TERADYNE, INC - Annual Report: 2009 (Form 10-K)

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

ANNUAL REPORT

PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 13 OR 15(d)

OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

(MARK ONE)

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009

OR

Commission file number 001-06462

TERADYNE, INC.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (978) 370-2700

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

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.    Yes  x    No  ¨

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act.    Yes  ¨    No  x

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.    Yes  x    No  ¨

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 (232.405 of this chapter) during the proceeding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).    Yes  ¨    No  ¨

* The registrant has not yet been phased in to the interactive data requirements.

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 in any amendment to this Form 10-K.  x

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):

Large accelerated filer x    Accelerated filer ¨    Non-accelerated filer ¨     Smaller reporting company ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).    Yes  ¨    No  x

The aggregate market value of the voting stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant as of July 5, 2009 was approximately $1.2 billion based upon the closing price of the registrant’s Common Stock on the New York Stock Exchange on that date.

The number of shares outstanding of the registrant’s only class of Common Stock as of February 22, 2010 was 177,237,096 shares.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the registrant’s proxy statement in connection with its 2010 annual meeting of shareholders are incorporated by reference into Part III.

TERADYNE, INC.

FORM 10-K

PART I

Teradyne, Inc. (the “Company” or “Teradyne”) was founded in 1960 and is a leading global supplier of automatic test equipment.

We design, develop, manufacture and sell automatic test systems and solutions used to test complex electronics in the consumer electronics, automotive, computing, telecommunications, and aerospace and defense industries. Our automatic test equipment products and services include:

We have a broad customer base which includes integrated device manufacturers (“IDMs”), outsourced sub-assembly and test providers (“OSATs”), wafer foundries, fabless companies that design, but contract with others for the manufacture of integrated circuits (“ICs”), manufacturers of circuit boards, automotive companies, HDD manufacturers, aerospace and military contractors as well as the United States Department of Defense.

In 2009, we entered the High Speed dynamic random access memory (“DRAM”) testing market with our UltraFlex-M product. High speed DRAM memory devices are used for high-end graphics applications in personal computer and gaming consoles.

In 2009, we also entered the market for hard disk drive test systems with our Neptune product. The Neptune product line currently is used to test 2.5 inch hard disk drives for laptops, netbooks and consumer electronic storage devices.

In 2008, we acquired Nextest Systems Corporation (“Nextest”) and Eagle Test Systems, Inc. (“Eagle Test”) to expand our product portfolio of automated test equipment for the semiconductor industry. Nextest develops systems to test integrated circuits such as microcontrollers, image sensors, smart cards and field programmable logic devices for the flash memory, flash card and flash memory based system-on-a-chip (“SOC”) markets. Eagle Test develops systems to test analog, mixed-signal and radio frequency semiconductors used in digital cameras, MP3 players, cellular telephones, video/multimedia products, automotive electronics and notebook and desktop computers. Nextest and Eagle Test are included within our Semiconductor Test segment.

In 2007, we purchased in-process enabling test technology and hired certain engineers from MOSAID Technologies Inc.

Investor Information

We are a Massachusetts corporation incorporated on September 23, 1960. We are subject to the informational requirements of the Exchange Act. We file periodic reports, proxy statements and other information with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). Such reports, proxy statements and other information may be obtained by visiting the Public Reference Room of the SEC at 100 F Street, N.E., Washington, DC 20549 or by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. In addition, the SEC maintains an internet site (http://www.sec.gov) that contains reports, proxy and information statements and other information regarding issuers that file electronically.

2

You can access financial and other information, including the charters of our Audit Committee, Compensation Committee and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, our Corporate Governance Guidelines and Standards of Business Conduct, by clicking the Investors link on our web site at www.teradyne.com. We make available, free of charge, copies of our filings with the SEC, including our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act through our web site as soon as reasonably practicable after filing such material electronically or otherwise furnishing it to the SEC.

Products

Semiconductor Test

We design, manufacture, sell and support Semiconductor Test products and services on a world wide basis. The test systems we provide are used both for wafer level and device package testing. These chips are used in automotive, communications, consumer, computer and electronic game applications, among others. Semiconductor devices span a broad range of functionality, from very simple low-cost devices such as appliance microcontrollers, operational amplifiers or voltage regulators to complex digital signal processors, microprocessors, high-density as well as high speed memory devices. Semiconductor Test products and services are sold to IDMs that integrate the fabrication of silicon wafers into their business, “Fabless” companies that outsource the manufacturing of silicon wafers, “Foundries” that cater to the processing and manufacturing of silicon wafers, and OSATs that provide test and assembly services for the final packaged devices to both Fabless companies and IDMs. Fabless companies perform the design of integrated circuits without manufacturing capabilities, and use Foundries for wafer manufacturing and OSATs for test and assembly. These customers obtain the overall benefit of comprehensively testing devices and reducing the total costs associated with testing by using our Semiconductor Test systems to:

Our FLEX Test Platform architecture advances our core technologies to produce test equipment that is designed for high efficiency multi-site testing. Multi-site testing involves the simultaneous testing of many devices and functions in parallel. Leading semiconductor manufacturers are using multi-site testing to significantly improve their “Cost of Test” economics. The FLEX Test Platform architecture addresses customer requirements through the following key capabilities:

1) A high efficiency multi-site architecture that eliminates tester overhead such as instrument setup, synchronization and data movement, and signal processing;

2) The IG-XL™ software operating system which provides fast program development, including instant conversion from single to multi-site test; and

3) Broad technology coverage by instruments designed to cover the range of test parameters, coupled with a Universal Slot test head design that allows easy test system reconfiguration to address changing test needs.

FLEX Test Platform purchases are being made by IDMs, OSATs and Fabless customers. The FLEX Test Platform has become a widely used test solution at OSATs and test houses by providing versatile testers that can handle the widest range of devices, allowing OSATs to leverage their capital investments. The broad consumer, automotive and broadband markets have historically driven most of the device volume growth in the semiconductor industry. These markets include cell phones, set top boxes, HDTVs, game controllers, computer

3

graphics, and automotive controllers to name a few. These end use markets are continuing to be drivers for the FLEX Test Platform family of products because they require a wide range of technologies and instrument coverage. The FLEX Test Platform has an installed base of more than 2,100 customer systems to date and it continues to grow. The introduction of the UltraFLEX-M tester in 2009 extends the FLEX Test Platform into the High Speed DRAM testing market.

Our J750™ test system shares the IG-XL software environment with the family of FLEX Test Platform systems. The J750 is designed to address the highest volume semiconductor devices such as microcontrollers that are central to the functionality of almost every consumer electronics product, from small appliances to automotive engine controllers. J750 test systems combine compact packaging, high throughput and ease of production test. These benefits are possible due to the high level of integration in the design. We extended the J750 platform technology to create the IP750 Image Sensor™ test system. The IP750 is focused on testing image sensor devices used in digital cameras and other imaging products. The J750 platform has an installed base of over 2,900 systems and it continues to grow.

We have continued to invest in the J750 platform with a set of J750Ex™ instrumentation that was released in 2007, with additional instrument releases in 2008. These instruments bring new capabilities to existing market segments and expand the J750 platform to critical new devices that include high end microcontrollers and the latest generation of cameras. These new J750Ex instruments are designed to be compatible with our customers’ existing hardware and software investments and deliver industry leading parallel test economics while providing customers with flexibility to address next generation functional requirements.

Our acquisition of Nextest in January of 2008 expanded our product offerings to include the Magnum test platform. The Magnum products address the requirements of mass production test of memory devices such as flash memory and DRAM. Flash and DRAM memory are widely used core building blocks in modern electronic products finding wide application in consumer, industrial, and computing equipment. Magnum II is the newest member of the family. With test rates up to 800 megabits per second and a versatile architecture designed for maximal throughput, Magnum II tests flash and DRAM devices, an important advantage for large memory producers that manufacture both types of memory. The Magnum platform has an installed base of over 700 systems and it continues to grow.

Our acquisition of Eagle Test in November of 2008 expanded our product offerings to include the ETS platform. The ETS platform is used by semiconductor manufacturers and assembly and test subcontractors, primarily in the low pin count analog/mixed signal discrete markets that cover more cost sensitive applications. Eagle Test’s proprietary SmartPin™ technology enables multiple semiconductor devices to be tested simultaneously, or in parallel, on an individual test system, permitting greater test throughput. Semiconductors tested by Eagle Test’s systems are incorporated into a wide range of products in historically high-growth markets, including digital cameras, MP3 players, cellular telephones, video/multimedia products, automotive electronics, computer peripherals, and notebook and desktop computers. The ETS platform has an installed base of over 1,900 systems and it continues to grow.

Systems Test Group

Our Systems Test Group segment is comprised of four business units: Mil/Aero, Hard Disk Drive, Commercial Board Test and Diagnostic Solutions.

Mil/Aero

Our expertise in the test and diagnosis of printed circuit boards (“PCB”) and subsystems has proven to be essential in supporting the ever-demanding military, defense and aerospace markets. Our test solutions for these markets include high-performance systems, instruments and software solutions that manufacturers and repair depots depend on to ensure the readiness of commercial and military electronic systems.

4

New programs from tactical aircraft to missile systems, as well as widespread enhancement programs, continue to fuel the demand for high performance test systems. We are a leading provider of test instrumentation and systems with performance well suited to the demands of military/aerospace electronics manufacturers and repair depots worldwide. Success in this market is illustrated by our penetration into major Department of Defense programs across all U.S. military service branches and many allied military services worldwide.

Hard Disk Drive

Leveraging our expertise in functional test and semiconductor test, we introduced the Neptune product line in 2009. This product is targeted at the high growth 2.5 inch hard disk drive market.

The storage growth for laptops, netbooks and consumer electronics combined with the growth in storage density is driving the need for high density test solutions for the 2.5 inch HDD segment. The Neptune product line addresses the challenges of high throughput automated manufacturing environments while at the same time meeting the performance requirements for next generation HDDs. Our products are targeted at the HDD manufacturers and used as part of the manufacturing and test process of drives.

