | | | 2009 | | | 2008 | | | 2007 | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | | | $9.37 | | | | $9.84 | | | | $8.97 | | | | $7.67 | | | | $13.92 | | | | $15.08 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Income From Investment Operations | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income (a) | | | .10 | | | | .17 | | | | .12 | | | | .16 | | | | .27 | | | | .32 | |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | .54 | | | | (.50 | ) | | | .93 | | | | 1.41 | | | | (5.62 | ) | | | (.85 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) in net asset value from operations | | | .64 | | | | (.33 | ) | | | 1.05 | | | | 1.57 | | | | (5.35 | ) | | | (.53 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Less: Dividends and Distributions | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Dividends from net investment income | | | –0 | – | | | (.14 | ) | | | (.18 | ) | | | (.27 | ) | | | (.28 | ) | | | (.21 | ) |
Distributions from net realized gain on investment transactions | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | (.62 | ) | | | (.42 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total dividends and distributions | | | –0 | – | | | (.14 | ) | | | (.18 | ) | | | (.27 | ) | | | (.90 | ) | | | (.63 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net asset value, end of period | | | $10.01 | | | | $9.37 | | | | $9.84 | | | | $8.97 | | | | $7.67 | | | | $13.92 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Return | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total investment return based on net asset value (b) | | | 6.83 | % | | | (3.50 | )% | | | 11.81 | %* | | | 21.12 | %* | | | (40.83 | )%* | | | (3.95 | )% |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Ratios/Supplemental Data | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net assets, end of period (000’s omitted) | | | $1,463 | | | | $1,517 | | | | $1,707 | | | | $1,594 | | | | $1,490 | | | | $3,305,460 | |
Ratio to average net assets of: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Expenses | | | .73 | %(c) | | | .71 | % | | | .71 | %(d) | | | .70 | % | | | .67 | % | | | .65 | % |
Net investment income | | | 1.90 | %(c) | | | 1.78 | % | | | 1.37 | %(d) | | | 2.09 | % | | | 2.46 | % | | | 2.17 | % |
Portfolio turnover rate | | | 18 | % | | | 62 | % | | | 73 | % | | | 64 | % | | | 33 | % | | | 20 | % |
See footnote summary on page 17.
16
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Selected Data For A Share Of Capital Stock Outstanding Throughout Each Period
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | CLASS B | |
| | Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 (unaudited) | | | Year Ended December 31, | |
| | | 2011 | | | 2010 | | | 2009 | | | 2008 | | | 2007 | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | | | $9.28 | | | | $9.75 | | | | $8.90 | | | | $7.59 | | | | $13.79 | | | | $14.95 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Income From Investment Operations | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net investment income (a) | | | .08 | | | | .15 | | | | .10 | | | | .14 | | | | .24 | | | | .27 | |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on investment and foreign currency transactions | | | .55 | | | | (.50 | ) | | | .91 | | | | 1.41 | | | | (5.58 | ) | | | (.83 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net increase (decrease) in net asset value from operations | | | .63 | | | | (.35 | ) | | | 1.01 | | | | 1.55 | | | | (5.34 | ) | | | (.56 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Less: Dividends and Distributions | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Dividends from net investment income | | | –0 | – | | | (.12 | ) | | | (.16 | ) | | | (.24 | ) | | | (.24 | ) | | | (.18 | ) |
Distributions from net realized gain on investment transactions | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | –0 | – | | | (.62 | ) | | | (.42 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total dividends and distributions | | | –0 | – | | | (.12 | ) | | | (.16 | ) | | | (.24 | ) | | | (.86 | ) | | | (.60 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net asset value, end of period | | | $9.91 | | | | $9.28 | | | | $9.75 | | | | $8.90 | | | | $7.59 | | | | $13.79 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Return | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total investment return based on net asset value (b) | | | 6.79 | % | | | (3.78 | )% | | | 11.42 | %* | | | 21.04 | %* | | | (41.01 | )%* | | | (4.16 | )% |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Ratios/Supplemental Data | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net assets, end of period (000’s omitted) | | | $162,866 | | | | $175,183 | | | | $212,522 | | | | $213,827 | | | | $197,080 | | | | $329,217 | |
Ratio to average net assets of: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Expenses | | | .98 | %(c) | | | .96 | % | | | .96 | %(d) | | | .95 | % | | | .92 | % | | | .90 | % |
Net investment income | | | 1.63 | %(c) | | | 1.51 | % | | | 1.12 | %(d) | | | 1.84 | % | | | 2.24 | % | | | 1.82 | % |
Portfolio turnover rate | | | 18 | % | | | 62 | % | | | 73 | % | | | 64 | % | | | 33 | % | | | 20 | % |
(a) | | Based on average shares outstanding. |
(b) | | Total investment return is calculated assuming an initial investment made at the net asset value at the beginning of the period, reinvestment of all dividends and distributions at net asset value during the period, and redemption on the last day of the period. Total return does not reflect (i) insurance company’s separate account related expense charges and (ii) the deductions of taxes that a shareholder would pay on Portfolio distributions or the redemption of Portfolio shares. Total investment return calculated for a period of less than one year is not annualized. |
(d) | | The ratio includes expenses attributable to costs of proxy solicitation. |
* | | Includes the impact of proceeds received and credited to the Portfolio resulting from class action settlements, which enhanced the Portfolio’s performance for the years ended December 31, 2010, December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008 by 0.01%, 0.02% and 0.02%, respectively. |
| | See notes to financial statements. |
17
| | |
| | |
VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
CONTINUANCE DISCLOSURE | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
INFORMATION REGARDING THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE PORTFOLIO’S ADVISORY AGREEMENT
The disinterested directors (the “directors”) of AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund, Inc. (the “Fund”) unanimously approved the continuance of the Fund’s Advisory Agreement with the Adviser in respect of AllianceBernstein Value Portfolio (the “Portfolio”) at a meeting held on May 1-3, 2012.
