COGNEX CORP - Annual Report: 2011 (Form 10-K)

Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

[ X ] Annual report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011 or

[    ] Transition report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 for the transition period from                      to                     

Commission File Number 001-34218

COGNEX CORPORATION

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of the registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.    [    ]

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).

Aggregate market value of voting stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant

as of July 3, 2011: $1,399,855,127

$.002 par value common stock outstanding as of January 29, 2012: 42,419,311 shares

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE:

The registrant intends to file a Definitive Proxy Statement pursuant to Regulation 14A within 120 days of the end of the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011. Portions of such Proxy Statement are incorporated by reference in Part III of this report.

Table of Contents

COGNEX CORPORATION

ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K

FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2011

INDEX

Table of Contents

PART I

This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Federal Securities Laws. Readers can identify these forward-looking statements by our use of the words “expects,” “anticipates,” “estimates,” “believes,” “projects,” “intends,” “plans,” “will,” “may,” “shall,” “could,” “should,” and similar words and other statements of a similar sense. Our future results may differ materially from current results and from those projected in the forward-looking statements as a result of known and unknown risks and uncertainties. Readers should pay particular attention to considerations described in the section captioned “Risk Factors,” appearing in Part I – Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. We caution readers not to place undue reliance upon any such forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date made. We disclaim any obligation to subsequently revise forward-looking statements to reflect the occurrence of anticipated or unanticipated events or circumstances after the date such statements are made.

Unless the context otherwise requires, the words “Cognex^®,” the “Company,” “we,” “our,” “us,” and “our company” refer to Cognex Corporation and its consolidated subsidiaries.

Corporate Profile

Cognex Corporation was incorporated in Massachusetts in 1981. Our corporate headquarters are located at One Vision Drive, Natick, Massachusetts 01760 and our telephone number is (508) 650-3000.

Cognex is a leading worldwide provider of machine vision products that capture and analyze visual information in order to automate tasks, primarily in manufacturing processes, where vision is required. Machine vision is important for applications in which human vision is inadequate to meet requirements for size, accuracy, or speed, or in instances where substantial cost savings are obtained through the reduction of labor or improved product quality. Today, many types of manufacturing equipment require machine vision because of the increasing demands for speed and accuracy in manufacturing processes, as well as the decreasing size of items being manufactured.

Cognex has two operating divisions: the Modular Vision Systems Division (MVSD), based in Natick, Massachusetts, and the Surface Inspection Systems Division (SISD), based in Alameda, California. MVSD develops, manufactures, and markets modular vision systems that are used to automate the manufacture of discrete items, such as cellular phones, aspirin bottles, and automobile wheels, by locating, identifying, inspecting, and measuring them during the manufacturing process. SISD develops, manufactures, and markets surface inspection vision systems that are used to inspect the surfaces of materials processed in a continuous fashion, such as metal, paper, nonwoven, plastic, and glass, to ensure there are no flaws or defects on the surfaces. Historically, MVSD has been the source of the majority of the Company’s revenue, representing approximately 85% of total revenue in 2011. Financial information about these segments may be found in Note 19 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, appearing in Part II – Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

What is Machine Vision?

Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, human vision has played an indispensable role in the process of manufacturing products. Human eyes did what no machines could do themselves: locating and positioning work, tracking the flow of parts, and inspecting output for quality and consistency. Today, however, the requirements of many manufacturing processes have surpassed the limits of human eyesight. Manufactured items often are produced too quickly or with tolerances too small to be analyzed by the human eye. In response to manufacturers’ needs, “machine vision” technology emerged, providing manufacturing equipment with the gift of sight. Machine vision systems were first widely embraced by manufacturers of electronic components who needed this technology to produce

1

Table of Contents

computer chips with decreasing geometries. However, advances in technology and ease-of-use, combined with the decreasing cost of implementing vision applications, have made machine vision available to a broader range of users.

Machine vision products combine cameras with intelligent software to collect images and then answer questions about these images, such as:

Machine Vision Market

Cognex machine vision is primarily used in the manufacturing sector, where the technology is widely recognized as an important component of automated production and quality assurance. In this sector, Cognex serves three primary markets: factory automation, semiconductor and electronics capital equipment, and surface inspection.

Factory automation customers, who are included in the Company’s MVSD segment, purchase Cognex vision products and incorporate them into their manufacturing processes. Virtually every manufacturer can achieve better quality and manufacturing efficiency by using machine vision, and therefore, this market includes a broad base of customers across a variety of industries, including automotive, consumer electronics, food and beverage, health and beauty, pharmaceutical, medical devices, and solar. The factory automation market also includes customers who purchase Cognex vision products for use outside of the assembly process, such as using ID products in logistics automation for package sorting and distribution. Sales to factory automation customers represented approximately 73% of total revenue in 2011, compared to 69% of total revenue in 2010.

Semiconductor and electronics capital equipment manufacturers, who are included in the Company’s MVSD segment, purchase Cognex vision products and integrate them into the automation equipment that they manufacture and then sell to their customers to either make semiconductor chips or assemble printed circuit boards. Demand from these capital equipment manufacturers has historically been highly cyclical, with periods of investment followed by downturn. This market, which represented a large portion of our business during the 1990’s, changed after the dot-com bubble burst in 2000. Customers shifted away from embedded machine vision systems containing specialized hardware as PC speeds increased. They first migrated to products containing mostly software with significantly less hardware content, and eventually began buying only the software portion of the system from Cognex. Although these software-only products have high gross margins, the average selling price is significantly lower than for a complete vision system. Sales to semiconductor and electronics capital equipment manufacturers represented approximately 12% of total revenue in 2011, compared to 16% of total revenue in 2010.

2

Table of Contents

Surface inspection customers, which comprise the Company’s SISD segment, are manufacturers of materials processed in a continuous fashion, such as metal, paper, nonwoven, plastic, and glass. These customers need sophisticated machine vision to detect, classify, and analyze defects on the surfaces of those materials as they are being processed at high speeds. Surface inspection sales represented approximately 15% of total revenue in both 2011 and 2010.

No customer accounted for greater than 10% of total revenue in 2011, 2010, or 2009.

Business Strategy

Our goal is to expand our position as a leading worldwide provider of machine vision products. Sales to customers in the factory automation market represent the largest percentage of our total revenue, and we believe that this market provides the greatest potential for long-term, sustained revenue growth.

In order to grow the factory automation market, we have invested in developing new products and functionality that make vision easier to use and more affordable, and therefore, available to a broader base of customers. This investment includes selective expansion into new industrial and commercial vision applications through internal development, as well as the acquisition of businesses and technologies. We have also invested in building a worldwide sales and support infrastructure in order to access more of the potential market for machine vision. This investment includes opening sales offices in emerging markets, such as China, India, Brazil, and Eastern Europe, where we believe many manufacturers can benefit from incorporating machine vision into their production processes, and developing strategic alliances with other leading providers of factory automation products.

Acquisitions and Divestitures

Our business strategy includes selective expansion into new machine vision applications through the acquisition of businesses and technologies. We plan to continue to seek opportunities to expand our product line, customer base, distribution network, and technical talent through acquisitions in the machine vision industry.

In July 2008, we sold all of the assets of our lane departure warning business for $3 million. We entered this business in May 2006 with the acquisition of AssistWare Technology, Inc., a small company that had developed a vision system that could provide a warning to drivers when their vehicle was about to inadvertently cross a lane. For two years after the acquisition date, we invested additional funds to commercialize AssistWare’s product and to establish a business developing and selling lane departure warning products for driver assistance. This business was included in the MVSD segment, but was never integrated with the other Cognex businesses. During the second quarter of 2008, we determined that this business did not fit the Cognex business model, primarily because car and truck manufacturers want to work exclusively with existing Tier One suppliers and, although these suppliers had expressed interest in Cognex’s vision technology, they would require access to, and control of, our proprietary software. Accordingly, we accepted an offer from one of these suppliers and sold the lane departure warning business.

In September 2009, we acquired the web monitoring business of Monitoring Technology Corporation (MTC), a manufacturer of products for monitoring industrial equipment and processes, for $5 million. This business is included in the Company’s SISD segment. The acquired SmartAdvisor Web Monitoring System (WMS) is complementary to Cognex’s Smart View Web Inspection System (WIS). When used together, the WIS automatically identifies and classifies defects and the WMS then provides the customer with the ability to determine the root causes of each of those defects so that they can be quickly eliminated. The combination of WMS and WIS allows SISD to provide a fully-integrated system to its surface inspection customers.

Additional information about acquisitions may be found in Note 20 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, appearing in Part II – Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

3

Table of Contents

Products

Cognex offers a full range of vision and ID products designed to meet customer needs at different performance and price points. Our products range from low-cost vision sensors that are easily integrated, to PC-based systems for users with more experience or more complex requirements. Our products also have a variety of physical forms, depending upon the user’s need. For example, customers can purchase vision software to use with their own camera and processor, or they can purchase a standalone unit that combines camera, processor, and software into a single package.

Vision Software

Vision software provides users with the most flexibility by combining the full general-purpose library of Cognex vision tools with the cameras, frame grabbers, and peripheral equipment of their choice. The vision software runs on the customer’s PC, which enables easy integration with PC-based data and controls. Applications based upon Cognex vision software perform a wide range of vision tasks, including part location, identification, measurement, assembly verification, and robotic guidance. Cognex’s VisionPro^® software offers the power and flexibility of advanced programming with the simplicity of a graphical development environment. VisionPro’s extensive suite of patented vision tools enables customers to solve challenging machine vision applications.

Vision Systems

Vision systems combine camera, processor, and vision software into a single, rugged package with a simple and flexible user interface for configuring applications. These general-purpose vision systems are designed to be easily programmed to perform a wide range of vision tasks including part location, identification, measurement, assembly verification, and robotic guidance. Cognex offers the In-Sight^® product line of vision systems in a wide range of models to meet various price and performance requirements.

Vision Sensors

Unlike general-purpose vision systems that can be programmed to perform a wide variety of vision tasks, vision sensors are designed to deliver very simple, low-cost, reliable solutions for a limited number of common vision applications such as checking the presence and size of parts. Cognex offers the Checker^® product line of vision sensors that perform a variety of single-purpose vision tasks.

ID Products

ID products quickly and reliably read codes (e.g., one-dimensional barcodes or two-dimensional data matrix codes) that have been applied or directly marked on discrete items during the manufacturing process. Manufacturers of goods ranging from automotive parts, pharmaceutical items, aircraft components, and medical devices are increasingly using direct part mark (DPM) identification to ensure that the appropriate manufacturing processes are performed in the correct sequence and on the right parts. In addition, DPM is used to track parts from the beginning of their life to the end, and is also used in supply chain management and repair.

Cognex also offers applications in the automatic identification market outside of the manufacturing sector, such as using ID products in logistics automation for package sorting and distribution. As shipping volumes grow, more distribution centers are choosing to upgrade their traditional laser-based scanners to image-based barcode readers which will cost-effectively increase package sorter efficiency and throughput by improving read rates. Cognex offers the DataMan^® product line of ID readers that includes both hand-held and fixed-mount models.

Surface Inspection Systems

Surface inspection systems detect, identify, track, and report visual defects in any continuous material or process, such as metal, paper, nonwoven, plastic, and glass. The Smart View^® Web Inspection

4

Table of Contents

System is targeted at high-speed applications that require extremely accurate surface defect detection and identification. The SmartAdvisor^TM Web Monitoring System is a process monitoring system that is used to track defects to their source and determine the root cause. These systems can be delivered as standalone or integrated solutions.

Research, Development, and Engineering

Cognex engages in research, development, and engineering (RD&E) to enhance our existing products and to develop new products and functionality to meet market opportunities. In addition to internal research and development efforts, we intend to continue our strategy of gaining access to new technology through strategic relationships and acquisitions where appropriate.

As of December 31, 2011, Cognex employed 210 professionals in RD&E, many of whom are software developers. Cognex’s RD&E expenses totaled $40,946,000 in 2011, $33,080,000 in 2010, and $31,132,000 in 2009, or approximately 13%, 11%, and 18% of revenue, respectively. We believe that a continued commitment to RD&E activities is essential in order to maintain or achieve product leadership with our existing products and to provide innovative new product offerings. In addition, we consider our ability to accelerate time-to-market for new products to be critical to our revenue growth. Therefore, we expect to continue to make significant RD&E investments in the future. At any point in time, we have numerous research and development projects underway. Although we target our RD&E spending to be between 10% and 15% of total revenue, this percentage is impacted by revenue levels.

Manufacturing and Order Fulfillment

Cognex’s MVSD products are manufactured utilizing a turnkey operation whereby the majority of component procurement, system assembly, and initial testing are performed by third-party contract manufacturers. Cognex’s primary contract manufacturers are located in Ireland and Southeast Asia. The contract manufacturers use specified components and assembly/test documentation created and controlled by Cognex. Certain components are presently available only from a single source. After the completion of initial testing, a fully-assembled product from the contract manufacturer is routed to the Company’s facility in Cork, Ireland or Natick, Massachusetts, USA, where trained Cognex personnel load the software onto the product and perform quality control procedures. Finished product for customers in the Americas is then shipped from our Natick, Massachusetts facility, while finished product for customers in Europe and Southeast Asia is shipped from our Cork, Ireland facility. The Company’s distribution center in Koriyama, Japan purchases finished product from the Cork, Ireland facility and then ships this product to customers in Japan when orders are received.

Cognex’s SISD products are manufactured and shipped from its Alameda, California facility. The manufacturing process at the Alameda facility consists of component procurement, system assembly, software loading, quality control, and shipment of product to customers worldwide.