Commercial Board Test

We produce a variety of test and inspection systems sold to many of the industry’s leading PCB original equipment manufacturers (“OEMs”) and subcontract manufacturers (“Subcons”) around the world. Because today’s PCBs and electronic assemblies handle more functionality than ever before, they contain highly integrated circuits and more complex components that operate faster, use lower voltages and are more susceptible to assembly problems. Our assembly test and inspection systems combine the advanced diagnostic hardware and operating software needed to ensure product quality, sustain high manufacturing yield, verify functional operation, diagnose faults and effectively reduce manufacturing costs. Our products are sold to the electronics manufacturers of cell phones, servers, computers, Internet switches, automobiles and military avionics systems worldwide.

In-Circuit Test Systems

We manufacture in-circuit test (“ICT”) systems that are used to assess electrical interconnections, verify interoperation and find faulty circuits on fully assembled and soldered PCBs. Fast, accurate and cost-effective diagnostic capabilities are hallmark features of our ICT systems, including the TestStation™ and Spectrum™ product families used in a variety of in-line, high-volume PCB test applications. These systems are also used in sample test environments for prototype testing and early-stage PCB design and development. Supporting technologies such as our patented SafeTest™ technology allow TestStation users to safely troubleshoot the low-voltage components and interconnects commonly found in battery-powered portable consumer electronics and low-power commercial equipment. In addition to standard ICT equipment, we offer combinational test platforms and handler-ready in-line test systems for high-volume board manufacturing.

Imaging Inspection Systems

We manufacture automated x-ray inspection (“AXI”) machines that are used to test PCB assemblies. These machines use patented technologies to quickly and automatically inspect the solder joints of the components on the board. Using x-rays allows our XStation™ MX to inspect joints that are on either side of the PCB assembly, or that are hidden by the component packages themselves. The XStation MX uses ClearVue™, a patented three-dimensional X-Ray imaging technique, to more accurately detect subtle defects and manufacturing flaws, even as board complexities grow.

5

Diagnostic Solutions

We provide electronic test and diagnostic systems to the automotive OEMs and their major subcontractors. The systems are used throughout the vehicle’s lifecycle from design through manufacture to after sale service and consist of highly integrated software and hardware components. As the number and complexity of electronic systems and embedded software proliferate in vehicles, the ability to manufacture and service those vehicles becomes increasingly dependent on electronic diagnostic equipment. Our Diagnostic Solutions’ products fall into two categories:

OEM Service Diagnostics

OEM dealer service technicians use our systems to find faults in vehicles in use by their customers, and to reduce OEM warranty costs. Historically, the focus has been on fixing faults in the service bay, but is now growing to include the programming of vehicle software.

Vehicle Configuration and Test Solutions

Our VCATS™ products are used on automotive and major automotive subassembly production lines. These products connect to the vehicle to test and program or “configure” the electronic systems on vehicles. These vehicle electronic systems include engine control modules and subsystems such as braking, navigation and climate control. Our VCATS products are also able to link to an OEM’s manufacturing control system in order to provide statistical quality reports to operators and management.

Both VCATS and OEM Service Diagnostics products utilize our GRADE-X™ authoring software enabling the manufacturing and service phases of vehicle development. Diagnostics for electronic modules and systems used on vehicles of our customers can be developed and written using the GRADE-X authoring software. The actual diagnosis of a customer’s vehicle occurs in the OEM dealer’s service bay utilizing a runtime portion of the software to facilitate the service and repair of the vehicle.

Discontinued Operations

On August 1, 2007, our Broadband Test Division business was sold to Tollgrade Communications, Inc. This business provided test systems for testing lines and qualifying lines for DSL telephone networks. On November 30, 2005, our Connection Systems business was sold to Amphenol Corporation. This business designed and manufactured high-performance connection systems including backplane systems, printed circuit boards and high-speed, high-density connectors. Connection Systems and Broadband Test Division have been reflected as discontinued operations in the accompanying financial statements.

Summary of Net Revenue by Reportable Segment

Our two reportable segments accounted for the following percentages of consolidated net revenue for each of last three years:

Sales and Distribution

Prices for our systems can reach $2 million or more. In fiscal year 2009, revenues from Western Digital Corporation accounted for more than 10% of total revenue. Western Digital Corporation is a customer of our

6

Systems Test Group. In 2008 and 2007, no single customer accounted for more than 10% of our consolidated net revenue. In each of the years 2009, 2008 and 2007, our three largest customers in aggregate accounted for 26%, 14% and 16% of our consolidated net revenue, respectively.

Direct sales to United States government agencies accounted for 4%, 2% and 5% of our consolidated net revenue in 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Approximately 12%, 11% and 23% of Systems Test Group’s revenue in 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively, was to United States government agencies and 18%, 27% and 16% of Systems Test Group’s revenue in 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively, was to government contractor customers.

We have sales and service offices located throughout North America, Asia and Europe, as our customers outside the United States are located primarily in these geographic areas. We sell in these areas predominantly through a direct sales force. Our manufacturing activities are primarily conducted through subcontractors and outsourced contract manufacturers with a significant operation concentrated in China.

Sales to customers outside the United States accounted for 74%, 78% and 77% of our consolidated net revenue in 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Sales to customers located in Taiwan were 14%, 18% and 13% of consolidated net revenue in 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Sales to customers located in Malaysia were 11%, 6% and 7% of our consolidated net revenue in 2009, 2008 and 2007 respectively. Sales to customers located in Europe were 10%, 10% and 12% of our consolidated net revenue in 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Sales to customers located in South East Asia were 10%, 10% and 8% of our consolidated net revenue in 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Sales are attributed to geographic areas based on the location of the customer site.

See also “Item 1A: Risk Factors” and “Note R: Operating Segment and Geographic Information” in Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

Competition

We face significant competition throughout the world in each of our reportable segments. Competitors in the Semiconductor Test segment include, among others, Advantest Corporation, Verigy Inc. and LTX–Credence Corporation. Competitors in the Systems Test Group include, among others, Agilent Technologies, Inc. and Xyratex Ltd. Some of our competitors have substantially greater financial and other resources to pursue engineering, manufacturing, marketing and distribution of their products. We also face competition from internal suppliers at several of our customers. Some of our competitors have introduced or announced new products with certain performance characteristics which may be considered equal or superior to those we currently offer. We expect our competitors to continue to improve the performance of their current products and to introduce new products or new technologies that provide improved cost of ownership and performance characteristics. See also “Item 1A: Risk Factors.”

Backlog

At December 31, 2009 and 2008, our backlog of unfilled orders in our two reportable segments was as follows:

Of the backlog at December 31, 2009, approximately 99% of the Semiconductor Test backlog and 85% of Systems Test Group backlog is expected to be delivered in 2010.

7

Customers may delay delivery of products or cancel orders suddenly and without significant notice, subject to possible cancellation penalties. Due to possible customer changes in delivery schedules and cancellation of orders, our backlog at any particular date is not necessarily indicative of the actual sales for any succeeding period. Delays in delivery schedules and/or cancellations of backlog during any particular period could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Raw Materials

Our products contain electronic and mechanical components that are provided by a wide range of suppliers. Certain of these components are standard products, while others are manufactured to our specifications. We can experience occasional delays in obtaining timely delivery of certain items. While the majority of our components are available from multiple suppliers, certain items are obtained from sole sources. We may experience a temporary adverse impact if any of our sole source suppliers delays or ceases to deliver products.

Intellectual Property and Licenses

The development of our products, both hardware and software, is based in significant part on proprietary information, our brands and technology. We protect our rights in proprietary information, brands and technology through various methods, such as:

However, these protections might not be effective in all circumstances. Competitors might independently develop similar technology or exploit our proprietary information and our brands in countries where we lack enforceable intellectual property rights or where enforcement of such rights through the legal system provides an insufficient deterrent. Also, intellectual property protections can lapse or be invalidated through appropriate legal processes. We do not believe that any single piece of intellectual property or proprietary rights is essential to our business.

Employees

As of December 31, 2009, we employed approximately 2,900 people. Since the inception of our business, we have experienced no work stoppages or other labor disturbances. We have no collective bargaining contracts.

Engineering and Development Activities

The highly technical nature of our products requires a large and continuing engineering and development effort. Engineering and development expenditures for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 were $164.8 million, $216.5 million, and $204.3 million, respectively. These expenditures amounted to approximately 20%, 20%, and 19% of consolidated net revenue in 2009, 2008, and 2007, respectively.

Environmental Affairs

We are subject to various federal, state, and local government laws and regulations relating to the protection of employee health and safety and the environment. We accrue for all known environmental liabilities when it becomes probable that we will incur cleanup costs and those costs can reasonably be estimated. The amounts accrued do not cover sites that are in the preliminary stages of investigation. Estimated environmental costs are not expected to materially affect the financial position or results of our operations in future periods. However, estimates of future costs are subject to change due to protracted cleanup periods and changing environmental remediation laws and regulations.

8

OUR EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

Pursuant to General Instruction G(3) of Form 10-K, the following table is included in Part I of this Annual Report on Form 10-K in lieu of being included in the Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting of Shareholders. The table sets forth the names of all of our executive officers and certain other information relating to their positions held with Teradyne and other business experience. Our executive officers do not have a specific term of office but rather serve at the discretion of the Board of Directors.

Risks Associated with Our Business

The risks described below are not the only risks that we face. Additional risks and uncertainties not currently known to us or that we currently deem to be immaterial also may materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and/or operating results.

Our business is impacted by worldwide economic cycles, which are difficult to predict.

Capital equipment providers in the electronics and semiconductor industries, such as Teradyne, have, in the past, been negatively impacted by sudden slowdowns in the global economies, and resulting reductions in customer capital investments. The duration of slowdowns in customer capital investments are difficult to predict.

The global economy and financial markets experienced disruption in 2009, including, among other things, extreme volatility in security prices, severely diminished liquidity and credit availability, rating downgrades of certain investments and declining valuations of others. Governments have taken historic actions intended to address extreme market conditions that include severely restricted credit. There may be a further deterioration in financial markets and confidence in major economies. We are unable to predict the likely duration and severity of the current disruptions in financial markets, credit availability, and adverse economic conditions throughout the world. These economic developments affect businesses such as ours and those of our customers and vendors in a number of ways that could result in unfavorable consequences to us. Further disruption and deterioration in economic conditions may reduce customer purchases of our products, thereby reducing our revenues and earnings. In addition, such adverse decline in economic conditions may, among other things, result in increased price competition for our products, increased risk of excess and obsolete inventories, increased risk in the collectability of our accounts receivable from our customers, increased risk in potential reserves for doubtful accounts and write-offs of accounts receivable, and higher operating costs as a percentage of revenues. In 2009

9

and 2008, we took actions to address the effects of the economic crisis, including implementing cost control and reduction measures. It is possible that we may need to take further cost control and reduction measures. We cannot predict whether these measures will be sufficient to offset certain of the negative trends that might affect our business.