Prior to approval of the continuance of the Advisory Agreement, the directors had requested from the Adviser, and received and evaluated, extensive materials. They reviewed the proposed continuance of the Advisory Agreement with the Adviser and with experienced counsel who are independent of the Adviser, who advised on the relevant legal standards. The directors also reviewed an independent evaluation prepared by the Fund’s Senior Officer (who is also the Fund’s Independent Compliance Officer) of the reasonableness of the advisory fee in the Advisory Agreement, in which the Senior Officer concluded that the contractual fee for the Portfolio was reasonable. The directors also discussed the proposed continuance in private sessions with counsel and the Fund’s Senior Officer.
The directors considered their knowledge of the nature and quality of the services provided by the Adviser to the Portfolio gained from their experience as directors or trustees of most of the registered investment companies advised by the Adviser, their overall confidence in the Adviser’s integrity and competence they have gained from that experience, the Adviser’s initiative in identifying and raising potential issues with the directors and its responsiveness, frankness and attention to concerns raised by the directors in the past, including the Adviser’s willingness to consider and implement organizational and operational changes designed to improve investment results and the services provided to the AllianceBernstein Funds. The directors noted that they have four regular meetings each year, at each of which they receive presentations from the Adviser on the investment results of the Portfolio and review extensive materials and information presented by the Adviser.
The directors also considered all other factors they believed relevant, including the specific matters discussed below. In their deliberations, the directors did not identify any particular information that was all-important or controlling, and different directors may have attributed different weights to the various factors. The directors determined that the selection of the Adviser to manage the Portfolio and the overall arrangements between the Portfolio and the Adviser, as provided in the Advisory Agreement, including the advisory fee, were fair and reasonable in light of the services performed, expenses incurred and such other matters as the directors considered relevant in the exercise of their business judgment. The material factors and conclusions that formed the basis for the directors’ determinations included the following:
Nature, Extent and Quality of Services Provided
The directors considered the scope and quality of services provided by the Adviser under the Advisory Agreement, including the quality of the investment research capabilities of the Adviser and the other resources it has dedicated to performing services for the Portfolio. They also noted the professional experience and qualifications of the Portfolio’s portfolio management team and other senior personnel of the Adviser. The directors also considered that the Advisory Agreement provides that the Portfolio will reimburse the Adviser for the cost to it of providing certain clerical, accounting, administrative and other services provided at the Portfolio’s request by employees of the Adviser or its affiliates. Requests for these reimbursements are approved by the directors on a quarterly basis and, to the extent requested and paid, result in a higher rate of total compensation from the Portfolio to the Adviser than the fee rate stated in the Portfolio’s Advisory Agreement. The directors noted that the methodology used to determine the reimbursement amounts had been reviewed by an independent consultant retained by the Fund’s Senior Officer. The quality of administrative and other services, including the Adviser’s role in coordinating the activities of the Portfolio’s other service providers, also were considered. The directors concluded that, overall, they were satisfied with the nature, extent and quality of services provided to the Portfolio under the Advisory Agreement.
Costs of Services Provided and Profitability
The directors reviewed a schedule of the revenues, expenses and related notes indicating the profitability of the Portfolio to the Adviser for calendar years 2010 and 2011 that had been prepared with an expense allocation methodology arrived at in consultation with an independent consultant retained by the Fund’s Senior Officer. The directors reviewed the assumptions and methods of allocation used by the Adviser in preparing fund-specific profitability data and noted that there are a number of potentially acceptable allocation methodologies for information of this type. The directors noted that the profitability information reflected all revenues and expenses of the Adviser’s relationship with the Portfolio, including those relating to its subsidiaries which provide transfer agency, distribution and brokerage services to the Portfolio. The directors recognized that it is difficult to make comparisons of profitability of the Advisory Agreement with fund advisory contracts for unaffiliated funds because comparative information is not generally publicly available and is affected by numerous factors. The directors focused on the profitability of the Adviser’s relationship with the Portfolio before taxes and distribution expenses. The direc-
18
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
tors concluded that they were satisfied that the Adviser’s level of profitability from its relationship with the Portfolio was not unreasonable.
Fall-Out Benefits
The directors considered the other benefits to the Adviser and its affiliates from their relationships with the Portfolio, including but not limited to benefits relating to soft dollar arrangements (whereby the Adviser receives brokerage and research services from brokers that execute transactions for certain clients, including the Portfolio); 12b-1 fees and sales charges received by the Fund’s principal underwriter (which is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Adviser) in respect of the Portfolio’s Class B shares; transfer agency fees paid by the Portfolio to a wholly owned subsidiary of the Adviser; and brokerage commissions paid by the Portfolio to brokers affiliated with the Adviser. The directors recognized that the Adviser’s profitability would be somewhat lower without these benefits. The directors also understood that the Adviser also might derive reputational and other benefits from its association with the Portfolio.