Sales Channels and Support Services

Cognex sells its MVSD products through a worldwide direct sales force that focuses on the development of strategic accounts that generate or are expected to generate significant sales volume, as well as through a global network of integration and distribution partners. Our integration partners are experts in vision and complementary technologies that can provide turnkey solutions for complex automation projects using vision, and our distribution partners provide sales and local support to help Cognex reach the many prospects for our products in factories around the world. Cognex’s SISD products are primarily sold through a worldwide direct sales force since there are fewer customers in a more concentrated group of industries.

As of December 31, 2011, Cognex’s sales force consisted of 335 professionals, and our partner network consisted of approximately 197 active integrators and 244 authorized distributors. Sales engineers call directly on targeted accounts and manage the activities of our partners within their terri-

5

Table of Contents

tories in order to implement the most advantageous sales model for our products. The majority of our sales force holds engineering or science degrees. Cognex has sales and support personnel located throughout the Americas, Japan, Europe, and Southeast Asia. In recent years, the Company has expanded its sales force in emerging markets, such as China and India (which the Company currently includes in its Southeast Asia region), Brazil (which the Company currently includes in its Americas region), and Eastern Europe, where we believe many manufacturers can benefit from incorporating machine vision into their production processes. During the third quarter of 2010, the Company established a Wholly Foreign Owned Enterprise (WFOE) in Shanghai, China and we began to sell to our Chinese customers through this new entity in the second quarter of 2011. The WFOE is able to accept payment from Chinese customers in Yuan, also known as Renminbi, which we believe will allow us to reach more of the potential market for machine vision throughout Mainland China.

During 2008, Cognex announced a partnership with Mitsubishi Electric Corporation, a leading worldwide provider of factory automation products (i.e., programmable controllers, motion controls, and industrial robots) based in Japan. Cognex and Mitsubishi have and will continue to jointly develop and market Cognex vision products to Mitsubishi’s factory automation customers. The products resulting from this collaboration have improved connectivity with Mitsubishi factory automation products and enabled customers to deploy systems more quickly. Cognex expects this partnership to increase its market presence on the factory floor, first in Japan and eventually in other fast-growing markets throughout Asia.

Sales to customers based outside of the United States represented approximately 66% of total revenue in 2011, compared to approximately 67% of total revenue in 2010. In 2011, approximately 33% of the Company’s total revenue came from customers based in Europe, 16% from customers based in Japan, and 17% from customers based in Southeast Asia. Sales to customers based in Europe are predominantly denominated in Euros, sales to customers based in Japan are predominantly denominated in Yen, and sales to customers based in Southeast Asia are denominated in U.S. Dollars as well as Yuan for sales within Mainland China. Financial information about geographic areas may be found in Note 19 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, appearing in Part II – Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Cognex’s MVSD service offerings include maintenance and support, training, and consulting services. Maintenance and support programs include hardware support programs that entitle customers to have failed products repaired, as well as software support programs that provide customers with application support and software updates on the latest software releases. Training services include a variety of product courses that are available at Cognex’s offices worldwide, at customer facilities, and on computer-based tutorials, video, and the internet. Cognex provides consulting services that range from a specific area of functionality to a completely integrated machine vision application.

Cognex’s SISD service offerings include maintenance and support and training services similar to those provided by MVSD, as well as installation services. The installation services group supervises the physical installation of the hardware at the customer location, configures the software application to detect the customer’s defects, validates that the entire integrated system with the peripheral components is functioning according to the specifications, and performs operator training.

Intellectual Property

We rely on the technical expertise, creativity, and knowledge of our personnel, and therefore, we utilize patent, trademark, copyright, and trade secret protection to maintain our competitive position and protect our proprietary rights in our products and technology. While our intellectual property rights are important to our success, we believe that our business as a whole is not materially dependent on any particular patent, trademark, copyright, or other intellectual property right.

As of December 31, 2011, Cognex had been granted, or owned by assignment, 287 patents issued and had another 206 patent applications pending. Cognex has used, registered, or applied to register a

6

Table of Contents

number of trademark registrations in the United States and in other countries. Cognex’s trademark and servicemark portfolio includes various registered marks, including, among others, Cognex^®, VisionPro^®, In-Sight^®, Checker^®, DataMan^®, IDMax^®, and Smart View^®, as well as many common-law marks, including, among others, SmartAdvisor^TM, SmartSystem^TM, and Cognex VSoC^TM.

Compliance with Environmental Provisions

Cognex’s capital expenditures, earnings, and competitive position are not materially affected by compliance with federal, state, and local environmental provisions which have been enacted or adopted to regulate the distribution of materials into the environment.

Competition

The machine vision market is fragmented and Cognex’s competitors vary depending upon market segment, geographic region, and application niche. Our competitors are typically other vendors of machine vision systems and manufacturers of image processing systems and sensors. In addition, in the semiconductor and electronics capital equipment market, and selling to machine builders in the factory automation market, Cognex competes with the internal engineering departments of current or prospective customers. In the identification and logistics market, Cognex competes with manufacturers of automatic identification systems. Any of these competitors may have greater financial and other resources than Cognex. Although we consider Cognex to be one of the leading machine vision companies in the world, reliable estimates of the machine vision market and the number of competitors are not available.

Cognex’s ability to compete depends upon our ability to design, manufacture, and sell high-quality products, as well as our ability to develop new products and functionality that meet evolving customer requirements. The primary competitive factors affecting the choice of a machine vision or ID system include vendor reputation, product functionality and performance, ease of use, price, and post-sales support. The importance of each of these factors varies depending upon the specific customer’s needs.

Backlog

As of December 31, 2011, backlog totaled $43,412,000, compared to $37,428,000 as of December 31, 2010. Backlog reflects customer purchase orders for products scheduled for shipment primarily within 60 days at MVSD and six months at SISD. The MVSD backlog excludes deferred revenue, while the SISD backlog includes deferred revenue. Although MVSD accepts orders from customers with requested shipment dates that are within 60 days, orders typically ship within one week of order placement. The level of backlog at any particular date is not necessarily indicative of future revenue. Delivery schedules may be extended and orders may be canceled at any time subject to certain cancellation penalties.

Employees

As of December 31, 2011, Cognex employed 919 persons, including 470 in sales, marketing, and service activities; 210 in research, development, and engineering; 105 in manufacturing and quality assurance; and 134 in information technology, finance, and administration. Of the Company’s 919 employees, 457 are based outside of the United States. None of our employees are represented by a labor union and we have experienced no work stoppages. We believe that our employee relations are good.

Available Information

Cognex maintains a website on the World Wide Web at www.cognex.com. We make available, free of charge, on our website in the “Company” section under the caption “Investor Information” and then “SEC FiIings” our Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, and Current Reports

7

Table of Contents

on Form 8-K, including exhibits, and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, as soon as reasonably practicable after such reports are electronically filed with, or furnished to, the SEC. Cognex’s reports filed with, or furnished to, the SEC are also available at the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. Information contained on our website is not a part of, or incorporated by reference into, this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones that we face. Additional risks and uncertainties that we are unaware of, or that we currently deem immaterial, also may become important factors that affect our company in the future. If any of these risks were to occur, our business, financial condition, or results of operations could be materially and adversely affected. This section includes or refers to certain forward-looking statements. We refer you to the explanation of the qualifications and limitations on such forward-looking statements, appearing in Part II – Item 7 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Current and future conditions in the global economy may negatively impact our operating results.

Our revenue is dependent upon the capital spending trends of manufacturers in a number of industries, including, among others, the semiconductor, electronics, automotive, metals, and paper industries. These spending levels are, in turn, impacted by global economic conditions, as well as industry-specific economic conditions.

In 2009, the credit market crisis and slowing global economies resulted in lower demand for our products as many of our customers experienced deterioration in their businesses, cash flow issues, difficulty obtaining financing, and declining business confidence. Although order levels increased in 2010 and 2011, our ability to maintain these business volumes and continue to grow may be impacted by global economic conditions, including the current uncertainty surrounding the European economy. If global economic conditions were to deteriorate, our revenue and our ability to generate quarterly operating profits could be materially adversely affected.

As a result, our business is subject to the following risks, among others:

As of December 31, 2011, the Company had approximately $351 million in either cash, cash equivalents, or debt securities that could be converted into cash. In addition, Cognex has no long-term debt and we do not anticipate needing debt financing in the near future. We believe that our strong cash position puts us in a relatively good position to weather another economic downturn. Nevertheless, our operating results have been materially adversely affected in the past, and could be materially adversely affected in the future, as a result of unfavorable economic conditions and reduced capital spending by manufacturers worldwide.

8

Table of Contents

Downturns in the semiconductor and electronics capital equipment market may adversely affect our business.

In 2011, approximately 12% of our revenue was derived from semiconductor and electronics capital equipment manufacturers. This concentration was as high as 61% in 2000 during its revenue peak. The semiconductor and electronics industries are highly cyclical and have historically experienced periodic downturns, which have often had a severe effect on demand for production equipment that incorporates our products. While we have been successful in diversifying our business beyond OEM customers who serve the semiconductor and electronics industries, our business is still impacted by capital expenditures in these industries, which, in turn, are dependent upon the market demand for products containing computer chips. As a result, our operating results in the foreseeable future could be significantly and adversely affected by declining sales in either of these industries. Furthermore, the competitive landscape in this market has changed in recent years, with price and the flexibility of purchasing hardware from other vendors becoming more important factors in the purchasing decisions of these manufacturers. In response to this market change, we have introduced software-only products. Although these products have high gross margins, the average selling price of these offerings is significantly lower than for a complete vision system, and therefore, we expect this trend to have a negative impact on our revenue in this market. In addition, a decline in sales in the semiconductor and electronics capital equipment market, where many of these software-only products are sold, may also have a negative impact on our MVSD gross margins.

Our inability to penetrate new markets outside of the manufacturing sector may impede our revenue growth.

We are pursuing applications in the automatic identification market outside of the manufacturing sector, such as using ID products in logistics automation for package sorting and distribution. As shipping volumes grow, more distribution centers are choosing to upgrade their traditional laser-based scanners to image-based barcode readers, which will cost-effectively increase package sorter efficiency and throughput by improving read rates. We introduced the DataMan 500 image-based barcode reader in January 2011 in order to penetrate the ID logistics market and grow our ID Products business beyond the traditional manufacturing sector that we currently serve. Our growth plan is dependent upon successfully penetrating the ID logistics market and we are making significant investments in this area. Therefore, our failure to generate revenue in this new market may have a materially adverse impact on our revenue growth and operating profits.

Economic, political, and other risks associated with international sales and operations could adversely affect our business and operating results.

In 2011, approximately 66% of our revenue was derived from customers located outside of the United States. We anticipate that international sales will continue to account for a significant portion of our revenue. In addition, certain of our products are assembled by third-party contract manufacturers in Ireland and Southeast Asia. We intend to continue to expand our sales and operations outside of the United States and expand our presence in international emerging markets, such as our expansion into China, India, Brazil, and Eastern Europe. During the third quarter of 2010, the Company established a Wholly Foreign Owned Enterprise (WFOE) in Shanghai, China and we began to sell to our Chinese customers through this new entity in the second quarter of 2011. This new entity has required and will continue to require significant management attention and financial resources. As a result, our business is subject to the risks inherent in international sales and operations, including, among other things:

9

Table of Contents

Any of these factors could have a material adverse effect on our operating results.

Fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates and the use of derivative instruments to hedge these exposures could adversely affect our reported results, liquidity, and competitive position.

We face exposure to foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations, as a significant portion of our revenues, expenses, assets, and liabilities are denominated in currencies other than the functional currencies of our subsidiaries or the reporting currency of our company, which is the U.S. Dollar. In certain instances, we utilize forward contracts and other derivative instruments to hedge against foreign currency fluctuations. These contracts are used to minimize foreign currency gains or losses, as the gains or losses on the derivative are intended to offset the losses or gains on the underlying exposure. We do not engage in foreign currency speculation.

The success of our foreign currency risk management program depends upon forecasts of transaction activity denominated in various currencies. To the extent that these forecasts are overstated or understated during periods of currency volatility, we could experience unanticipated foreign currency gains or losses that could have a material impact on our results of operations. Furthermore, our failure to identify new exposures and hedge them in an effective manner may result in material foreign currency gains or losses. In addition, although the use of these derivative instruments may be effective in minimizing foreign currency gains or losses, significant cash inflows or outflows may result when these instruments are settled.

A significant portion of our investment portfolio, and therefore our investment income, is denominated in Euros. In addition, a significant portion of our revenues and expenses are denominated in the Euro and the Japanese Yen. Our predominant currency of sale is the U.S. Dollar in the Americas, the Euro in Europe, the Yen in Japan, and the U.S. Dollar and Chinese Yuan for sales in Southeast Asia. We estimate that approximately 46% of our sales in 2011 were invoiced in currencies other than the U.S. Dollar, and we expect sales denominated in foreign currencies to continue to represent a significant portion of our total revenue. While we also have expenses denominated in these same foreign currencies, the impact on revenues has historically been, and is expected to continue to be, greater than the offsetting impact on expenses. Therefore, in times when the U.S. Dollar strengthens in relation to these foreign currencies, we would expect to report a net decrease in operating income. Conversely, in times when the U.S. Dollar weakens in relation to these foreign currencies, we would expect to report a net increase in operating income. Thus, changes in the relative strength of the U.S. Dollar may have a material impact on our operating results.

The loss of a large customer could have an adverse effect on our business.

In 2011, our top five customers accounted for approximately 7% of total revenue. Our expansion into the factory automation marketplace has reduced our reliance upon the revenue from any one customer. Nevertheless, the loss of, or significant curtailment of purchases by, any one or more of our larger customers could have a material adverse effect on our operating results.