Our business is dependent on the current and anticipated market for electronics, which historically has been highly cyclical.

Our business and results of operations depend in significant part upon capital expenditures of manufacturers of semiconductors and other electronics, which in turn depend upon the current and anticipated market demand for those products. As evidenced by our current business and results of operations, the market demand for electronics is impacted by economic slowdowns. Historically, the electronics and semiconductor industry has been highly cyclical with recurring periods of over-supply, which often have had a severe negative effect on demand for test equipment, including systems we manufacture and market. We believe that the markets for newer generations of electronic products such as those that we manufacture and market will also be subject to similar fluctuations. We are dependent on the timing of orders from our customers, and the deferral or cancellation of previous customer orders could have an adverse effect on our results of operations. We cannot ensure that the level of revenues or new orders for a calendar quarter will be sustained in subsequent quarters. In addition, any factor adversely affecting the electronics industry or particular segments within the electronics industry may adversely affect our business, financial condition and operating results.

We are subject to intense competition.

We face significant competition throughout the world in each of our reportable segments. Some of our competitors have substantial financial and other resources to pursue engineering, manufacturing, marketing and distribution of their products. We also face competition from internal suppliers at several of our customers. Some of our competitors have introduced or announced new products with certain performance characteristics which may be considered equal or superior to those we currently offer. We expect our competitors to continue to improve the performance of their current products and to introduce new products or new technologies that provide improved cost of ownership and performance characteristics. New product introductions by competitors could cause a decline in revenues or loss of market acceptance of our products. Moreover, increased competitive pressure could lead to intensified price based competition, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our operating results are likely to fluctuate significantly.

Our operating results are affected by a wide variety of factors that could materially adversely affect revenues and profitability. The following factors are expected to impact future operations:

10

As a result of the foregoing and other factors, we have experienced and may continue to experience material fluctuations in future operating results on a quarterly or annual basis which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, operating results and stock price.

We are subject to risks of operating internationally.

A significant portion of our total revenue is derived from customers outside the United States. Our international sales and operations are subject to significant risks and difficulties, including:

In addition, an increasing portion of our products and the products we purchase from our suppliers are sourced or manufactured in foreign locations, including China, and a large portion of the devices our products test are fabricated and tested by foundries and subcontractors in Taiwan, Singapore, China and other parts of Asia. As a result, we are subject to a number of economic and other risks, particularly during times of political or financial instability in these regions. Disruption of manufacturing or supply sources in these international locations could materially adversely impact our ability to fill customer orders and potentially result in lost business.

If we fail to develop new technologies to adapt to our customers’ needs and if our customers fail to accept our new products, our revenues will be adversely affected.

We believe that our technological position depends primarily on the technical competence and creative ability of our engineers. In a rapidly evolving market, such as ours, the development of new technologies, commercialization of those technologies into products and market acceptance and customer demand for those products are critical to our success. Successful product development, introduction and acceptance depend upon a number of factors, including:

11

If our suppliers do not meet product or delivery requirements, we could have reduced revenues and earnings.

Certain components, including semiconductor chips, may be in short supply from time to time because of high industry demand or the inability of some vendors to consistently meet our quality or delivery requirements. Approximately 30% of material purchases require some custom work where having multiple suppliers would be cost prohibitive. If any of our suppliers were to cancel contracts or commitments or fail to meet the quality or delivery requirements needed to satisfy customer orders for our products, we could lose time-sensitive customer orders and have significantly decreased revenues and earnings, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. In addition, we rely on contract manufacturers for certain subsystems used in our products, and our ability to meet customer orders for those products depends upon the timeliness and quality of the work performed by these subcontractors, over whom we do not exercise any control.

To a certain extent, we are dependant upon the ability of our suppliers and contractors to help meet increased product or delivery requirements. Many of our suppliers implemented cost reduction strategies to address the slowdowns in the market. In the second half of 2009, several of our suppliers had material shortages which increased the lead times for certain of our products. We implemented programs to minimize the impact of these shortages. However, it may be difficult for certain suppliers to meet delivery requirements in a period of rapid growth, therefore impacting our ability to meet our customers’ demands.

We rely on the financial strength of our suppliers. There can be no assurance that the loss of suppliers either as a result of financial viability, bankruptcy or otherwise will not have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations or financial condition.

Our operations may be adversely impacted if our outsourced contract manufacturers or service providers fail to perform.

We depend on Flextronics International Ltd. (“Flextronics”) to manufacture and test our FLEX and J750 family of products from its facility in China. If for any reason Flextronics cannot provide us with these products in a timely fashion, or at all, we may not be able to sell these products to our customers until we enter a similar arrangement with an alternative contract manufacturer. If we experience a problem with our supply of products from Flextronics, it may take us significant time to either manufacture the product or find an alternate contract manufacturer, which could result in substantial expense and disruption to our business.

We have also outsourced a number of our general and administrative functions, including information technology, to reputable service providers, many of which are in foreign countries, sometimes impacting communication with them because of language and time difficulties. Their presence in foreign countries also increases the risk they could be exposed to political risk. Additionally, there may be difficulties encountered in coordinating the outsourced operations with existing functions and operations. If we fail in successfully

12

coordinating and managing the outsourced service providers, it may cause an adverse effect on our operations which could result in a decline in our stock price.

We may not fully realize the benefits of our acquisition of Nextest, Eagle Test, and other businesses that we may acquire or strategic alliances that we may form in the future.

In January 2008, we acquired Nextest, and in November 2008, we acquired Eagle Test. We may continue to acquire additional businesses, form strategic alliances or create joint ventures with third parties that we believe will complement or augment our existing businesses. We may not be able to realize the expected synergies and cost savings from the integration with our existing operations of Nextest, Eagle Test and other businesses or technologies that we may acquire. In addition, the integration process for our acquisitions may be complex, costly and time consuming and include unanticipated issues, expenses and liabilities. We may have difficulty in developing, manufacturing and marketing the products of a newly acquired company in a manner that enhances the performance of our combined businesses or product lines and allows us to realize value from expected synergies. Following an acquisition, we may not achieve the revenue or net income levels that justify the acquisition. Acquisitions may also result in one-time charges (such as acquisition-related expenses, write-offs or restructuring charges) or in the future, impairment of goodwill, that adversely affect our operating results. Additionally, we may fund acquisitions of new businesses, strategic alliances or joint ventures by utilizing our cash, raising debt, issuing shares of our common stock, or by other means.

We have increased our indebtedness.

On April 6, 2009, we completed a registered underwritten offering of $190.0 million aggregate principal amount of 4.50% Convertible Senior Notes (the “Notes”) due March 15, 2014 and received net proceeds of approximately $163.0 million. We used approximately $123.3 million of the net proceeds of this offering to repay all amounts outstanding under our revolving credit facility. Although we are no longer subject to the restrictive covenants under the revolving credit facility, we have incurred approximately $190.0 million principal amount of new indebtedness that the holders of the Notes may require us to repurchase upon the occurrence of certain fundamental changes involving the Company. In addition, on March 31, 2009, our wholly-owned subsidiary in Japan, Teradyne K.K., incurred approximately $10.0 million in indebtedness that we guaranteed. The level of our indebtedness, among other things, could:

Our convertible note hedge and warrant transactions could impact the value of our stock.

Concurrent with the offering of the Notes, we entered into a convertible note hedge transaction with Goldman, Sachs & Co. (the “hedge counterparty”) with a strike price equal to the initial conversion price of the Notes. The convertible note hedges cover, subject to customary antidilution adjustments, approximately 34,703,196 shares of our common stock.

Separately and concurrent with the pricing of the Notes, we entered into a warrant transaction with the hedge counterparty with a strike price of $7.6650 per share, which is 75% higher than the closing price of our common stock on March 31, 2009. The warrants will be net share settled and cover, subject to customary

13

antidilution adjustments, approximately 31,963,470 shares of our common stock. On April 1, 2009, the hedge counterparty exercised its option to purchase warrants covering, subject to customary antidilution adjustments, an additional 2,739,726 shares of our common stock. However, we will not be obligated to deliver to the hedge counterparty more than 34,526,500 shares of common stock upon exercise of the warrants (which amount represents less than 19.99% of our outstanding shares of common stock as of March 31, 2009, without giving effect to any shares of common stock issuable pursuant to the warrant transaction), subject to customary antidilution adjustments.

The convertible note hedges are expected to reduce the potential dilution to our common stock upon any conversion of the Notes. However, the warrant transaction could separately have a dilutive effect to the extent that the market value per share of our common stock exceeds the applicable strike price of the warrant. The net cost of the convertible note hedge transaction to us, after being partially offset by the proceeds from the sale of the warrants, was approximately $21.7 million.

In connection with establishing its initial hedge of these convertible note hedge and warrant transactions, the hedge counterparty has entered into various derivative transactions with respect to our common stock and/or purchase shares of our common stock or other securities, including the Notes, concurrent with, or shortly after, the pricing of the Notes. In addition, the hedge counterparty may modify its hedge positions by entering into or unwinding various derivative transactions with respect to our common stock or by selling our common stock or other securities, including the Notes, in secondary market transactions (and may do so during any observation period related to the conversion of the Notes). These activities could adversely impact the value of our common stock and the Notes.

We may not be able to pay our debt and other obligations.

If our cash flow is inadequate to meet our obligations, we could face substantial liquidity problems. If we are unable to generate sufficient cash flow or otherwise obtain funds necessary to make required payments on the Notes or certain of our other obligations, we would be in default under the terms thereof, which would permit the holders of those obligations to accelerate their maturity and also could cause defaults under future indebtedness we may incur. Any such default could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial position and operating results. In addition, we cannot be certain that we would be able to repay amounts due in respect of the Notes if those obligations were to be accelerated following the occurrence of any other event of default as defined in the instruments creating those obligations, or if the holders of the Notes require us to repurchase the Notes upon the occurrence of a fundamental change involving us. Moreover, we cannot be certain that we will have sufficient funds or will be able to arrange for financing to pay the principal amount due on the Notes at maturity.