Investment Results
In addition to the information reviewed by the directors in connection with the meeting, the directors receive detailed performance information for the Portfolio at each regular Board meeting during the year. The directors noted that the Portfolio is a clone of another fund managed by the Adviser (the “Corresponding Fund”) and is managed to track the investment performance of its Corresponding Fund, although investment results may differ between the Portfolio and its Corresponding Fund due to differences in their expense ratios and other factors. At the May 2012 meeting, the directors reviewed information prepared by Lipper showing the performance of the Class A Shares of the Portfolio as compared with that of a group of similar funds selected by Lipper (the “Performance Group”) and as compared with that of a broader array of funds selected by Lipper (the “Performance Universe”), and information prepared by the Adviser showing performance of the Class A Shares as compared with the Russell 1000 Value Index (the “Index”), in each case for the 1-, 3- and 5-year periods ended February 29, 2012 and (in the case of comparisons with the Index) the since inception period (July 2002 inception). The directors noted that the Portfolio was in the 5th quintile of the Performance Group and 4th quintile of the Performance Universe for the 1-year period, in the 4th quintile of the Performance Group and the Performance Universe for the 3-year period, and in the 5th quintile of the Performance Group and the Performance Universe for the 5-year period. The Portfolio lagged the Index in all periods. The directors also reviewed performance information for periods ended March 31, 2012 (for which the data was not limited to Class A Shares), and noted that in the 3-month period the Portfolio had outperformed the Lipper VA Large Cap Value Funds Average and the Index.
The directors noted that they had discussed with the Adviser their concerns about the relative performance of the Portfolio. The directors took into account the Adviser’s recent restructuring of the Adviser’s research and portfolio management teams and investment process changes that are intended to improve the investment performance of its equity services. The Adviser had stated its belief that, in the case of its value funds, it had adhered to its rigorous process for value investing during a period when value investing had not generally obtained favorable returns. The Adviser believed that other managers of value funds may not pursue value characteristics to the same degree as the Adviser, and that their funds’ short-term performance may have benefited from style drift. The Adviser also reiterated its conviction that, over the long term, rigorous value investing would yield superior investment returns. The directors were satisfied with the Adviser’s explanation.
Based on their review and their discussion with the Adviser of the reasons for the Portfolio’s performance, the directors retained confidence in the Adviser’s ability to manage the Portfolio. The directors determined to continue to monitor the Portfolio’s performance closely.
Advisory Fees and Other Expenses
The directors considered the advisory fee rate paid by the Portfolio to the Adviser and information prepared by Lipper concerning advisory fee rates paid by other funds in the same Lipper category as the Portfolio at a common asset level. The directors recognized that it is difficult to make comparisons of advisory fees because there are variations in the services that are included in the fees paid by other funds.
The directors also considered the fees the Adviser charges non-fund clients pursuing a substantially similar investment style. For this purpose, they reviewed the relevant fee information from the Adviser’s Form ADV and the evaluation from the Fund’s Senior Officer. The directors noted that the institutional fee schedule started at a higher fee rate than the Portfolio’s starting fee rate, but had more breakpoints starting at lower asset levels. As a result, the application of the institutional fee schedule to the level of assets of the Portfolio would result in a lower fee rate than that being paid by the Portfolio. The
19
| | |
VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
CONTINUANCE DISCLOSURE | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
directors noted that the Adviser may, in some cases, agree to fee rates with large institutional clients that are lower than those reviewed by the directors and that they had previously discussed with the Adviser its policies in respect of such arrangements. The directors also reviewed information that indicated that the Portfolio’s fee rate is higher than the sub-advisory fee rate earned by the Adviser for sub-advising certain registered investment companies with a similar investment style. The directors noted that the advisory fee schedule for the Portfolio is the same as that for its Corresponding Fund.
The Adviser reviewed with the directors the significantly greater scope of the services it provides to the Portfolio relative to institutional clients and sub-advised funds. The Adviser also noted that because mutual funds are constantly issuing and redeeming shares, they are more difficult to manage than an institutional account, where the assets tend to be relatively stable. In light of the substantial differences in services rendered by the Adviser to institutional clients as compared to funds such as the Portfolio, the directors considered these fee comparisons inapt and did not place significant weight on them in their deliberations.
The directors also considered the total expense ratio of the Class A shares of the Portfolio in comparison to the fees and expenses of funds within two comparison groups created by Lipper: an Expense Group and an Expense Universe. Lipper described an Expense Group as a representative sample of funds similar to the Portfolio and an Expense Universe as a broader group, consisting of all funds in the investment classification/objective with a similar load type as the Portfolio. The Class A expense ratio of the Portfolio was based on the Portfolio’s latest fiscal year. The directors noted that it was likely that the expense ratios of some of the other funds in the Portfolio’s Lipper category were lowered by waivers or reimbursements by those funds’ investment advisers, which in some cases might be voluntary or temporary. The directors view the expense ratio information as relevant to their evaluation of the Adviser’s services because the Adviser is responsible for coordinating services provided to the Portfolio by others.
The directors noted that, at the Portfolio’s current size, its contractual effective advisory fee rate of 55 basis points, plus the 3 basis point impact of the administrative expense reimbursement in the latest fiscal year, was lower than the Expense Group median. The directors also noted that the Portfolio’s total expense ratio, which had been capped by the Adviser (although the expense ratio was currently lower than the cap), was lower than the Expense Group and the Expense Universe medians. The directors concluded that the Portfolio’s expense ratio was satisfactory.
Economies of Scale
The directors noted that the advisory fee schedule for the Portfolio contains breakpoints that reduce the fee rates on assets above specified levels. The directors took into consideration prior presentations by an independent consultant on economies of scale in the mutual fund industry and for the AllianceBernstein Funds, and by the Adviser concerning certain of its views on economies of scale. The directors also had requested and received from the Adviser certain updates on economies of scale at the May 2012 meetings. The directors believe that economies of scale may be realized (if at all) by the Adviser across a variety of products and services, and not only in respect of a single fund. The directors noted that there is no established methodology for establishing breakpoints that give effect to the fund-specific services provided by a fund’s adviser and to the economies of scale that an adviser may realize in its overall mutual fund business or those components of it which directly or indirectly affect a fund’s operations. The directors observed that in the mutual fund industry as a whole, as well as among funds similar to the Portfolio, there is no uniformity or pattern in the fees and asset levels at which breakpoints (if any) apply. The directors also noted that the advisory agreements for many funds do not have breakpoints at all. Having taken these factors into account, the directors concluded that the Portfolio’s shareholders would benefit from a sharing of economies of scale in the event the Portfolio’s net assets exceed a breakpoint in the future.