Our business could suffer if we lose the services of, or fail to attract, key personnel.

We are highly dependent upon the management and leadership of Robert J. Shillman, our Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Culture Officer, and Robert J. Willett, our President and Chief Executive Officer, as well as other members of our senior management team. Although we have many experienced and qualified senior managers, the loss of key personnel could have a material adverse effect on our company. Our continued growth and success also depends upon our ability to attract and

10

Table of Contents

retain skilled employees and on the ability of our officers and key employees to effectively manage the growth of our business through the implementation of appropriate management information systems and internal controls.

We have historically used stock options as a key component of our employee compensation program in order to align employee interests with the interests of our shareholders, provide competitive compensation and benefits packages, and encourage employee retention. We are limited as to the number of options that we may grant under our stock option plan. Accordingly, we may find it difficult to attract, retain, and motivate employees, and any such difficulties could materially adversely affect our business.

The failure of a key supplier to deliver quality product in a timely manner or our inability to obtain components for our products could adversely affect our operating results.

A significant portion of our MVSD product is manufactured by two third-party contractors. These contractors have agreed to provide Cognex with termination notification periods and last-time-buy rights, if and when that may be applicable. We are dependent upon these contractors to provide quality product and meet delivery schedules. We engage in extensive product quality programs and processes, including actively monitoring the performance of our third-party manufacturers; however, we may not detect all product quality issues through these programs and processes.

Certain key electronic components that are purchased from strategic suppliers, such as processors or imagers, are fundamental to the design of Cognex products. A disruption in the supply of these key components, such as a last-time-buy announcement, natural disaster, financial bankruptcy, or other event, may require us to purchase a significant amount of inventory at unfavorable prices resulting in lower gross margins and higher risk of carrying excess or obsolete inventory. If we are unable to secure adequate supply from alternative sources, we may have to redesign our products, which may lead to a delay in manufacturing and a possible loss of sales. Although we are taking certain actions to mitigate supply risk, an interruption in, termination of, or material change in the purchase terms of any key components could have a material adverse effect on our operating results.

We manage our inventory levels in order to be able to meet increases in customer demand, while at the same time minimizing inventory obsolescence exposure. Many of our vendors reduced their inventory levels and manufacturing capacity during the economic downturn that began in late 2008. As a result, if customer demand increases beyond the levels we are forecasting, our vendors may have difficulty meeting our accelerated delivery schedules due to their reduced manufacturing capacities. We may therefore be unable to take delivery of an adequate supply of components and turnkey systems from our vendors in order to meet an increase in demand from our customers. These supply issues could impact our ability to ship product to customers, and therefore, to recognize revenue, which could have a material adverse effect on our operating results.

Our failure to effectively manage product transitions or accurately forecast customer demand could result in excess or obsolete inventory and resulting charges.

Because the market for our products is characterized by rapid technological advances, we frequently introduce new products with improved ease-of-use, improved hardware performance, additional software features and functionality, or lower cost that may replace existing products. Among the risks associated with the introduction of new products are difficulty predicting customer demand and effectively managing inventory levels to ensure adequate supply of the new product and avoid excess supply of the legacy product. In addition, we may strategically enter into non-cancelable commitments with vendors to purchase materials for our products in advance of demand in order to take advantage of favorable pricing or address concerns about the availability of future supplies or long lead times. Our failure to effectively manage product transitions or accurately forecast customer demand, in terms of both volume and configuration, has led to, and may again in the future lead to, an increased risk of excess or obsolete inventory and resulting charges.

11

Table of Contents

Our products may contain design or manufacturing defects, which could result in reduced demand, significant delays, or substantial costs.

If flaws in either the design or manufacture of our products were to occur, we could experience a rate of failure in our products that could result in significant delays in shipment and material repair or replacement costs. While we engage in extensive product quality programs and processes, including actively monitoring and evaluating the quality of our component suppliers and contract manufacturers, these actions may not be sufficient to avoid a product failure rate that results in:

Any of these results could have a material adverse effect on our operating results.

Our failure to introduce new products in a successful and timely manner could result in the loss of our market share and a decrease in our revenues and profits.

The market for our products is characterized by rapidly changing technology. Accordingly, we believe that our future success will depend upon our ability to accelerate time-to-market for new products with improved functionality, ease-of-use, performance, or price. There can be no assurance that we will be able to introduce new products in accordance with scheduled release dates or that new products will achieve market acceptance. Our ability to keep pace with the rapid rate of technological change in the high-technology marketplace could have a material adverse effect on our operating results.

Product development is often a complex, time-consuming, and costly process involving significant investment in research and development with no assurance of return on investment. Our strong balance sheet allows us to continue to make significant investments in research, development, and marketing for new products and technologies. Research is by its nature speculative and the ultimate commercial success of a product depends upon various factors, many of which are not in our control. We may not achieve significant revenue from new product investments for a number of years, if at all. Moreover, new products may not generate the operating margins that we have experienced historically.

Our failure to properly manage the distribution of our products and services could result in the loss of revenues and profits.

We utilize a direct sales force, as well as a network of integration and distribution partners, to sell our products and services. Successfully managing the interaction of our direct and indirect sales channels to reach various potential customers for our products and services is a complex process. In addition, our reliance upon indirect selling methods may reduce visibility to demand and pricing issues. Cognex expects that its partnership with Mitsubishi Electric Corporation will enable us to grow our factory automation revenue in Japan, as we utilize Mitsubishi’s existing distribution network to reach more factory automation customers in this region. Each sales channel has distinct risks and costs, and therefore, our failure to implement the most advantageous balance in the sales model for our products and services could adversely affect our revenue and profitability.

If we fail to successfully protect our intellectual property, our competitive position and operating results could suffer.

We rely on our proprietary software technology and hardware designs, as well as the technical expertise, creativity, and knowledge of our personnel to maintain our position as a leading provider of machine vision products. Although we use a variety of methods to protect our intellectual property, we rely most heavily on patent, trademark, copyright, and trade secret protection, as well as non-disclosure agreements with customers, suppliers, employees, and consultants. We also attempt to

12

Table of Contents

protect our intellectual property by restricting access to our proprietary information by a combination of technical and internal security measures. These measures, however, may not be adequate to:

Any of these adverse circumstances could have a material adverse effect on our operating results.

Our company may be subject to time-consuming and costly litigation.

From time to time, we may be subject to various claims and lawsuits by competitors, customers, or other parties arising in the ordinary course of business, including lawsuits charging patent infringement. We are currently a party to actions that are fully described in the section captioned “Legal Proceedings,” appearing in Part I – Item 3 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. These matters can be time-consuming, divert management’s attention and resources, and cause us to incur significant expenses. Furthermore, the results of any of these actions may have a material adverse effect on our operating results.

Increased competition may result in decreased demand or prices for our products and services.

The machine vision market is fragmented and Cognex’s competitors vary depending upon market segment, geographic region, and application niche. Our competitors are typically other vendors of machine vision systems and manufacturers of image processing systems and sensors. Any of these competitors may have greater financial and other resources than we do. Ease-of-use and product price are significant competitive factors in the factory automation marketplace. We may not be able to compete successfully in the future and our investments in research and development, sales and marketing, and support activities may be insufficient to enable us to maintain our competitive advantage. In addition, competitive pressures could lead to price erosion that could have a material adverse effect on our gross margins and operating results. We refer you to the section captioned “Competition,” appearing in Part I – Item 1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for further information regarding the competition that we face.

Implementation of our acquisition strategy may not be successful, which could affect our ability to increase our revenue or profitability and result in the impairment of acquired intangible assets.

We have in the past acquired, and will in the future consider the acquisition of, businesses and technologies in the machine vision industry. Our business may be negatively impacted by risks related to those acquisitions. These risks include, among others:

Acquisitions are inherently risky and the inability to effectively manage these risks could have a material adverse effect on our operating results.

We are at risk for impairment charges with respect to our investments or for acquired intangible assets or goodwill, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.

As of December 31, 2011, the Company had $319 million of investments, of which $313 million consisted of debt securities. The remaining investment balance of $6 million represented a limited partnership interest in a venture capital fund.

13

Table of Contents

The debt securities are reported at fair value, with unrealized gains and losses, net of tax, recorded in shareholders’ equity as other comprehensive income (loss). As of December 31, 2011, the Company’s portfolio of debt securities had a net unrealized gain of $127,000. Included in this net gain, however, were gross unrealized losses totaling $1,086,000, of which $1,074,000 was in a loss position for less than twelve months. The Company’s portfolio of debt securities consists of treasury bills issued by the U.S. and foreign governments, municipal bonds issued by state and local government entities, corporate bonds issued by domestic and foreign companies, agency bonds issued by domestic and foreign government agencies and government-sponsored enterprises, sovereign bonds issued directly by foreign governments, and covered bonds backed by governments, mortgages, or public sector loans. Given the current economic climate, specifically in Europe, our investments in international debt securities may be at risk for impairment.

The limited partnership interest is accounted for using the cost method because our investment is less than 5% of the partnership and we have no influence over the partnership’s operating and financing policies. Furthermore, the investment does not have a readily determinable market value, and therefore, does not qualify for fair value accounting. As of December 31, 2011, the carrying value of this investment was $5,933,000 compared to an estimated fair value of $7,460,000. The limited partnership’s investments consist of young and emerging companies. The worldwide economic slowdown and credit market crisis that began in late 2008 made the environment for these startups much less forgiving. As a result, it is possible that some of the younger companies in the portfolio that require capital investments to fund their current operations may not be as well prepared to survive economic uncertainty as would a more mature company. These factors could impact the fair value of the companies in the partnership’s portfolio.

Management monitors the carrying value of its investments compared to their fair value to determine whether an other-than-temporary impairment has occurred. In considering whether a decline in fair value is other-than-temporary, we consider many factors, both qualitative and quantitative. In its evaluation of its debt securities, management considers the type of security, the credit rating of the security, the length of time the security has been in a loss position, the size of the loss position, our ability and intent to hold the security to expected recovery of value, and other meaningful information. In its evaluation of its limited partnership interest, management considers the duration and extent of the decline, the length of the Company’s commitment to the investment, general economic conditions, and specific communications with the General Partner. If a decline in fair value is determined to be other-than-temporary, an impairment charge would be recorded in current operations to reduce the carrying value of the investment to its fair value. Should the fair value of investments decline in future periods below their carrying value, management will need to determine whether this decline is other-than-temporary and future impairment charges may be required.

As of December 31, 2011, the Company had $19 million in acquired intangible assets, of which $16 million represented acquired distribution networks. These assets are susceptible to changes in fair value due to a decrease in the historical or projected cash flows from the use of the asset, which may be negatively impacted by economic trends. A decline in the cash flows generated by these assets, such as the revenue we are able to generate through our distribution network, may result in future impairment charges.

As of December 31, 2011, the Company had $82 million in acquired goodwill, $78 million of which is assigned to our Modular Vision Systems Division and $4 million of which is assigned to our Surface Inspection Systems Division. The fair value of goodwill is susceptible to changes in the fair value of the reporting segments in which the goodwill resides, and therefore, a decline in our market capitalization or cash flows relative to the net book value of our segments may result in future impairment charges.

If we determine that any of these investments, acquired intangible assets, or goodwill is impaired, we would be required to take a related charge to earnings that could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.

14

Table of Contents

We may have additional tax liabilities, which could adversely affect our operating results and financial condition.

We are subject to income taxes in the United States, as well as numerous foreign jurisdictions. Significant judgment is required in determining our worldwide provision for income taxes. In the ordinary course of business, there are many transactions and calculations where the ultimate tax determination is uncertain. We are regularly under audit by tax authorities. Although we believe our tax positions are reasonable, the final determination of tax audits and any related litigation could be materially different than that which is reflected in our financial statements and could have a material adverse effect on our income tax provision, net income, or cash flows in the period in which the determination is made.

Information security breaches or business system disruptions may adversely affect our business.

We rely on our information technology infrastructure and management information systems to effectively run our business. We may be subject to information security breaches caused by illegal hacking, computer viruses, or acts of vandalism or terrorism. Our security measures or those of our third-party service providers may not detect or prevent such breaches. Any such compromise to our information security could result in an interruption in our operations, the unauthorized publication of our confidential business or proprietary information, the unauthorized release of customer, vendor, or employee data, the violation of privacy or other laws, and the exposure to litigation, any of which could harm our business and operating results.

We continue to devote significant resources to various business system enhancement projects, including an upgrade to the most recent version of our PeopleSoft Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system and the implementation of a new Customer Relationship Management (CRM) system, both planned for 2012. These types of business system projects have the potential to cause significant business disruption, including our ability to provide quotes, process orders, ship products, invoice customers, process payments, and otherwise run our business. Any disruption occurring with these systems may have a material adverse effect on our operating results.

There are no unresolved SEC staff comments as of the date of this report.

In 1994, Cognex purchased and renovated a 100,000 square-foot building located in Natick, Massachusetts that serves as our corporate headquarters. In 1997, Cognex completed construction of a 50,000 square-foot addition to this building. In 2009, the Company renovated space in this building to establish a distribution center for its customers in the Americas.

In 1995, Cognex purchased an 83,000 square-foot office building adjacent to our corporate headquarters. This building is currently occupied by tenants who have lease agreements that expire at various dates through 2017. Cognex also uses a portion of this space for storage, product demonstrations, and Company events. A portion of this space is currently unoccupied.

In 1997, Cognex purchased a three and one-half acre parcel of land adjacent to our corporate headquarters. This land is being held for future expansion.