We have taken measures to address slowdowns in the market for our products, which could have long-term negative effects on our business or impact our ability to adequately address a rapid increase in customer demand.

We have taken measures to address slowdowns in the market for our products. These measures include shifting more of our operations to lower cost regions, outsourcing manufacturing processes, divesting of certain businesses, implementing material cost reduction programs, reducing the number of our employees, and reducing planned capital expenditures and expense budgets. We cannot ensure that the measures we have taken will not impair our ability to effectively develop and market products, to remain competitive in the industries in which we compete, to operate effectively, to operate profitably during slowdowns or to effectively meet a rapid increase in customer demand. These measures may have long-term negative effects on our business by reducing our pool of technical talent, decreasing or slowing improvements in our products, making it more difficult to hire and retain talented individuals and to quickly respond to customers or competitors in an upward cycle.

14

We may incur significant liabilities if we fail to comply with environmental regulations.

We are subject to both domestic and international environmental regulations and statutory strict liability relating to the use, storage, discharge, site cleanup and disposal of hazardous chemicals used in our manufacturing processes. If we fail to comply with present and future regulations, or are required to perform site remediation, we could be subject to future liabilities or cost, including penalties or the suspension of production. Present and future regulations may also:

Pursuant to present regulations and agreements, we are conducting groundwater and subsurface assessment and monitoring and are implementing remediation and corrective action plans for facilities located in California, Massachusetts and New Hampshire which are no longer conducting manufacturing operations. As of December 31, 2009, we have not incurred material costs as result of the monitoring and remediation steps taken at the California, Massachusetts and New Hampshire sites.

On January 27, 2003, the European Union adopted the following directives: (i) the directive on the Restriction of the Use of Certain Hazardous Substances in Electrical and Electronic Equipment (the “RoHS Directive”); and (ii) the directive on Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (the “WEEE Directive”). The WEEE Directive became effective August 13, 2005 and the RoHS Directive became effective on July 6, 2006. Both the RoHS Directive and the WEEE Directive alter the form and manner in which electronic equipment is imported, sold and handled in the European Union. Other jurisdictions, such as China, have followed the European Union’s lead in enacting legislation with respect to hazardous substances and waste removal. Ensuring compliance with the RoHS Directive, the WEEE Directive and similar legislation in other jurisdictions, and integrating compliance activities with our suppliers and customers could result in additional costs and disruption to operations and logistics and thus, could have a negative impact on our business, operations and financial condition.

We currently are and in the future may be subject to litigation that could have an adverse effect on our business.

From time to time, we may be subject to litigation or other administrative and governmental proceedings that could require significant management time and resources and cause us to incur expenses and, in the event of an adverse decision, pay damages in an amount that could have a material adverse effect on our financial position or results of operations.

Third parties may claim we are infringing their intellectual property and we could suffer significant litigation costs, licensing expenses or be prevented from selling our products.

We have been sued for patent infringement in the past and receive notifications from time to time that we may be in violation of patents held by others. An assertion of patent infringement against us, if successful, could have a material adverse effect on our ability to sell our product or it could force us to seek a license to the intellectual property rights of others or alter such products so that they no longer infringe the intellectual property rights of others. A license could be very expensive to obtain or may not be available at all. Similarly, changing our products or processes to avoid infringing the rights of others may be costly or impractical. Additionally, patent litigation could require a significant use of management resources and involve a lengthy and expensive defense, even if we eventually prevail. If we do not prevail, we might be forced to pay significant damages, obtain licenses, modify our products, or stop making our products; each of which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and operating results.

15

We may incur higher tax rates than we expect and may have exposure to additional international tax liabilities and costs.

We are subject to paying income taxes in the United States and various other countries where we operate. Our effective tax rate is dependent on where our earnings are generated and the tax regulations and the interpretation and judgment of administrative tax or revenue entities in the United States and such other countries. We have pursued a global tax strategy which could adversely be affected by our failure to expand operations or earnings in certain countries, the mix of earnings and tax rates in the countries where we operate, changes to tax laws or an adverse tax ruling by administrative entities. We are also subject to tax audits in the countries where we operate. Any material assessment resulting from an audit from an administrative tax or revenue entity could also negatively affect our financial results.

As a multinational corporation, we are subject to income taxes as well as non-income based taxes, in both the United States and various foreign jurisdictions. In certain foreign jurisdictions, we qualify for tax incentives based on our ability to meet, on a continuing basis, various tests relating to our employment levels, research and development expenditures and other qualification requirements in a particular foreign jurisdiction. While we intend to operate in such a manner to maintain and maximize our tax incentives, no assurance can be given that we have so qualified or that we will so qualify for any particular year or jurisdiction. If we fail to qualify and to remain qualified for certain foreign tax incentives, we may be subject to further taxation or an increase in our effective tax rate which would adversely impact our financial results. In addition, we may incur additional costs, including headcount expenses, in order to obtain or maintain a foreign tax incentive in a particular foreign jurisdiction.

We have significant guarantees and indemnification obligations.

From time to time we make guarantees to customers regarding the performance of our products and guarantee certain indebtedness, performance obligations or lease commitments of our subsidiary and affiliate companies. We also have agreed to provide indemnification to our officers, directors, employees and agents, to the extent permitted by law, arising from certain events or occurrences while the officer, director, employee or agent, is or was serving at our request in such capacity. If we become liable under any of these obligations, it could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and operating results. For additional information see “Note J: Commitments and Contingencies—Guarantees and Indemnification Obligations” in Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

If we are unable to protect our intellectual property (“IP”), we may lose a valuable asset or may incur costly litigation to protect our rights.

We protect the technology that is incorporated in our products in several ways, including through patent, copyright, and trade secret protection and by contractual agreement. However, even with these protections, our IP may still be challenged, invalidated or subject to other infringement actions. While we believe that our IP has value in the aggregate, no single element of our IP is in itself essential. If a significant portion of our IP is invalidated or ineffective, our business could be materially adversely affected.

Our business may suffer if we are unable to attract and retain key employees.

Competition for employees with skills we require is intense in the high technology industry. Our success will depend on our ability to attract and retain key technical employees. The loss of one or more key or other employees, a decrease in our inability to attract additional qualified employees, or the delay in hiring key personnel could each have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations or financial condition.

16

We may have additional pension funding obligations as a result of the weak performance of financial markets and its effect on plan assets.

Our future funding obligations for our U.S. defined benefit pension plan qualified with the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) depend upon the future performance of assets for this plan, the level of interest rates used to determine funding levels, the level of benefits provided for by the plans and any changes in government laws and regulations. Our defined benefit pension plan currently holds a significant amount of equity and fixed income securities. Due to our contributions and the strong performance of these assets during prior periods, our U.S. defined benefit pension plan has been over funded prior to 2008, which allowed us to maintain a surplus without making additional contributions to the plan. However, due to significant declines in financial markets and deterioration in the value of our plan assets, we made additional discretionary contributions to our U.S. Defined Benefit Pension Plan in the fourth quarter of 2009 and first quarter of 2010 and may make additional contributions in future reporting periods, which would negatively affect our cash flow.

Acts of war, terrorist attacks and the threat of domestic and international terrorist attacks may adversely impact our business.

Acts of war and terrorist attacks may cause damage or disruption to our employees, facilities, customers, suppliers and distributors which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operation or financial condition. As we, our outsourced manufacturing providers and our suppliers sell and manufacture products both in the United States and internationally, the threat of future terrorist attacks could lead to changes in security and operations at these locations which could increase our operating costs and which may adversely affect our business. Such conflicts may also cause damage or disruption to transportation and communication systems. We have completed some emergency preparedness planning and have a business continuity plan in case some of these events occur. However, we cannot be certain that our plans will be effective in the event of a disaster or other situation. All of these conditions make it difficult for us, and our customers, to accurately forecast and plan future business activities and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Provisions of our charter and by-laws and Massachusetts law make a takeover of Teradyne more difficult.

During 2007, we made several important corporate governance changes, which included declassification of our Board of Directors, adoption of majority voting standard for the election of our directors, and early termination of our shareholder rights plan. Despite these changes, there are still provisions in our basic corporate documents and under Massachusetts law that could discourage, delay or prevent a change in control, even if a change in control may be regarded as beneficial to some or all of our stockholders.

None.

17

Item 2:    Properties

The following table provides certain information as to our principal general offices and manufacturing facilities.

Item 3:    Legal Proceedings

On July 11, 2008, Xyratex Technology, Ltd (“Xyratex”) filed a complaint against us in the United States District Court in Los Angeles, California alleging that certain of our disk drive test products infringe one of Xyratex’s patents. The suit sought temporary, preliminary and permanent injunctive relief as well as unspecified monetary damages, including treble damages, for patent infringement. We filed separate complaints in the United States District Court in Los Angeles alleging that Xyratex’s disk drive test products infringe two of our patents and that Xyratex had engaged in anti-competitive conduct in violation of the federal antitrust laws. Prior to trial,

18

on December 14, 2009, the parties entered into a Settlement Agreement agreeing to settle all of the pending litigation between them. The settlement had no impact on our financial condition or results of operations. Although there can be no assurance, we do not expect the settlement to negatively impact our business.

On September 5, 2001, after our August 2000 acquisition of Herco Technology Corp. and Perception Laminates, Inc., the former owners of those companies filed a complaint against us and two of our then executive officers in the United States District Court in San Diego, California, asserting securities fraud and breach of contract related to the acquisition. The District Court dismissed certain of the plaintiffs’ claims, granted partial summary judgment against them with respect to their breach of contract claim and denied their motion for reconsideration. In July 2007, after an appeal by the plaintiffs, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part the District Court rulings. We petitioned the Ninth Circuit for rehearing, which was denied, and the case was remanded back to the District Court. On August 29, 2008, the District Court granted us motion for judgment on the pleadings. On September 11, 2008, the plaintiffs filed their notice of appeal. In August 2009, the parties agreed to settle the litigation. The settlement had no impact on our financial condition or results of operations.