20
| | |
| | |
VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
THE FOLLOWING IS NOT PART OF THE SHAREHOLDER REPORT OR THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
SUMMARY OF SENIOR OFFICER’S EVALUATION OF INVESTMENT ADVISORY AGREEMENT1
The following is a summary of the evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement between AllianceBernstein L.P. (the “Adviser”) and the AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund (the “Fund”), in respect of AllianceBernstein Value Portfolio (the “Portfolio”).2 The evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement was prepared by Philip L. Kirstein, the Senior Officer of the Fund, for the Directors of the Fund, as required by a September 2004 agreement between the Adviser and the New York State Attorney General (the “NYAG”). The Senior Officer’s evaluation of the Investment Advisory Agreement is not meant to diminish the responsibility or authority of the Board of Directors of the Fund to perform its duties pursuant to Section 15 of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “40 Act”) and applicable state law. The purpose of the summary is to provide shareholders with a synopsis of the independent evaluation of the reasonableness of the advisory fees proposed to be paid by the Portfolio which was provided to the Directors in connection with their review of the proposed approval of the continuance of the Investment Advisory Agreement. The Senior Officer’s evaluation considered the following factors:
| 1. | Advisory fees charged to institutional and other clients of the Adviser for like services; |
| 2. | Advisory fees charged by other mutual fund companies for like services; |
| 3. | Costs to the Adviser and its affiliates of supplying services pursuant to the advisory agreement, excluding any intra-corporate profit; |
| 4. | Profit margins of the Adviser and its affiliates from supplying such services; |
| 5. | Possible economies of scale as the Portfolio grows larger; and |
| 6. | Nature and quality of the Adviser’s services including the performance of the Portfolio. |
These factors, with the exception of the first factor, are generally referred to as the “Gartenberg factors,” which were articulated by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in 1982. Gartenberg v. Merrill Lynch Asset Management, Inc., 694 F. 2d 923 (2d Cir. 1982). The first factor is an additional factor required to be considered by the AoD. On March 30, 2010, the Supreme Court held the Gartenberg decision was correct in its basic formulation of what §36(b) requires: to face liability under §36(b), “an investment adviser must charge a fee that is so disproportionately large that it bears no reasonable relationship to the services rendered and could not have been the product of arm’s length bargaining.” Jones v. Harris Associates L.P., 130 S. Ct. 1418 (2010). In the Jones decision, the Court stated the Gartenberg approach fully incorporates the correct understanding of fiduciary duty within the context of section 36(b) and noted with approval that “Gartenberg insists that all relevant circumstances be taken into account” and “uses the range of fees that might result from arm’s-length bargaining as the benchmark for reviewing challenged fees.”3
PORTFOLIO ADVISORY FEES, NET ASSETS & EXPENSE RATIOS
The Adviser proposed that the Portfolio pay the advisory fee set forth in the table below for receiving the services to be provided pursuant to the Investment Advisory Agreement. The fee schedule below, implemented in January 2004 in consideration of the Adviser’s settlement with the NYAG in December 2003, is based on a master schedule that contemplates eight categories of funds with almost all funds in each category having the same advisory fee schedule.
| | | | | | | | |
Category | | Advisory Fee Based on % of Average Daily Net Assets | | Net Assets
03/31/12
($MIL) | | | Portfolio |
Value | | 55 bp on first $2.5 billion 45 bp on next $2.5 billion 40 bp on the balance | | $ | 183.4 | | | Value Portfolio |
The Adviser is reimbursed as specified in the Investment Advisory Agreement for certain clerical, legal, accounting, administrative and other services provided to the Portfolio. During the Portfolio’s most recently completed fiscal year, the Adviser received $60,578 (0.03% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets) for such services.
1 | | The information in the fee summary was completed on April 19, 2012 and discussed with the Board of Directors on May 1-3, 2012. |
2 | | Future references to the Fund and the Portfolio do not include “AllianceBernstein.” References in the fee summary pertaining to performance and expense ratio rankings refer to the Class A shares of the Portfolio. |
3 | | Jones v. Harris at 1427. |
21
| | |
VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
The Adviser has agreed to waive that portion of its management fees and/or reimburse the Portfolio for that portion of its total operating expenses to the degree necessary to limit the Portfolio’s expense ratios to the amounts set forth below for the Portfolio’s fiscal year. The waiver is terminable by the Adviser on May 1st of each year upon at least 60 days written notice. It should be noted that the Portfolio was operating below its expense caps for the most recent fiscal year; accordingly the expense limitation undertaking of the Portfolio was of no effect. In addition, set forth below are the gross expense ratios of the Portfolio for the most recently completed fiscal year:
| | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Expense Cap Pursuant to Expense Limitation Undertaking | | Gross Expense Ratio | | | Fiscal Year End |
Value Portfolio | | Class A 1.20% Class B 1.45% | |
| 0.71%
0.96% |
| | December 31 |
I. ADVISORY FEES CHARGED TO INSTITUTIONAL AND OTHER CLIENTS
The advisory fees charged to investment companies which the Adviser manages and sponsors are normally higher than those charged to similar sized institutional accounts, including pension plans and sub-advised investment companies. The fee differential reflects, among other things, different services provided to such clients, and different liabilities assumed. Services provided by the Adviser to the Portfolio that are not provided to non-investment company clients and sub-advised investment companies include providing office space and personnel to serve as Fund Officers, who among other responsibilities make the certifications required under the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002, and coordinating with and monitoring the Portfolio’s third party service providers such as Fund counsel, auditors, custodians, transfer agents and pricing services. The accounting, administrative, legal and compliance requirements for the Portfolio are more costly than those for institutional assets due to the greater complexities and time required for investment companies, although as previously noted, the Adviser is reimbursed for providing such services. Also, retail mutual funds managed by the Adviser are widely held. Servicing the Portfolio’s investors is more time consuming and labor intensive compared to institutional clients since the Adviser needs to communicate with a more extensive network of financial intermediaries and shareholders. The Adviser also believes that it incurs substantial entrepreneurial risk when offering a new mutual fund, since establishing a new mutual fund requires a large upfront investment, and it may take a long time for the fund to achieve profitability since the fund must be priced to scale from inception in order to be competitive and assets are acquired one account at a time. In addition, managing the cash flow of an investment company may be more difficult than managing that of a stable pool of assets, such as an institutional account with little cash movement in either direction, particularly, if a fund is in net redemption and the Adviser is frequently forced to sell securities to raise cash for redemptions. However, managing a fund with positive cash flow may be easier at times than managing a stable pool of assets. In recent years, investment advisers have been sued by institutional clients and have suffered reputational damage both by the attendant publicity and outcomes other than complete victories. Accordingly, the legal and reputational risks associated with institutional accounts are greater than previously thought, although still not equal to those related to the mutual fund industry.