In 2007, Cognex purchased a 19,000 square-foot building adjacent to our corporate headquarters. This building is currently occupied by tenants who have lease agreements that expire at various dates through 2015.

Cognex conducts certain of its operations in leased facilities. These lease agreements expire at various dates through 2021. Certain of these leases contain renewal options, retirement obligations, escalation clauses, rent holidays, and leasehold improvement incentives.

15

Table of Contents

In May 2008, the Company filed a complaint against MvTec Software GmbH, MvTec LLC, and Fuji America Corporation in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts alleging infringement of certain patents owned by the Company. In April 2009 and again in June 2009, Defendant MvTec Software GmbH filed re-examination requests of the patents-at-issue with the United States Patent and Trademark Office. This matter is ongoing.

In May 2009, the Company pre-filed a complaint with the United States International Trade Commission (ITC) pursuant to Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. §1337, against MvTec Software GmbH, MvTec LLC, Fuji America, and several other respondents alleging unfair methods of competition and unfair acts in the unlawful importation into the United States, sale for importation, or sale within the United States after importation. By this filing, the Company requested the ITC to investigate the Company’s contention that certain machine vision software, machine vision systems, and products containing the same infringe, and respondents directly infringe and/or actively induce and/or contribute to the infringement in the United States, of one or more of the Company’s U.S. patents. In July 2009, the ITC issued an order that it would institute an investigation based upon the Company’s assertions. In September 2009, the Company reached a settlement with two of the respondents, and in December 2009, the Company reached a settlement with five additional respondents. In March 2010, the Company reached a settlement with respondent Fuji Machine Manufacturing Co., Ltd. and its subsidiary Fuji America Corporation. These settlements did not have a material impact on the Company’s financial results. An ITC hearing was held in May 2010. In July 2010, the Administrative Law Judge issued an initial determination finding two of the Company’s patents invalid and that respondents did not infringe the patents-at-issue. In September 2010, the Commission issued a notice that it would review the initial determination of the Administrative Law Judge. The ITC issued its Final Determination in November 2010 in which it determined to modify-in-part and affirm-in-part the Administrative Law Judge’s determination, and terminate the investigation with a finding of no violation of Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (as amended 19 U.S.C. §1337). The Company has filed an appeal of the decision with the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. An oral hearing is scheduled before the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on February 10, 2012. This matter is ongoing.

The Company cannot predict the outcome of the above-referenced pending matters and an adverse resolution of these lawsuits could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position, liquidity, results of operations, and/or indemnification obligations. In addition, various other claims and legal proceedings generally incidental to the normal course of business are pending or threatened on behalf of or against the Company. While we cannot predict the outcome of these incidental matters, we believe that any liability arising from them will not have a material adverse effect on our financial position, liquidity, or results of operations.

Not applicable.

ITEM 4A: EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND OTHER MEMBERS OF THE MANAGEMENT TEAM OF THE REGISTRANT

The following table sets forth the names, ages, and titles of Cognex’s executive officers as of December 31, 2011:

Executive officers are elected annually by the Board of Directors. There are no family relationships among the directors and executive officers of the Company.

16

Table of Contents

Messrs. Shillman and Morin have been employed by Cognex in their present capacities for no less than the past five years.

Mr. Willett joined the Company in June 2008 as President of the Modular Vision Systems Division (MVSD). In early 2010, Mr. Willett was promoted to President and Chief Operating Officer. On March 16, 2011, the Board of Directors elected Robert J. Willett as Chief Executive Officer of the Company. Mr. Willett came to Cognex from Danaher Corporation, a diversified manufacturer of industrial controls and technologies, where he served as Vice President of Business Development and Innovation for the Product Identification Business Group. Prior to that, Mr. Willett was President of Videojet Technologies, a leader in coding and marking products, which is a subsidiary of Danaher. Mr. Willett also served as Chief Executive Officer of Willett International Ltd., a privately-owned coding and marking company which was sold to Danaher in 2003 and merged with Videojet. He holds a Bachelor of Arts degree from Brown University and a Masters in Business Administration from Yale University.

17

Table of Contents

PART II

ITEM 5:    MARKETFOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS, AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES

The Company’s common stock is traded on The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC, under the symbol CGNX. As of January 29, 2012, there were approximately 600 shareholders of record of the Company’s common stock. The Company believes the number of beneficial owners of the Company’s common stock on that date was substantially greater.

The high and low sales prices of the Company’s common stock as reported by the NASDAQ Stock Market for each quarter in 2011 and 2010 were as follows:

The Company declared and paid a cash dividend of $0.05 per share in the first quarter of 2010. The quarterly dividend increased to $0.06 per share in the second and third quarters of 2010, and to $0.08 per share in the fourth quarter of 2010 and the first quarter of 2011. The quarterly dividend increased to $0.09 per share in the second and third quarters of 2011, and to $0.10 per share in the fourth quarter of 2011. Future dividends will be declared at the discretion of the Company’s Board of Directors and will depend upon such factors as the Board deems relevant, including, among other things, the Company’s ability to generate positive cash flows from operations.

In April 2008, the Company’s Board of Directors authorized the repurchase of up to $50,000,000 of the Company’s common stock. As of December 31, 2011, the Company had repurchased 1,375,875 shares at a cost of $30,000,000 under this program, including 337,078 at a cost of $10,000,000 in 2011. The Company did not purchase any shares under this program in 2010 or 2009. In November 2011, the Company’s Board of Directors authorized the repurchase of up to $80,000,000 of the Company’s common stock to help reduce share dilution associated with equity incentive plans. This new authorization will commence once the Company completes the $50,000,000 program, of which $20,000,000 remains available. The Company may repurchase shares under this program in future periods depending upon a variety of factors, including, among other things, stock price, share availability, and cash reserve requirements.

The following table sets forth information with respect to purchases by the Company of shares of its common stock during the periods indicated:

18

Table of Contents

Set forth below is a line graph comparing the annual percentage change in the cumulative total shareholder return on the Company’s common stock, based upon the market price of the Company’s common stock, with the total return on companies within the Nasdaq Composite Index and the Research Data Group, Inc. Nasdaq Lab Apparatus & Analytical, Optical, Measuring & Controlling Instrument (SIC 3820-3829 US Companies) Index (the “Nasdaq Lab Apparatus Index”). The performance graph assumes an investment of $100 in each of the Company and the two indices, and the reinvestment of any dividends. The historical information set forth below is not necessarily indicative of future performance. Data for the Nasdaq Composite Index and the Nasdaq Lab Apparatus Index was provided to the Company by Research Data Group, Inc.

COMPARISON OF 5 YEAR CUMULATIVE TOTAL RETURN*

Among Cognex Corporation, The NASDAQ Composite Index

And NASDAQ Stocks (SIC 3820-3829 U.S. Companies) Lab Apparatus & Analyt,Opt, Measuring, and Controlling Instr

* $100 invested on 12/31/06 in stock or index-including reinvestment of dividends. Fiscal year ending December 31.

19

Table of Contents

ITEM 6:  SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

20

Table of Contents

ITEM 7:MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

Certain statements made in this report, as well as oral statements made by the Company from time to time, constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Readers can identify these forward-looking statements by our use of the words “expects,” “anticipates,” “estimates,” “believes,” “projects,” “intends,” “plans,” “will,” “may,” “shall,” “could,” “should,” and similar words and other statements of a similar sense. These statements are based upon our current estimates and expectations as to prospective events and circumstances, which may or may not be in our control and as to which there can be no firm assurances given. These forward-looking statements, which include statements regarding business and market trends, future financial performance, customer order rates, and growth and strategic plans, involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected. Such risks and uncertainties include: (1) current and future conditions in the global economy; (2) the cyclicality of the semiconductor and electronics industries; (3) the inability to penetrate new markets; (4) the inability to achieve significant international revenue; (5) fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates; (6) the loss of a large customer; (7) the inability to attract and retain skilled employees; (8) the reliance upon key suppliers to manufacture and deliver critical components for our products; (9) the failure to effectively manage product transitions or accurately forecast customer demand; (10) the inability to design and manufacture high-quality products; (11) the technological obsolescence of current products and the inability to develop new products; (12) the failure to properly manage the distribution of products and services; (13) the inability to protect our proprietary technology and intellectual property; (14) our involvement in time-consuming and costly litigation; (15) the impact of competitive pressures; (16) the challenges in integrating and achieving expected results from acquired businesses; (17) potential impairment charges with respect to our investments or for acquired intangible assets or goodwill; (18) exposure to additional tax liabilities; and (19) information security breaches or business system disruptions. The foregoing list should not be construed as exhaustive and we encourage readers to refer to the detailed discussion of risk factors included in Part I – Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. The Company cautions readers not to place undue reliance upon any such forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date made. The Company disclaims any obligation to subsequently revise forward-looking statements to reflect the occurrence of anticipated or unanticipated events or circumstances after the date such statements are made.

EXECUTIVE OVERVIEW

Cognex Corporation is a leading worldwide provider of machine vision products that capture and analyze visual information in order to automate tasks, primarily in manufacturing processes, where vision is required. Our Modular Vision Systems Division (MVSD) specializes in machine vision systems that are used to automate the manufacture of discrete items, while our Surface Inspection Systems Division (SISD) specializes in machine vision systems that are used to inspect the surfaces of materials processed in a continuous fashion.

In addition to product revenue derived from the sale of machine vision systems, the Company also generates revenue by providing maintenance and support, training, consulting, and installation services to its customers. Our customers can be classified into three primary markets: factory automation, semiconductor and electronics capital equipment, and surface inspection.

21

Table of Contents

Revenue for the year ended December 31, 2011 totaled $321,914,000, representing an increase of 11% over the prior year. While sales in the cyclical semiconductor and electronics capital equipment market declined from 2010, sales in the factory automation and surface inspection markets reached record levels for both the fourth quarter and full year of 2011. The higher revenue contributed to a gross margin of 76% of revenue in 2011, compared to 73% of revenue in 2010. Operating expenses increased by $21,250,000 over the prior year due primarily to expenses associated with increased headcount in strategic areas, the unfavorable impact of changes in foreign currency exchange rates, and higher stock-based compensation expense. The Company generated net income of $69,869,000, or 22% of revenue, in 2011, compared to net income of $61,381,000, or 21% of revenue, in 2010.

The following table sets forth certain consolidated financial data as a percentage of revenue:

22

Table of Contents

RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

Year Ended December 31, 2011 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2010

Revenue

Revenue for the year ended December 31, 2011 increased by $31,223,000, or 11%, from the prior year. This increase was due to a $35,317,000 increase in sales to factory automation customers and a $4,964,000 increase in sales to surface inspection customers, partially offset by a $9,058,000 decrease in sales to semiconductor and electronics capital equipment customers.

Factory Automation Market

Sales to customers in the factory automation market represented 73% of total revenue in 2011, compared to 69% of total revenue in 2010. Sales to these customers increased by $35,317,000, or 18%, from the prior year. A weaker U.S. Dollar relative to the Euro and Japanese Yen, on average, in 2011 compared to 2010 contributed to the higher revenue, as sales denominated in Euros and Yen were translated to U.S. Dollars. Excluding the impact of foreign currency exchange rate changes on revenue, sales to factory automation customers increased by $28,794,000, or 14%, from 2010.

By region, the largest dollar increases were experienced in the Americas and Europe, where the Company has a broad base of factory automation customers, and the largest percentage increase was experienced in Asia, where the Company has made significant investments to expand its sales and support infrastructure, particularly in China, in order to access more of the machine vision market in this high-potential growth region. Revenue in Japan was lower than the prior year, as business levels in 2011 were negatively impacted by the earthquake that hit this region earlier in the year, as well as a slowdown in the consumer electronics industry during the second half of 2011.

By product, the majority of the growth in factory automation revenue came from sales of the Company’s ID products and In-Sight general-purpose vision systems. Sales of ID products, which are used in manufacturing applications as well as in the logistics industry for package sorting and distribution, increased $16,301,000, or 38%, from the prior year. The Company expects its ID business to continue to be a growth engine into 2012.

Sales to factory automation customers increased by $3,429,000, or 6%, in the fourth quarter 2011 from the third quarter of 2011. During the fourth quarter of 2011, the U.S. Dollar strengthened relative to the Euro, resulting in lower revenue as sales denominated in Euros were translated to U.S. Dollars. Excluding the impact of foreign currency exchange rate changes on revenue, sales to factory automation customers increased by $4,496,000, or 8%, in the fourth quarter of 2011 from the third quarter of 2011, primarily from customers in the Americas and to a lesser extent Europe, where economic conditions are more uncertain. Revenue trends in Japan and Asia during the second half of 2011 have been negatively impacted by a slowdown in the consumer electronics industry, which overshadowed positive forward momentum in the broader factory automation market.

Semiconductor and Electronics Capital Equipment Market

Sales to customers who make automation equipment for the semiconductor and electronics industries represented 12% of total revenue in 2011 compared to 16% of total revenue in 2010. Sales to these customers decreased by $9,058,000, or 19%, from the prior year. Excluding the impact of foreign currency exchange rate changes on revenue, sales to semiconductor and electronics capital equipment customers decreased by $10,414,000, or 22%, from 2010. Geographically, revenue decreased most significantly in Japan where many of the Company’s semiconductor and electronics capital equipment customers are located.

Revenue for this market has declined sequentially in each quarter of 2011. The semiconductor and electronics capital equipment market has historically been highly cyclical and management has limited visibility regarding future order levels from these customers.