In November 2008, we received a general notice letter from the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (“DTSC”) that informed us of potential liability with respect to contamination at the BKK Corporation Landfill Facility Site in West Covina, California. This claim arose out of our acquisition of Perception Laminates in August 2000. Neither we nor Perception Laminates have ever conducted any operations at the West Covina site. We have asked the DTSC and the group of settling defendants to remove us as a Potentially Responsible Party (“PRP”) for this site.

In addition, we are subject to legal proceedings, claims and investigations that arise in the ordinary course of business such as, but not limited to, patent, employment, commercial and environmental matters. We believe that we have meritorious defenses against all pending claims and intend to vigorously contest them. While it is not possible to predict or determine the outcomes of any pending claims or to provide possible ranges of losses that may arise, we believe the potential losses associated with all of these actions are unlikely to have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position or results of operations.

Item 4:    Reserved

19

PART II

The following table shows the market range for our common stock based on reported sales price on the New York Stock Exchange.

The number of record holders of our common stock at February 22, 2010 was 2,586.

We have never paid cash dividends because it has been our policy to use earnings to finance expansion and growth. Payment of future cash dividends will rest within the discretion of our Board of Directors and will depend, among other things, upon our earnings, capital requirements, and financial condition.

See “Item 7: Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Equity Compensation Plans,” for information on our equity compensation plans and our performance graph.

In November 2007, Teradyne’s Board of Directors (the “Board”) authorized a $400 million stock repurchase program. During the three months and the year ended December 31, 2009, Teradyne did not repurchase any shares of common stock. The cumulative repurchases as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, totaled 8.5 million shares of common stock for $102.6 million at an average price of $12.14 per share. As of November 4, 2008, the Board suspended the stock repurchase program.

The following table includes information with respect to repurchases we made of our common stock during the quarter ended December 31, 2009 (in thousands except per share price):

20

Statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K which are not historical facts, so called “forward looking statements,” are made pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Investors are cautioned that all forward looking statements involve risks and uncertainties, including those detailed in Teradyne’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements which reflect management’s analysis only as of the date hereof. We assume no obligation to update these forward-looking statements to reflect actual results or changes in factors or assumptions affecting forward-looking statements, except as may be required by law.

21

Overview

We design, develop, manufacture, and sell automatic test systems and solutions used to test complex electronics in the consumer electronics, automotive, computing, telecommunications, and aerospace and defense industries. Our automatic test equipment products and services include:

We have a broad customer base which includes integrated device manufacturers (“IDMs”), outsourced sub-assembly and test providers (“OSATs”), wafer foundries, fabless companies that design, but contract with others for the manufacture of integrated circuits (“ICs”), manufacturers of circuit boards, automotive companies, HDD manufacturers, aerospace and military contractors as well as the United States Department of Defense.

The sales of our products and services are dependent, to a large degree, on customers who are subject to cyclical trends in the demand for their products. These cyclical periods have had, and will continue to have, a significant effect on our business since our customers often delay or accelerate purchases in reaction to changes in their businesses and to demand fluctuations in the semiconductor industry. Historically, these demand fluctuations have resulted in significant variations in our results of operations. This was particularly relevant beginning in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2008 where we saw a significant decrease in revenue in our Semiconductor Test business which was impacted by the deteriorating global economy, which has negatively impacted the entire semiconductor industry. The sharp swings in the semiconductor industry in recent years have generally affected the semiconductor test equipment and services industry more significantly than the overall capital equipment sector.

In response to the business downturn, we implemented significant permanent and temporary cost reduction measures. We reduced headcount worldwide, cut capital spending, and imposed temporary salary reductions and furloughs on our workforce.

Due to the continued improvement in our business, we removed the temporary salary reductions and furloughs we imposed over the last year. We believe the permanent cost-cutting measures we took in the last several quarters will be of long term value. In addition, we believe our acquisitions of Nextest and Eagle Test and our entry into the high speed memory and HDD markets have enhanced our opportunities for growth. We will continue to invest in our business in anticipation of a broader recovery in our markets and to expand further our addressable markets while tightly managing our costs. As the fourth quarter of 2009 demonstrated, with our current cost structure, we can achieve significantly higher profitability than we achieved at comparable revenue levels in the past.

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

We have identified the policies discussed below as critical to understanding our business and our results of operations and financial condition. The impact and any associated risks related to these policies on our business operations is discussed throughout Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations where such policies affect our reported and expected financial results.

Preparation of Financial Statements and Use of Estimates

The preparation of consolidated financial statements requires management to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues, and expenses and related disclosure of contingent liabilities. On an on-going basis, management evaluates its estimates, including those related to inventories,

22

investments, goodwill, intangible and other long-lived assets, bad debts, income taxes, pensions, warranties, contingencies, and litigation. Management bases its estimates on historical experience and on appropriate and customary assumptions that are 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 may differ significantly from these estimates.

Revenue Recognition

We recognize revenue when there is persuasive evidence of an arrangement, title and risk of loss have passed, delivery has occurred or the services have been rendered, the sales price is fixed or determinable and collection of the related receivable is reasonably assured. Title and risk of loss generally pass to our customers upon shipment or at delivery destination point. In circumstances where either title or risk of loss pass upon destination, acceptance or cash payment, we defer revenue recognition until such events occur.

Our equipment includes embedded software which is considered incidental to the product. Revenue is recognized upon shipment or at delivery destination point, provided that customer acceptance criteria can be demonstrated prior to shipment. Certain contracts require us to perform tests of the product to ensure that performance meets the published product specifications or customer requested specifications, which are generally conducted prior to shipment. Where the criteria cannot be demonstrated prior to shipment, revenue is deferred until customer acceptance has been received.

For multiple element arrangements, we defer the fair value of any undelivered elements of the contract. We also defer the portion of the sales price that is not due until acceptance, which represents deferred profit. For a delivered item to be considered a separate unit, the delivered item must have value to the customer on a standalone basis, there must be objective and reliable evidence of fair value of the undelivered items in the arrangement and the delivery or performance of the undelivered item must be considered probable and substantially in our control. Fair value is the price charged when the element is sold separately. Our post-shipment obligations include installation, training services, one-year standard warranties, and extended warranties. Installation does not alter the product capabilities, does not require specialized skills or tools and can be performed by the customers or other vendors. Installation is typically provided within five days of product shipment and is completed within one to two days thereafter. Training services are optional and do not affect the customer’s ability to use the product. We defer revenue for the fair value of installation and training. Extended warranties constitute warranty obligations beyond one year and we defer revenue in accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 605-20, “Separately Priced Extended Warranty and Product Maintenance Contracts.”

Our products are generally subject to warranty and related costs of the warranty are provided for in cost of revenue when product revenue is recognized. We classify shipping and handling costs in cost of revenue. Service revenue is recognized over the contractual period or as the services are performed.

We generally do not provide our customers with contractual rights of return for any of our products.

For transactions involving the sale of software which is not incidental to the product, revenue is recognized in accordance with ASC 985-605, “Software Revenue Recognition.” We recognize revenue when there is persuasive evidence of an arrangement, delivery has occurred, the sales price is fixed or determinable and collectability is probable. In instances where an arrangement contains multiple elements, revenue related to the undelivered elements is deferred to the extent that vendor-specific objective evidence of fair value (“VSOE”) exists for such elements. In instances where VSOE does not exist for one or more of the undelivered elements of an arrangement, all revenue related to the arrangement is deferred until all elements have been delivered. VSOE is the price charged when the element is sold separately. Revenue for the separate elements is only recognized where the functionality of the undelivered element is not essential to the delivered element.

23

For certain contracts eligible for contract accounting under ASC 605-35, “Revenue Recognition Construction-Type and Production-Type Contracts,” revenue is recognized using the percentage-of-completion accounting method based upon the percentage of incurred costs to estimated total costs. These arrangements require significant production, modification, or customization. In all cases, changes to total estimated costs and anticipated losses, if any, are recognized in the period in which they are determined. With respect to contract change orders, claims or similar items, judgment must be used in estimating related amounts and assessing the potential for realization. Such amounts are only included in the contract value when they can be reliably estimated and realization is reasonably assured, generally upon receipt of a customer approved change order.

Inventories

Inventories, which include materials, labor, and manufacturing overhead, are stated at the lower of cost (first-in, first-out basis) or net realizable value. On a quarterly basis, we use consistent methodologies to evaluate all inventories for net realizable value. We record a provision for both excess and obsolete inventory when such write-downs or write-offs are identified through the quarterly review process. The inventory valuation is based upon assumptions about future demand, product mix, and possible alternative uses.

Equity Incentive and Stock Purchase Plans

Effective January 1, 2006, we adopted the fair value recognition provision of ASC 718-10, “Stock Compensation”, using the modified prospective transition method and therefore have not restated results for prior periods. Under this transition method, stock based compensation expense for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 includes compensation expense for all stock-based compensation awards granted prior to, but not yet vested as of January 1, 2006, and is calculated based on the grant date fair value estimated in accordance with the original provisions of ASC 718-10. Stock-based compensation expense for all stock-based compensation awards granted after January 1, 2006 is based on the grant-date fair value estimated in accordance with the provisions of ASC 718-10. As required by ASC 718-10, we have made an estimate of expected forfeitures and are recognizing compensation costs only for those stock-based compensation awards expected to vest. The cumulative effect of the initial adoption of ASC 718-10 was not material. Prior to the adoption of ASC 718-10, we recognized stock-based compensation expense in accordance with Accounting Principles Board (“APB”) Opinion No. 25 (“APB 25”).

On May 26, 2005, our Board of Directors approved the accelerated vesting of certain outstanding, unvested “out of the money” stock options awarded to employees, officers, and other eligible participants under our various stock option plans in effect at that time. The stock options that were accelerated had exercise prices that were in excess of $13.26, the closing price of our common stock on the New York Stock Exchange on May 26, 2005, and ranged in exercise price from $13.73 to $41.37 per share. As a result of the vesting acceleration, options to purchase approximately 7.6 million shares became exercisable immediately, and we reduced the compensation expense we otherwise would have been required to record under ASC 718-10 by approximately $48.6 million in the aggregate, on a pre-tax basis, over fiscal years 2006, 2007 and 2008.