Notwithstanding the Adviser’s view that managing an investment company is not comparable to managing other institutional accounts because the services provided are different, the Supreme Court has indicated consideration should be given to the advisory fees charged to institutional accounts that have a substantially similar investment style as the Portfolio.4 In addition to the AllianceBernstein institutional fee schedule, set forth below is what would have been the effective advisory
4 | | The Supreme Court stated that “courts may give such comparisons the weight that they merit in light of the similarities and differences between the services that the clients in question require, but the courts must be wary of inapt comparisons.” Among the significant differences the Supreme Court noted that may exist between services provided to mutual funds and institutional accounts are “higher marketing costs.” Jones v. Harris at 1428. |
22
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
fee of the Portfolio had the AllianceBernstein institutional fee schedule been applicable to the Portfolio versus the Portfolio’s advisory fee based on March 31, 2012 net assets:5
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Net Assets 3/31/12 ($MIL) | | | AllianceBernstein Institutional Fee Schedule | | Effective AB Inst. Adv. Fee | | | Portfolio Advisory Fee | |
Value Portfolio | | $ | 183.4 | | | Diversified Value Schedule 65 bp on first $25m 50 bp on the next $25m 40 bp on the next $50m 30 bp on the next $100m 25 bp on the balance Minimum account size $25m | | | 0.402 | % | | | 0.550 | % |
The Adviser also manages AllianceBernstein Value Fund, Inc. (“Value Fund, Inc.”), a retail mutual fund, which has a substantially similar investment style as the Portfolio. Set forth below is the fee schedule of Value Fund, Inc. and what would have been the effective advisory fee of the Portfolio had the fee schedule of the retail mutual fund been applicable to the Portfolio:6
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | AllianceBernstein Mutual Fund | | Fee Schedule | | ABMF
Effective Fee | | | Portfolio
Advisory Fee | |
Value Portfolio | | Value Fund, Inc. | | 0.55% on first $2.5 billion 0.45% on next $2.5 billion 0.40% on the balance | | | 0.550% | | | | 0.550% | |
The Adviser provides sub-advisory services to certain other investment companies managed by other fund families that have an investment style similar to that of the Portfolio. The Adviser charges the fees set forth below for the sub-advisory relationships that have a somewhat similar investment style as the Portfolio. Also shown are the Portfolio’s advisory fees and what would have been the effective advisory fees of the Portfolio had the fee schedules of the sub-advisory relationships been applicable to the Portfolio based on March 31, 2012 net assets.
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | | | Fee Schedule | | Effective
Sub-Adv.
Fee (%) | | | Portfolio Advisory Fee (%) | |
Value Portfolio | | Client #17 | | 0.49% on the first $100 million 0.30% on the next $100 million 0.25% on the balance | | | 0.404% | | | | 0.550% | |
| | Client #27 | | 0.30% of the average daily net assets | | | 0.300% | | | | 0.550% | |
| | Client #3 | | 0.15% on the first $1 billion 0.14% on the next $2 billion 0.12% on the next $2 billion 0.10% on the balance +/- Performance Fee (v. R`000V) | | | 0.150% | 8 | | | 0.550% | |
It is fair to note that the services the Adviser provides pursuant to sub-advisory agreements are generally confined to the services related to the investment process; in other words, they are not as comprehensive as the services provided to the Portfolio by the Adviser. In addition, to the extent that certain of these sub-advisory relationships are with affiliates of the Adviser, the fee schedules may not reflect arm’s length bargaining or negotiations.
5 | | The Adviser has indicated that with respect to institutional accounts with assets greater than $300 million, it will negotiate a fee schedule. Discounts that are negotiated vary based upon each client relationship. |
6 | | The retail mutual fund was also affected by the settlement between the Adviser and the NYAG. As a result, the Portfolio has the same breakpoints in its advisory fee schedule as the retail mutual fund. |
7 | | The client is an affiliate of the Adviser. |
8 | | The sub-advised fund’s sub-advisory fee shown does not include any performance fee adjustment. |
23
| | |
VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
While it appears that the sub-advisory relationships are paying a lower fee than the Portfolios, it is difficult to evaluate the relevance of such lower fees due to differences in terms of the services provided, risks involved and other competitive factors between the Portfolio and the sub-advisory relationship. There could be various business reasons why an investment adviser would be willing to provide a sub-advisory relationship investment related services at a different fee level than an investment company it is sponsoring where the investment adviser is providing all the services, not just investment management, generally required by a registered investment company.