23

Table of Contents

Surface Inspection Market

Sales to customers in the surface inspection market represented 15% of total revenue in both 2011 and 2010. Sales to these customers increased by $4,964,000, or 12%, from the prior year. Excluding the impact of foreign currency exchange rate changes on revenue, sales to surface inspection customers increased by $3,632,000, or 8%, from 2010. Geographically, revenue increased in the Americas, Europe, and Asia where we believe SISD gained market share, while revenue decreased in Japan in the aftermath of the earthquake that hit this region earlier in the year.

Sales to surface inspection customers increased by $4,196,000, or 35%, in the fourth quarter of 2011 from the third quarter of 2011. Due to the relatively large average order values at SISD, the revenue reported each quarter can vary significantly depending upon the timing of customer orders, system deliveries, and installations, as well as the impact of revenue deferrals.

Product Revenue

Product revenue increased by $33,847,000, or 13%, from the prior year due primarily to a higher volume of systems sold to customers in the factory automation market. The impact of the higher volume was partially offset by slightly lower MVSD average selling prices, as the Company introduced new products at lower price points. The growth in ID product units that are sold at relatively lower price points also contributed to the lower average selling prices.

Service Revenue

Service revenue, which is derived from the sale of maintenance and support, education, consulting, and installation services, decreased by $2,624,000, or 10%, from the prior year. In 2010, service revenue included $6,500,000 related to an arrangement with a single customer for which the work was performed over the prior four years, but revenue was deferred until the final obligation was completed in the fourth quarter of 2010. This decrease was partially offset by higher SISD installation and maintenance and support revenue, including spare part sales. Service revenue decreased as a percentage of total revenue to 8% in 2011 from 9% in 2010.

Gross Margin

Gross margin as a percentage of revenue was 76% for 2011 compared to 73% for 2010. This increase was due to improvements in both MVSD and SISD product margins.

MVSD Margin

MVSD gross margin as a percentage of revenue was 80% in 2011 compared to 78% in 2010. This increase was due to higher product margins resulting from manufacturing efficiencies achieved from higher revenue levels, as fixed manufacturing costs were spread over a higher revenue base. A greater percentage of MVSD revenue from the sale of products as opposed to lower-margin services also contributed to the increase.

SISD Margin

SISD gross margin as a percentage of revenue was 51% in 2011 compared to 44% in 2010. This increase was due to improvements in both product and service margins. Product margins improved primarily due to low-cost sourcing initiatives, higher average selling prices, and the impact of relatively flat manufacturing costs spread over a higher revenue base. The improvement in service margins was the result of a higher number of completed installations, as well efficiencies achieved in the installation process.

Product Margin

Product gross margin as a percentage of revenue was 78% in 2011 compared to 77% in 2010. This increase was due to higher product margins at both MVSD and SISD as described above.

24

Table of Contents

Service Margin

Service gross margin as a percentage of revenue was 46% in 2011 compared to 41% in 2010. This increase was due to higher SISD service margins as described above.

Operating Expenses

Research, Development, and Engineering Expenses

Research, development, and engineering (RD&E) expenses in 2011 increased by $7,866,000, or 24%, from the prior year. MVSD RD&E expenses increased by $7,857,000, or 26%, while SISD RD&E expenses were relatively flat.

The table below details the $7,857,000 net increase in MVSD RD&E in 2011:

During 2011, the Company increased MVSD RD&E headcount in strategic areas, resulting in higher personnel-related costs, such as salaries and fringe benefits. The Company also recorded increased stock-based compensation expense due to a higher valuation of stock options granted during 2011, increased spending on outsourced engineering services and materials related to engineering activities, and higher costs to patent new technology. In addition, a weaker U.S. Dollar relative to the Euro, on average, in 2011 compared to 2010 resulted in higher RD&E costs when expenses of the Company’s foreign engineering centers, primarily in Hungary, were translated to U.S. Dollars.

RD&E expenses as a percentage of revenue were 13% in 2011 and 11% in 2010. We believe that a continued commitment to RD&E activities is essential in order to maintain or achieve product leadership with our existing products and to provide innovative new product offerings. In addition, we consider our ability to accelerate time-to-market for new products to be critical to our revenue growth. Therefore, we expect to continue to make significant RD&E investments in the future. Although we target our RD&E spending to be between 10% and 15% of total revenue, this percentage is impacted by revenue levels.

Selling, General, and Administrative Expenses

Selling, general, and administrative (SG&A) expenses in 2011 increased by $13,459,000, or 13%, from the prior year. MVSD SG&A expenses increased by $15,463,000, or 20%, and SISD SG&A expenses increased by $576,000, or 5%. Corporate expenses that are not allocated to either division decreased by $2,580,000, or 16%.

25

Table of Contents

The table below details the $15,463,000 net increase in MVSD SG&A in 2011:

During 2011, the Company increased MVSD SG&A headcount in strategic areas, resulting in higher personnel-related costs, such as salaries, fringe benefits, commissions, and travel expenses. The Company also recorded increased stock-based compensation expense due to a higher valuation of stock options granted during 2011, increased spending on marketing and promotional activities intended to grow factory automation revenue, and higher spending on sales demonstration equipment. In addition, a weaker U.S. Dollar relative to the Euro and Japanese Yen, on average, in 2011 compared to 2010 resulted in higher SG&A costs when expenses of the Company’s foreign sales and support offices were translated to U.S. Dollars. Offsetting the increase in sales commissions associated with additional personnel was a decrease in sales commissions as a result of fewer sales employees exceeding their bookings quotas compared to the prior year.

The increase in SISD SG&A expenses was primarily due to the unfavorable impact of changes in foreign currency exchange rates ($365,000) and increased stock-based compensation expense ($150,000).

The decrease in corporate expenses was due to lower legal fees related to patent-infringement actions ($4,273,000 – refer to Note 10 to the Consolidated Financial Statements in Part II – Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K). This decrease was partially offset by increased stock-based compensation expense ($1,003,000) and costs associated with the Company’s 30^th Anniversary parties held in the first quarter of 2011 ($480,000).

Nonoperating Income (Expense)

The Company recorded foreign currency losses of $504,000 in 2011 and $328,000 in 2010. The foreign currency fluctuations in each period resulted primarily from the revaluation and settlement of accounts receivable and intercompany balances that are reported in one currency and collected in another. Although the foreign currency exposure of accounts receivable is largely mitigated through the use of forward contracts, this program depends upon forecasts of sales and collections, and therefore, gains or losses on the underlying receivables may not perfectly offset losses or gains on the contracts.

Investment income in 2011 increased by $1,481,000, or 104%, from the prior year. The increase was primarily due to an increase in cash generated from operations that was available for investment, as well as a shift in investment mix to higher-yielding securities. Beginning in the second quarter of 2010, the Board of Directors approved a change to the Company’s investment policy to allow management to invest excess cash accumulated in the Company’s international entities in debt securities. Prior to this change, these funds were invested in lower-yielding savings accounts.

The Company recorded other expense of $636,000 in 2011 and $703,000 in 2010. Other expense includes rental income, net of associated expenses, from leasing buildings adjacent to the Company’s corporate headquarters. For a majority of 2011, these buildings were partially unoccupied.

26

Table of Contents

Income Tax Expense

The Company’s effective tax rate was a provision of 20% in 2011, compared to a provision of 19% in 2010.

The effective tax rate for 2011 included the impact of the following discrete events: (1) a decrease in tax expense of $808,000 from the expiration of the statutes of limitations for certain reserves for income taxes, (2) a decrease in tax expense of $155,000 from the finalization of the Advanced Pricing Agreement between Japan and Ireland, partially offset by, (3) an increase in tax expense of $574,000 from the final true-up of the prior year’s tax accrual upon filing the actual tax returns, and (4) an increase in tax expense of $201,000 from the write down of a noncurrent deferred tax asset based upon a change in the tax rate in Japan. The effective tax rate in 2011 was a provision of 20%, with or without these discrete events.

The effective tax rate for 2010 included the impact of the following discrete events: (1) a decrease in tax expense of $462,000 from the settlement of the Competent Authority case with Japan, (2) a decrease in tax expense of $151,000 from the final true-up of the prior year’s tax accrual upon filing the actual tax returns, (3) a decrease in tax expense of $124,000 from the receipt of a state refund, and (4) a decrease in tax expense of $105,000 from the expiration of the statutes of limitations for certain reserves for income taxes. These discrete events changed the effective tax rate in 2010 from a provision of 20% to a provision of 19%.

The Company’s effective tax rate excluding discrete events in both 2011 and 2010 remained a provision of 20%.

RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

Year Ended December 31, 2010 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2009

Revenue

Revenue for the year ended December 31, 2010 increased by $114,964,000, or 65%, from the prior year due to higher sales in all of the Company’s primary markets. A stronger U.S. Dollar relative to the Euro, on average, in 2010 compared to 2009, resulted in lower revenue, as sales denominated in Euros were translated to U.S. Dollars. This impact was offset, however, by the favorable impact on revenue of a weaker U.S. Dollar relative to the Japanese Yen.

Factory Automation Market

Sales to manufacturing customers in the factory automation market represented 69% of total revenue in 2010 compared to 70% of total revenue in 2009. Sales to these customers increased by $76,303,000, or 62%, from the prior year. Revenue in 2009 included $4,400,000 related to an arrangement with a single customer for which product was shipped in 2007 and 2008, but revenue was deferred until the final unit was delivered in the first quarter of 2009. Revenue in 2010 included $6,500,000 related to an arrangement with another customer for which the work was performed over the prior four years, but revenue was deferred until the final obligation was completed in the fourth quarter of 2010. In addition, revenue in 2010 included $2,505,000 related to the adoption of new revenue recognition rules that would have been deferred under the previous guidance. Excluding the recognition of the revenue noted above, sales to these customers increased by $71,698,000, or 60%, from the prior year. Management believes that excluding this revenue from the growth in factory automation sales allows investors to more accurately assess business trends.

Revenue levels in 2009 were adversely impacted by the worldwide economic slowdown that first began to affect the Company’s business in the third quarter of 2008. During the slowdown, the Company continued to invest in developing and marketing new factory automation products and expanding its global factory automation sales force and partner network. Demand for the Company’s factory automation

27

Table of Contents

products increased sequentially in each quarter of 2010 and was at a record level during the fourth quarter of 2010. The largest dollar increases year over year were experienced in the Americas and Europe, where the Company has a broad base of factory automation customers. The largest percentage increases were experienced in Japan, where the Company has invested in a partnership with Mitsubishi Electric Corporation to help grow its factory automation business in this region, and in Southeast Asia, where the Company has expanded its sales and support infrastructure, particularly in China, in order to access more of the machine vision market for this high-potential region.

Semiconductor and Electronics Capital Equipment Market

Sales to customers who make automation equipment for the semiconductor and electronics industries represented 16% of total revenue in 2010 compared to 9% of total revenue in 2009. Sales to these customers increased by $31,828,000, or 208%, from the prior year. Geographically, revenue increased most significantly in Japan where many of the Company’s semiconductor and electronics capital equipment customers are located. The adoption of the new revenue recognition rules did not have a material impact on revenue from these customers in 2010.

Although revenue levels were significantly higher than the prior year, business in this market in 2009 was adversely impacted by the worldwide economic slowdown. Furthermore, demand in this market has declined sequentially in each quarter since the second quarter of 2010. This business continues to be impacted by the shift to software-only products, which have higher gross margins but average lower selling prices than a complete vision system with embedded hardware.

Surface Inspection Market

Sales to surface inspection customers represented 15% of total revenue in 2010 compared to 21% of total revenue in 2009. Revenue from these customers increased by $6,833,000, or 19%, from the prior year. In addition, surface inspection revenue increased on a sequential basis in each quarter of 2010 and was at a record level during the fourth quarter of 2010. This increase can be attributed to overall growth in the segment’s base business, the Smart View^® product line, as well as incremental revenue earned as a result of the Company’s acquisition and development of the SmartAdvisor™ product line. However, due to the relatively large average order values at SISD, the revenue reported for sales to surface inspection customers in each quarter can vary significantly depending upon the timing of customer orders, system deliveries, and installations, as well as the impact of revenue deferrals. The adoption of the new revenue recognition rules did not have a material impact on revenue from these customers in 2010.

Product Revenue

Product revenue increased by $105,084,000 in 2010 or 66%, from the prior year due to a significantly higher volume of vision systems sold, slightly offset by lower average selling prices, as the Company introduced new products at lower price points. A higher percentage of revenue from the sale of software-only products, which have relatively low selling prices, also contributed to the decrease in average selling prices from the prior year. Product revenue in 2009 included $4,400,000 related to an arrangement with a single customer for which product was shipped during 2007 and 2008, but revenue was deferred until the final unit was delivered in the first quarter of 2009.

Service Revenue

Service revenue, which is derived from the sale of maintenance and support, education, consulting, and installation services, increased by $9,880,000 in 2010 or 57%, from the prior year. In 2010, this revenue included $6,500,000 related to an arrangement with a single customer for which the work was performed over the prior four years, but revenue was deferred until the final obligation was completed in the fourth quarter of 2010. The remaining increase was due primarily to higher revenue from main-

28

Table of Contents

tenance and support arising from a higher level of spare part sales and repair services, as well as higher revenue from consulting and installation services. Service revenue decreased as a percentage of total revenue to 9% in 2010 from 10% in 2009.

Gross Margin

Gross margin as a percentage of revenue was 73% for 2010 compared to 68% for 2009. This increase was primarily due to higher MVSD product margins and a higher percentage of total revenue from the sale of modular vision systems, which have higher margins than the sale of surface inspection systems.