Income Taxes

On a quarterly basis, we evaluate the realizability of our deferred tax assets by jurisdiction and assess the need for a valuation allowance. As a result of this review, undertaken at December 31, 2002, we concluded under applicable accounting criteria that it was more likely than not that our deferred tax assets would not be realized and established a valuation allowance in several jurisdictions, most notably the United States. Due to the continued uncertainty of realization, we have maintained our valuation allowance at December 31, 2009 and 2008.

24

Investments

We account for our investments in debt and equity securities in accordance with the provisions of ASC 320-10, “Investments—Debt and Equity Securities.” On a quarterly basis we review our investments to identify and evaluate those that have an indication of a potential other-than-temporary impairment. Factors considered in determining whether a loss is other-than-temporary include:

We determined that we did not intend to hold certain marketable securities for a period of time sufficient to allow for recovery in market value and recognized an other-than-temporary impairment loss in the amount of $0.7 million and $11.0 million, in the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, primarily related to mortgage and asset backed debt securities.

Effective January 1, 2008, we adopted ASC 820-10, “Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures” for financial assets and liabilities. As defined in ASC 820-10, fair value is the price that would be received from the sale of an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants. We use the market and income approach techniques to value our financial instruments. ASC 820-10 requires that assets and liabilities carried at fair value be classified and disclosed in one of the following three categories:

Level 1: Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets as of the reporting date.

Level 2: Inputs other than Level 1, that are observable either directly or indirectly as of the reporting date. For example, a common approach for valuing fixed income securities is the use of matrix pricing. Matrix pricing is a mathematical technique used to value securities by relying on the securities’ relationship to other benchmark quoted prices, and therefore is considered a Level 2 input.

Level 3: Unobservable inputs that are not supported by market data. Unobservable inputs are developed based on the best information available, which might include Teradyne’s own data.

As a result of our November 14, 2008 acquisition of Eagle Test, we acquired $26.5 million of auction rate securities (“ARS”) at fair value ($30.0 million par value). In addition, we acquired (1) the right (“UBS Put”) to sell our ARS back to UBS at par plus interest, at our sole discretion, during a two-year period beginning on June 30, 2010, and (2) received an option to borrow up to 75% of the fair value of the ARS at no cost.

Beginning in February 2008 and continuing through December 31, 2009, the majority of the securities in our acquired ARS portfolio have experienced failed auctions, resulting in inability to sell these securities. Consequently, as set forth in the trust indentures, the coupon rate resets to a contractual rate which may not equal the current market rate. A failed auction results in a lack of liquidity in the securities but does not necessarily represent a deterioration of the credit quality of the issuer. All of our ARS are AAA, AA or A rated by one or more of the major credit rating agencies and are substantially guaranteed by a U.S. Department of Education agency or a third party insurer. At December 31, 2009, the underlying securities for the ARS have remaining maturities ranging from five to thirty years. Substantially all of these securities are collateralized by student loans.

Because the UBS Put is expected to allow us to sell our ARS securities at par within a relatively short time period and provides UBS with the ability to require us to sell the securities to them at any time between acceptance of the UBS Put through July 2012, we do not anticipate holding these investments to the earlier of maturity or redemption by the issuer. We intend to exercise the UBS Put and require UBS to repurchase our ARS at par at the earliest possible time, June 2010. As a result, as of the Eagle Test acquisition date (November 14,

25

2008), we classified the ARS as trading securities under ASC 320-10. During 2009, we recorded a net gain of $0.7 million in interest income and during 2008 we recorded a loss of $0.5 million, in interest expense and other, in our consolidated statement of operations for the changes in the ARS fair value.

In determining the fair value of our ARS and other investments, we utilize the provisions of ASC 820-10. In determining the value of our ARS as of December 31, 2009 and 2008 we utilized a discounted cash flow valuation model with the major inputs to such model based on our estimates of the assumptions that market participants would use in valuing these instruments. Specifically, we used the following key inputs to our valuation model as of December 31, 2009 and 2008:

Based on these key inputs, we estimated the fair value of our ARS portfolio at $23.6 million and $26.0 million as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively.

On November 14, 2008, we recognized the UBS Put as an asset measured at a fair value of $2.7 million. At December 31, 2009 and 2008, the fair value of the UBS Put was $2.8 million and $3.3 million, respectively. We recorded a $0.5 million loss in interest expense during 2009 for the decrease in the fair value of the UBS Put and a $0.6 million gain in interest income during 2008 for an increase in the fair value. In determining the fair value of the UBS Put as of December 31, 2009, we assumed we would redeem the auction rate securities at par at the earliest possible time, June 30, 2010. We utilized a discounted cash flow model to determine the fair value of the UBS Put using the following assumptions: (1) a time period of 0.5 years, representing the period from December 31, 2009 to the earliest date we can expect to be able to redeem the UBS Put (June 30, 2010) and (2) a discount rate of 0.85%, which included a spread based on the credit default swap of UBS in order to account for the credit risk of UBS. As of December 31, 2008, the following assumptions were used: (1) a time period of 1.5 years and (2) a discount rate of 3.79%.

We have elected fair value treatment for the UBS Put under ASC 825-10, “Financial Instruments.” The UBS Put is the only instrument of this nature or type that we hold and for which we have elected the fair value option under ASC 825-10.

Goodwill, Intangible and Long-Lived Assets

We assess the impairment of identifiable intangibles, long-lived assets, and goodwill whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value may not be recoverable. Factors we consider important in the determination of an impairment include significant underperformance relative to historical or projected future operating results, significant changes in the manner that we use the acquired asset and significant negative industry or economic trends. When we determine that the carrying value of intangibles and long-lived assets may not be recoverable based upon the existence of one or more of the above indicators of impairment, we measure any impairment based on a projected discounted cash flow method using a discount rate commensurate with the associated risks. We assess goodwill for impairment at least annually in the fourth quarter, on a reporting unit

26

basis, or more frequently, when events and circumstances occur indicating that the recorded goodwill may be impaired. If the book value of a reporting unit exceeds its fair value, the implied fair value of goodwill is compared with the carrying amount of goodwill. If the carrying amount of goodwill exceeds the implied fair value, an impairment loss is recorded in an amount equal to that excess.

We considered the significant adverse change in the business climate for our products at the end of 2008 a triggering event for testing the recoverability of the carrying amount of our long-lived assets. Based upon a review of the operations and activities associated with our long-lived assets, we determined that our long-lived assets should be grouped with other assets and liabilities and identified four asset groups (System on a Chip/High Speed Memory, Nextest, Eagle Test and Assembly Test) that resulted in the lowest level for which identifiable cash flows were largely independent of the cash flows of other assets and liabilities. We identified developed technology as the primary asset for the Nextest and Eagle Test asset groups, test system fixed assets as the primary asset for the System on a Chip/High Speed Memory asset group, and fixed assets as the primary asset for the Assembly Test asset group.

We tested the recoverability of our asset groups by comparing the sum of the undiscounted cash flows from the use and eventual disposition of the asset group to the asset group’s carrying amount. The projections utilized in the undiscounted cash flows to test the recoverability of the asset groups were consistent with the underlying projections utilized in our 2008 goodwill impairment evaluation, except that the undiscounted cash flows included only the future cash flows directly associated with the direct use and eventual disposition of the asset group. The sum of the undiscounted cash flows exceeded the carrying amount of the asset groups and, as a result, the carrying amount of asset groups was deemed recoverable. As a result, no impairment loss was recognized.

27

SELECTED RELATIONSHIPS WITHIN THE CONSOLIDATED

STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

Results of Operations

Discontinued Operations

On August 1, 2007, we completed the sale of the Broadband Test Division to Tollgrade Communications, Inc. for $11.3 million in cash. Broadband Test Division had revenues for the seven month period ended July 31, 2007 of $11.2 million. Loss from discontinued operations of our Broadband Test Division for the year ended December 31, 2007 was $6.3 million. In 2007, we recorded a gain on the sale of Broadband Test Division of $5.9 million, net of a tax provision of $0.4 million.

In accordance with ASC 360-10, we are reporting Broadband Test Division as discontinued operations in the consolidated financial statements for all periods presented throughout this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Unless indicated otherwise, the discussion and amounts provided in this “Results of Operations” section and elsewhere in this Form 10-K relate to continuing operations only.

Book to Bill Ratio

Book to bill ratio is calculated as net bookings divided by net sales. Book to bill ratio by reportable segment was as follows:

28

Revenues

Net revenues for our two reportable segments were as follows:

Semiconductor Test revenue decreased $347.9 million or approximately 39% from 2008 to 2009, due to excess test capacity at our customers as a result of the global economic downturn. The Eagle Test acquisition which was completed in November of 2008 added $61.0 million of revenue in 2009 compared to $2.5 million in 2008.

Semiconductor Test revenue increased $23.8 million or approximately 3% from 2007 to 2008, primarily due to $79.4 million of sales from our Nextest acquisition partially offset by lower sales due to decreased demand related to SOC device units growing at a lower rate in 2008 compared to 2007.

The increase in Systems Test Group revenue of $60.3 million or approximately 29% from 2008 to 2009 was primarily due to sales of Hard Disk Drive test systems, partially offset by a decrease in Commercial Board Test and Diagnostic Solutions sales, while Mil/Aero product and service sales remained flat.

Systems Test Group revenue decreased $19.1 million or approximately 8% from 2007 to 2008, primarily due to a lower Mil/Aero board test program-related sales.

Our two reportable segments accounted for the following percentages of consolidated net revenue for each of the last three years:

Net revenue by region as a percentage of total revenue was as follows:

The breakout of product and service revenue for the past three years was as follows:

29

Our product revenue decreased $240.7 million or 29% in 2009 from 2008 due to lower sales across all Semiconductor Test, Commercial Board Test and Diagnostic Solutions products as a result of excess test capacity at our customers due to the global economic downturn. The decrease was partially offset by sales of Hard Disk Drive test systems. The Eagle Test acquisition which was completed in November of 2008 added $52.6 million of product revenue in 2009. Service revenue, which is derived from the servicing of our installed base of products and includes maintenance contracts, repairs, extended warranties, parts sales, and applications support, decreased $46.9 million or 17% due to the global economic downturn.