II. MANAGEMENT FEES CHARGED BY OTHER MUTUAL FUND COMPANIES FOR LIKE SERVICES.
Lipper, Inc. (“Lipper”), an analytical service that is not affiliated with the Adviser, compared the fees charged to the Portfolio with fees charged to other investment companies for similar services offered by other investment advisers.9 Lipper’s analysis included the comparison of the Portfolio’s contractual management fee, estimated at the approximate current asset level of the Portfolio, to the median of the Portfolio’s Lipper Expense Group (“EG”) and the Portfolio’s contractual management fee ranking.10
Lipper describes an EG as a representative sample of comparable funds. Lipper’s standard methodology for screening funds to be included in an EG entails the consideration of several fund criteria, including fund type, investment classification/objective, load type and similar 12b-1/non-12b-1 service fees, asset (size) comparability, expense components and attributes. An EG will typically consist of seven to twenty funds.
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Contractual Management Fee11 | | | Lipper Exp. Group Median (%) | | | Rank | |
Value Portfolio | | | 0.550 | | | | 0.745 | | | | 1/13 | |
Lipper also analyzed the Portfolio’s most recently completed fiscal year total expense ratio in comparison to the Portfolio’s EG and Lipper Expense Universe (“EU”). The EU12 is a broader group compared to the EG, consisting of all funds that have the same investment classification/objective and load type as the subject Portfolio.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Portfolio | | Expense Ratio (%)13 | | | Lipper Exp. Group Median (%) | | | Lipper Group Rank | | | Lipper Exp. Universe Median (%) | | | Lipper Universe Rank | |
Value Portfolio | | | 0.706 | | | | 0.748 | | | | 2/13 | | | | 0.750 | | | | 11/36 | |
Based on this analysis, the Portfolio has a more favorable ranking on a management fee basis than on a total expense ratio basis.
III. COSTS TO THE ADVISER AND ITS AFFILIATES OF SUPPLYING SERVICES PURSUANT TO THE ADVISORY FEE ARRANGEMENT, EXCLUDING ANY INTRA-CORPORATE PROFIT.
The Adviser utilizes two profitability reporting systems, which operate independently but are aligned with each other, to estimate the Adviser’s profitability in connection with investment advisory services provided to the Portfolio. The Senior Officer has retained a consultant to provide independent advice regarding the alignment of the two profitability systems as well as the methodologies and allocations utilized by both profitability systems.
9 | | The Supreme Court cautioned against accepting mutual fund fee comparisons without careful scrutiny since “these comparisons are problematic because these fees, like those challenged, may not be the product of the negotiations conducted at arm’s-length.” Jones v. Harris at 1429. |
10 | | The contractual management fee is calculated by Lipper using the Portfolio’s contractual management fee rate at a hypothetical asset level. The hypothetical asset level is based on the combined net assets of all classes of the Portfolio, rounded up to the next $25 million. Lipper’s total expense ratio information is based on the most recent annual report except as otherwise noted. A ranking of “1” would mean that the Portfolio had the lowest effective fee rate in the Lipper peer group. |
11 | | The contractual management fee does not reflect any expense reimbursements made by the Portfolio to the Adviser for certain clerical, legal, accounting, administrative and other services. In addition, the contractual management fee does not reflect any advisory fee waiver or expense cap that would effectively reduce the actual management fee. |
12 | | Except for asset (size) comparability, Lipper uses the same criteria for selecting an EG when selecting an EU. Unlike the EG, the EU allows for the same adviser to be represented by more than just one fund. |
13 | | Most recently completed fiscal year end Class A total expense ratio. |
24
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
IV. PROFIT MARGINS OF THE ADVISER AND ITS AFFILIATES FOR SUPPLYING SUCH SERVICES.
The Portfolio’s profitability information, prepared by the Adviser for the Board of Directors, was reviewed by the Senior Officer and the consultant. The Adviser’s profitability from providing investment advisory services to the Portfolio decreased during calendar year 2011, relative to 2010.
In addition to the Adviser’s direct profits from managing the Portfolio, certain of the Adviser’s affiliates have business relationships with the Portfolio and may earn a profit from providing other services to the Portfolio. The courts have referred to this type of business opportunity as “fall-out benefits” to the Adviser and indicated that such benefits should be factored into the evaluation of the total relationship between the Portfolio and the Adviser. Neither case law nor common business practice precludes the Adviser’s affiliates from earning a reasonable profit on this type of relationship provided the affiliates’ charges and services are competitive. These affiliates provide transfer agent, distribution and brokerage related services to the Portfolio and receive transfer agent fees, Rule 12b-1 payments, and brokerage commissions. In addition, the Adviser benefits from soft dollar arrangements which offset expenses the Adviser would otherwise incur.
The Portfolio has adopted a distribution plan for Class B shares pursuant to Rule 12b-1 under the 40 Act. Under the distribution plan, the Portfolio pays distribution and servicing fees to its principal underwriter, AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (“ABI”), at an annual rate of up to 0.50% of the Portfolio’s average daily net assets attributable to Class B shares. The current annual rate that the Portfolio pays to ABI for 12b-1 fees is 0.25%. During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011, AllianceBernstein Investments, Inc. (“ABI”), the Portfolio’s distributor and an affiliate of the Adviser, received $481,003 in Rule 12b-1 fees.
During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011, the Adviser incurred distribution expenses in the amount of $1,408,158 in connection with activities primarily intended to result in the sale of the Portfolio’s Class B shares. This amount includes the 12b-1 fees paid by the Portfolio to the Adviser.