MVSD Margin

MVSD gross margin as a percentage of revenue was 78% in 2010 compared to 74% in 2009. In 2010, MVSD margin included $6,500,000 of revenue from a customer arrangement with a 51% margin, which decreased the MVSD margin by one percentage point, while in 2009, MVSD margin included $4,400,000 of revenue from a customer arrangement with a 92% margin, which increased the MVSD margin by one percentage point. Excluding the recognition of these specific customer arrangements, the MVSD gross margin as a percentage of revenue was 79% in 2010 compared to 73% in 2009. The increase in MVSD margin was primarily due to higher product margins resulting from improved absorption of manufacturing overhead costs, relatively flat new product introduction costs spread over a higher revenue base, and lower provisions for excess and obsolete inventory. A higher percentage of revenue from the sale of software-only products, which have relatively high margins, also contributed to the increase in product margin from the prior year.

SISD Margin

SISD gross margin as a percentage of revenue was 44% in 2010 compared to 46% in 2009. The decrease in SISD margin was primarily due to a shift in mix of sales to lower-margin paper sales, higher discounting of products in response to competitive market pressures, and costs incurred in 2010 to start up a manufacturing operation in China. Although the Company achieved cost savings from the closure of its Kuopio, Finland facility late in 2009, certain of the manufacturing positions that were terminated in Finland were replaced at the division’s headquarters in Alameda, California, resulting in minimal impact on the SISD margin.

Product Margin

Product gross margin as a percentage of revenue was 77% in 2010 compared to 72% in 2009. This increase was primarily due to higher MVSD product margins as described above, as well as a higher percentage of total revenue from the sale of modular vision systems, which have higher margins than the sale of surface inspection systems.

Service Margin

Service gross margin as a percentage of revenue was 41% in 2010 compared to 35% in 2009. This increase was primarily due to a shift in mix to higher-margin spare parts, repair, and consulting services, as well as improvements in product ease of use that resulted in lower technical support costs. Consulting services included $6,500,000 of revenue from a single customer arrangement recorded in 2010 with a margin of 51%.

29

Table of Contents

Operating Expenses

Research, Development, and Engineering Expenses

Research, development, and engineering (RD&E) expenses in 2010 increased by $1,948,000, or 6%, from the prior year. MVSD RD&E expenses increased by $1,821,000, or 7%, and SISD RD&E expenses increased $127,000, or 4%.

The table below details the $1,821,000 net increase in MVSD RD&E in 2010:

The lower stock-based compensation expense was due to the declining trend in the number of options granted, the accelerated expense taken in the fourth quarter of 2009 related to unvested options tendered by employees in the Company’s cash tender offer for certain underwater stock options, and higher estimated forfeiture rates in 2010. These savings were offset by the impact of stock options that were granted late in the second quarter of 2010 as part of the Company’s annual program. In addition, expenses increased as a result of company bonus accruals recorded during 2010 as the Company returned to profitability and higher vacation expense in 2010 as the Company did not continue the mandatory shutdown programs employed in 2009.

Although a work force reduction in the second quarter of 2009, primarily in the United States, reduced personnel-related costs in 2009, the Company increased RD&E headcount in strategic areas in 2010 due to the improved business climate, resulting in relatively flat personnel-related costs year over year. The majority of the headcount increase was in lower-cost regions, such as Hungary.

The increase in SISD RD&E expenses for 2010 was due to company bonus accruals recorded in 2010 ($149,000) and increased materials costs related to product development efforts ($136,000). These higher expenses were offset by lower personnel-related costs due to the closure of the division’s Kuopio, Finland facility late in 2009 ($240,000).

Selling, General, and Administrative Expenses

Selling, general, and administrative (SG&A) expenses in 2010 increased by $7,885,000, or 8%, from the prior year. MVSD SG&A expenses increased by $3,520,000, or 5%, while SISD SG&A expenses were relatively flat. Corporate expenses that are not allocated to either division increased by $4,320,000, or 38%.

The table below details the $3,520,000 net increase in MVSD SG&A in 2010:

The lower stock-based compensation expense was due to the declining trend in the number of options granted, the accelerated expense taken in the fourth quarter of 2009 related to unvested options ten-

30

Table of Contents

dered by employees, higher estimated forfeiture rates in 2010, and higher credits related to forfeited options in 2010. These savings were offset by the impact of stock options that were granted late in the second quarter of 2010 as part of the Company’s annual program. A $1,000,000 intangible asset impairment charge in the first quarter of 2009 also contributed to the decrease in SG&A expenses. Offsetting these savings were higher sales commissions related to the increase in revenues over the prior year, higher spending on marketing and promotional expenses intended to grow factory automation revenue, and company bonus accruals recorded during 2010 as the Company returned to profitability.

Although a work force reduction in the second quarter of 2009 reduced personnel-related costs in 2009, the Company increased SG&A headcount in strategic areas in 2010 due to the improved business climate, resulting in relatively flat personnel-related costs year over year. The majority of this headcount increase was in lower-cost regions, such as China.

There were no significant changes to SISD SG&A expenses from the prior year.

The increase in corporate expenses was due to higher legal fees primarily related to patent-infringement actions ($1,463,000), company bonus accruals recorded in 2010 ($1,629,000), and higher tax service fees related to the settlement of the Competent Authority tax case with Japan ($312,000). In addition, a majority of the remaining increase is due to expenses for the Company’s President, which were transferred from MVSD into the corporate group upon his promotion in January 2010, as he then became responsible for both divisions.

Restructuring Charges

November 2008

In November 2008, the Company announced the closure of its MVSD facility in Duluth, Georgia. The $12,000 balance in this restructuring accrual as of December 31, 2009 was paid in the first quarter of 2010, thereby concluding this restructuring program.

April 2009

In April 2009, the Company implemented a variety of cost-cutting measures at MVSD intended to more closely align the Company’s cost structure with the lower levels of business at that time. Of the $16,000 balance in this restructuring accrual as of December 31, 2009, $4,000 was reversed in the first quarter of 2010, $8,000 was paid in the first quarter of 2010, and $4,000 was paid in the second quarter of 2010, thereby concluding this restructuring program.

September 2009

On October 1, 2009, which was part of the Company’s fiscal September, the Company announced the closure of its SISD facility in Kuopio, Finland to achieve cost savings and production efficiencies. This SISD facility included a system assembly and integration team, a spare parts depot, and an engineering group dedicated to supporting the Company’s SISD products, as well as finance and support staff.

The restructuring charge from these actions was $584,000, all of which has been recorded to date and included in “Restructuring charges” on the Consolidated Statements of Operations in the SISD reporting segment. The following table summarizes this restructuring plan (in thousands):

31

Table of Contents

One-time termination benefits included salary, which the Company was obligated to pay over the legal notification period, and severance for eight employees who were terminated. A liability for the termination benefits of those employees who were not retained to render service beyond the legal notification period was measured and recognized at the communication date. A liability for the termination benefits of those employees who were retained to render service beyond the legal notification period was measured initially at the communication date but was recognized over the future service period. Contract termination costs included rental payments for the Kuopio, Finland facility during the periods for which the Company did not receive an economic benefit, as well as lease cancellation costs. The costs related to rental payments were recognized in the fourth quarter of 2009 when the Company ceased using the facility. Lease cancellation costs had been recorded based upon management’s estimates of those costs; however, a final settlement was recognized in the third quarter of 2010 when negotiations with the landlord concluded. Other associated costs included legal costs related to the employee termination actions and lease negotiations, as well as travel and transportation expenses between Kuopio and other Cognex locations related to the closure of the facility. These costs were recognized when the services were performed.

The following table summarizes the activity in the Company’s restructuring reserve related to the closure of the Finland facility, which is included in “Accrued expenses” on the Consolidated Balance Sheets (in thousands):

Nonoperating Income (Expense)

The Company recorded foreign currency losses of $328,000 and $1,265,000 in 2010 and 2009, respectively. The foreign currency fluctuations in each period resulted primarily from the revaluation and settlement of accounts receivable and intercompany balances that are reported in one currency and collected in another. In the second half of 2010, the Company began to record Yen-denominated accounts receivable on the books of its Japanese subsidiary, while in prior periods, these receivables were translated into Euros on the books of its Irish subsidiary, resulting in foreign currency gains or losses that the Company is no longer exposed to. Although the foreign currency exposure of accounts receivable is largely mitigated through the use of forward contracts, this program depends upon forecasts of sales and collections, and therefore, gains or losses on the underlying receivables may not perfectly offset losses or gains on the contracts.

Investment income in 2010 decreased by $764,000, or 35%, from the prior year. The decrease was primarily due to declining coupon rates on the Company’s portfolio of debt securities. Beginning in the second quarter of 2010, the Board of Directors approved a change to the Company’s investment policy to allow management to invest excess cash accumulated in the Company’s international entities in debt securities. This change is expected to contribute to higher investment income in future periods.

The Company recorded other expense of $703,000 in 2010 compared to income of $1,372,000 in 2009. The Company recorded $2,003,000 of other income in the first quarter of 2009 upon the expiration of the applicable statute of limitations relating to a tax holiday, during which time the Company collected value-added taxes from customers that were not required to be remitted to the government

32

Table of Contents

authority. Other income (expense) also includes rental income, net of associated expenses, from leasing buildings adjacent to the Company’s corporate headquarters. For a majority of 2010, these buildings were partially unoccupied.

Income Tax Expense (Benefit) on Continuing Operations

The Company’s effective tax rate on continuing operations was a provision of 19% in 2010, compared to a benefit of 53% in 2009.

The effective tax rate for 2010 included the impact of the following discrete events: (1) a decrease in tax expense of $462,000 from the settlement of the Competent Authority case with Japan, (2) a decrease in tax expense of $151,000 from the final true-up of the prior year’s tax accrual upon filing the actual tax returns, (3) a decrease in tax expense of $124,000 from the receipt of a state refund, and (4) a decrease in tax expense of $105,000 from the expiration of the statutes of limitations for certain reserves for income taxes. These discrete events changed the effective tax rate in 2010 from a provision of 20% to a provision of 19%.

The effective tax rate for 2009 included the impact of the following discrete events: (1) a decrease in tax expense of $3,150,000 from the expiration of the statutes of limitations for certain reserves for income taxes, (2) a decrease in tax expense of $406,000 from the receipt of a state refund, and (3) a decrease in tax expense of $51,000 from the final true-up of the prior year’s tax accrual upon filing the actual tax returns and other year-end adjustments, partially offset by (4) an increase in tax expense of $72,000 from the write-off of certain foreign tax credits. These discrete events changed the effective tax rate in 2009 from a benefit of 19% to a benefit of 53%.

The Company’s effective tax rate excluding discrete events increased from a benefit of 19% of the Company’s pre-tax loss in 2009 to a provision of 20% of the Company’s pre-tax income in 2010 due to more of the Company’s profits being earned in higher tax jurisdictions.

LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES

The Company has historically been able to generate positive cash flow from operations, which has funded its operating activities and other cash requirements and has resulted in an accumulated cash, cash equivalent, and investment balance of $357,440,000 as of December 31, 2011. The Company has established guidelines relative to credit ratings, diversification, and maturities of its investments that maintain liquidity.

The Company’s cash requirements in 2011 were met with its existing cash balances, cash from investment maturities, positive cash flows from operations, and the proceeds from stock option exercises. Cash requirements consisted of operating activities, purchases of investments, the payment of dividends, the repurchase of common stock, and capital expenditures. Capital expenditures totaled $7,820,000 in 2011 and consisted primarily of expenditures for computer hardware, computer software related to business system upgrades, manufacturing test equipment related to new product introductions, and building improvements at the Company’s headquarters in Natick, Massachusetts.

33

Table of Contents

The following table summarizes the Company’s material contractual obligations, both fixed and contingent (in thousands):

In June 2000, the Company became a Limited Partner in Venrock Associates III, L.P. (Venrock), a venture capital fund. The Company has committed to a total investment in the limited partnership of up to $20,500,000, with the commitment period expiring on December 31, 2013. The Company does not have the right to withdraw from the partnership prior to December 31, 2013. As of December 31, 2011, the Company had contributed $19,886,000 to the partnership. No contributions were made and no distributions were received during 2011. The remaining commitment of $614,000 can be called by Venrock in any period through December 31, 2013.

In addition to the obligations described above, the following items may also result in future material uses of cash:

Dividends

Beginning in the third quarter of 2003, the Company’s Board of Directors has declared and paid a cash dividend in each quarter, including a dividend of $0.08 per share in the first quarter of 2011, a dividend of $0.09 per share in the second and third quarters of 2011, and a dividend of $0.10 per share in the fourth quarter of 2011 that totaled $15,114,000 in 2011. On February 8, 2012, the Company’s Board of Directors declared a cash dividend of $0.10 per share payable in the first quarter of 2012. Future dividends will be declared at the discretion of the Company’s Board of Directors and will depend upon such factors as the Board deems relevant, including, among other things, the Company’s ability to generate positive cash flow from operations.

Stock Repurchase Program

In April 2008, the Company’s Board of Directors authorized the repurchase of up to $50,000,000 of the Company’s common stock, primarily as a means to reduce the dilutive effect of employee stock options. As of December 31, 2011, the Company had repurchased 1,375,875 shares at a cost of $30,000,000 under this program, including 337,078 shares at a cost of $10,000,000 during 2011. In November 2011, the Company’s Board of Directors authorized the repurchase of up to $80,000,000 of the Company’s common stock to help reduce share dilution associated with equity incentive plans. This new authorization will commence once the Company completes the $50,000,000 program, of which $20,000,000 remains available. The Company may repurchase shares under this program in future periods depending upon a variety of factors, including, among other things, stock price, share availability, and cash reserve requirements.