Our product revenue decreased $25.6 million or 3% in 2008 from 2007 due to decreased demand. Service revenue increased $30.3 million or 13% due to a larger installed base.

In 2009, revenues from one customer accounted for approximately 12% of total revenue. In 2008 and 2007, no single customer accounted for more than 10% of our consolidated net revenue.

In 2009, 2008, and 2007, our three largest customers in the aggregate accounted for 26%, 14%, and 16% of consolidated net revenue, respectively.

Gross Profit

Gross profit as a percentage of revenue decreased from 2008 to 2009 by 7.0 percentage points. This decrease in gross profit was the result of a decrease of 5.2 points due to lower product sales volume, a decrease of 4.1 points related to higher product revenue as a percentage of total revenue, which included the growth of Hard Disk Drive test system revenues, and a decrease of 1.5 points for a charge to adjust Eagle Test acquired inventory to fair value. These decreases were partially offset by an increase of 3.8 points primarily from lower operations spending due to workforce reductions and lower freight and warranty charges, which were the result of lower product sales.

Gross profit as a percentage of revenue decreased from 2007 to 2008 by 1.6 percentage points. A decrease of 2.5 points was due to a $27.6 million increase in provision for excess inventory recorded as a result of the significant decrease in forecasted semiconductor demand coupled with a product transition; this decrease was partially offset by improved service margins in our Semiconductor Test group.

The breakout of product and service gross profit was as follows:

We assess the carrying value of our inventory on a quarterly basis by estimating future demand and comparing that demand against on-hand and on-order inventory positions. Forecasted revenue information is obtained from the sales and marketing groups and incorporates factors such as backlog and future revenue demand. This quarterly process identifies obsolete and excess inventory. Obsolete inventory, which represents items for which there is no demand, is fully reserved. Excess inventory, which represents inventory items that are not expected to be consumed during the next four quarters, is written-down to estimated net realizable value.

30

During the year ended December 31, 2009, we recorded an inventory provision of $28.0 million included in cost of revenues, due to the following factors:

Of the $28.0 million of total excess and obsolete provisions recorded in 2009, $20.3 million was related to Semiconductor Test and $7.7 million was related to Systems Test Group.

During the year ended December 31, 2008, we recorded an inventory provision of $29.4 million included in cost of revenues, due to the following factors:

Of the $29.4 million of total excess and obsolete provisions recorded in 2008, $24.9 million was related to Semiconductor Test and $4.5 million was related to Systems Test Group.

The provision for excess and obsolete inventory included in cost of revenues for the year ended December 31, 2007 was $1.8 million. Of the $1.8 million of total excess and obsolete provisions recorded, $0.5 million related to Semiconductor Test and $1.3 million related to Systems Test Group.

During the year ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, we scrapped $31.6 million, $9.8 million and $33.5 million of inventory, respectively, and sold $4.3 million, $2.4 million and $1.1 million of previously written-down or written-off inventory, respectively. As of December 31, 2009, we had inventory related reserves for amounts which had been written-down or written-off totaling $129.7 million. We have no pre-determined timeline to scrap the remaining inventory.

31

Engineering and Development

Engineering and development expenses were as follows:

The decrease of $51.7 million in engineering and development expenses from 2008 to 2009 was mainly due to a $54.9 million decrease in spending as a result of workforce reductions and lower project spending and a $6.2 million decrease due to temporary salary reductions. This decrease was partially offset by additional costs of $9.4 million related to the acquisition of Eagle Test.

The increase of $12.2 million in engineering and development expenses from 2007 to 2008 was mainly due to an increase of $10.3 million in spending related to investments in adjacent markets, an increase of $12.9 million due to the acquisition of Nextest and Eagle Test, partially offset by a decrease in other Semiconductor Test spending primarily related to headcount reduction of $8.3 million and lower variable employee compensation of $2.8 million.

Selling and Administrative

Selling and administrative expenses were as follows:

The decrease in selling and administrative spending of $47.4 million from 2008 to 2009 is due primarily to a $57.3 million decrease from workforce reductions and on-going cost reduction initiatives and a $9.9 million decrease due to temporary salary reductions, partially offset by additional costs of $19.8 million related to the acquisition of Eagle Test.

The decrease in selling and administrative spending of $0.3 million from 2007 to 2008 consists primarily of the following: $14.7 million decrease due to lower labor costs from reductions in headcount, $7.0 million decrease due to lower variable employee compensation, partially offset by $18.5 million increase due to the acquisition of Nextest and $3.0 million increase related to the acquisition of Eagle Test.

Acquired Intangible Assets Amortization

Acquired intangible assets amortization expense was as follows:

Acquired intangible assets amortization expense increased from 2008 to 2009 due to the Eagle Test acquisition which was completed in November of 2008. Acquired intangible assets amortization expense increased from 2007 to 2008 due to the acquisitions of Nextest and Eagle Test.

32

Goodwill Impairment

In 2008, we recorded a non-cash impairment charge of $329.7 million. We experienced a worsening in our demand outlook during the fourth quarter of 2008. This sharp decline led to a non-cash impairment of our goodwill of $329.7 million as of December 31, 2008.

In-process Research and Development

In 2008, we recorded an expense of $1.6 million related to in-process research and development related to the acquisition of Nextest and Eagle Test.

On March 7, 2007, we purchased in-process enabling test technology and hired certain engineers from MOSAID Technologies Inc. for $17.6 million, which includes $0.6 million in fees directly related to the acquisition. Of the purchase price, $16.7 million has been allocated to in-process research and development and therefore has been immediately charged to the statement of operations. The balance of the purchase price has been allocated to acquired workforce and fixed assets. In the year ended December 31, 2008, as a result of a workforce reduction, we recorded an impairment charge of $0.6 million to write-off the acquired workforce asset.

Restructuring and Other

Restructuring

In response to a downturn in the industry, we implemented restructuring activities across all segments to reduce costs, principally through headcount reductions and facility consolidations. The remaining accrual for severance and benefits of $2.9 million is reflected in the accrued employees’ compensation and withholdings account on the balance sheet and is expected to be paid by the end of the first quarter of 2010. The remaining accrual for lease payments of $10.5 million on vacated facilities is reflected in the other accrued liabilities account and the long-term other accrued liabilities account, and is expected to be paid out over the lease terms, the latest of which expires in 2013. We expect to pay approximately $3.5 million against the lease accruals over the next twelve months. Our future lease commitments, as of December 31, 2009, are net of expected sublease income of $5.8 million. As of December 31, 2009, we have subleased approximately 54% of our unoccupied space.

During the year ended December 31, 2009, we recorded restructuring charges of $37.9 million related to 2009 activities, as part of ongoing efforts to lower expenses and our cost structure in light of the industry wide decline in orders for semiconductor equipment, and a credit of $(0.4) million due to a change in sublease income estimate related to Q208 activity. The restructuring charges (credit) recorded in 2009 consisted of the following activities:

Q1 2009 Activity:

Q2 2009 Activity:

Q3 2009 Activity:

33

Q2 2008 Activity:

The restructuring actions taken during the year ended December 31, 2009 are expected to generate quarterly cost savings of approximately $14.8 million in Semiconductor Test, $1.4 million in Systems Test Group, and $0.7 million in Corporate.

During the year ended December 31, 2008, we recorded restructuring charges of $25.8 million related to 2008 activities, mainly due to the continuation of the cost down and improved productivity efforts, the consolidation of field operations, and lowering our service infrastructure. We also recorded an additional charge of $2.7 million due to a change in sublease income estimate related to Pre-2007 activity. The restructuring charges recorded in 2008 consisted of the following activities:

Q1 2008 Activity:

Q2 2008 Activity:

Q4 2008 Activity:

Pre-2007 Activity:

During the year ended December 31, 2007, we recorded restructuring charges of $7.0 million related to 2007 activities, primarily due to the transition of our manufacturing processes, including board assembly, electro-mechanical integration and final configuration and test for the FLEX product to the outsourced provider in China, in an effort to achieve lower material costs, more efficient manufacturing and lower shipping costs. We also recorded an additional net charge of $1.2 million for a change in estimates related to Pre-2007 activities. The restructuring charges recorded in 2007 consisted of the following activities:

Q1 2007 Activity:

34

Q2 2007 Activity:

Q3 2007 Activity:

Pre-2007 Activity:

Other

During the year ended December 31, 2009, we recorded $(1.0) million of other net credits related to the following:

During the year ended December 31, 2008, we recorded $34.3 million of other charges related to the following:

During the year ended December 31, 2007, we recorded $(8.8) million of other credits related to the following:

35

Interest and Other

Interest income decreased by $9.2 million, from $12.6 million in 2008 to $3.4 million in 2009, due primarily to lower cash balances as a result of the acquisitions of Nextest and Eagle Test and lower interest rates. Interest income decreased by $26.5 million, from $39.1 million in 2007 to $12.6 million in 2008, due primarily to lower cash balances as a result of the acquisitions of Nextest and Eagle Test and stock repurchase activity.

Interest expense and other increased by $9.4 million, from $14.2 million in 2008 to $23.6 million in 2009, due primarily to the following: $13.9 million of interest expense related to our convertible senior notes, $2.5 million related to the write off of the remaining revolving credit facility debt issue costs due to the termination of our revolving credit facility agreement, an increase of $1.2 million in interest expense related to the revolving credit facility, partially offset by a decrease of $12.6 million in losses on marketable securities. In 2008, interest expense and other included $2.8 million for the gain on sale of an equity investment and a $1.3 million life insurance gain.

(Loss) Income from Continuing Operations before Income Taxes

The decrease in loss from continuing operations before income taxes from 2008 to 2009 is primarily due to the goodwill impairment charge in 2008, lower spending and lower restructuring and other costs in 2009 compared to 2008, partially offset by lower revenue in 2009 compared to 2008. The decrease in income from continuing operations before income taxes from 2007 to 2008 is primarily due to the goodwill impairment charge in 2008 and increased restructuring and other costs in 2008 compared to 2007.

Income Taxes

The income tax benefit from continuing operations of $8.8 million for 2009 was primarily due to federal net operating loss carryback claims. The income tax expense from continuing operations for 2008 and 2007 of $12.6 and $7.4 million, respectively, related primarily to tax provisions for foreign taxes.