Financial intermediaries, such as insurers, market and sell shares of the Portfolio and typically receive compensation from ABI, the Advisers and/or the Portfolio for selling shares of the Portfolio. These financial intermediaries receive compensation in any or all of the following forms: 12b-1 fees, defrayal of costs for educational seminars and training, additional distribution support, recordkeeping and/or administrative services. Payments related to providing contract-holder recordkeeping and/or administrative services will generally not exceed 0.35% of the average daily net assets of the Portfolio attributable to the relevant intermediary over the year. With respect to the Fund, which includes the Portfolio and other Portfolios of the Fund not discussed in this summary, ABI paid approximately $500,000 in 2011.
The transfer agent of the Portfolio is AllianceBernstein Investor Services, Inc. (“ABIS”). During the most recently completed fiscal year, ABIS received a fee of $1,385 from the Portfolio.14
The Portfolio did not effect brokerage transactions and pay commissions through the Adviser’s affiliate, Sanford C. Bernstein & Co., LLC (“SCB & Co.”) nor its U.K. affiliate, Sanford C. Bernstein Limited (“SCB Ltd.”), collectively “SCB,” during the Portfolio’s most recently completed fiscal year. The Adviser represented that SCB’s profitability from business conducted in the future with the Portfolio would be comparable to the profitability of SCB’s dealings with other similar third party clients. In the ordinary course of business, SCB receives and pays liquidity rebates from electronic communications networks (“ECNs”) derived from trading for its clients, including the Portfolio. These credits and charges are not being passed onto any SCB client. The Adviser also receives certain soft dollar benefits from brokers that execute agency trades for the Portfolio and other clients. These soft dollar benefits reduce the Adviser’s cost of doing business and increase its profitability.
V. POSSIBLE ECONOMIES OF SCALE
The Adviser has indicated that economies of scale are being shared with shareholders through fee structures,15 subsidies and enhancement to services. Based on some of the professional literature that has considered economies of scale in the mutual fund industry, it is thought that to the extent economies of scale exist, they may more often exist across a fund family as opposed to a specific fund. This is because the costs incurred by the Adviser, such as investment research or technology for trading or compliance systems can be spread across a greater asset base as the fund family increases in size. It is also
14 | | The Fund (which includes the Portfolio and other Portfolios of the Fund) paid ABIS a flat fee of $18,000 in 2010. |
15 | | Fee structures include fee reductions, pricing at scale and breakpoints in advisory fee schedules. |
25
| | |
VALUE PORTFOLIO | | |
SENIOR OFFICER FEE EVALUATION | | |
(continued) | | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
possible that as the level of services required to operate a successful investment company has increased over time, and advisory firms make such investments in their business to provide services, there may be a sharing of economies of scale without a reduction in advisory fees.
An independent consultant, retained by the Senior Officer, provided the Board of Directors information on the Adviser’s firm-wide average costs from 2005 through 2011 and potential economies of scale. The independent consultant noted that from 2005 through 2007 the Adviser experienced significant growth in assets under management (“AUM”). During this period, operating expenses increased, in part to keep up with growth, and in part reflecting market returns. However, from 2008 through the first quarter of 2009, AUM rapidly and significantly decreased. Some operating expenses, including base compensation and office space, adjusted more slowly during this period, resulting in an increase in average costs. Since 2009, AUM has moved within a range of $400 to $500 million ending 2011 with an average of $411 million in the fourth quarter. The independent consultant noted that changes in operating expenses reflect changes in business composition and business practices in response to changes in financial markets. Finally, the independent consultant concluded that the increase in average cost and the decline in net operating margin across the company since 2008 are inconsistent with the view that there are currently “economies of scale” to be shared with clients through lower fees.
In February 2008, the independent consultant provided the Board of Directors an update of the Deli16 study on advisory fees and various fund characteristics.17 The independent consultant first reiterated the results of his previous two dimensional comparison analysis (fund size and family size) with the Board of Directors.18 The independent consultant then discussed the results of the regression model that was utilized to study the effects of various factors on advisory fees. The regression model output indicated that the bulk of the variation in fees predicted were explained by various factors, but substantially by fund AUM, family AUM, index fund indicator and investment style. The independent consultant also compared the advisory fees of the AllianceBernstein Mutual Funds to similar funds managed by 19 other large asset managers, regardless of the fund size and each Adviser’s proportion of mutual fund assets to non-mutual fund assets.
VI. NATURE AND QUALITY OF THE ADVISER’S SERVICES, INCLUDING THE PERFORMANCE OF THE PORTFOLIO
With assets under management of approximately $419 billion as of March 31, 2012, the Adviser has the investment experience to manage and provide non-investment services (described in Section I) to the Portfolio.