Reserve for Income Taxes

The Company may be required to make cash outlays related to its reserve for income taxes totaling $5,354,000 as of December 31, 2011, of which $558,000 will likely be paid within the next twelve

34

Table of Contents

months and $4,796,000 may be paid in a future period. Due to the uncertainty of the timing of future cash payments associated with its reserve for income taxes, the Company is unable to make reasonably reliable estimates of the future period of cash settlement, if any, with the respective taxing authorities.

Acquisitions

The Company’s business strategy includes selective expansion into new machine vision applications through the acquisition of businesses and technologies, which may result in significant cash outlays in the future.

The Company believes that its existing cash, cash equivalent, and investment balances, together with cash flow from operations, will be sufficient to meet its operating, investing, and financing activities for the next twelve months. As of December 31, 2011, the Company had approximately $351,507,000 in either cash, cash equivalents, or debt securities that could be converted into cash. In addition, Cognex has no long-term debt and does not anticipate needing debt financing in the near future. We believe that our strong cash position has put us in a relatively good position with respect to our longer-term liquidity needs.

OFF-BALANCE SHEET ARRANGEMENTS

As of December 31, 2011, the Company had no off-balance sheet arrangements.

CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND ESTIMATES

Our discussion and analysis of the Company’s financial condition and results of operations is based upon the consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. The preparation of these financial statements requires management to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenue, and expenses, and related disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. We base our estimates on historical experience and various other assumptions believed to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results could differ from these estimates under different assumptions or circumstances resulting in charges that could be material in future reporting periods. We believe the following critical accounting policies require the use of significant estimates and judgments in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements.

Revenue Recognition

The Company’s product revenue is derived from the sale of machine vision systems, which can take the form of hardware with embedded software or software-only, and related accessories. The Company also generates revenue by providing maintenance and support, training, consulting, and installation services to its customers. Certain of the Company’s arrangements include multiple deliverables that provide the customer with a combination of products or services. In order to recognize revenue, the Company requires that a signed customer contract or purchase order is received, the fee from the arrangement is fixed or determinable, and collection of the resulting receivable is probable. Assuming that these criteria have been met, product revenue is recognized upon delivery, revenue from maintenance and support programs is recognized ratably over the program period, revenue from training and consulting services is recognized over the period that the services are provided, and revenue from installation services is recognized when the customer has signed off that the installation is complete.

The majority of the Company’s product offerings consist of hardware with embedded software. Under the revenue recognition rules for tangible products, the fee from a multiple-deliverable arrangement is allocated to each of the deliverables based upon their relative selling prices as determined by a selling-

35

Table of Contents

price hierarchy. A deliverable in an arrangement qualifies as a separate unit of accounting if the delivered item has value to the customer on a stand-alone basis. A delivered item that does not qualify as a separate unit of accounting is combined with the other undelivered items in the arrangement and revenue is recognized for those combined deliverables as a single unit of accounting. The selling price used for each deliverable is based upon vendor-specific objective evidence (VSOE) if available, third-party evidence (TPE) if VSOE is not available, and management’s best estimate of selling price (BESP) if neither VSOE nor TPE are available. TPE is the price of the Company’s or any competitor’s largely interchangeable products or services in stand-alone sales to similarly-situated customers. BESP is the price at which the Company would sell the deliverable if it were sold regularly on a stand-alone basis, considering market conditions and entity-specific factors.

Management exercises judgment in connection with the determination of the amount of revenue to be recognized each period. Such judgments include, but are not limited to, determining whether separate contracts with the same customer that are entered into at or near the same time should be accounted for as a single arrangement, identifying the various elements in an arrangement, determining if delivered items have stand-alone value, determining the relative selling prices of the arrangement’s deliverables, determining whether options to buy additional products or services in the future are substantive and should be accounted for as a deliverable in the original arrangement, assessing whether the fee is fixed or determinable, determining the probability of collecting the receivable, determining whether customer-specified acceptance criteria are substantive in nature, and assessing whether vendor-specific objective evidence of fair value has been established for undelivered elements.

Investments

As of December 31, 2011, the Company’s investment balance totaled $319,337,000, of which $313,404,000 consisted of debt securities. These securities are reported at fair value, with unrealized gains and losses, net of tax, recorded in shareholders’ equity as other comprehensive income (loss). As of December 31, 2011, the Company’s portfolio of debt securities had net unrealized gains totaling $127,000.

The remaining investment balance of $5,933,000 represented a limited partnership interest in Venrock Associates III, L.P., a venture capital fund with an investment focus on Information Technology and Health Care and Life Sciences. A Director of the Company was a General Partner of Venrock Associates through December 31, 2009. The Company’s limited partnership interest is accounted for using the cost method because our investment is less than 5% of the partnership and we have no influence over the partnership’s operating and financial policies. Furthermore, the investment does not have a readily determinable market value, and therefore, does not qualify for fair value accounting. As of December 31, 2011, the carrying value of this investment was $5,933,000 compared to an estimated fair value of $7,460,000.

The Company applies a three-level valuation hierarchy for fair value measurements. The categorization of assets and liabilities within the valuation hierarchy is based upon the lowest level of input that is significant to the measurement of fair value. Level 1 inputs to the valuation methodology utilize unadjusted quoted market prices in active markets for identical assets and liabilities. Level 2 inputs to the valuation methodology are other observable inputs, including quoted market prices for similar assets and liabilities, quoted prices for identical and similar assets and liabilities in markets that are not active, or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable market data. Level 3 inputs to the valuation methodology are unobservable inputs based upon management’s best estimate of the inputs that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability at the measurement date, including assumptions about risk. Changes in the valuation methodology, interest rates, credit rates, or the market for these investments could result in changes to their fair values.

The fair value of the Company’s debt securities is based upon model-driven valuations in which all significant inputs are observable or can be derived from or corroborated by observable market data for substantially the full term of the assets, and are therefore classified as level 2 investments. In estimat-

36

Table of Contents

ing the fair value of its debt securities, management takes into consideration valuations provided by a large, third-party pricing service. This service maintains regular contact with market makers, brokers, dealers, and analysts to gather information on market movement, direction, trends, and other specific data. They use this information to structure yield curves for various types of debt securities and arrive at the daily valuations.

The fair value of the Company’s limited partnership interest takes into consideration valuations of the partnership’s investments as determined by the General Partner. Publicly-traded investments in active markets are reported at the market closing price less a discount, as appropriate, to reflect restricted marketability. Fair value for private investments for which observable market prices in active markets do not exist is based upon the best information available including the value of a recent financing, reference to observable valuation measures for comparable companies (such as revenue multiples), public or private transactions (such as the sale of a comparable company), and valuations for publicly-traded comparable companies. The valuations also incorporate the General Partner’s own judgment and close familiarity with the business activities of each portfolio company. The portfolio consists of securities of public and private companies, and consequently, inputs used in the fair value calculation are classified as level 3. These valuations are judgmental and require the use of many assumptions and estimates, and changes in these assumptions could result in an impairment charge in future periods.

The majority of the partnership’s portfolio consists of investments in early-stage, private companies characterized by a high degree of risk, volatility, and illiquidity, and the global economic slowdown and credit market crisis have made the environment for these startups much less forgiving. As a result, it is possible that some of the younger companies in the portfolio that require capital investments to fund their current operations may not be as well prepared to survive this economic uncertainty as would a more mature company. These factors make the assumptions and estimates used in the fair valuation calculations more judgmental.

Management monitors the carrying value of its investments compared to their fair value to determine whether an other-than-temporary impairment has occurred. In considering whether a decline in fair value is other-than-temporary, we consider many factors, both qualitative and quantitative in nature. In its evaluation of its debt securities, management considers the type of security, the credit rating of the security, the length of time the security has been in a loss position, the size of the loss position, our ability and intent to hold the security to expected recovery of value, and other meaningful information. In its evaluation of its limited partnership interest, management considers the duration and extent of the decline, the length of the Company’s commitment to the investment, general economic trends, and specific communications with the General Partner. If a decline in fair value is determined to be other-than-temporary, an impairment charge would be recorded in current operations to reduce the carrying value of the investment to its fair value. There were no other-than-temporary impairments of investments in 2011, 2010, or 2009. If the fair value of the Company’s limited partnership interest decreases below its current carrying value, which would represent a decline of greater than 20%, the Company may be required to record an impairment charge related to this investment.

Accounts Receivable

The Company maintains reserves against its accounts receivable for potential credit losses. Ongoing credit evaluations of customers are performed and the Company has historically not experienced significant losses related to the collection of its accounts receivable. Allowances for specific accounts determined to be at risk for collection are estimated by management taking into account the length of time the receivable has been outstanding, the customer’s current ability to pay its obligations to the Company, general economic and industry conditions, as well as various other factors. Global economic uncertainty may result in longer payment cycles and challenges in collecting accounts receivable balances, which make these estimates more judgmental. An adverse change in any of these factors could result in higher than expected customer defaults and may result in the need for additional bad

37

Table of Contents

debt provisions. As of December 31, 2011, the Company’s reserve against accounts receivable was $1,240,000, or 3% of the gross accounts receivable balance. A 10% difference in the reserve against accounts receivable as of December 31, 2011 would have affected net income by approximately $99,000.

Inventories

Inventories are stated at the lower of cost or market. Management estimates excess and obsolescence exposures based upon assumptions about future demand, product transitions, and market conditions, and records reserves to reduce the carrying value of inventories to their net realizable value. Volatility in the global economy makes these assumptions about future demand more judgmental. Among the risks associated with the introduction of new products are difficulty predicting customer demand and effectively managing inventory levels to ensure adequate supply of the new product and avoid excess supply of the legacy product. In addition, we may strategically enter into non-cancelable commitments with vendors to purchase materials for products in advance of demand in order to take advantage of favorable pricing or address concerns about the availability of future supplies and long lead times. As of December 31, 2011, the Company’s reserve for excess and obsolete inventory totaled $4,359,000, or 13% of the gross inventory balance. A 10% difference in inventory reserves as of December 31, 2011 would have affected net income by approximately $349,000.

Long-lived Assets

The Company has long-lived assets including property, plant, and equipment and acquired intangible assets. These assets are susceptible to shortened estimated useful lives and changes in fair value due to changes in their use, market or economic changes, or other events or circumstances. The Company evaluates the potential impairment of these long-lived assets whenever events or circumstances indicate their carrying value may not be recoverable. Factors that could trigger an impairment review include historical or projected results that are less than the assumptions used in the original valuation of an acquired asset, a change in the Company’s business strategy or its use of an acquired asset, or negative economic or industry trends.

If an event or circumstance indicates the carrying value of long-lived assets may not be recoverable, the Company assesses the recoverability of the assets by comparing the carrying value of the assets to the sum of the undiscounted future cash flows that the assets are expected to generate over their remaining economic lives. If the carrying value exceeds the sum of the undiscounted future cash flows, the Company compares the fair value of the long-lived assets to the carrying value and records an impairment loss for the difference. The Company generally estimates the fair value of its long-lived assets using the income approach based upon a discounted cash flow model. The income approach requires the use of many assumptions and estimates including future revenues and expenses, discount factors, income tax rates, the identification of groups of assets with highly independent cash flows, and assets’ economic lives. Volatility in the global economy makes these assumptions and estimates more judgmental. The Company recorded an impairment loss on an intangible asset in 2009 based on lower revenue expected to be generated from the respective assets. No impairment losses were recorded in 2010 or 2011. Actual future operating results and the remaining economic lives of our long-lived assets could differ from those used in assessing the recoverability of these assets and could result in an impairment of long-lived assets in future periods.

Goodwill

Management evaluates the potential impairment of goodwill for each of its reporting units annually each fourth quarter and whenever events or circumstances indicate their carrying value may not be recoverable. The Company has identified two reporting units for its goodwill test: MVSD and SISD. Determining the Company’s reporting units requires judgments regarding what constitutes a business and at what level discrete financial information is available and reviewed by management.

38

Table of Contents

In the third quarter of 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued an Accounting Standards Update intended to reduce the cost and complexity of the annual goodwill impairment test by providing entities an option to perform a qualitative assessment (commonly known as “step zero”) to determine whether further impairment testing is necessary. If this qualitative assessment indicates that it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, the entity would proceed to a two-step process. Step one compares the fair value of the reporting unit with its carrying value, including goodwill. If the carrying amount exceeds the fair value of the reporting unit, step two is required to determine if there is an impairment of the goodwill. Step two compares the implied fair value of the reporting unit goodwill to the carrying amount of the goodwill. The Company estimates the fair value of its reporting units using the income approach based upon a discounted cash flow model. In addition, the Company uses the market approach, which compares the reporting unit to publicly-traded companies and transactions involving similar businesses, to support the conclusions based upon the income approach. The income approach requires the use of many assumptions and estimates including future revenues, expenses, capital expenditures, and working capital, as well as discount factors and income tax rates.

The Company elected to perform a qualitative assessment for its 2011 analysis of goodwill. Based on this assessment, management does not believe that it is more likely than not that the carrying value of either reporting unit exceeds its fair value. Factors that management considered in this assessment include macroeconomic conditions, industry and market considerations, overall financial performance (both current and projected), changes in management or strategy, and changes in the composition or carrying amount of net assets. In addition, management took into consideration the goodwill valuation it performed under the two-step process as of October 4, 2010. This process indicated that the fair value of the MVSD unit exceeded its carrying value by approximately 208%, while the fair value of the SISD unit exceeded its carrying value by approximately 119% at that date.