36

Contractual Obligations

The following table reflects our contractual obligations as of December 31, 2009:

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Our cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities balance increased $144.5 million in 2009 from 2008 to $518.8 million. Cash activity for 2009, 2008 and 2007 was as follows (in millions):

37

In 2009, changes in operating assets and liabilities, net of businesses and product lines sold and acquired, provided cash of $78.5 million. This was due to a decrease in operating assets of $47.1 million and an increase in operating liabilities of $31.4 million. The decrease in operating assets consisted mainly of a decrease in inventory of $63.4 million partially offset by an increase of $15.6 million in accounts receivable due to higher sales volume. The increase in operating liabilities consisted of an increase in advanced customer payments, accounts payable, deferred revenue and other accrued expenses of $46.7 million partially offset by retirement plan contributions of $15.3 million. The $46.4 million increase in deferred revenue and customer advances in 2009 is due to an advanced payment of approximately $68.2 million received from one of our Semiconductor Test customers. The customer received an incremental discount and also wanted to secure its position in our manufacturing slot plan. This increase in customer advances was partially offset by a $21.8 million decrease in deferred revenue.

Investing activities in 2009 used cash of $93.9 million due to investments in property, plant and equipment of $41.9 million, payment of transaction fees related to the Eagle Test acquisition of $3.7 million, and purchases of marketable securities of $90.4 million, partially offset by sales of marketable securities that provided cash of $41.0 million, and proceeds from life insurance policies that provided cash of $1.1 million.

During 2009, financing activities provided cash of $66.1 million due to approximately $163.0 million of net proceeds from the issuance of the senior convertible notes, $10.0 million of long-term debt proceeds from a loan in Japan, and $15.7 million from the issuance of common stock under stock option and stock purchase plans. These increases were partially offset by $122.5 million of cash used for the repayment of our revolving credit facility and $1.1 million of cash used for principal payment on long-term debt.

On April 6, 2009, we completed a registered public offering of $190.0 million aggregate principal amount convertible senior notes (“Notes”) and settled the related convertible bond hedge and warrant transaction and received approximately $163.0 million as a result of these financing transactions. The Notes bear interest at a rate of 4.50% per annum, payable semi-annually in arrears on March 15 and September 15 of each year. The first interest payment was on September 15, 2009. The Notes will mature on March 15, 2014, unless earlier repurchased by us or converted. The Notes may be converted, under certain circumstances and during certain periods, at an initial conversion rate of approximately 182.65 shares of our common stock per $1,000 principal amount of Notes, which is equivalent to an initial conversion price of approximately $5.48. The convertible note hedge and warrant transaction will generally have the effect of increasing the conversion price of the Notes to approximately $7.67 per share of our common stock, representing a 75% conversion premium based upon the closing price of our common stock on March 31, 2009. We may not redeem the Notes prior to their maturity. Holders of the Notes may require us to purchase in cash all or a portion of their Notes at a price equal to 100% of the principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest, upon the occurrence of certain fundamental changes involving the Company.

In 2008, changes in operating assets and liabilities, net of businesses and product lines sold and acquired, provided cash of $38.6 million. This was due primarily to a decrease in accounts receivable of $118.2 million as a result of a decrease in sales volume in the fourth quarter of 2008, and a decrease in days sales outstanding from 66 days in 2007 to 51 days in 2008, as a result of improved collections. This was partially offset by a decrease in accounts payable and other accruals of $31.6 million and an increase in other assets of $32.7 million.

38

In 2007, changes in operating assets and liabilities, net of businesses and product lines sold and acquired, used cash of $44.2 million. This was due to a number of factors including, an increase in accounts receivable of $33.7 million due to an increase in days sales outstanding from 55 days in 2006 to 66 days in 2007, a reduction of accrued income taxes of $30.9 million due to the payments of 2006 foreign income taxes around the world, and an increase in other assets of $25.0 million primarily related to balances due for inventory provided to our outsourced subcontract manufacturer of $15.7 million. These uses of cash were partially offset by a decrease in our inventory balances due to shorter cycle times for our FLEX products.

In 2008, investing activities used cash of $449.1 million, and in 2007, investing activities provided cash of $116.6 million. In 2008, we completed the acquisition of Nextest and Eagle Test, for a total cash purchase price and related fees, net of cash acquired of $574.3 million. In March 2007, we bought an enabling technology from MOSAID Technologies Inc. for a purchase price and related costs totaling $17.6 million. Capital expenditures were $87.2 million in 2008 and $86.1 million in 2007. Proceeds from asset disposals were $61.7 million and $8.8 million in 2008 and 2007, respectively, and primarily consisted of sales of real estate. Investing activities of discontinued operations provided $10.8 million of cash in 2007. Included in this balance are the net proceeds we received related to the sale of our Broadband Test Division to Tollgrade Communications, Inc. in August 2007.

In 2008, financing activities provided cash of $46.3 million, and in 2007, financing activities used cash of $250.5 million. In November of 2008, we obtained a revolving credit facility that provided net cash of $119.7 million. The credit facility had a three year term that was to end on November 14, 2011. As of December 31, 2008, the outstanding balance under the credit facility was $122.5 million. The credit facility contained customary representations and warranties, as well as affirmative and negative covenants, including the financial measures of a leverage ratio, fixed charge coverage ratio, and an available domestic cash to total revolving borrowings ratio. As of December 31, 2008, we were in compliance with the financial covenants contained in the credit facility. On April 7, 2009, we repaid and terminated our revolving credit facility agreement. We used approximately $123.3 million of the net proceeds of the convertible senior notes transaction to repay $122.5 million of principal and $0.8 million of accrued interest outstanding under the revolving credit facility agreement.

During 2008 and 2007, issuances of common stock under stock option and stock purchase plans provided cash of $17.8 million and $23.2 million, respectively.

In July 2006, our Board of Directors authorized a stock repurchase program which was completed in October 2007. In total, $400.0 million of common stock was repurchased in the open market or in privately negotiated transactions. During 2007, we repurchased 18.3 million shares of common stock for $273.7 million for an average price per share of $14.94. In November 2007, our Board of Directors authorized another stock repurchase program, allowing us to spend an aggregate of $400.0 million to repurchase shares of our common stock. During 2008, we repurchased 7.5 million shares of common stock for $91.2 million at an average price of $12.20 per share. As of November 4, 2008, the Board of Directors suspended the stock repurchase program.

We operate in a highly cyclical industry and we may experience, with relatively short notice, significant fluctuations in demand for our products. This could result in a material effect on our liquidity position. We expect that our cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities balance of $518.8 million will be sufficient to meet our cash requirements for at least the next twelve months. Inflation has not had a significant long-term impact on earnings.

Retirement Plans

We adopted the funded status recognition provision of ASC 715-20, “Compensation – Retirement Benefits – Defined Benefit Plans” effective December 31, 2006. ASC 715-20 requires an employer with defined benefit plans or other postretirement benefit plans to recognize an asset or a liability on its balance sheet for the overfunded or underfunded status of the plans as defined by ASC 715-20. The pension asset or liability

39

represents the difference between the fair value of the pension plan’s assets and the projected benefit obligation as of December 31. For other postretirement benefit plans, the liability is the difference between the fair value of the plan’s assets and the accumulated postretirement benefit obligation as of December 31.

Our pension expense, which includes the U.S. Qualified Pension Plan, certain qualified plans for non-U.S. subsidiaries, and a Supplemental Executive Defined Benefit Plan, was approximately $9.0 million, including a settlement charge of $1.6 million and a curtailment gain of $0.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2009. The largest portion of our 2009 pension expense was $2.8 million for our Supplemental Executive Defined Benefit Plan. Pension expense is calculated based upon a number of actuarial assumptions, a significant input to the actuarial models that measure pension benefit obligations. Discount rate and expected return on assets are two assumptions which are important elements of pension plan expense and asset/liability measurement. We evaluate these critical assumptions at least annually on a plan and country specific basis. We evaluate other assumptions related to demographic factors, such as retirement age, mortality and turnover periodically, and update them to reflect our experience and expectations for the future.

In developing the expected return on plan assets assumption, we evaluated input from our investment manager and pension consultants, including their review of asset class return expectations. Based on this review, we believe that 7.75% was an appropriate rate to use for 2009. We will continue to evaluate the expected return on plan assets at least annually, and will adjust the rate as necessary. The current asset allocation for our U.S. Qualified Pension Plan is 46.0% invested in equity securities, 42.6% invested in fixed income securities, and 11.4% invested in other securities. Our investment manager regularly reviews the actual asset allocation and periodically rebalances the portfolio to ensure alignment with our targeted allocations.

We base our determination of pension expense or benefit on a market-related valuation of assets, which reduces year-to-year volatility. This market-related valuation recognizes investment gains or losses over a five-year period from the year in which they occur. Investment gains or losses for this purpose are the difference between the expected return calculated using the market-related value of assets and the actual return on assets. Since the market-related value of assets recognizes gains or losses over a five-year period, the future value of assets will be impacted as previously deferred gains or losses are recognized. As of December 31, 2009, under the U.S. Qualified Pension Plan, we had cumulative losses of approximately $34.7 million, which remain to be recognized in the calculation of the market-related value of assets. The discount rate that we utilized for determining future pension obligations for the U.S. Qualified Pension Plan is based on the Citigroup Pension Index adjusted for the Plan’s expected cash flows and was 5.85% at December 31, 2009, down from 6.2% at December 31, 2008. We estimate that in 2010 we will recognize approximately $3.3 million of pension expense for the U.S. Qualified Pension Plan. The pension expense estimate for 2010 is based on a 5.85% discount rate, and 7.5% return on Plan assets. Future pension expense will depend on future investment performance, changes in future discount rates and various other factors related to the employee population participating in our pension plans. As of December 31, 2009, we had unrecognized pension losses and prior service costs of $136.6 million, of which $120.7 million is for the U.S. Qualified Pension Plan.

We performed a sensitivity analysis, which expresses the potential change in our U.S. Qualified Pension Plan expense for the year ending December 31, 2010, that would result from changes to either the discount rate or the expected return on plan assets.