The information prepared by Lipper shows the 1, 3 and 5 year performance returns and rankings of the Portfolio19 relative to its Lipper Performance Group (“PG”) and Lipper Performance Universe (“PU”)20 for the periods ended February 29, 2012.21
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Fund | | | PG Median | | | PU Median | | | PG Rank | | | PU Rank | |
Value Portfolio | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
1 year | | | –1.08 | | | | 0.68 | | | | 1.53 | | | | 11/13 | | | | 35/46 | |
3 year | | | 22.73 | | | | 23.52 | | | | 23.25 | | | | 9/13 | | | | 26/43 | |
5 year | | | –3.90 | | | | 0.51 | | | | –0.04 | | | | 10/10 | | | | 34/36 | |
16 | | The Deli study, originally published in 2002 based on 1997 data and updated for the February 2008 Presentation, may be of diminished value due to the age of the data used in the presentation and the changes experienced in the industry over the last four years. |
17 | | As mentioned previously, the Supreme Court cautioned against accepting mutual fund fee comparisons without careful scrutiny since the fees may not be the product of negotiations conducted at arm’s length. See Jones V. Harris at 1429. |
18 | | The two dimensional analysis showed patterns of lower advisory fees for funds with larger asset sizes and funds from larger family sizes compared to funds with smaller asset sizes and funds from smaller family sizes, which according to the independent consultant is indicative of a sharing of economies of scale and scope. However, in less liquid and active markets, such is not the case, as the empirical analysis showed potential for diseconomies of scale in those markets. The empirical analysis also showed diminishing economies of scale and scope as funds surpassed a certain high level of assets. |
19 | | The performance rankings are for the Class A shares of the Portfolio. The Portfolio’s performance returns shown were provided by Lipper. |
20 | | The Portfolio’s PG is identical to the Portfolio’s respective EG. The Portfolio’s PU is not identical to the Portfolio’s EU as the criteria for including/excluding a fund from a PU is somewhat different from that of an EU. |
21 | | Lipper investment classification/objective dictates the PG and PU throughout the life of the fund even if a fund had a different investment classification/objective at a different point in time. |
26
| | |
| | AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund |
Set forth below are the 1, 3, 5 year and since inception performance returns of the Portfolio (in bold)22 versus its benchmarks.23 Portfolio and benchmark volatility and reward-to-variability ratio (“Sharpe Ratio”) information is also shown.24
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | 1 Year (%) | | | 3 Year (%) | | | 5 Year (%) | | | Since Inception (%) | | | Annualized | | | Risk Period (Year) | |
| | | | | Volatility (%) | | | Sharpe (%) | | |
Value Portfolio | | – | 1.08 | | | | 22.73 | | | – | 3.90 | | | | 5.39 | | | | 20.97 | | | – | 0.14 | | | | 5 | |
Russell 1000 Value Index | | | 2.18 | | | | 25.01 | | | – | 1.08 | | | | 7.60 | | | | 20.05 | | | – | 0.02 | | | | 5 | |
Inception Date: July 22, 2002 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
CONCLUSION:
Based on the factors discussed above the Senior Officer’s conclusion is that the proposed advisory fee for the Portfolio is reasonable and within the range of what would have been negotiated at arm’s-length in light of all the surrounding circumstances. This conclusion in respect of the Portfolio is based on an evaluation of all of these factors and no single factor was dispositive.
Dated: May 25, 2012
22 | | The performance returns and risk measures shown in the table are for the Class A shares of the Portfolio. |
23 | | The Adviser provided Portfolio and benchmark performance return information for periods through February 29, 2012. |
24 | | Portfolio and benchmark volatility and Sharpe Ratio information was obtained through Lipper LANA, a database maintained by Lipper. Volatility is a statistical measure of the tendency of a market price or yield to vary over time. A Sharpe Ratio is a risk adjusted measure of return that divides a portfolio’s return in excess of the riskless return by the portfolio’s standard deviation. A portfolio with a greater volatility would be viewed as more risky than a portfolio with equivalent performance but lower volatility; for that reason, a greater return would be demanded for the more risky portfolio. A portfolio with a higher Sharpe Ratio would be viewed as better performing than a portfolio with a lower Sharpe Ratio. |
27
ITEM 2. CODE OF ETHICS.
Not applicable when filing a semi-annual report to shareholders.
ITEM 3. AUDIT COMMITTEE FINANCIAL EXPERT.
Not applicable when filing a semi-annual report to shareholders.
ITEM 4. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES.
Not applicable when filing a semi-annual report to shareholders.
ITEM 5. AUDIT COMMITTEE OF LISTED REGISTRANTS.
Not applicable to the registrant.
ITEM 6. SCHEDULE OF INVESTMENTS.
Please see Schedule of Investments contained in the Report to Shareholders included under Item 1 of this Form N-CSR.
ITEM 7. DISCLOSURE OF PROXY VOTING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR CLOSED-END MANAGEMENT INVESTMENT COMPANIES.
Not applicable to the registrant.
ITEM 8. PORTFOLIO MANAGERS OF CLOSED-END MANAGEMENT INVESTMENT COMPANIES.
Not applicable to the registrant.
ITEM 9. PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES BY CLOSED-END MANAGEMENT INVESTMENT COMPANY AND AFFILIATED PURCHASERS.
Not applicable to the registrant.
ITEM 10. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS.
There have been no material changes to the procedures by which shareholders may recommend nominees to the Fund’s Board of Directors since the Fund last provided disclosure in response to this item.
ITEM 11. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES.
(a) The registrant’s principal executive officer and principal financial officer have concluded that the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rule 30a-2(c) under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended) are effective at the reasonable assurance level based on their evaluation of these controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days of the filing date of this document.
(b) There were no changes in the registrant’s internal controls over financial reporting that occurred during the second fiscal quarter of the period that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
ITEM 12. EXHIBITS.
The following exhibits are attached to this Form N-CSR:
| | |
EXHIBIT NO. | | DESCRIPTION OF EXHIBIT |
| |
12 (b) (1) | | Certification of Principal Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
| |
12 (b) (2) | | Certification of Principal Financial Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
| |
12 (c) | | Certification of Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Investment Company Act of 1940, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
(Registrant): AllianceBernstein Variable Products Series Fund, Inc.
| | |
By: | | /s/ ROBERT M. KEITH |
| | Robert M. Keith |
| | President |
Date: August 9, 2012
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Investment Company Act of 1940, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
| | |
By: | | /s/ ROBERT M. KEITH |
| | Robert M. Keith |
| | President |
Date: August 9, 2012
| | |
By: | | /s/ JOSEPH J. MANTINEO |
| | Joseph J. Mantineo |
| | Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer |
Date: August 9, 2012