Warranty Obligations

The Company records the estimated cost of fulfilling product warranties at the time of sale based upon historical costs to fulfill claims. Obligations may also be recorded subsequent to the time of sale whenever specific events or circumstances impacting product quality become known that would not have been taken into account using historical data. While we engage in extensive product quality programs and processes, including actively monitoring and evaluating the quality of our component suppliers and third-party contract manufacturers, the Company’s warranty obligation is affected by product failure rates, material usage, and service delivery costs incurred in correcting a product failure. An adverse change in any of these factors may result in the need for additional warranty provisions. As of December 31, 2011, the Company’s accrued warranty obligations amounted to $2,097,000. A 10% difference in accrued warranty obligations as of December 31, 2011 would have affected net income by approximately $168,000.

Contingencies

Estimated losses from contingencies are accrued by management based upon whether a loss is probable and whether management has the ability to reasonably estimate the amount of the loss. Estimating potential losses, or even a range of losses, is difficult and involves a great deal of judgment. Management relies primarily on assessments made by its internal and external legal counsel to make our determination as to whether a loss contingency arising from litigation should be recorded or disclosed. This analysis is performed on a quarterly basis or when facts and circumstances dictate. Should the resolution of a contingency result in a loss that we did not accrue because management did not believe that the loss was probable or capable of being reasonably estimated, then this loss would result in a charge to income in the period the contingency was resolved. The Company did not have any significant accrued contingencies as of December 31, 2011.

39

Table of Contents

Stock-Based Compensation

Compensation expense is recognized for all stock option grants. Determining the appropriate valuation model and estimating the fair values of these grants requires the input of subjective assumptions, including expected stock price volatility, dividend yields, expected term, and forfeiture rates. The expected volatility assumption is based partially upon the historical volatility of the Company’s common stock, which may or may not be a true indicator of future volatility, particularly as the Company continues to seek to diversify its customer base. The assumptions used in calculating the fair values of stock option grants represent management’s best estimates, but these estimates involve inherent uncertainties and the application of judgment. As a result, if factors change and different assumptions are used, stock-based compensation expense could be significantly different from what the Company recorded in the current period.

Income Taxes

Significant judgment is required in determining worldwide income tax expense based upon tax laws in the various jurisdictions in which the Company operates. The Company has established reserves for income taxes by applying the “more likely than not” criteria, under which the recognition threshold is met when an entity concludes that a tax position, based solely on its technical merits, is more likely than not to be sustained upon examination by the relevant tax authority. All tax positions are analyzed periodically and adjustments are made as events occur that warrant modification, such as the completion of audits or the expiration of statutes of limitations, which may result in future charges or credits to income tax expense.

As part of the process of preparing consolidated financial statements, management is required to estimate income taxes in each of the jurisdictions in which the Company operates. This process involves estimating the current tax liability, as well as assessing temporary differences arising from the different treatment of items for financial statement and tax purposes. These differences result in deferred tax assets and liabilities, which are recorded on the Consolidated Balance Sheets.

The Company has net deferred tax assets primarily resulting from temporary differences between the financial statement and tax bases of assets and liabilities. Management has evaluated the realizability of these deferred tax assets and has determined that it is more likely than not that these assets will be realized, net of any valuation allowance. In reaching this conclusion, we have evaluated relevant criteria, including the Company’s historical profitability, current projections of future profitability, and the lives of tax credits, net operating and capital losses, and other carryforwards, certain of which have indefinite lives. Should the Company fail to generate sufficient pre-tax profits in future periods, we may be required to record material adjustments to these deferred tax assets, resulting in a charge to income in the period of determination.

Derivative Instruments

In certain instances, the Company enters into forward contracts and other derivative instruments to hedge against foreign currency fluctuations. These contracts are used to minimize foreign currency gains or losses, as the gains or losses on these contracts are intended to offset the losses or gains on the underlying exposures. The Company does not engage in foreign currency speculation and these forward contracts are not subject to effective hedge accounting. Administering the Company’s foreign currency risk management program requires the use of estimates and the application of judgment, including compiling forecasts of transaction activity denominated in various currencies. The failure to identify foreign currency exposures and construct effective hedges may result in material foreign currency gains or losses.

Purchase Accounting

Business acquisitions are accounted for under the purchase method of accounting. Allocating the purchase price requires the Company to estimate the fair value of various assets acquired and

40

Table of Contents

liabilities assumed. Management is responsible for determining the appropriate valuation model and estimated fair values, and in doing so, considers a number of factors, including information provided by an outside valuation advisor. The Company primarily establishes fair value using the income approach based upon a discounted cash flow model. The income approach requires the use of many assumptions and estimates including future revenues and expenses, as well as discount factors and income tax rates.

NEW PRONOUNCEMENTS

Accounting Standards Update (ASU) 2011-04, “Fair Value Measurements: Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure Requirements in U.S. GAAP and IFRSs”

The amendments in this ASU change certain aspects of the fair value measurement guidance in Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) 820, “Fair Value Measurement” in order to make U.S. GAAP and international standards more consistent. These changes include the application of the concepts of highest and best use and valuation premise, introduction of an option to measure groups of offsetting assets and liabilities on a net basis, incorporation of certain discounts and premiums in fair value measurements, and measurement of the fair value of certain instruments classified in shareholders’ equity. In addition, the amended guidance includes new fair value disclosure requirements, including, among other things, information about valuation techniques and unobservable inputs used in Level 3 fair value measurements and a narrative description of Level 3 measurements’ sensitivity to changes in unobservable inputs. ASU 2011-04 must be applied prospectively and is effective for the first quarter of 2012. Management does not expect this ASU to have a material impact on the fair value of our investments portfolio or the related disclosure requirements.

Accounting Standards Updates (ASU) 2011-05 and 2011-12, “Comprehensive Income”

The amendments in ASU 2011-05 revise the manner in which companies present comprehensive income in their financial statements in order to make U.S. GAAP and international standards more consistent. This ASU requires companies to report the components of comprehensive income in either a continuous statement of comprehensive income or in two separate but consecutive statements. In the two-statement approach, the first statement would present the components of net income, similar to the Company’s current Consolidated Statements of Operations, while the second statement would include the components of other comprehensive income, as well as a cumulative total for comprehensive income.

In December 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued ASU 2011-12 to defer one provision of ASU 2011-05. The amendments in ASU 2011-12 defer the requirements under ASU 2011-05 to present reclassification adjustments by component in both the statement where net income is presented and the statement where other comprehensive income is presented. This deferral was prompted by users’ concerns that the presentation requirements would be costly to implement and could add unnecessary complexity to financial statements.

Neither of these ASU’s change the items that must be reported in other comprehensive income. Both Updates must be applied retrospectively beginning in the first quarter of 2012. At that time, management has elected to present other comprehensive income in two separate but consecutive statements.

Accounting Standards Update (ASU) 2011-08, “Testing Goodwill For Impairment”

In the third quarter of 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued an ASU aimed at simplifying entities’ annual goodwill impairment test. This ASU is intended to reduce the cost and complexity of the annual goodwill impairment test by providing entities an option to perform a qualitative assessment to determine whether further impairment testing is necessary. ASU 2011-08 is effective for annual and interim goodwill impairment tests performed for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2011; however, early adoption is allowed. Management has elected to adopt this ASU early and has applied the provisions of this Update to its 2011 analysis of goodwill.

41

Table of Contents

Foreign Currency Risk

The Company faces exposure to foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations, as a significant portion of its revenues, expenses, assets, and liabilities are denominated in currencies other than the functional currencies of the Company’s subsidiaries or the reporting currency of the Company, which is the U.S. Dollar. These exposures may change over time as business practices evolve. The Company evaluates its foreign currency exposures on an ongoing basis and makes adjustments to its foreign currency risk management program as circumstances change. The failure to identify new exposures and hedge them in an effective manner may result in material foreign currency gains or losses.

The Company faces two types of foreign currency exchange rate exposures:

The Company faces transactional currency/functional currency exposures that it may hedge from time to time. These exposures include cash balances, accounts receivable or payable denominated in currencies other than the functional currency of the subsidiary, and intercompany balances denominated in currencies other than the functional currency of the subsidiary. The Company presently manages its intercompany foreign currency risk by transferring cash to minimize intercompany balances at the end of each month, and in certain instances, entering into forward contracts. In addition, the Company enters into forward contracts to hedge the exposure of its Irish subsidiary’s accounts receivable denominated in U.S. dollars.

Forward contracts to exchange 3,790,000 U.S. Dollars for Euros at a weighted-average settlement price of 1.34 USD/Euro, with terms between one and three months, were outstanding as of December 31, 2011. At fair value, these instruments had a loss of $87,000 as of December 31, 2011. In addition, the Company also had one outstanding forward contract to exchange 200,000,000 Japanese Yen for Euros at a settlement price of 102.20 JPY/Euro as of December 31, 2011. At fair value, this instrument had a loss of $64,000 as of December 31, 2011.

These forward contracts are used to minimize foreign currency gains or losses, as the gains or losses on these contracts are intended to offset the losses or gains on the underlying exposures. Both the underlying exposures and the forward contracts are recorded at fair value on the Consolidated Balance Sheets and changes in fair value are reported as “Foreign currency loss” on the Consolidated Statements of Operations. The Company does not engage in foreign currency speculation and these forward contracts are not subject to effective hedge accounting. The success of this hedging program depends upon forecasts of sales and collections denominated in various currencies. To the extent that these forecasts are overstated or understated during periods of currency volatility, the Company could experience unanticipated foreign currency gains or losses that could have a material impact on the Company’s results of operations.

The Company’s functional currency/reporting currency exchange rate exposures result from revenues and expenses that are denominated in currencies other than the U.S. Dollar. A significant portion of our revenues and expenses are denominated in the Euro and the Japanese Yen. The Company’s predominant currency of sale is the U.S. Dollar in the Americas, the Euro in Europe, the Yen in Japan, and the U.S. Dollar and Chinese Yuan for sales in Southeast Asia. We estimate that approximately 46% of our sales in 2011 were invoiced in currencies other than the U.S. Dollar, and we expect sales denominated

42

Table of Contents

in foreign currencies to continue to represent a significant portion of our total revenue. While we also have expenses denominated in these same foreign currencies, the impact on revenues has historically been, and is expected to continue to be, greater than the offsetting impact on expenses. Therefore, in times when the U.S. Dollar strengthens in relation to these foreign currencies, we would expect to report a net decrease in operating income. Conversely, in times when the U.S. Dollar weakens in relation to these foreign currencies, we would expect to report a net increase in operating income.

Interest Rate Risk

The Company’s portfolio of debt securities includes treasury bills, municipal bonds, corporate bonds, agency bonds, sovereign bonds, and covered bonds. Debt securities with original maturities greater than three months are designated as available-for-sale and are reported at fair value. As of December 31, 2011, the fair value of the Company’s portfolio of debt securities amounted to $313,404,000, with principal amounts totaling $313,277,000, maturities that do not exceed five years, and a yield to maturity of 1.31%. Differences between the fair value and principal amounts of the Company’s portfolio of debt securities are primarily attributable to discounts and premiums arising at the acquisition date, as well as unrealized gains and losses as of the balance sheet date.

Although it is the Company’s policy to invest in debt securities with effective maturities that do not exceed ten years, 90% of the investment portfolio as of December 31, 2011 have effective maturity dates of less than three years. Given the relatively short maturities and investment-grade quality of the Company’s portfolio of debt securities as of December 31, 2011, a sharp rise in interest rates should not have a material adverse effect on the fair value of these instruments. As a result, the Company does not currently hedge these interest rate exposures.

The following table presents the hypothetical change in the fair value of the Company’s portfolio of debt securities arising from selected potential changes in interest rates (in thousands). This modeling technique measures the change in fair value that would result from a parallel shift in the yield curve plus or minus 50 and 100 basis points (BP) over a twelve-month time horizon.

Other Market Risks

As noted above, the Company’s investments include a variety of debt securities held in both domestic and foreign portfolios. Given the current economic climate, specifically in Europe, the investments in the foreign portfolio may be subject to increased market risk.

The Company’s investment portfolio also includes a limited partnership interest in Venrock Associates III, L.P., a venture capital fund with an investment focus on Information Technology and Health Care and Life Sciences. The majority of the partnership’s portfolio consists of investments in early stage, private companies characterized by a high degree of risk, volatility, and illiquidity. A Director of the Company was a General Partner of Venrock Associates through December 31, 2009.

The fair value of the Company’s limited partnership interest takes into consideration valuations of the partnership’s investments as determined by the General Partner. Publicly-traded investments in active

43

Table of Contents

markets are reported at the market closing price less a discount, as appropriate, to reflect restricted marketability. Fair value for private investments for which observable market prices in active markets do not exist is based upon the best information available including the value of a recent financing, reference to observable valuation measures for comparable companies (such as revenue multiples), public or private transactions (such as the sale of a comparable company), and valuations for publicly-traded comparable companies. The valuations also incorporate the General Partner’s own judgment and close familiarity with the business activities of each portfolio company. These valuations are judgmental and require the use of many assumptions and estimates, and changes in these assumptions could result in an impairment charge in future periods.

The majority of the partnership’s portfolio consists of investments in early-stage, private companies characterized by a high degree of risk, volatility, and illiquidity, and the global economic slowdown and credit market crisis have made the environment for these startups much less forgiving. As a result, it is possible that some of the younger companies in the portfolio that require capital investments to fund their current operations may not be as well prepared to survive economic uncertainty as would a more mature company. These factors make the assumptions and estimates used in the fair valuation calculations more judgmental.

As of December 31, 2011, the carrying value of this investment was $5,933,000 compared to an estimated fair value of $7,460,000. Should the fair value of this investment decline in future periods below its carrying value, management will determine whether this decline is other-than-temporary and future impairment charges may be required.

44

Table of Contents

ITEM 8:  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

INDEX TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA